Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:19]

>> COMMISSIONER JAMES JOHNS, HERE.

>> COMMISSIONER BLOCKER?

>> IF I COULD GET EVERYBODY TO RISE FOR THE INVOCATION.

>> SPEAKER: WANT TO READ FROM SECOND CHRONICLES OF THAT'S OKAY.

THIS IS A MOMENT WE READ ABOUT IN SCRIPTURE WHERE SULLIVAN ASKED GOD FOR WISDOM ABOVE EVERYTHING ELSE AND GOD RESPONDS IN SECOND CHRONICLES CHAPTER 1 VERSE 11 THIS IS WHAT HAS COME OUT OF YOUR HEART.

MONEY, WEALTH, FAME AND THE DOOM OF YOUR ENEMIES.

YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR LONG LIFE.

YOU ASKED WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE SO YOU COULD GOVERNMENT PEOPLE OVER WHOM I'VE MADE YOU KING.

ECAUSE OF THIS YOU GET WHAT YOU ASK FOR, WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE AND IN PRESENTING YOU WITH THE REST AS A BONUS.

MONEY WEALTH FAME.

BEFORE OR AFTER YOU HAVE HAD OR WILL HAVE.

LORD WE THANK YOU FATHER FOR ANOTHER DAY AND LORD I PRAY OVER THIS MEETING, FATHER, THANK YOU FOR WISDOM THAT DESCENDS FROM THE TOP AND WE ASK THAT YOU GIVE IT LIBERALLY.

AND WE CAN HAVE AS MUCH AS WE WANT SO WE PRAY FOR SPECIAL BLESSING OF THE BOARD FOR ALL OF THEM INDIVIDUALLY IN THEIR OWN LIVES.

THANK YOU YOU WILL GIVE THE WISDOM TO GOVERN OUR WORLD WELL AND THANK YOU FOR A GREAT MEETING.

IN JESUS NAME, AMEN.

>> SPEAKER: PLEASE JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THE FLAG OF OUR COUNTRY.

PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

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

PLEASE BE SEATED.

[Proclamations]

>> SPEAKER: I INVITE EARL PARKER AND THE MEMBERS OF THE FLORIDA CHAMBER MUSIC PROJECT TO JOIN ME.

THANK YOU FOR SETTING THE TONE THIS MORNING.

THE MUSIC WAS FANTASTIC.

I REALLY ENJOYED IT.

IT WAS A NICE WAY TO START THE DAY WITH SUCH BEAUTIFUL MUSIC.

I WISH WE COULD START EVERY MEETING THIS WAY.

IF YOU WOULD READ THE PROCLAMATION.

>> SPEAKER: A PROCLAMATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, WHERE THE FLORIDA CHAMBER MUSIC WAS FOUNDED IN SEPTEMBER 2013 AND PLAYED THEIR INAUGURAL CONCERT AT THE PONTE VEDRE CONCERT HALL ON NOVEMBER 10, 2013.

AND CONTINUES TO SERVE AN INAUGURAL ROLE WITHIN THE ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY ARTS COMMUNITY BY FOSTERING AND ENCOURAGING THE PRESENTATION OF CLASSICAL CHAMBER MUSIC.AND WHEREAS A PRIMARY GOAL OF THE FLORIDA CHAMBER MUSIC PROJECT IS TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION WITH OPPORTUNITIES TO EDUCATE STUDENTS, THE NATURE AND VALUE OF CLASSICAL CHAMBER MUSIC AND ITS PERFORMANCE.

AND WHERE IS THE FLORIDA CHAMBER MUSIC PROJECT COMPOSE A SIGNATURE CLASSICAL PIECE FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY TITLED TO THE SHORE AND IT BEGINS IN SEPTEMBER 15, 2019 AND INCLUDES SEVERAL PERFORMANCES THROUGHOUT 2020 HONORING A VARIETY OF COMPOSERS INCLUDING BRAHMS AND BEETHOVEN.

THEREFORE BE PROCLAIMED THE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS THAT THE FLORIDA CHAMBER OF MUSIC PROJECT BE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR UNWAVERING SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY BY FACILITATING MUSICAL EDUCATION THROUGH CLASSICAL CHAMBER MUSIC THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST.

JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, THIS 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019.

THE TEST HUNTER S CONRAD CLERK OF COURT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY BEGAN A SPECIAL PROGRAM LAST

[00:06:27]

YEAR WHERE WE PURCHASED TICKETS FOR MIDDLE SCHOOLERS AND THEIR PARENTS AND TEACHERS AND CHAPERONES WHO OTHERWISE COULD NOT ATTEND CLASSICAL CHAMBER MUSIC AND HEAR THIS BEAUTIFUL KIND OF PRESENTATION.

SO THEY CAN COME FREE OF CHARGE.

MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE MADE THIS CULTURAL RESOURCE AVAILABLE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND FOR AUDIENCES THAT HAVE TOTALED OVER 3000 ATTENDEES AT THIS POINT IN A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THOSE COME FROM ADJOINING COUNTIES I MET A GENTLEMAN AFTER THE LAST CONCERT OF LAST SEASON FROM MINNESOTA WHO FAVORABLY COMPARED OUR MUSICIANS AND THEIR PERFORMANCE WITH THAT OF THE PERFORMANCES IN ST. PAUL.

WHICH HAVE BEEN RENOWNED FOR A LONG TIME.

ALL OF THIS IN MORE HAS COME AS A RESULT OF YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS VERY SMALL GROUP.

WE THANK YOU AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING WORKING TOGETHER AND THE RELATIONSHIP AND ON BEHALF OF EVERYBODY, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. BILL DUDLEY WITH THE ST.

JOHN'S VETERANS COUNCIL TO COME FORWARD.

TODAY WE RECOGNIZE A POW MIA RECOGNITION DAY AND I'M GOING TO ASK FOR THE PUBLISHING OF THE PROCLAMATION.

>> SPEAKER: A PROCLAMATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. JOHN'S, FLORIDA.

WHEREAS AMERICANS LOOK TO OUR MEN AND WOMEN AS AN EXAMPLE OF COURAGE AND SACRIFICE AND ARE GRATEFUL TO ALL WHO OBSERVED THE UNITED STATES THROUGH THE ARMED FORCES AND WERE ASKED THERE WOULD MANY FORMER PRISONERS OF WAR LIVING IN FLORIDA WHO COPE WITH THE PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL AFTERMATH OF THEIR CAPTIVITY AND WHEREAS FOR THEIR COURAGEOUS DEFENSE OF OUR NATION, WE REMEMBER WITH DEEP GRATITUDE THOSE WHO SUFFERED CAPTIVITY AND THOSE WHOSE FATE REMAINS UNKNOWN.

AND WHEREAS ST. JOHNS COUNTY ACKNOWLEDGES THE ETERNAL APPRECIATION AND RESPECT THOSE WHO PAID FOR OUR FREEDOM WITH THEIR OWN AND WE REMEMBER WITH DEEP SORROW THOSE WHOSE FATES HAVE NEVER BEEN RESOLVED.

THEREFORE BE PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT SEPTEMBER 2019 BE DESIGNATED AS A POW IN MY RECOGNITION DAY.

URGING ALL RESIDENTS OF ST.

JOHNS COUNTY TO HONOR FORMER

[00:10:02]

AMERICAN PRISONERS OF WAR AND THOSE WHO REMAIN MISSING IN ACTION AS ALL OF THE FAMILIES AFFECTED BY THESE EVENTS.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST.

JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019.

BECAUSE HUNTER S CONRAD CLERK OF COURT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. JOHN'S COUNTY FLORIDA SIGNED PAUL WALTER CHAIR.

>> SPEAKER: I REMEMBER MY FATHER WAS AN ARMY OFFICER IN THE VIETNAM ERA AND I REMEMBER THE INTENSE EMOTION THAT THE POW MIA FLAG HAD.

HE KEPT IT IN HIS OFFICE BECAUSE IT AWAKENED GREAT MEMORIES OF LOSS, OF SOLDIERS AND FRIENDS THAT NEVER CAME BACK.

WHEN I SERVED IN IRAQ IN OUR COMPANY IN BOZO WEEK KEPT A POW MIA FLAG FLYING AS A RECOGNITION AND MEMORY OF THOSE WHO NEVER CAME HOME.

I WANT TO THANK YOU, MR. DUDLEY, FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO FOR THE ST. JOHN'S VETERANS COUNCIL TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE SPIRIT.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER.

MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR RECOGNIZING OUR POW MIAS IT WAS MADE OF LAST YEAR, IF YOU RECALL THAT WE.

JOHN'S COUNTY.

THAT SAME DAY WE DECLARED ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY A PURPLE HEART COUNTY, AND WE ARE VERY PROUD OF THAT.

SO ON BEHALF OF THE NEARLY 23,000 VETERANS AND THE 28 VETERANS ORGANIZATIONS WE HAVE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY, I PROBABLY ACCEPT THIS PROCLAMATION ON THEIR BEHALF.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[APPLAUSE]

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

WE WILL HAVE A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SEPTEMBER 17 THROUGH THE 23RD, 2019 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK.

GENERALLY WE PRESENT THAT TO THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO ATTEND TODAY.

OH, YOU ARE HERE.

WONDERFUL.

I WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY CALL ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SERVED TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION, BUT IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL ASK MS. LUNDQUIST TREAT THIS PROCLAMATION INTO THE RECORD.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS.> SPEAKER: PROCLAMATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. JOHN'S COUNTY FLORIDA.

WHEREAS IN ORDER TO SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO THEMSELVES AND THEIR PROSPERITY, OUR FOUNDING FATHERS ORDAINED AND ESTABLISH A CONSTITUTION FOR OUR NATION, SIGNING IT SEPTEMBER 17, 1787.

AND WHEREAS IT IS IMPERATIVE ALL AMERICANS UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE PROVISIONS AND PRINCIPLES INCLUDED IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES IN ORDER TO BETTER SUPPORT, PRESERVE AND DEFEND IT, AND WHEREAS EACH YEAR ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE ENACTING OF THE CONSTITUTION, WE HONOR THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION AS WELL AS THE GLORIOUS NATION BUILT UPON THE FOUNDATION THEY PROVIDED.

AND WHEREAS THIS ANNUAL OBSERVANCE ALSO SERVES AS A TIME FOR ALL CITIZENS TO HOLD DEAR AND CELEBRATE THE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THIS DOCUMENT AFFORDS TO US AS AMERICANS.

AND WHEREAS WITHOUT THE CONSTITUTION, THE SUPREME LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, WEIGHT THE PEOPLE, WOULD NOT BE GUARANTEED OUR MANY FREEDOMS OR THE BENEFITS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE.

AND WHEREAS THIS SEPTEMBER THE REGION COUNCIL OF DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION WILL JOIN IN THE NATIONAL CELEBRATION OF THE 232ND ANNIVERSARY OF OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

THEREFORE BE PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT SEPTEMBER 17-23, 2019, BE DESIGNATED AS CONSTITUTION WEEK.

ASKING ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN IN COMMEMORATING THE SIGNING OF THIS PIVOTAL AMERICAN DOCUMENT AS WELL AS CELEBRATING THE MANY RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES IT CONFERS UPON THE CITIZENS OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY FLORIDA THIS 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019.

A TEST HUNTER S CONRAD, CLERK OF COURT, COURT OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SIGNED PAUL WALDRON, CHAIR.

[APPLAUSE]

[00:15:04]

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WALDRON, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND EVERYONE WHO IS HERE.

TODAY IS THE COMMEMORATION OF THE SIGNING OF THE CONSTITUTION AND IT IS A TERRIBLY IMPORTANT THING.

THE MARIAH JEFFERSON CHAPTER OF THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION THIS AFTERNOON IN THE PLAZA WILL STAGE WHAT WE CALL BELLS ACROSS AMERICA.

WE HAVE ARRANGED FOR ALL OF THE CHURCH BELLS, THE FIREHOUSE BELL, AND EVERYBODY WHO IS THERE IS INVITED TO BRING A HAND BELL TO RING AT PRECISELY 4:00.

THERE WILL ALSO BE A CANNON FIRING AT THE FORT JUST A FEW MINUTES BEFORE TO COMMEMORATE THIS GREAT EVENT.

WE THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH AND PLEASE HONOR THE CONSTITUTION.

IT IS A GREAT, GREAT WAY TO HONOR A COUNTRY AND CONSIDER IN THE WORLD AS THE GREATEST CONSTITUTION AND FORMER GOVERNMENT EVER WRITTEN.THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>> SPEAKER: IF I COULD GET A MOTION FOR ACCEPT INNATE DOMINANT EXCEPTION OF THE PROCLAMATION.

[Public Comment]

WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE SECOND TO ACCEPT THE PROCLAMATIONS ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

IT PASSES.

WE WILL NOW HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THE OUTPOST IS BEING WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT YOU CAN AT THIS TIME.

>> SPEAKER: AT THIS TIME THE BOARD WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS THAT ARE NOT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.

THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS WILL HAVE THEIR OWN PUBLIC COMMENT, PERIOD.

ANY PERSON WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD SHOULD COME TO THE PODIUM AND STATE HIS OR HER NAME AND ADDRESS EACH PERSON WILL BE PROVIDED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE BOARD PRESIDENT RULE OF DECORUM.

COMMENTS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE BOARD AS A WHOLE AND NOT TO ANY INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER AND MAY NOT INCLUDE A DEMAND FOR AN IMMEDIATE RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD.

THE PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD PERSONAL PERTINENT OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS OR BOISTEROUS BEHAVIOR.

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

I WOULD ASK ANY PART FOR SPEAKER WHO PRESENTS ANY OVERHEAD MATERIAL, PLEASE PRESENT THE MATERIAL TO THE STAFF OF THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO BE ENTERED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: 220.

>> SHERRY BADGER 2772 S.

COLLINS AVENUE.

I AM BACK AGAIN BECAUSE NOW THAT THEY HAVE OPEN THE ROAD AT WESTGATE PLAZA ON COLLINS AVENUE AND 16, WHEN WE LEFT THIS COUNTY COMMISSION BACK IN 2016, A TURN LANE WAS TO BE PUT INTO THE STRIP MALL BY COMMISSIONER MCCLURE BUT WE WERE DENIED OUR MAJOR MODIFICATION BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAD 58 FEET AND STAFF APPROVED IT.

THIS IS WHAT THEY APPROVED AFTER COMMISSIONER MCCLURE SAID THAT IT WOULD BE A TURN LANE INTO THE MALL.ELL, THE TURN LANE IS RIGHT HERE.

COMING LIKE THAT.

THE TURN LANE IS NOT GOING TO THE MALL.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S UP WITH YOU WALLS STAFF UPPER-LEVEL STAFF THAT KEEPS RUBBERSTAMPING AND APPROVING STUFF BUT LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON AT TREATY PARK, WHICH SUMMER HAVEN Ã2002 ÃTHE COUNTY COMMISSION HAD A

[00:20:01]

MORATORIUM PUT ON THAT LAND TO KEEP FROM BUILDING.

THE LAND OWNERS WENT AND SUED ST. JOHN'S COUNTY WHERE THEY COULD BUILD ON THEIR LAND, AND NOW I GOT WHAT THEY ASKED FOR AND IT'S TIME FOR THIS COUNTY COMMISSION TO STAND UP FOR ITSELF.

THANK YOU.

HAVE A GOOD DAY.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> ED SLAVIN.

YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE EX PARTE MEETINGS WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEY CAN COUNT JUST AS WELL AS YOU CAN.

I'M GLAD THAT WE ONE AND THANK YOU.

ALSO SHERRY BADGER IS CORRECT.

SHE WAS THE ORIGINAL SOURCE WHO TOLD ME ABOUT THE ILLEGAL DUMPING OF THE LANDFILL AND THE LAKE BY THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE AND THAT WAS AN EPIC BATTLE AND WE WON THAT ONE TOO.

ON SEPTEMBER 17 OF 1787 AND FRANKLIN LOOKED AT THE CHAIR THAT GEORGE WASHINGTON WAS SITTING IN THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.

AND ON THE BACK OF THE CHAIR WAS CARVED A IS EVEN AND HE WAS THE OLDEST DELEGATE SAID HE WANDERED THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER IS IT A RISING SUN OR A SETTING SUN.

AND HE FINALLY CONCLUDED THAT IT IS A RISING SUN.

AND ON THE SALE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH THERE IS A SUN AND AFTER MEETING LAST WEEK MAYOR GEORGE SAID IT OBVIOUSLY IS A RISING SUN BECAUSE IT'S OVER THE OCEAN.

AND WHEN I SAW 400 PEOPLE IN THIS AUDITORIUM BACK ON AUGUST 15 WITH AN OVERFLOW CROWD ÃI WANT TO THANK PATRICK FOR GETTING THE FANCY CHAIRS FOR THE OVERFLOW CROWD HE GOT THEM IN A HEARTBEAT BECAUSE I AM THE ADA 504.

I KNOW IT'S A RISING SUN IN ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY.

AS BEN FRANKLIN SAID TO THE LADY IN PHILADELPHIA WHO ASKED HIM AFTER THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION SECRET DELIBERATIONS SHE SAID WHAT KIND OF GOVERNMENT DID WE GET? AND HE SAID A REPUBLIC, MADAM, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.

AND WE ARE WORKING ON THAT FEARLESSLY DAY BY DAY AND IN THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WE NEED TO PRESERVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THE FOURTH AMENDMENT, THE FIFTH AMENDMENT, THE SIXTH AMENDMENT, THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT, THE 14TH AMENDMENT, 15 AMENDMENT WHICH ARE BEING VIOLATED DAILY BY SHERIFF DAVID SHORE AD HIS HENCHMEN AND LOOKING FORWARD TO HIS RETIREMENT AND HAVING AN ACTUAL SHERIFF WHO WILL HONOR HIS OATH.

BUT I WANT TO COMMEND THE FOLKS FROM SAFE CORNER NOW AND I WANT TO COMMEND YOU.

I WISH I COULD'VE SEEN THE VIDEOTAPES OF YOUR MEETINGS WITH THE APPLICANT.

LUCAS WARREN GAVE A SPEECH LAST NIGHT IN NEW YORK CITY AT WASHINGTON SQ., PARK WITH 20,000 PEOPLE AND SHE CALLED FOR THE SAME THING THAT I'VE BEEN SAYING FOR SOME TIME WHICH IS OF A LOBBYIST MEETS WITH A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL, THAT NEEDS TO BE DOCUMENTED.

I APPRECIATE YOU HAVE UP YOUR GAME IN TERMS OF DISCLOSURES ON EX PARTE CONTACT, BUT PLEASE VIDEOTAPE THEM BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, MAYBE THE FBI WILL.

BUT I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE CONSTITUTION DAY PROCLAMATION, AND I JUST WISH THE TWO ITTY-BITTY CITIES WOULD DO THE SAME.

THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE WHEN WE WERE HAVING OUR BUDGET MEETING HERE, THEY ILLEGALLY MET ÃTHEY HAVE A BUDGET MEETING IN VIOLATION OF STATE LAW.

THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO CONFLICT WITH THE COUNTY, AND THEY DID.

I CALLED HIM ON IT.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>>.

AUGUSTINE.

WE DON'T NEED COMP PLAN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOP OUTPOST BY ASKING FOR AN AMENDMENT.

THE THREE PZA MEMBERS WHO CHOSE TO MOVE THIS TO THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE THEIR NAMES IN THE MEDIA.

OBVIOUSLY THEIR VOTES ÃI REPEAT THIS ÃTHEIR VOTES FAILED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THIS COUNTY.

BY TAKING THIS FROM TODAY'S AGENDA ON FRIDAY THE 13TH KEEPS THE DEVELOPER ON THE OFFENSIVE.

LET ME ENCOURAGE CONCERNED TAXPAYERS TO SHOW UP TO BCC MEETINGS FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS, SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS COMP AMENDMENT CHANGE.

THIS CAN HELP PUT THE DEVELOPER AND THEIR LAWYERS ON THE DEFENSIVE.

KEEP THE 312 TENANTS ALSO KNOWN AS PROJECTS AT THE NORTH PART OF THE 312 BRIDGE IN MIND.

THEY ARE PETITIONING TO VACATE RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF ST.

AUGUSTINE COMMISSION.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS OVER WITH AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE RESIDENTS AND THE TAXPAYERS TO STAY ON THE SPIRIT I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS GOING TO BE CHANGED WHEN YOU CHANGE THINGS ON THE

[00:25:01]

AGENDA BECAUSE I WILL COME BACK AT 1:30 IF IT WILL BE BROUGHT UP BUT I NOTICED THE ATTORNEY AND DEVELOPER IS HERE.

SO IF THEY PULL IT AND WE DON'T GET TO SPEAK AGAIN ÃBUT IF THEY COULD TO SPEAK AGAIN AT 1:30, I WILL BE BACK.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> MY NAME IS SUSIE WHITE AND 11535 CANAL RD. IN PONTE VEDRE.

THIS CONCERNS THE ROSCOE COMMUNITY MARINA.

ON MAY 16, THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY APPROVED A VARIANCE FOR THE ROSCOE COMMUNITY MARINA.

ON AUGUST 20, THIS BOARD HEARD AN APPEAL TO THAT DECISION AND REVERSED THE RULING OF THE PZA.

I'M HERE TODAY TO REQUEST THAT THIS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RETURN TO THAT APPEAL AND DENIED N THE GROUNDS THAT NO FACTS WERE PRESENTED BY THE OPPOSITION TO THE ROSCOE COMMUNITY MARINA OR BOAT STORAGE FACILITY.

ALL OPPOSITION STATEMENTS WERE HYPOTHETICAL, SPECULATIVE GENERALIZED STATEMENTS THAT WHILE POLITICALLY PERSUASIVE, WERE NOT COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

THUS THEIR TESTIMONY SHOULD HAVE HAD NO EFFECT ON THE DECISION BY THIS BOARD.

COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE MUST BE FACT-BASED AND NOT UNSUPPORTED GENERALIZED STATEMENTS.

DURING THE APPEAL HEARING CONCERNING THE ROSCOE COMMUNITY MARINA, NO FACTS WERE PRESENTED.

THERE WAS NO PROOF OF POTENTIAL DANGER FOR INCREASED BOAT TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE BOAT STORAGE.

SNORT FOR ACCIDENTS, ETC. NO EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT A BOAT STORAGE FACILITY WOULD CAUSE ANY HARM TO THIS AREA, ONLY OPINION.

IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD GO FURTHER IN STATING THAT THIS APPEAL SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALLOWED IN THE FIRST PLACE.

SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

EMOTION-BASED STATEMENTS, ALTHOUGH LOGICALLY PERSUASIVE, HAVE NO ROLE TO PLAY IN THE REVIEW OF THE LAND-USE SPECULATION.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING.

>> SPEAKER: I AM JOHN WHITE AND I AGREE WITH MY WIFE.

ALWAYS.

WE DO WANT TO ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER LOOKING AT THE BOAT STORAGE.

AND WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS JUST VERY QUICKLY REMIND YOU OF SOME OF THE FACTS THAT WERE STATED BY THE OPPOSITION.

THEY HAD A GOOD PROGRAM GOING BASICALLY TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE INTO THE FACT THAT IT WAS A DANGEROUS AREA.

FOR INSTANCE, ONE LADY ÃI THINK HER NAME WAS HOFFMAN Ã GOT UP AND SAID SHE WAS SITTING ON HER DOCK AND SAW A FAST JET SKI COMING AND BOUNCED OFF THE BOAT AND RAN INTO A DOCK AND THE PERSON WAS A PARAPLEGIC.

REALLY NOT SO.

NO FACTS.

SHE HAD NO FACTS, AND I THINK THE POLICE REPORT SHOWED THAT THAT DID NOT TAKE PLACE.

ANOTHER GUY, DON'T KNOW HIS NAME, BUT HE HAD A LICENSE FOR A 110 CATFISH LICENSE.

HE SAID HE GOES UP AND DOWN FROM NEW JERSEY ALL THE WAY TO MIAMI AND THAT THE PALM VALLEY AREA WAS THE MOST NARROW AND DANGEROUS PLACE ON THE INTRACOASTAL, WHICH REALLY WASN'T A FACT EITHER.

I THINK THE INTRACOASTAL ALL THE WAY IS 150 FEET.

WE DO HAVE ONE AREA IN ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY WHICH WOULD BE THE BRIDGE OF THE ALLIANCE WHICH IS NARROW.

THE OTHER ÃSOMEONE ELSE.

IT MIGHT'VE BEEN ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS, THE BRIDGE ACTUALLY CAUSED A NARROWING OF FACT, BUT THE BRIDGE COLORS ARE ACTUALLY 30 OR 40 FEET UP ON THE BANK, SO THE BRIDGE HAS NO EFFECT ON IT WHATSOEVER IN THAT AREA.

THE OTHER THING THAT WAS MENTIONED, I THOUGHT WAS NOT RIGHT, WAS THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO BE DROPPING THOSE INTO THE CHANNEL IF YOU GUYS DID APPROVE THE STORAGE AREA.

THE CORPS OF ENGINEER WOULD NEVER LET ANYBODY DO THAT.

THEY WERE GOING TO DROP THE BOOKS WHERE THERE DOCS ARE EXISTING, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR BEING OUTSIDE THE CHANNEL.

NOW I MUST SAY, MR. JIMMY JOHN'S, I THINK HE JUMPED ON THIS DURING THAT MEETING AND WAS ASKING THE ATTORNEY, HOW DO WE MAKE A DECISION ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? AND THE ATTORNEY SAID JUST WHAT MY WIFE SAID.

YOU CAN'T DO IT UNLESS YOU HAVE FACTS.

YOU CAN'T DO IT ON INNUENDOS OR HYSTERIA.

AND I DO BELIEVE, AND I MAY BE WRONG, BUT I THINK THE ATTORNEYS SAID THAT TURNING THIS DOWN THAT YOU WOULD PUT A

[00:30:05]

HARDSHIP ON THE COMMUNITY BY TURNING DOWN THIS PROJECT.

SO I DO THINK WE OUGHT TO GO AHEAD AND READ LOOK AT IT IF POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> PAUL .

I DIDN'T SPEAK OF THE APPEAL.

I HAD AN ATTORNEY.

THE FOUR APPELLANTS THAT FILED FOR AN APPEAL ON THE SAME, THERE WAS FOR.

THERE WAS ALL A PLAN TO EXTORT MONEY AND TO LEVERAGE THEIR POSITION INTO GETTING WHATEVER THEY WANTED.

THE FIRST PERSON SAID PREDICATE PROVIDED ME A CONTRACT RATE, $150,000.IVE ME 30 DAYS TO CLOSE PRIOR TO THE HEARING OR HE WOULDN'T DROP HIS APPEAL.

HAVE A CONTRACT AND EVEN SUPPORTING IT.

THE NEXT ONE IS THE HOFFMANS.

OFTEN SKIPPING A LIST OF DEMANDS WHICH PLATED UP TO $500,000.

ONCE AGAIN, I HAD TO AGREE TO THE DEMANDS PRIOR TO THE APPEAL OR THEY WOULD NOT DROP IT.

I HAVE EMAILS SUPPORTING VOICEMAILS AND I HAVE RECORDINGS.

PETER SCHWAB REPRESENTED THE OTHER SIDE HIS HOUSE IS 2000 FEET AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

ONE WEEK AFTER WINNING THE APPEAL APPROACH IS ONE OF THE OWNERS TO SAY HERE ARE MACABRE PRODUCTS FOR YOUR PROPERTY FULLY DESIGN.

I WILL BE GLAD TO BUILD YOU KONTOS.

THIS WAS A ROUNDABOUT WAY FOR HIM TO TRY TO GET THE PROPERTY.

THE.

FROM THE PROPERTY.

THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY LINE IS 330 FEET AWAY FROM THE BOUNDARY.

THERE IS A HOUSE BUILT IN FRONT OF THEM.

THERE'S NO ADVERSE RELATION TO THIS SITUATION.

THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP.

MOST IMPORTANTLY PRE-APPLICATION WAS FILED AS A DEVELOPER.

BEFORE YOU MOVE FORWARD ON THIS PROJECT WE HAD APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY TO MOVE TOWARD AND DEVELOP THIS.

WE WENT TO THEM.

WE DOUBLE CHECKED, REJECT BEFORE WE MADE THE COMMITMENT TO PURCHASE THIS.

THEY CAN SAY IT WAS A PRE-APPLICATION.

NOWHERE IN THE PRIOR APPLICATION OF THE ESSAY SUBJECT TO ZONING SUBJECT TO USE.

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.

IT IS DOCUMENTED.HE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT THE STAFF CAME BACK AND SAID WE MADE A MISTAKE.

I HAVE AN EMAIL DOCUMENTING THAT.

WE REFERENCED THAT WE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY BASED ON THAT.

THE STAFF REALIZED ITS MISTAKE AND REQUIRED US TO GO FOR PARENTS AND SUBWAY WILL HELP.

THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE COUNTY CAME FORWARD AND HELPED WRITE HARDSHIP WITH MY ATTORNEY TO MAKE SURE IT WAS RIGHT.

NONE OF THIS WAS BROUGHT UP.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, SAFETY.

WE PULLED THE POLICE REPORTS.

NOBODY WAS CRIPPLED, NOBODY WAS SENT BY HELICOPTER FOR A BROKEN NECK.

SHAME ON THESE PEOPLE FOR COMING UP HERE AND LYING TO YOU THAT THERE WAS THREE ACCIDENTS.

ONE WAS A BOAT THAT EXPLODED DUE TO PAPERS AND ONE WAS DOWN AT SOLANO ROAD AND ONE WAS A MILE AND HALF THE OTHER WAY.

THESE ARE ACCURATE POLICE REPORTS AND PROVIDING YOU WITH THE DATES WITH THE COMMENTS FROM THE OFFICERS.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.

IT'S SAFE.

IT IS COERCIVE.

IT TAKES CARE OF THE CONGESTION.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE DISTANCE FROM MY PROPERTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IS 100 FEET WIDER THAN THE BOAT MARINA ÃTHE BOAT RAMP I ASKED THE COMMISSIONERS PLEASE RECONSIDER ON THE FACT THAT AN ACCURATE AND INFORMATION WAS WITHHELD FROM YOU GUYS.

I'M PROVIDING ALL THE DOCUMENTATION AT THIS TIME TO SUPPORT MY ALLEGATIONS.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>>.

I AM THANKFUL THAT WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION A UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AS WELL AS THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION AND I'M VERY HAPPY THAT THE MARIA JEFFERSON REPRESENTATIVES WERE HERE TO COMMEMORATE OUR CONSTITUTION.

OUR CONSTITUTION, YES, GIVES US THE RIGHT TO PETITION YOU, THE GOVERNMENT LEADERS, OUR REPRESENTATIVES, AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ALLOW PUBLIC PARTICIPATION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

AND I HAVE CERTAINLY BEEN A BENEFICIARY OF THESE RIGHTS.

I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO BE SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN EXERCISE THIS RIGHT.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME LEGISLATION IN TALLAHASSEE THAT

[00:35:01]

HAS ATTEMPTED TO RESTRAIN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, SO I'M JUST VERY THANKFUL THAT YOU ARE VERY KIND TO THE PUBLIC.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> MY NAME IS DAVID PLUMMER 363 NORTH ROSCOE BLVD.

I AM A LIFETIME RESIDENT OF PALM VALLEY AND MY FAMILY HELPED BUILD THE COMMUNITY AND MY FAMILY IS THE.

CONTRACTOR FOR MR. ROHAN.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THE MARINA, I BUILT IT.

I BUILT ALL OF THE DOCKS.

IT'S SETBACK PROPER FROM THE CHANNEL.

IT'S 60 FEET FURTHER BACK FROM THE PUBLIC BOAT RAMP.

THAT'S ONE THING I WANT TO BRING UP.

IF YOU EVER WANT ENTERTAINMENT TO WATCH THESE BOATERS LAUNCHED INTO THE PUBLIC BOAT RAMP AND THEIR BOATS TO FLY OUT TO THE INTRACOASTAL.

THAT'S UNSAFE.

WHAT MR. ROHAN IS BUILDING IS SAFE.

BOATS WILL GO IN VERY SICKLY INTO THE WATER AND BE CARRIED NOT UNDER POWER BUT IN TWO MOORING LINES AROUND, TIED UP.

THAT'S ONE THING I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.

THE OTHER THING IS THE WIT OF THE INTRACOASTAL THERE.

IT'S WELL OVER 100 FEET.

AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT THAT LIVED ACROSS THE WAY, OKAY, THEY ARE BLESSED.

THEIR DOCS ARE $200,000 OR $300,000 DOCKS.

THEY ARE CONCRETE.

THEY ARE ALSO 15 TO 24 FEET OUT FURTHER INTO THE CHANNEL IT'S A NO WAKE ZONE THE ARMY CORPS IS KIND OF BEEN BATTLING THEM NOW FOR 15 YEARS OR SO.

THESE PEOPLE HAVE LIVED THERE IN RETROSPECT ÃI HAVE A UNIQUE POSITION ON THIS BECAUSE I WAS BORN AND RAISED THERE.

THE RESTAURANT THERE ON THE PROPERTY MY FAMILY ACTUALLY OWNED FROM 1929 TO 1999.

I GREW UP THERE.

THE WHOLE AREA IS A PLACE THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD BOATS AND STOCKS.

THIS IS NOTHING UNIQUE.

IN ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GRIPING ABOUT THIS, THEY'VE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT 10 SECONDS COMPARED TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPORTING THIS THAT LIVE TO THE SOUTH ON THE SAME SIDE I KNOW ALL THESE PEOPLE.

SOME OF THEM ARE MY FAMILY.

THEY BEEN THERE SINCE DIRT.

AND SO IT'S LIKE SOMEBODY JUST NEEDS TO WAKE UP IN THE MORNING AND GRIPE ABOUT SOMETHING.

ALL OF THESE PEOPLE HE MENTIONED THAT ARE GRIPING ABOUT THIS REALLY DEEP IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S NOT GOING TO HURT ANYTHING.

I HAVE BEEN BUILDING THERE FOR 20 YEARS, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 42 YEARS.

I'M BUILDING THE WHARF WHICH I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS GRANTING THAT TO ME AND I'M ALMOST DONE WITH IT.

THAT'S JUST MY FEELINGS ON IT.

ONE LAST POINT I WANT TO MAKE.

THIS WILL PICK UP TRAFFIC.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE CONGESTION AWAY FROM THE PUBLIC BOAT RAMP AND SOME PEOPLE VISITING DURING THE WEEK TO GET THEIR BOATS LAUNCHED, THAT'S NOT GOING TO PICK UP TRAFFIC.

BIG RESTAURANT WILL CAUSE CONGESTION ON THE BRIDGE LIKE NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN.

THANKS FOR HEARING ME.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT THIS MORNING? SAY NO, MR. CHAIRMAN WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER BLOCKER?

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD LIKE TO GO OUT OF ORDER FOR A MINUTE.

I HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS IN PALM VALLEY REACH OUT TO ME.

SEVERAL OF THE COMMUNITY GROUPS PALM VALLEY PONTE VEDRE COALITION I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT STANDING ISSUE THAT HAPPENED HERE.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF MATTERS THAT HAVE COME TO MY ATTENTION SINCE I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT SOME PROCEDURAL DEFECTS.

PATRICK, YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

I FEEL STRONGLY ENOUGH ABOUT AS THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND THEY DID MAKE THE MOTION ON THIS ORIGINALLY ON THE MERITS I WOULD LIKE IF THE BOARD WOULD ALLOW ÃMR. CHAIR, IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME OUT OF ORDER I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO BRING THIS MATTER BACK FOR CONSIDERATION.

LET'S BASED ON MY REVIEW OF SOME OF THE LEGAL MATTERS THAT HAVE COME IN.

SOME OF THE STANDING ISSUES BASED ON DISTANCE TO THOSE MATTERS THAT REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN VETTED BEFORE AND IDENTIFIED.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT HAPPENED.

I BELIEVE SOME OF THAT WAS INFORMATION IF WE HAD BEEN DISCLOSED TO US AS A BOARD WE WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENT DECISION.

I THINK SEVERAL OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE IN THE APPEAL THERE IS A DISTANCE REQUIREMENT AND THEY WERE OUTSIDE OF THE DISTANCE.

I THINK THERE WERE PROCEDURAL DEFECTS AS WELL.

I THINK THIS IS A MATTER OF WHERE EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A FAIR HEARING.

THESE ARE ISSUES THAT I WOULD'VE HOPED THAT WOULD'VE BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION.

THEY WERE NOT.

[00:40:03]

AS A DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, I FEEL BEING THE PERSON THAT MADE THE MOTION ON THIS MATTER ORIGINAL, I WOULD LIKE ÃMR. CHAIR, IF YOU WILL ALLOW, MAKE A MOTION TO BRING US BACK.> SPEAKER: SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

LEGAL?

>> SPEAKER: IT IS THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVE TO RECONSIDER A MANNER.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT BASED ON SOME OF THE STANDING TYPE ISSUES THAT I THINK WERE DISCUSSED HERE TODAY, WE HAVE REVIEWED SOME OF THOSE IN OUR OFFICE, AND IN MY OPINION, JUST BASED ON THE STANDING ISSUE, IT WOULD NOT BE MY ADVICE TO BRING IT BACK FOR HEARING ON THE MERITS.

THERE HAVE BEEN SOME OTHER ALLEGATIONS MADE TODAY.

I THINK SOME OF THOSE ARE THE FIRST TIME THAT I HAVE HEARD THOSE.

I WILL SAY IN GENERAL, YOUR CODE PROVIDES THAT IF THERE ARE MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATIONS PERTAINING TO AN APPLICATION, THAT TYPE OF THING, THAT THAT MAY BE GROUNDS TO VOID A DECISION AND APPROVAL IF THERE WERE.

SO I WILL SAY THIS.

THIS BOARD HEARD THE MATTER AT AN ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE APPLICANT FOR THE VARIANCE WAS PRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

THE APPELLANTS, A NUMBER OF THOSE WERE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

I THINK ONE INDIVIDUAL WAS NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, BUT I THINK THAT THE MERITS OF THE VARIANCE AND THE APPEAL TO THE VARIANCE OR ARGUED IN FRONT OF YOU AND A LENGTHY HEARING, AND MY SENSE IS IF THERE WERE ISSUES PERTAINING TO STANDING, THAT IS WHERE THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARGUED AND DECIDED UPON BY THE BOARD.

ONE OF THOSE APPELLANTS ÃAND CORRECT ME IF I HAVE A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS, ONE OF THOSE APPELLANTS, I BELIEVE, WAS WITHIN A 300 FOOT SORT OF AUTOMATIC STANDING TYPE CIRCUMSTANCE.

>> SPEAKER: THAT'S NOT CORRECT.

>> SPEAKER: THE OTHER APPELLANTS WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE SHOWED PARTICULAR SPECIFIC ADVERSE EFFECT THAT IS NOT TO SORT OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT THAT TYPE OF THING.

BUT THOSE TYPES ÃTHOSE TYPES OF ISSUES, I THINK, CAN BE DEBATED, AND I THINK THE BOARD COULD HAVE MADE A DECISION ON THAT HAD THAT ISSUE BEEN RAISED AT THE HEARING.

I AM CONCERNED THAT AFTER THIS BOARD HAS HAD A FULL HEARING ON THE MERITS WITH SIDES REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, THAT AFTER THE FACT, ISSUES COME UP THAT COULD HELP AND I THINK SHOULD HAVE PERHAPS BEEN BROUGHT AT THE INITIAL HEARING.

AND MY CONCERN PERTAINS TO THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, BUT IT ALSO PERTAINS MORE GENERALLY.

APPLICANTS, OPPONENTS TO APPLICATIONS NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR HEARINGS AND TO SORT OF BRING THE BIG GUNS AFTERWARDS AFTER THE HEARING.

I THINK IT KIND OF SETS A COURSE OF ACTION IN GENERAL THAT AS YOUR LEGAL ADVISOR, I WOULD NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS.

HOWEVER, ON THIS ITEM IS A PREROGATIVE OF THE BOARD.

I'VE HEARD INFORMATION NEW TODAY THAT I HAD NOT HEARD, SO I THINK THE OPTIONS ARE THE BOARD MAY VOTE TO RECONSIDER THIS AND HAVE THE MATTER SET FOR A REHEARING OR THE BOARD COULD DECLINE TO DO THAT AND IN WHICH CASE THE APPLICANT FOR THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE A JUDICIAL REMEDY AVAILABLE SHOULD HE CHOOSE TO TAKE THAT.

SO THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL.

[00:45:07]

>> SPEAKER: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ADVICE.

I DISAGREE.

THE POLICY DECISION IS FOR THIS BOARD TO MAKE.

>> SPEAKER: ABSOLUTELY.

>> SPEAKER: I APPRECIATE YOUR ADVICE.

I DON'T 100 PERCENT AGREE WITH YOUR ANALYSIS.

THERE WERE MATERIAL REPRESENTATIONS MADE AT THE HEARING THAT IF WE HAD NO DIFFERENTLY ÃIN FACT, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON BROUGHT UP THE POINT I THINK WE ALL DID, THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT MATTER TO DECIDE.

I THINK COMMISSIONER JOHNS ASKED SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT IS THE STANDARD AND WENT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WITH DOCTOR GREECE TO HELP.

THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FLUSHED OUT BEFORE HIM.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF.

I THINK THAT AS A BOARD, THAT'S OUR DETERMINATION.

THAT'S NOT A STAFF POSITION.

THAT'S OUR DECISION WHETHER WE WANT TO HEAR THIS OR NOT.

THERE WERE MATERIAL REPRESENTATIONS MADE THAT WE HAVE HEARD WERE NOT CORRECT.

I DO BELIEVE THERE WAS A STANDING ISSUE.

SHOULD THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP? YOU KNOW, MAYBE SO.

BUT WE ARE ALSO COUNTING ON STAFF TO HELP IDENTIFY SOME OF THESE THINGS AS WELL.

I DON'T THINK THAT WAS FULLY FLUSHED OUT.

YOU MENTIONED YOU WERE HEARING SOME OF THIS FOR THE FIRST TIME.

I BELIEVE WE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WHERE I BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE.

THIS WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARDS THAT THERE WERE SOME ISSUES BEFORE. THINK WE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.

BUT MY MOTION STAND, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I THINK AS A DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, AS WELL WITHIN OUR LEGAL RIGHT TO DO THAT.

THIS SHOULD BE A POLICY DECISION WE MAKE IS A BOARD, NOT A STATISTICIAN.

>> SPEAKER: MR. CHAIR, LET ME SAY.

THERE WAS NOTHING IN MY COMMENTS THAT IN ANY WAY TAKES A PREROGATIVE OF THIS BOARD'S DECISION AWAY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR.

NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, COMMISSIONER BLOCKER YOU AND I DID HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.

IT WAS OUTSTANDING.

IT WAS ABOUT THE INS AND OUTS OF STANDING.

I STAND BY MY COMMENTS THAT I HAVE HEARD INFORMATION TODAY THAT I HAD NOT HEARD BEFORE.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> SPEAKER: IS THERE A METHOD IN THE FUTURE FOR EITHER ENCOURAGING COMPLETE AND ACCURATE PRESENTATIONS SUCH AS PUTTING PEOPLE UNDER OATH OR SOME OTHER LEGAL MECHANISM THAT WOULD HAVE RAMIFICATIONS IF DETERMINED LATER TO BE FACTUALLY INACCURATE OR MISLEADING?

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS, ABSOLUTELY.

QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS IN PARTICULAR, ALL WITNESSES MAY BE PLACED UNDER OATH.

IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY LAW, BUT IT DOES GIVE AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF SECURITY OR CONFIDENCE IN THE TESTIMONY, AND THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE MISREPRESENTATIONS THEY ARE.

SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES.

>> SPEAKER: IS DETERMINED THERE SHOULD BE CONSEQUENCES, WHO WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBLE ENTITY FOR PURSUING THAT.

IS OF THE DAMAGED PARTY? THE STAFF? NOT ENCOURAGING IT ON A SPECIFIC CASE, BUT I AM LOOKING FOR A METHOD BY WHICH WE CAN OBJECTIVELY RECOGNIZE THIS IS IMPORTANT.

YOU HAVE TO PRESENT THINGS TO US THAT ARE FACTUAL AND COMPLETE AND ACCURATE, NOT A PARTIAL TRUTH, NOT A MISLEADING TRUTH.

IF IT'S DETERMINED FACTUALLY NOT TO BE SO, FOR MY EDUCATION BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A LEGAL BACKGROUND, WHAT IS THE EXPECTATION OF IDENTIFYING IT AND PURSUING IT? I DON'T WANT IT TO BE A DISTRACTION, BUT I WANT IT TO BE A FACTUAL PART OF OUR PROCESS WHEN APPROPRIATE.

NOT ON EVERY ITEM, BUT AS YOU SAID THERE'S CERTAIN SITUATIONS WEATHER EXPERT OR OTHERWISE WHERE THERE ARE CONFLICTING PARTIES.

WHAT PARTIES TO HAVE A EXPECTATION TO GIVE US ALL OF THE FACTS.

I'VE EXPRESSED THIS CONCERN PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS WHEN Ã THANKFULLY I'VE ASKED YOU AND OTHER STAFF FOR OPINIONS ON STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE THAT HAVE RECEIVED DIRECT AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT WITH THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE.

WE DO HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A FINAL DECISION, BUT IS HIGHLY PREDICATED ON THE RESPONSES WE GET FROM STAFF.

THAT'S WHY WE HIRE YOU AS THE EXPERTS, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR EXPERTISE, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, THOSE IN THE ROOM AND ELSEWHERE.

WE HIRE YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED FROM A WIDE VARIETY OF PEOPLE.

WE EXPECT YOU TO INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY AND CHANGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO CHANGES TO POLICIES AND MANY OTHER ASPECTS NOT MAKING THESE DECISIONS IN A FISHBOWL.E DON'T WANT TO BE CAUGHT UP IN THE SAME SITUATION.

SO WHAT IS THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE CAN EXPECT RAMIFICATIONS THAT PEOPLE WILL RECOGNIZE IF THEY DON'T PRESENT THINGS HOLY AND FACTUALLY WILL BE PURSUED.

>> SPEAKER: I THINK THOSE WOULD BE BROKEN DOWN INTO SORT OF TWO MAJOR CATEGORIES.

IF AN APPLICANT, WHETHER IT BE,

[00:50:02]

YOU KNOW, AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE OR REZONING OR SOME OTHER APPLICATION MAKES MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATIONS, THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES IN YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ABOUT THAT.

AND I THINK THE SAME CONCEPT WOULD APPLY, I THINK, IF THERE WERE AN APPEAL TO SOMETHING AND THERE WERE MATERIAL REPRESENTATIONS THAT WOULD HAVE HAD AN EFFECT ON THE DECISION.

THAT'S NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, IF STATEMENTS ARE MADE UNDER OATH, THEN THERE COULD BE POTENTIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT CONSEQUENCES IN THAT REGARD.

>> SPEAKER: ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WAS WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR IDENTIFYING THOSE INACCURACIES, AND WHAT IS THE HIGH-LEVEL PROCESS BY WHICH IS PURSUED? IS IT THE DAY OF THE MEETING? IS IT A FOLLOW-UP MEETING? IS IT A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE? I DON'T NEED ALL THE DETAILS BUT IN WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD SOMEBODY GO SHOULD THEY WANT TO PURSUE CONCERNS THERE MAY NOT BE ¦

>> SPEAKER: I CAN JUST GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE.

MANY YEARS IN THE PAST, THERE WAS A REZONING APPLICATION.

THERE WAS A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION MADE BETWEEN STAFF AND OUR OFFICE.

WE IDENTIFIED THAT MISREPRESENTATION.

WE BROUGHT IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE BOARD.

SO THAT WOULD BE, I THINK, A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE OF THAT.

I DO BELIEVE THIS BOARD HAS ALREADY TAKEN ITS POSITION WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNS THAT IF THERE IS A MISREPRESENTATION Ã A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION THAT WE KNOW ABOUT AND THAT WOULD HAVE AFFECTED THE BOARD'S DECISION, WE ARE TO BRING IT TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION.

I MEAN, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, YOUR STAFF.

>> SPEAKER: SO IF SOMEBODY COMES TO US AT A LATER MEETING AND SAYS THERE WAS A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION ON A PREVIOUS BOARD AGENDA ITEM, DO THEY COME TO US TO MAKE THIS ÃA DECISION SIMILAR TO WHAT'S GOING ON TODAY OR DOES IT GO THROUGH SOME OTHER LEGAL PROCESS?

>> I THINK IT COULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD.

ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION, THOUGH, AS PART OF THIS ÃAND THERE'S NOT SORT OF A PERFECT PROCEDURE, PERFECT SOLUTION TO THIS.

FOR EXAMPLE, IN SOME HYPOTHETICAL APPLICATION WITH A HEARING, WHAT IF ONE OF THE SIDES KNEW OF A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION, BUT THEY DIDN'T MENTION IT? THEY KEPT IT IN THEIR BACK POCKET TO SEE HOW THE DECISION WOULD GO AND THEN AFTER THE DECISION RED TO LIGHT.

YOU SEE, BOB ITSELF ALSO COULD BE AN ISSUE.

I JUST WANTED TO GIVE AN APPRECIATION, I THINK, OF SOME OF THE COMPLEXITY.

BUT I THINK CERTAINLY IN THE CLEANEST FORM, IF THERE'S A MISREPRESENTATION MADE, NOBODY REALISTICALLY WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT.

IT WAS DISCOVERED LATER.

THAT WOULD BE A CLASSIC EXAMPLE.

IN FACT, FROM THAT, THAT'S WHY THE PROVISION WAS PUT INTO YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO PREVENT BACK ÃTO INHIBIT THAT TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IN THE FUTURE.

>> SPEAKER: ARE YOU SAYING THAT ANYONE CAN PROVIDE THE PERCEPTION THAT THERE WAS MISREPRESENTATION AND THAT IT WOULD NEED TO BE PURSUED IF SUCH ALLOCATION IS MADE? IN PURSUED BY COUNTY STAFF? IS IT BY A PRIVATE ATTORNEY? THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

HOW DOES SOMEBODY WHO HAS THE CONCERN THAT'S BEEN EXPRESSED TODAY PROPERLY FOLLOW THE PROCESS TO HAVE THAT VETTED?

>> SPEAKER: RIGHT.

I THINK THEY COULD SUBMIT THAT INFORMATION EITHER THEY COULD SUBMIT IT TO THE BOARD, THEY COULD SUBMIT IT TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IF IT WAS SUBMITTED TO STAFF, I THINK IT WOULD BE PROVIDED TO OUR OFFICE.

WE WOULD REVIEW, WE WOULD MAKE SORT OF A ÃAN ANALYSIS OF SORT OF THE MATERIAL ÃTHE MATERIALITY OF THE MISREPRESENTATION IF THERE WAS A MISREPRESENTATION AND THEN GO ON TO ADVISE THE BOARD AFTER THAT.

>> SPEAKER: SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR A BOARD MEETING.

IT CAN BE MADE IN WRITING?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> SPEAKER: I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> SPEAKER: ADMINISTRATION?

>> SPEAKER: JUST FOLLOWING UP ON THE TRAIN OF THOUGHT, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, IS THE BOARD POLICY DECISION THE BOARD HAS A RIGHT TO CONSIDER AN ITEM AT THE NEXT COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING.

YOU ARE FREE TO DO THAT FROM MY READING OF OUR ROLES AND I THINK PATRICK IS INDICATED THAT AS WELL.

I THINK YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF ON THEM.

YOU CAN EITHER APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE COMMISSIONER BLOCKER'S RECOMMENDATION TODAY OR MOTION TODAY OR YOU COULD ASK STAFF TO TAKE WHAT WE HAVE HEARD HERE THIS MORNING.

[00:55:01]

HAVE NOT HEARD A LOT ABOUT MYSELF DO AN EVALUATION REPORT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ONCE YOU HAVE THAT FEEDBACK, YOU CAN MAKE YOUR DECISION WHETHER YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RECONSIDERATION.

AT THE END OF THE DAY IS THE BOARD'S DECISION AND WE WILL BE HAPPY TO CLARIFY THE RECORD TO THE EXTENT THE BOARD WANTS US TO GET INVOLVED.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: THERE'S ONE THING I WOULD ADD UPON MR. WANCHICK'S COMMENT.

AND THAT IS THERE'S A TIMELINE RUNNING FROM THE SIGNING OF THE ORDER PRETENDING TO THE HEARING AND AFTER THAT THERE'S A 30 DAY PERIOD FOR APPEAL.

THAT IS RUNNING AND WE WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THE DATES, BUT I THINK THAT THAT PROBABLY RUNS APPROXIMATELY WHEN?> SPEAKER: I BELIEVE THE ORDER WAS SIGNED ON THE 23RD OF AUGUST.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE TIME PERIOD TO APPEAL WOULD RUN BEFORE THE BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING.

IN OTHER WORDS, I DON'T KNOW THAT ÃIF THE PLAN WORK FOR THERE TO BE A FURTHER ANALYSIS AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD, THAT MAY NOT BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD UNTIL YOUR OCTOBER 1 WHICH WOULD BE AFTER THE APPEAL TIME.

SO SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL OR NOT APPEAL TO THE CIRCUIT COURT.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP.

>> SPEAKER: WHAT IS THAT TIME.

FOR THAT ACTION REQUIRED? WHAT'S THE NUMBER OF DAYS OR WHATEVER TRIGGER?

>> OF 30 DAYS AFTER THE RENDERING OF THE ORDER AND THE RENDERING OF THE ORDER MEANS EXECUTED AND FILED WITH THE CLERK COULD SERVE 30 DAYS AFTER THAT, WHICH AGAIN, I THINK STARTED RUNNING AUGUST 23.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, MR. CHECK.

>> SPEAKER: PATRICK, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

AT THE HEARING IF THIS INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE, HIS ATTORNEY COULD HAVE CROSS-EXAMINED STAFF, CORRECT?

>> ANSWER.

>> AND HE COULD HAVE CROSS-EXAMINED THE APPELLANTS, THE PEOPLE WHO MADE THE APPEAL? I MEAN, I'VE BEEN IN A FEW HEARINGS AND SEEN THAT HAPPEN.

>> SPEAKER: YES SIR.

>> SPEAKER: MY CONCERNS ARE IF WE HAVE INFORMATION SOMEBODY SOMEBODY ELSE IS SAYING SOMEBODY NEIGHBORS MISREPRESENTATION.

THAT'S NOT UP JUST TO RECAP THE SAME PEOPLE COME UP AND SAY THIS OR THIS WHETHER WE CAN PROVE IT OR NOT WE HAVE PEOPLE COME UP ALL THE TIME THAT SAY STUFF THAT PROBABLY IS NOT FACTUAL.

AND WHETHER THAT WEIGHS INTO YOUR DECISION-MAKING, I CAN TELL YOU THE RACK ON THE PERSON OF THE SEED YOU HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH MY DECISION ON THIS ITEM.

THAT'S AN ACCIDENT AND THEY HAPPEN ALL THE TIME.

IF WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WE WOULD CLOSE EVERY HIGHWAY.

I MEAN, THERE WILL BE HALF-DOZEN OR 95 TODAY.

YOU KNOW, THERE IS ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN.

MY CONCERN IS WE ARE DWELLING IN A THING WHERE WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO MAKE DECISIONS.

WE ARE NOT 100 PERCENT CAPABLE OF MAKING.

THAT SHOULD PROBABLY BE MADE AT A CIRCUIT COURT LEVEL.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD A HEARING AND THEY FELT THEY DIDN'T HAVE A PROPER HEARING, THAT PROBABLY SHOULD BE HEARD BY THE JUDGE AND HE CAN SEND IT BACK TO US.

THAT'S MY OPINION ON THAT.

>> AND THOSE ARE ALL PLUSES AND MINUSES.

IT REALLY IS THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVE TO DECIDE IN THIS MATTER TO RECONSIDER AND DIRECT FOR REHEARING.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: CONSTITUTION THIS MORNING AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE WHAT WE DO IN LARGE MEASURE IN MY MIND AS COMMISSIONERS WE HEAR CASES, WE HEAR LAND-USE DECISIONS EVERY TWO WEEKS.

REALLY, IT'S A MATTER, TO ME, FOR THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH.

AND SOMETIMES WE GET IT RIGHT, SOMETIMES WE MAY GET IT WRONG.

BUT ALL OF US, I KNOW EACH OF YOU SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH.

WHEN WE TOOK THIS ITEM UP, THINGS MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WITH COMPLETE ACCURACY.

THINGS MAY HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT.

BUT I PERSONALLY ÃIT WAS A VERY CLOSE CALL ON MY PART, AND I DID WHAT I DID IN MY MIND THINK ABOUT THAT SEA-DOO ACCIDENT.

I REALLY DID.

SO THERE WERE PROBABLY, AS I RECALL, I WOULD SAY THERE WERE PROBABLY 8 TO 10 ASSERTIONS MADE THAT DAY THAT ARE NOW WHAT I WOULD CALL MATERIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE.

AND THIS IS A RARE ACTION, I

[01:00:04]

THINK, TO VOTE TO RECONSIDER AND REHEAR AN ITEM.

BUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SO MANY FACTS IN DISPUTE THAT WERE PRESENTED TO US, AND I MADE A DECISION BASED IN LARGE PART ON A NUMBER OF THOSE FACTS BE THEY RIGHT OR WRONG THAT I WOULD LIKE ÃI THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THE TIME AND THE INTEREST TO HEAR IT AGAIN.

THAT'S WHY YOU MAKE THE MOTION ÃOR I MADE THE SECOND TWO MR. BLOCKER'S MOTION.

THAT'S WHY IT'S A BIT RARE BUT IN OUR EFFORT TO SEEK THE TRUTH, I AM WILLING TO SIT HERE AND SPEND A WHOLE DAY OF THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES TO HEAR BOTH SIDES SO THAT WE CAN MAKE AN INFORMED AND INTELLIGENT DECISION.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND THE SECOND TO REHEAR THE ITEM.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD RECOMMEND PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT.

>> SPEAKER: WE OPEN UP THIS DISCUSSION ITEM FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE ARE OPENING IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> I SUPPORT THE MOTION COMMISSIONER BLOCKER IS RIGHT AND COMMISSIONER DEAN IS RIGHT.

IT'S LIKE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT SAID IN THE CASE OF.

AMERICA FOR PERJURY OF PERJURY CONTAMINATED WATER AND RESERVOIR IT MUST BE CLEANED UP AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.

AND COUNSEL NEGLECTED IN RESPONDING TO COMMISSIONER JOHNS'S QUESTIONS ALSO A REFERRAL TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD BE IN ORDER IF THERE WAS PERJURY.

IF THERE WAS EXTORTION AS WE JUST HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

IN THE DEVELOPER.

AND ALSO, I WAS SITTING IN THE BACK NEXT TO DOUGLAS NELSON BURNETT AFTER THE ITEM WAS NOTED AND ONE OF THE CONSULTANTS FOR THE APPLICANT WENT OVER TO MR. BURNETT AFTER THE BOAT AND SAID TO HIM, WE PERMITTED THIS PROJECT.

DID MR. BURNETT AND THE ST.

JOHN'S LAW GROUP CHANGE SIDES? I DON'T KNOW.

BUT FROM THAT REMARK, I INFERRED THERE MAY ALSO BE A POTENTIAL ATTORNEY CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUE.

AND WHILE COUNSEL FOR NEITHER THE APPLICANT NOR THE OPPONENTS IS PRESENT, I AM VERY TROUBLED BY WHAT I HEARD AT THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE DEVELOPER, FROM THE LANDOWNER.

SO I THOROUGHLY AGREE WITH THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WALKER AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DEAN, AND I HOPE YOU DO A REHEARING.UST FOR THE RECORD, I HEARD THE TESTIMONY AT THAT HEARING, AND I WAS PERSUADED BY WHAT I HEARD AND I SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE OPPONENTS.

IN HEARING WHAT I HEARD THIS MORNING, I WOULD NOT HAVE DONE THAT.

BUT THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING FAIR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS.

IT A.

[INDISCERNIBLE] OF DUE PROCESS IN OUR SYSTEM IN OUR COUNTRY AND OUR STATE AND COUNTY AND HERE ON CONSTITUTION DAY, YOU HONOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND YOU HONOR THE MEMBERS OF ALL THE PEOPLE WHO FOUGHT, BLED, DIED FOR OUR CONSTITUTION, FOR OUR CIVIL RIGHTS.

THEY HAD MACHINE GUN NAZIS IN NORMANDY AND HE SURVIVED.

I HEAR.

HE TAUGHT ME YOU HAVE TO STAND UP TO PEOPLE IN POWER OR THEY WALK ALL OVER YOU.

AND JFK'S DAD TAUGHT HIM THE SAME THING.

I TOTALLY AGREED WITH COMMISSIONER BLOCKER'S MOTION AND I THANK HIM FOR BRINGING IT.

IT TAKES A LOT OF GUTS FOR A PUBLIC OFFICIAL AT ANY TIME EVER TO ADMIT THEY MIGHT HAVE MADE A MISTAKE.

AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OF THAT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THAT MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE, HIS NUMBER WAS ADMITTED THAT HE EVER MADE A MISTAKE, NOT EVEN ON THE WEATHER.

SO PLEASE APPROVE THE MOTION AND AS RUBEN ASK YOU TOLD HENRY DEAN 40 SOME YEARS AGO IF YOU HAVE THE FOLKS SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: SHERRY BADGER 2772 S. COLLINS AVENUE.

THIS GENTLEMAN'S RIGHT.

I WASN'T HERE AT THE OTHER HEARING, BUT YOUR STAFF IN HIGH POSITIONS HAVE TAUGHT UP AND GIVEN PHONY TESTAMENT JUST LIKE IN MY ROAD WHERE THEY CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD THAT APPROVES ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT I BROUGHT TO HER ATTENTION THAT YOU ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPOINT, WHICH NOBODY HAS SPENT APPOINTED NEW.

YOUR STAFF IS NOT TELLING YOU THE TRUTH.

YOU ALL ARE VOTING ON HALF-TRUTHS.

WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP WE HAD A MAJOR MODIFICATION, CAME IN HERE, THEY TESTIFIED.HERE WERE 68 FEET.

THERE WAS ONLY 58 PETE THERE'S NO 20 FOOT BUFFER.

AND IT WAS APPROVED.

EVEN PATRICK SAID NO, IT NEEDS TO COME BACK BEFORE A MAJOR

[01:05:08]

MODIFICATION WHICH FELL ON DEAF EARS BECAUSE ONE OF THE LLCS WAS A COMMISSIONER.

THANK YOU.

HAVE A GOOD DAY.

>> SPEAKER: TO SEE WHITE 535 CANAL RD. TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROJECT.

I HOPE YOU DO COME BACK TO REVISIT THIS APPEAL.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING, THE PEOPLE WHO SPEAK, CITIZENS WHO SPEAK, DO NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO REBUT TESTIMONY FROM OTHER PEOPLE WHO SPEAK, OTHERWISE, WE SHOULD HAVE CLARIFIED THE ERRONEOUS STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE TO YOU, SO I URGE YOU TO PLEASE REVISIT THIS SO ALL TRUTHS WILL COME OUT.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: BJ.

AUGUSTINE.

I HOPE THIS IS RE-HEARD AND THE REASON IS AT LEAST AS TELEVISED AND AT LEAST WE HAVE LAWYERS SITTING IN THIS ROOM NOW WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO REBUT US, AND WE CANNOT REBUT.HE LADY WAS VERY TRUE.

IT'S A LEGAL MATTER, AND WE HAVE TO FOLLOW LEGAL PROCEDURES, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE CITIZENS WHO DO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION GET TO PARTICIPATE AS MUCH AS ATTORNEYS OR LAWYERS, WHICHEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM AND DEVELOPERS AND THEIR TEAMS THERE'S ALWAYS TEAMS COMING UP HERE AND WE AS CITIZENS ARE BY OURSELVES PEOPLE CAN'T GET OFF WORK AND SIT HERE UNTIL WHATEVER TIME IT IS NOW AND WE HAVEN'T GOT TO THE AGENDA WHICH IS ALL RIGHT.

BECAUSE I AM GLAD TO SEE LAWYERS ARE PAYING ATTENTION BY BEING SET UP HERE BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

SOMETIMES THEY COME IN AND THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WILL GET BECAUSE THEY SPENT HOURS AND HOURS SENDING EMAILS AND WORKING WITH THE STAFF.

SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME AND WE ARE NOT BEING PAID TO COME IN HERE AND SIT.

WE CARE ABOUT OUR CONSTITUTION.

WE CARE ABOUT THIS COUNTY.

THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE.

WE WANT THE BEST FOR EVERYBODY, NOT JUST FOR PEOPLE THAT GOT THE MONEY TO HIRE A LAWYER AND COME IN HERE. HOPE THIS IS REHEARD AND NO MATTER WHAT'S DECIDED, AT LEAST THE PUBLIC IS AWARE NOW THAT WE CAN COME TO COMMISSIONERS, AND WE CAN HAVE THEM LOOK AT THESE DECISIONS HONESTLY, AND IF WE NEED TO GO BACK AND MAKE CORRECTIONS, WE ARE BIG ENOUGH TO DO THAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF EVERYBODY IN THIS COUNTY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING THAT WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE SPOKE.

WPLEASE VOTE.

IT PASSES 5 TO 0. DO WE HAVE TO DO A TIME CERTAIN?

>> SPEAKER: WE WOULD HAVE TO RE-ADVERTISE THE HEARING, SO WE WILL FIND AN APPROPRIATE TIME.

>> SPEAKER: HOW ARE WE GOING TO WEIGH THE ALLEGATIONS FROM BOTH SIDES?

>> SPEAKER: .BIZÃTHEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THEY DO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE STANDING THAT THEY MEET THE DEFINITION OF AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED PERSON AS DICTATED AND OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THAT IS A PRESENTATION OF PROOF BECAUSE THIS IS A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING ON THE MERITS, AND IS A DE NOVO HEARING SO YOU CAN READ WAY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, YOU CAN TAKE AN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND WITHIN THAT, WHETHER OR NOT THE APPELLANTS HAVE ÃARE AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED PERSON.

IT WAS BRIEFLY MENTIONED IN THE.

[INDISCERNIBLE] EXPLAINING THAT ONLY ONE OF THEM RECEIVED MAILED NOTICE AND MEETS THE AUTOMATIC REQUIREMENT BUT THE OTHERS MAY BE AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED PERSON.

IT IS A DETERMINATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT TO THE ARGUMENTS BY THE APPELLANT AND BY THE APPLICANT.

SO IT WOULD RESULT IN A LENGTHIER PROCESS BECAUSE LAST TIME, WE ALLOCATED TIME ASSUMING IT WAS JUST GOING TO BE HEARD ON THE MERITS.

NOW YOU HAVE KIND OF A PROCEDURAL ASPECT BEFORE YOU GET TO THE MARRIAGE QUESTION.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD SAY TODAY

[01:10:05]

OBVIOUSLY IS SEPTEMBER 17.

YOUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS OCTOBER 1. THAT MAY BE A LITTLE TOO SOON IN TERMS OF I THINK THE PARTIES'S PREPARATION AND NOTICE.

I THINK REALISTICALLY, PROBABLY THE OCTOBER 15 MEETING WOULD BE APPROPRIATELY AVAILABLE.

I JUST WANTED TO SET THAT UP FOR THE EXPECTATION PURPOSES.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> SPEAKER: WE SERVE AND A QUASIJUDICIAL CAPACITY AS A BOARD.

WE ARE NOT JUDICIAL, DON'T HAVE THAT EDUCATION OR EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE.

HOW DO WE KEEP PEOPLE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT YOU HAD JUST DESCRIBED WHEN THERE IN THEIR PRESENTATION IN THIS PROCESS OR ANY FUTURE QUASIJUDICIAL PRESENTATION? I HAVE HEARD MANY TIMES PEOPLE EFFECTIVELY CALL EACH OTHER LIARS IN A PROFESSIONAL WAY.

OTHER THAN STICKING TO CHAPTER AND VERSE OF THE CODE AND HOW THEY CONFORM OR DON'T CONFORM ON THE OTHER SIDE, HOW DO WE MINIMIZE THE HYPERBOLE IN THEIR PRESENTATIONS? OR HOW DOES OUR STAFF MINIMIZE THEIR HYPERBOLE?

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHN, PARTLY, HYPERBOLE MAY BE SOMETHING AS SAFE OR UNSAFE AS SOMETHING AS CROWDED OR UNCROWDED OR SOMETHING AS QUIET OR NOT QUIET.

THAT, FRANKLY, IS, YOU KNOW, MORE DIFFICULT TO REALLY PIN DOWN.

SOME ARE JUDGMENT CALLS.

BUT IN TERMS OF ASPECTS, HOW MANY FEET? HOW MANY ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS, THOSE TYPES OF MORE OBJECTIVE TYPE OF INFORMATION.

MY ADVICE WOULD BE THAT IF SOMEBODY IS MAKING SORT OF STATEMENTS OR ALLEGATIONS TO THAT EFFECT THEY SHOULD BRING SOME TYPE OF DOCUMENT TERRY EVIDENCE TO KIND OF SUPPORT IF IT'S X MENIFEE COURT X MANY ACCIDENTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY TO TRY TO PIN IT DOWN BETTER.

>> THERE'S NOT AN EXPECTATION FOR SOMEONE TO SAY THAT'S UNSAFE TO DEMONSTRATE SUCH?

>> AGAIN, IF IT IS A TRAFFIC EXPERT, I MEAN, PART IF THAT IS THEIR EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING AND THEIR TYPE OF THING IF THEY ARE GIVING AN EXPERT OPINION.

THIS IS A NON-EXPERT, THAT PROBABLY WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE ANYWAY.

BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER FACTORS THAT ARE MORE SUBJECTIVE, COMPATIBILITY, FOR EXAMPLE.

THIS APPLICATION, YOU KNOW, THAT THE USE WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS COMMUNITY ARE NOT COMPATIBLE.

THOSE ARE MORE SUBJECTIVE CALLS, AND I THINK, FIRST OF ALL, CITIZEN INPUT ON THOSE ITEMS CAN BE MADE.

THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE AN EXPERT OPINION BUT THEY ARE MORE SUBJECTIVE AND IT GOES TO, I GUESS, THE PERSUASIVENESS OF THEIR ARGUMENT.

>> SPEAKER: I WISH THAT WAS MORE CLEAR TO ME.

I SEE THE ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENT THEIR CLIENTS AS EXPERTS AND LAW, AND WHEN THERE'S OPPOSING SIDES AT EACH ARE USING THOSE SUBJECTIVE WORDS, I DON'T SEE THAT I HAVE SOMETHING OBJECTIVE TO MEASURE ONE SIDE VERSUS THE OTHER AGAINST IF IT'S SAFE, UNSAFE.

PICK THE WORDS YOU MAY WANT TO USE.

UNLESS THEY ARE CITING CODE OR LOSS OR SOMETHING, IT'S ALL PURELY BASED ON SOMEONE'S PERSPECTIVE.

I MEAN, PERSPECTIVE Ã PERCEPTION IS SIMPLY WHAT THEY CHOOSE IT TO SOUND LIKE IN THEIR ARGUMENT.

PERCEPTION IS REALITY UNTIL REALITY IS PERCEIVED.

UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC AND CONCRETE TO BE SURE PERCEPTION ON, BOTH SIDES, THAT'S THE REASON THEY ARE HERE IS THEY HAVE AN OPPOSING PERCEPTION OF THESE SITUATIONS THAT WE HOLD VERY SERIOUSLY IN OUR DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.

I AM STILL NOT HEARING SOMETHING I CAN DEFINITIVELY BASE A DECISION ON OR IDENTIFY WHEN SOMEONE IS USING WHAT I CALL HYPERBOLE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.

THEY ARE HERE REPRESENTING AND IT'S NOT MOVING BUT WE ARE NOT JUDICIAL BOARD IN THAT RESPECT.

WE ARE QUASIJUDICIAL, BUT I RELY ON YOUR EXPERTISE NOT SO MUCH TO BE THE TIEBREAKER BUT TO INTERPRET THE LEGAL LANGUAGE THAT'S PRESENTED TO US.

>> SPEAKER: AGAIN, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT EVEN IN A

[01:15:01]

JUDICIAL PROCESS, EITHER A JUDGE OR A JURY, SOMETIMES THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OBJECTIVE FACTORS, HOW MANY FEET, HOW MANY DECIBEL, AND HOW MANY ÃOTHER TIMES IT'S MORE SUBJECTIVE.

THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS.

WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS IF SOMETHING IS POSSIBLE TO BE OBJECTIVE TO BASICALLY BE KIND OF QUANTIFIED IF IT'S REASONABLY ABLE TO HAVE THAT DONE THEN IT SHOULD BE DONE.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

>> SPEAKER: ALL RIGHT.

[Consent Agenda]

ARE WE THROUGH WITH PUBLIC COMMENT? NOW WE HAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

LET'S GO WITH OCTOBER 15.

MY OPINION I THINK THE OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED THIS WAS GOING TO COME UP TODAY IF WE HAD THIS MANY PEOPLE.

BUT ONE THING I WILL ASK PATRICK FOR YOU TO DO IS REACH OUT TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FIND OUT HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, IF THEY ARE THERE, THAT IN THEIR REALM, NOT IN OUR REALM.NOT FOR US TO DECIDE WHETHER IT'S FACTUAL OR NOT.

THEY MIGHT WANT TO BE AT THE HEARING.

I DON'T KNOW.

THEY MIGHT WANT A STENOGRAPHER HERE.

I DON'T KNOW.

I CAN TELL YOU THIS.

AS A BOARD APPEAR TO HAVE PEOPLE COME AND TELL YOU NONFACTUAL STUFF, I MEAN, IT HAPPENS QUITE OFTEN.

AND WE NEED TO GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT NO MATTER WHO IS DOING IT.

>> SPEAKER: AT THE RISK OF CARRYING THIS ON A LITTLE FURTHER, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS.

I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN WE HEARD THIS ITEM LAST MONTH ÃI BELIEVE IT WAS LAST MONTH ÃNO ONE WAS UNDER OATH.

NO ONE ¦

>> SPEAKER: I AM THINKING AS A BOARD IF WE ARE TRYING TO WEIGH WHETHER SOMEBODY IS TELLING THE TRUTH, YOU KNOW, AND YOU GO IN A JUDGE'S CHAMBERS AND YOU'VE BEEN THERE YOU ARE SWORN IN.

THAT'S A LOT DIFFERENT THAN YOU ARE COMING HERE TO SPEAK.

MAYBE WE NEED TO HAVE THEM SWORN IN THAT DAY AS A THING BEFORE THEY SPEAK.

>> SPEAKER: I ÃMAYBE I MISHEARD ¦

>> SPEAKER: YOU HAVE AN APPLICANT THAT SAYING THEY HAVE BEEN EXPORTED.

THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT REALM THAN WHAT WE ARE HERE TO DO.

>> SPEAKER: I AGREE.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE NO WAY TO WAY THAT THEY ARE NOT AND NO DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU WENT DOWN THE ROAD AND SAID GEE, IF YOU DON'T DO THIS I'M GOING TO BUILD THIS.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S ¦

>> SPEAKER: I MUST HAVE MISREAD WHAT YOU SAID.

I'M JUST SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ANOTHER GROUP OF MY COMPANY.

>> SPEAKER: I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO GET A BALL.

>> SPEAKER: WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE GOING TO PROCEED DIRECTLY IF THESE ALLEGATIONS WILL BE BROUGHT UP DURING PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SPEAKER: NOT SPEAKING ABOUT THE MATTER THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED TO THE BOARD TODAY, BUT I WOULD JUST SAY IN GENERAL, IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC FEELS THAT A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED AGAINST HIM OR HER, NOTHING PREVENTS THAT INDIVIDUAL HIMSELF OR HERSELF FROM REFERRING THE MATTER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.

YOU KNOW, THEY ARE PROBABLY IN THE BEST POSITION TO MAKE ANY TYPE OF COMPLAINT LIKE THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THIS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WANTS TO BE THE FACTFINDER ON SOME, YOU KNOW, ¦

>> SPEAKER: RIGHT.

BUT THIS WAS BROUGHT UP TODAY AND WHAT WE ARE WE HEARING IT ON HIS ALLEGATIONS THAT THINGS WERE NOT DONE CORRECTLY OR THEY WERE ÃI WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO MOVE ON AND GET THROUGH SOME OF THE AGENDA.

GO AHEAD.

>> SPEAKER: I HAD A QUESTION FOR PATRICK AS WELL.

WHEN DID YOU BECOME ÃHAVE YOU HEARD THERE WERE ALLEGATIONS OF EXTORTION BEFORE?

>> SPEAKER: I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT.

I HEARD THERE WERE SOME OFFERS.

I NEVER HEARD THE EXTORTION TYPE OF THING.

I HEARD IN ONE CIRCUMSTANCE THERE WAS AN OFFER FROM ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT MADE SOME OFFER, YOU KNOW, PERTAINING TO THE APPLICATION.

THAT IS WHAT I HEARD.

I HAD NOT HEARD IT IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXTORTION, AND IT SOUNDED LIKE, FROM WHAT I HEARD TODAY, THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SORT OF MULTIPLE TYPES OF THINGS.

WHICH IS NEW INFORMATION FOR ME.

>> SPEAKER: I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL BE HELPFUL AND I THINK LEGAL COUNSEL CAN MAYBE ADVISE US BETTER ON THIS IS WHEN THESE TYPES OF MATTERS TO LAPORTE THERE IS SOME TYPE OF INSINUATION OF THIS, SOME MECHANISM TO ADVISE THE BOARD Ã I THINK THAT'S SIGNIFICANT.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

[01:20:01]

I WAS AWARE OF SOME OF THAT.

I THOUGHT WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

I AGREE THERE WAS NEW INFORMATION THAT CAME UP TODAY.

I THINK THERE HAS TO BE A WAY WE IDENTIFY THAT.

IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROSECUTE THAT WILL LOOK INTO THAT.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING FOR THE CHAIRMAN FOR LEGAL COUNSEL TO REFLECT ON AND SEE ÃTHIS COULD COME UP AGAIN IN A DIFFERENT MATTER.

WE ARE NOT IN A SITUATION AGAIN IF THERE'S MATERIAL PERTINENT INFORMATION THAT COULD ALTER POTENTIALLY SOMETHING FOR THE BOARD TO LOOK AT LATER.

I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO THE CHAIR AND THE BOARD WISHES TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THAT AND HELP US WITH THE BETTER HANDLE.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> SPEAKER: YES, IT DOES.

I WILL SAY TOO, THOUGH IT MAY BE PART OF A NORMAL KIND OF PROCESS.

I WOULD JUST GIVE A HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE OF AN APPLICATION, A PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO CHANGE IT ÃA USE ON THE PROPERTY, THAT TYPE OF THING.

THEY INTERACT WITH THE NEIGHBORS, THE NEIGHBORS MAY REQUEST, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN BUFFERING, CERTAIN NESTS, CERTAIN THAT WHICH MAY NOT BE REQUIRED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

BUT THOSE TYPES OF DISCUSSIONS GO ON AND I DON'T THINK THOSE ARE NECESSARILY IMPROPER.

THOSE ARE NOT THE EVERYDAY PROCESS OF SOMEBODY REACHING OUT TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE TYPE OF THING.

AT A CERTAIN POINT, THERE COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD CROSS OVER BARGAINING BACK AND FORTH TYPE OF THING.

OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AGAIN.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER AVENUES TO PURSUE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> SPEAKER: AS WE MOVE ON I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THE PROCESS IS WORKING.

IT MAY BE CUMBERSOME YOU HAD A HEARING YOU HAVE PARTIES COME FORWARD THAT THERE WAS MISINFORMATION AND ACCURATE INFORMATION HOWEVER YOU WANT TO CHARACTERIZE IT THE BOARD HAS PROCEDURES FOR RECONSIDERATION.

YOU EXERCISED THOSE THIS MORNING AND YOU WANT US TO PURIFY THE RECORD TO THE EXTENT WE CAN FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF THE ITEMS BEFORE IT COMES BACK.

AS CUMBERSOME AS THIS CONVERSATION IS IS HEALTHY BUT I DON'TWANT ANYONE TO THINK WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE BECAUSE YOU ARE EXERCISING THIS MORNING.

>> SPEAKER: ANY DELETIONS TO THE CONSENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> NONE.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> NO SIR.

>> CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR.

>> SPEAKER: MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

[Regular Agenda]

>> SPEAKER: ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> SPEAKER: ANY ADDITIONS TO THE REGULAR AGENDA?

>> NONE.

>> COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> AS THE BOARD IS AWARE, THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY DECLARATION EXTENSION THAT WAS DONE LAST THURSDAY THAT WOULD RUN A WEEK UNTIL TODAY IS TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY.

THE BOARD CAN CONSIDER AT THAT TIME WHETHER TO EXTEND, HOWEVER, THE BOARD IS HERE TODAY, AND I THINK THE COUNTY STAFF IF REQUESTED, COULD YOU GIVE A RECOMMENDATION AS WHETHER TO EXTEND OR NOT IF IT WERE EXTENDED, IT WOULD BE EXTENDED FROM TODAY AND THAT WOULD GO TO YOUR NEXT NOT REGULAR MEETING BUT COULD HAVE I BELIEVE A BUDGET MEETING ON THE 24TH AND SO THAT WOULD BE A SEVEN-DAY THING.

THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THE BOARD COULD CONSIDER ADDING TO THE AGENDA JUST A CONSIDERATION OF EXTENDING THE LOCAL DECLARATION.

>> MR. CHAIR AS YOU HAVE BROUGHT UP EARLY IN THE MEETING BEFORE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, REGULAR AGENDA NUMBER EIGHT WHICH IS 2019, MR. TRAN KUALA THE APPLICANT FOR THAT AS PER THE RIGHT UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HAS REQUESTED A WITHDRAWAL FOR THAT AND AGAIN UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THE BOARD IMMEDIATELY BEFORE TAKING ANY OTHER ACTION ON THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION SHALL APPROVE SUCH REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION AND TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION ON THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION.

SO I WOULD REQUEST THAT THE

[01:25:03]

BOARD REMOVE REGULAR AGENDA NUMBER EIGHT AND CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE REGULAR AGENDA AS AMENDED AND APPROVING THE WITHDRAWAL OF COMP PLAN AMENDMENT 2019 ÃTHREE VISTA TRANQUILA.

>> SPEAKER: ADMINISTRATION, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

>> SPEAKER: NOTHING.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY ANYBODY MAKE .

>> SPEAKER: I MAKE THE MOTION.

>> SPEAKER: SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION ON A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

[Item 1]

ALL OPPOSE? IT PASSES 5 TO 0.

WE WILL HEAR ITEM NUMBER ONE WHICH IS QUASIJUDICIAL.

COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: NONE.

>> SPEAKER: NONE TO REPORT.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNS.

>> SPEAKER: NONE.

>> SPEAKER: I HAVE SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT, LUKE PERCY AND HIS FATHER JOEL NUMEROUS TIMES ON THIS ITEM HAD THE PROCESS HOW TO GET UP TO THIS POINT.

JUST TO KIND OF CLEAR THE RECORD I HAVE BEEN ON SITE MANY TIMES.HEY ARE GOOD FRIENDS OF MINE AND I VISITED THEIR HOUSE QUITE A BIT. AND THERE QUITE OFTEN.

>> SPEAKER: ERICA CLARK WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.

I AM ON ITEM NON-ZONING VARIANCE 2019 Ã09 KERSEY ROAD EASEMENT.

VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT TO AN EASEMENT EXISTING EASEMENT ALREADY SERVING MORE THAN TWO DWELLING UNITS AND TO USE THE EXISTING EASEMENT AS IS.

LOCATION MAP IS WEST OF ÃON COUNTY ROAD 204 WEST OF U.S. 1 AERIAL MAP SUBJECT PROPERTY.

KERSEY ROAD EXTENSION 2.

COUNTY ROAD 204.

BACKGROUND, EASEMENT IS A 30 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT APPROXIMATELY 1000 LINEAR FEET LONG.

THERE ARE CURRENTLY SIX RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ACCESSING ON THE EASEMENT.

PROPERTIES ARE PART OF A FAMILY FARM.

APPLICANTS'S PROPERTY WAS CREATED IN 2018 BY DIVISION.

APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE TOTAL EASEMENT AND FIRE RESCUE HAS HAD A TRUCK ON SITE TO VERIFY ACCESS AND TURN ABILITY.

TYPICAL KERSEY ROAD PICTURES.

YOU HAVE A LAYOUT.

THE EASEMENT IS FULLY OPEN FOR THE ENTIRE 30 FOOT WIDTH.

APPLICANT SEEKS RELIEF FROM SECTION 6.0407 B1 AND JUNE 4, 2007 B2 B STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND THERE'S NO COUNTY FINANCIAL OR MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE EASEMENT.

STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE.

OKAY.

I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

DID THE APPLICANT WANT TO SPEAK? OKAY.

PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE ARE NOW OPENING PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.

SEEING HIM, MR. CHAIRMAN WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: ALL RIGHT.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

MOTION TO APPROVE NON-ZONING VARIANCE 20 1909 KERSEY ROAD EASEMENT.

REQUEST FOR A NON-ZONING VARIANCE AND LAND VELMA CODE SECTION 6.04 POINT ¦

>> SPEAKER: I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE BOARD AWARE ONE OF YOUR MEMBERS IS DOING A POWDER ROOM AND HE WILL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL MAKE IT AND WE WILL ÃTO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN EASEMENT SERVING MORE THAN TWO PROPERTIES IN THE SECTION 6.04.07 POINT BE .2 POINT BE TOO ALLOW THE UTILIZATION OF DRIVING SURFACE LESS THAN 20 FEET IN WIDTH BASED ON SIX FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO FOUR CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL SECOND IT.

>> SPEAKER: WE WILL WAIT ON COMMISSIONER DEAN.

>> SPEAKER: YOU CAN ACTUALLY HEAR THIS IN THE RESTROOM.

WE HEARD EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON.

YO>> JUSTIN KELLY GROWTH

[Item 2]

[01:30:44]

MANAGEMENT I WILL BE PRESENTING ITEM NUMBER TWO REZONING 20 1907 BUSINESS PARK.

>> SPEAKER: THIS ALSO IS QUALIFIED JUDICIAL, COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER SMITH?

>> SPEAKER: NO.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS.

>> NONE.

>> COMMISSIONER BLOCKER?

>> NONE.

>> I DID DRIVE BY THIS SITE THIS WEEKEND AND DIDN'T GO IN BUT DROVE BY THE SITE.

READ.

>> SPEAKER: THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES FROM INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING WITH CONDITIONS TO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING.

THIS IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH IS LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF DOBBS ROAD NORTH OF KANSAS STATE ROAD.

THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD USE EAR TO THE EAST ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS IS THE HIDEOUT AND OLD MOULTRIE ROAD SUBDIVISION.

THE PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED-USE AND EXCELLENT INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING CONDITIONS.

AS MENTIONED THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES TO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING TO ACCOMMODATE 42,562 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE SPACE.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF A LARGE TRACT OF LAND THAT WAS REZONE TO IW WITH CONDITIONS FOR ORDINANCE 1984-70.

CERTAIN CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THIS ORDINANCE WILL INTERFERE WITH RETENTION AND SAFE FLOW OF TRAFFIC IN AND OUT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND IS REQUESTING THAT CONDITIONS BE REMOVED AND IT BE RESUMED.

REVIEWED BY STAFF SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN AN AREA WHERE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES ARE CONCENTRATED THE PROPOSED REZONING WILL BE COMPATIBLE.

FURTHERMORE I WAREHOUSING USES THAT ARE PROPOSED.

STAFF ALSO NOTES THAT SEVERAL NEARBY PROPERTIES WERE SIMILARLY RESUMED IN SUPPORT ORDINANCE 2015-40.

THIS REZONING REMOVED THE CONDITION AND ALSO REQUESTED SIMILAR USES.

PROVIDED HERE IS THE CONDITIONS ARE REQUIRED BY THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.

THOSE WERE PROVIDED TO ANY STAFF REPORT AND THEY ARE LISTED HERE ONLY SLIDE.

IF APPROVED THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD ELIMINATE ALL THE CURRENT REQUIRED CONDITIONS.

ALL OF THESE CATEGORIES ALLOWED AND IW ZONING CLASSIFICATION WOULD BE PERMITTED AND THOSE USE CATEGORIES ARE LISTED HERE ON THE SLIDE AS WELL AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

STAFF FINDS ELIMINATING THE CURRENT CONDITIONS WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA SINCE A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED IW OR ALLOW SIMILAR TYPE OF USES.

THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS POLICING PUBLIC USES PERMITTED AND IW ZONING EXCEPT, EXCEPT.

[INDISCERNIBLE] IF THIS ZONING WAS APPROVED.

REVIEWED BY TECHNICAL STAFF FOUND THE SPACING AND BUFFERING OPTIONS ARE NOT REQUIRED ALONG THIS SECTION SINCE IT'S A MINOR COLLECTOR GROUP.

PROVIDED ON THE SLIDE'S COMPATIBILITY MAP OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS SHOWING SEVERAL PROPERTIES ARE TO THE NORTH AND SIMILAR REZONING THAT TOOK PLACE TO THE SOUTH.

AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE BY THE APPLICANT THAT SHOWS THE INTENDED LAYOUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THIS REQUEST WAS HEARD BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY AFTER SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 26, 2019 AND THEY RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE IT.

THERE WAS ONE PERSON THAT WAS CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL NOISE AND AGENCY MEMBERS DID NOTE THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT FACE TOWARDS THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD HELP MITIGATE POTENTIAL NOISE.

STAFF HAS RECEIVED TWO PHONE CALLS REGARDING THIS REQUEST SINCE THE WRITING OF THE STAFF REPORT AND BOTH CALLS WERE ONLY INFORMATIONAL AND WERE RECEIVED FROM THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEARBY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS.

BOTH CALLS INQUIRED ABOUT PROPOSED USES AND POTENTIAL NOISE AS WELL.

OVERALL STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LDC AND HAS AND THAT INCLUDES PRESENTATION WE WILL STAND BY

[01:35:01]

FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.

THANK YOU.

LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION?

>> I AM HOWARD ALLGOOD, 33, MORRIS AVENUE SUITE 101.AINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.

I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, AND I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> SPEAKER: I SEE NONE AT THIS TIME.

>> SPEAKER: WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO.

>> IT'S ME AGAIN SHERRY BADGER 2772 S. COLLINS AVENUE.

I JUST URGE YOU TO TAKE GREAT Ã THERE IS GREAT DANGER IN IMPROVING THESE STORAGE UNITS BECAUSE THE SAME THING HAPPENED TO US IN THE 1990S, IT WAS APPROVED FOR STORAGE UNITS WITHOUT A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

IT CAME BEFORE THE STAFF AND ENDED UP A STRIP MALL FOR YEARS AND YEARS IT WOULD NEVER INTERFERE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

NOW THEY HAVE AN OUTLET.

IT'S NOT RIGHT ON OUR ROAD AND I URGE EACH ONE OF YOU TO TAKE CAUTION WHEN YOU APPROVE THAT THESE STORAGE UNITS BE APPROVED BECAUSE THEY DO COME BACK BEFORE YOU.

THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME BEFORE YOU, AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO INTERFERE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU.

>> ED SLAVIN BOX 3084 ED SLAVIN.COM COULD WE IDENTIFY ALL THE BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND INVESTORS ON THE PROJECT? ALSO COULD WE PLEASE SWEAR ON ALL THE WITNESSES FROM NOW ON.

YOU RAISED REALLY GOOD POINTS.

ABOUT THE POSSIBLE PERJURY AND EXTORTION IN THE ITEM THAT HAD BEEN APPROVED AT A PRAYER MEETING THAT'S NOW SET FOR OCTOBER 15.

I HAD A GOOD COLLOQUY WITH THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM.

MY SUGGESTION IS SQUARE AND ALL THE WITNESSES AS WAS THE PRACTICE IN PRIOR YEARS, AND ALSO PLEASE ADOPT FLORIDA STATUTE 90, THE FLORIDA EVIDENCE CODE, FOR YOUR DELIBERATIONS HERE FROM THIS DAY FORWARD.

PLEASE PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 1. WHEN I WAS CLERKING FOR THE CHIEF JUDGE OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LEISURE BACK IN THE 80S HE HIRED PROFESSOR MIKE GRAHAM FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI.

BASICALLY WHAT PROFESSOR GRANT DID WAS ADOPT THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE AND THEY WOULD APPLY TO THE HISTORY OF HEARINGS ADDING ABOUT SIX ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS BECAUSE WE TRUSTED ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATORS SOMEWHAT MORE THAN WE TRUST JURORS.

WE NEED TO HAVE THE RULES IN WRITING.

GOOD LAW REVIEW ARTICLE ABOUT.

[INDISCERNIBLE] FLORIDA BAR JOURNAL ABOUT 15 OR 20 YEARS AGO PROPOSING THE RULES OF EVIDENCE BE ADOPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS.N THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, IT ILLUSTRATES ONCE MORE YOU NEED A SCIENCE ADVISOR AND WHY AND THE NAME OF ALL THAT'S HOLY WITH YOUR STAFF SUPPORT THE NOTION OF MINING IN THIS PROPERTY, EVEN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THAT SHOWS A LACK OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND TECHNICAL EXPERTISE.

DELETE THE MINING AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS ILLUSTRATES THE DESTITUTE AND ALEXA DIESEL NATURE OF YOUR STAFF.

BACK IN 1990 THERE WAS A PROPERTY ON STATE ROUTE 207 THAT'S THE ASPHALT PLANT AND IT WAS REZONED AND WHEN I INTERVIEWED IN 2005, 2006, THE HEAD OF THE ZONING FOR THE COUNTY SHE DID NOT CARE.

SHE DID NOT WANT TO KNOW THE FACT THAT IF YOU HAVE AN ASPHALT PLANT IT INCREASES THE LEVELS OF BRAIN CANCER 16 TIMES AND INCREASES THE LEVEL OF SUICIDE 16 TIMES.

IT CORRELATES ÃNOT NECESSARILY CAUSES BUT CORRELATES.

THE FIRST TIME I SAW KEN BRYANT SPEAK WAS AT THE SPORT ON T.V.

ON JANUARY 28 OF 2005 AND HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ASPHALT PLANT AND ABOUT HOW HE HAD A BUSINESS ON DOBBS ROAD, A FAMILY BUSINESS THEY MOVED DOWN FROM MARYLAND WHEN HE RETIRED FROM THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.

AND THEY PUT AN ASPHALT PLANT AND A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD NEAR ST. JOSEPH'S NEAR SCHOOLS AND RETIREE HOUSING, FEDERAL HOUSING.

THAT'S THE INDIFFERENCE THAT THE COUNTY SHOWED.

WE CALL THE ARTICLE POLLUTION PARTNERS, ST. JOHN'S COUNTY AND ASHLAND PETROLEUM AT AIPAC BUT PLEASE DON'T APPROVE THIS AND PLEASE DON'T EVER HOLD A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING WITHOUT IDENTIFYING THE WITNESSES AND KNOWING YOUR CUSTOMERS ARE, KNOWING THE NAME OF EVERY SINGLE BENEFICIAL OWNER AND INVESTOR AND HAVING SCIENTIFIC TECHNICAL ADVISOR WILL LET YOU MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION OTHERWISE WE ARE POISONING PEOPLE AS WE ARE WITH THAT AS WELL PLANT TO THE STATE.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO? SINA, WE CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: BACK TO THE BOARD.

ANY QUESTIONS? CONCERNS? OKAY.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION IN THAT

[01:40:02]

ORDINANCE 2019-61.

REQUEST TO RESUME THREE ACRES OF LAND FROM INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING WITH CONDITIONALS TO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SPEAKER: I SECONDED.

THEY WOULD HAVE A MOTION ON THE SECOND TO APPROVE.

PLEASE VOTE.

[Items 3 & 4]

IT PASSES 5 TO 0.

>> SPEAKER: NUMBER 3.

>> SPEAKER: CHAIR ITEMS THREE AND FOUR ARE TO BE HEARD TOGETHER AND THEY ARE BOTH QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS IF YOU HAD ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS ARE MADE ANY SITE VISITS NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DISCLOSE THE NATURE OF THOSE COMMUNICATIONS AND WHO THEY WERE MADE WITH.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: YES.

I MET LAST THURSDAY WITH THE APPLICANT AND KAREN TAYLOR, HIS CONSULTANT AND HIS FIRST NAME IS DYLAN BUT I'M GOING TO STRUGGLE WITH THE LAST NAME.

I AM SURE KAREN CAN HELPED ME OUT WHEN SHE GETS UP TO SPEAK.

AND THEN I ALSO MET WITH SEVERAL HOMEOWNERS NEARBY EITHER ADJACENT OR ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM THE PROPOSED TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, AND I THINK I HAVE THE SAME STRIKE.

I HOPE I DO.

BUT THERE WERE SEVERAL THERE WAS DOTTIE HUCHISON, CYNTHIA.

LIVINGSTON, WHO I MET WITH AND ALSO HAD PHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH.

EACH OF THEM HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THIS TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT AND THE IMPACTS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT MAY HAVE ON THE RESIDENTIAL AREA JUST ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM THIS PROPOSAL.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER SMITH?

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I MET WITH TERRY TAYLOR AND THE APPLICANT DYLAN.

1:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 9.

WE DISCUSSED THE TWO VARIANCE REQUEST, THE SETBACKS AND EXPLAINED WHAT THAT WAS.

WE DISCUSSED ALSO THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE FOUR AREA RATIO VARIANCE.

WE LOOKED AT THE SITE PLAN, DISCUSSED THE MOTEL THAT EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY AT PRESENT.

WE DISCUSSED THE TWO FRONTAGES, TO ROAD FRONTAGES AND THE ALLEYWAY, THE 20 FOOT IN THE BACK.

WE LOOKED ÃDISCUSSED THE PLOT FROM THE 1920S.

ALSO, WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER BOUGHT THIS IN JUNE 2010, A SMALL MOBILE HOME THERE AS WELL AND WE DISCUSSED SOME OF THESE OTHER LAND PURCHASES WITHIN THE COUNTY.

I HAVE RECEIVED SOME EMAILS, LIKEWISE FROM THE SAME FOLKS THAT COMMISSIONER DEAN HAS MENTIONED.

MS. HUTCHINSON AND THE.

WILL DISCLOSE EVERYTHING I NEED TO PUT FORWARD.

MR. CHAIRMAN?

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> SPEAKER: I MET WITH KAREN TAYLOR AND THE APPLICANT ON SEPTEMBER 12 AT 12:30 P.M. TO DISCUSS MANY OF THE SAME DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, THE VARIANCES, CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES EXISTING USES, POTENTIAL USES.

HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY, AND I RECEIVED AN UNCOUNTED NUMBER OF EMAILS FOR AND AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER BLOCKER?

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

I MET ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 AT 1:30 P.M. WITH KAREN TAYLOR AND DYLAN.

I THINK I'M SAYING THAT QUICKLY.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT.

WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE GENERAL DETAILS AS FAR AS WHAT THE LAYOUT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL EMAILS BOTH PRO AND CON TO THIS AS WELL.HAT'S ALL WE HAVE TO DISCLOSE AT THIS TIME.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

I HAD A MEETING SEPTEMBER 12 AT 11:00 A.M. WITH MS. KAREN TAYLOR AND MR. DILLON ÃDYLAN.

I'M NOT GOING TO TRY.

AND THEN WE DISCUSSED THE SITE AND THE PLANS AND WE DID DISCUSS THE ALLEYWAY AND WE DISCUSSED THE TWO VARIANCES AHEAD, THE OLD HOTEL THAT WAS ON THE PREMISES, THE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR SOME OF THE PUBLIC USES IN THE AREA, AND I TINK I SPOKE WITH VIVIAN BROWNING AND DID SOME PASSING ON THE REQUESTS AND THEN I DID GET EMAILS FOR AND AGAINST FROM THE SAME PEOPLE.

>> SPEAKER: I FORGOT I HAD A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION.

>> GOOD MORNING.

I HAVE ITEMS THREE AND FOUR AND AS.

APPLICATION COMES BEFORE YOU THE ACCOMPANYING BEACH TOWN CENTER WHICH IS THE.

[01:45:04]

THE NON-SONY VARIANCE IS 2019 - 07 HAS NOT GONE TO PDA BECAUSE OF THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE IN REGARDS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH WAS AMENDED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO SO THAT THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO COULD BE Ã COULD GET A VARIANCE TO IT UNDER YOUR DECISIONS.

THE ÃTHERE IS TWO REQUESTS.

THE FIRST IS FOR A NON-ZONING VARIANCE TO THE SETBACKS.

VILANO HAS DIFFERENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.

THEY ARE REQUESTING AN EIGHT-FOOT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE 12TH OF SETBACK.

ONLY ALONG LUCIA STREET AND ALONG THE ROAD.

THEY ARE REQUESTING TO EXCEED THE RATIO OF 80 PERCENT UP TO 118 PERCENT.

THIS IS THE SITE.

THE SOUTHWEST CORNER BETWEEN VILANO ROAD AND LOJA STREET INTO THE CELL PHYSIOLOGY LEFT IS THE RESTAURANT.

THE TOWN CENTER TO THE SOUTH IS.

[INDISCERNIBLE] THE ZONING MAP AGAIN SAME THING.

TOWNCENTER MIXED USE FOR EVERYTHING IN THE BRAIN AND TO THE SOUTH IS RS 3.

HERE, I NOTED DIFFERENT COLORS TO SHOW WHAT'S THE CONTEXT.

THE YELLOW IS THE OLD HOTEL BUT IS PLANNED TO BE DEMOLISHED.

THE PURPLE TO THE LEFT IS THE RESTAURANT.

THE BLUE TO THE SOUTH IS THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND THE GREEN TO THE RIGHT ÃTO THE EAST IS THE NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION HYATT PLACE AND TO THE NORTH IS NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS.

THE REASON FOR THE ENCROACHMENT IS TO ALLOW FOR SOME FRONT YARD SPACE BUT ALLOWING FOUR FEET SEVEN IN THE FUTURE, THEY CAN USE THAT TO PLACE ACCESSIBILITY RAMPS.

THE SAR INCREASE IS DUE TO THEM BEING ALLOWED TO INCREASE THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY WHICH IS A RESULT OF THE VILANO BEACH RESIDENTIAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO A TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BUT IT'S ONLY FOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS SO IT'S THE VILANO BEACH RESIDENTIAL EXCHANGE.

THEY WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE 27 UNITS ON THIS PROPERTY.

SO BY DOUBLING IT, WHICH IS WHAT THE CBRE ALLOWS THEY COULD GO TO 54 UNITS BUT THEY ARE REQUESTING 49 UNITS.

THE VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER ALLOWS FOR BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.

THOUGH THESE ARE PLANNED TO BE RESIDENTIAL, HOWEVER, VILANO ROAD AND THE LOJA STREET, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BE CONVERTED TO COMMERCIAL SHOULD BE OWNERS DECIDE TO DO THAT WHEN THEY MOVE IN.

THE REASON THE DENSITY IS DIFFERENT IN VILANO BEACH IS THAT THE TOWNCENTER IS LOOKED AT AS ONE UNIT, AND THERE IS 186 DWELLING UNITS ALLOWED WITHIN MAC, AND THE VBRE ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE THOSE UNITS AROUND, AND THAT'S HOW THIS PROPERTY ENDS UP WITH MORE UNITS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTIES THEY WERE REMOVED FROM.

>>> THE SITE PLAN TO THE LEFT IS AN EARLY SITE PLAN.

IT SHOWS THE INTERNAL ROADS AND MAKE CUTS WHERE THEY WILL BE MAKING ON VILANO ROAD AND ON LOJA STREET.

THE DRAWING ON THE TOP RIGHT IS A RENDERING OF A POSSIBLE ARCHITECTURAL SELECTION WHEN THEY GET TO THAT POINT.

THEY HAVE NOT HAD THAT REVIEWED YET.

AT THE BOTTOM, IT SHOWS THE PLAN THAT SHOWS THIS PART OF VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER DOES NOT REQUIRE COMMERCIAL.

AND SO THAT MEANS THEY ARE TYPE II BUILDINGS AND THAT IS WHAT DRAWS ÃMAKES THE SETBACK ZERO AND 12 FEET, AND THAT'S WHERE THE VARIANCES COME FROM.IF THEY HAD A ZERO SETBACK THE TWO CHOICES ARE ZERO AND 12.

IF IT HAD A ZERO SETBACK WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BUILD AT LEAST 50 PERCENT OF THE BUILDING ON THE FRONT SETBACK LINE.

INSTEAD THEY CHOSE THE PROPHET SETBACK AND TO ENCOURAGE A DEEP, THEY WILL HAVE A DEEP PORCH THAT ALLOWS A BIT OF A YARD.

AND IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR THE ACCESSIBILITY RAMPS SHOULD THE OWNERS DECIDE TO MAKE IT A BOUTIQUE OR AN OFFICE.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FROM THE VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER DESIGN GUIDELINES TO SHOW WHAT THE VISION MUST SUPPORT THESE SETBACKS.

AND THESE ARE PHOTOS FROM THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO SHOW WHAT THE VISION MUST FOR THE URBAN DOWNTOWN.

THE 80 PERCENT IS NORMALLY THE LIMIT FOR THE SAR YOU'RE ASKING FOR 100 18 PERCENT OF ÃTHERE IS ANOTHER SECTION OF SECTION Ã ARTICLE 310 THAT ALLOWS FOR OWNERS WHO RESTORE AND PRESERVE THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO HAVE THEIR FAR INCREASED TO 150 PERCENT BUT THERE IS NO SUCH

[01:50:01]

PROVISION FOR THOSE WHO ARE JUST USING THE VBRE PROGRAM.

THAT WAS NOT PUT IN THE CODE WENDY VBRE PROGRAM WAS ADOPTED, AND SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR 118 PERCENT NOT THE 150.

THIS WENT BEFORE THE NORTH COASTAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ON AUGUST 14.

THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE WAS APPROVED 5 TO 0 UNANIMOUSLY.

THE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION, HOWEVER, WAS 4 TO 1 BUT THE ONE IN OPPOSITION DID NOT EXPLAIN WHY.

STAFF HAS RECEIVED SEVERAL INQUIRIES BY PHONE JUST ABOUT WHAT THE ITEM ÃTO EXPLAIN THE ITEM AS YOU CAN TELL THERE'S LOTS TO EXPLAIN.E RECEIVED ONE LETTER OF CONCERN, ONE LETTER OPPOSITION AND TO RESPONSES TO THE ADJACENT OWNERS LIST WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION.

STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN AND THE LDC THERE ARE SIX FINDINGS OF FACTS AND SIX CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL FOR THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE AND SIX FINDINGS OF FACTS FOR DENIAL AND THE DESIGN REVIEW, THERE'S ONE FINDING OF FACT SUBJECT TO THREE CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL WHICH WERE REVIEWED BY THE NORTH COASTAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND ONE FINDING OF FACT FOR DENIAL.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

STATEMENT I DON'T SEE ANY AT THIS TIME.

WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

>> KAREN TAYLOR, 77 SARAGOSSA ST. I'M GOING TO HEAD OUTSIDE PLANTS THAT WE WILL GET TO IN A LITTLE BIT.

I GAVE THEM TO YOU AND I DID SEND THESE IN AN EMAIL YESTERDAY THAT SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE SEEN OR NOT SEEN THAT WENT TO EVERYBODY INCLUDING LEGAL STAFF AND SO THAT EVERYBODY KIND OF KNEW WE WERE DOING THIS.

AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR DOING THIS, BUT AFTER A NUMBER OF THE MEETINGS WITH THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, WE STARTED WORKING ON SOLUTIONS TO TRY TO RESOLVE SOME ISSUES THAT THEY HAD.

SO ALTHOUGH THIS SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS NOT PART OF THIS TODAY, WE FEEL IS A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT BECAUSE OF THE USE OF THE ALLEY AND THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP FROM THE PUBLIC.

SO HERE IT IS.

I HAVE LOTS OF EXTRA COPIES IF EVERYBODY WANTS THEM WANTS TO HAVE THEM AVAILABLE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN AND I DID GIVE THEM TO KIM AS WELL.

SO I AM HERE ÃIF I MAY JUST WITH THE NEW SITE PLAN CAN YOU VERIFY FOR THE BOARD THAT THE ONLY CHANGE IS MADE TO THE SITE PLAN PERTAINING TO THE TREATMENT OF THE ALLEYWAY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

>> THERE'S NO CHANGES TO ANY OF THE INTERNAL ÃTHE PROPERTY WITH THE TOWNHOUSES ETC., IS THAT CORRECT?

>>.

>> AND RELOCATING THE ALLEY THERE IS A SHIFT IN THE BUILDINGS THAT LINED UP ALONG

MAC.>> MS. TAYLOR FOR THESE CHANGES MADE IN REACTION TO SOME OF THE PUBLIC CONCERN EXPRESSED TO THE BOARD THROUGH EMAILS, ETC.?

>> YES.

AND AT MEETINGS AND THE CLIENT HAD AN OFFICE SPACE OPEN TO MEET AND TALK WITH PEOPLE AS WELL AND THROUGH MAIN STREET MEETINGS AND DRP MEETINGS AS WELL.

I HAVE INTRODUCED MYSELF.

WHITNEY IS STILL IN.

OWNER DYLAN HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME.

THEY HAVE THE SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH HOUSES DOWN THE ROAD FROM US RAN A LITTLE BOUTIQUE MOTEL AND WAS GOING TO BE DEMOLISHED.

AND HAS OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN TOWN AS WELL.

THE ARCHITECT IS HERE, RUSS IRVIN, AND OUR CIVIL ENGINEER CHRIS BUTLER MORE.

AND I HAVE SOME OF THE SAME THINGS KIM HAS SAID SO I WILL TRY TO BE SHORT.

THIS WAS JUST TO GIVE A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHERE THE SITE IS AND WHERE IT IS WITHIN THE TOWNCENTER.

AND THIS IS A BIT CLOSER TO SHOW YOU THE SAME THINGS SHE WAS MENTIONING THE RESTAURANT THAT USED TO BE.

THIS ASPECT THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT ARE ALONG FARRELL ROAD TO THE SOUTH, LOJA STREET AND VILANO ROAD.

[01:55:02]

THIS IS KIND OF A BIGGER OVERVIEW OF THE TOWNCENTER.

SHE KIND OF GAVE YOU THE IMMEDIATE AREAS SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS KIND OF THE MIDDLE OF THE TOWNCENTER.

AND THIS IS THE ZONING THE TOWNCENTER ZONING AS WELL.

THE PROPERTY IS 3.37 ACRES AND HAS THE FRONTAGE ON VILANO AND LOJA STREET AND IS MENTIONED IT HAS A 75 PERCENT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO ISR AND AN 80 PERCENT OF AR FLORIDA AREA RATIO.

WE DO MEET THE 75 PERCENT.

NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

IT IS THE FLOOR AREA RATIO THAT WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT.

SHE EXPLAINED THE DENSITY CREDITS FOR WERE OBTAINED OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN THE TOWNCENTER.

WE HAVE 3186.

I HAVE RUN ACROSS 205 SO I'M NOT SURE BUT I AM GOING TO GO WITH THE 186.

WE ARE ASKING FOR 49 UNITS.

SO BASICALLY, WE ARE KIND OF ABOUT 1/4 OF WHAT IS HOPEFULLY GOING TO BE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITHIN THE TOWNCENTER.

AS MENTIONED, IT IS THE FLOOR AREA RATIO, GIVEN THE NUMBERS, AND I DID GIVE ÃWE DID GIVE YOU INFORMATION WHEN WE MET WITH YOU BUT BASICALLY THIS IS TAKEN FROM.

AND THEN THE SECOND ITEM WE ARE ASKING FOR ARE THE SETBACKS, AND THAT IS THE EIGHT-FOOT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE 12 FOOT AND WE HAVE A LITTLE DIFFERENCE ON THE ONE ON LOJA STREET SO I WILL EXPLAIN THAT.

SO ALONG THE ROAD, AS KIM INDICATED, WE ARE LEAVING A LITTLE FOUR FOOT FRONT YARD.

LET ME GO BACK TO BACK.

AND I WILL GET TO THAT SLIDE AND I WILL KIND OF EXPLAIN THAT.

ON LOJA STREET WE ARE LEAVING A FOUR FOOT FRONT YARD, BUT WE ARE ALSO DEDICATING FOUR FEET TO INCREASE THE SIDEWALK WITH AS WELL.

WE DO HAVE THE SITE PLAN AND THAT IS TO INDICATE THE SETBACKS AND BUFFERS AND AS NOTED BY THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WE HAVE NOT MADE ANY CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKAGE OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD RELATE TO THOSE.

AND THIS IS THE OLD SITE PLAN, WHEN I HAVE TO PRESENT THIS TO GET IT INTO THE AGENDA, SO WE HAVE IT IF WE WANT TO REVIEW IT OR TAKE A LOOK AT IT, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEAS OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT DO EXIST AND ARE THINGS THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR AND KIND OF EXPLAIN.ND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE DOWN HERE WE WERE PLANNING ON A FOUR FOOT BUFFER, WHICH IS NOW BEING CHANGED.

BUT IT DOES SHOW YOU THE ENTRANCES, IT DOESN'T SHOW YOU OUR INTERNAL ALLEYWAYS, OUR OVERFLOW PARKING, AND AS EXPLAINED, THESE BASICALLY WITHIN THE ALLEYS, THE GARAGES ARE TWO-CAR GARAGES AND THERE'S NO PARKING IN THE ALLEYWAYS.

THERE WAS A QUESTION FROM ONE OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORS.

THERE IS SOME REPLACEMENT OF A COUPLE OF PARKING SPACES, AND THAT IS IN ORDER TO PUT THE ALLEYWAY IN.

SO THERE WOULD BE ALL NORTH OF WHERE THE ALLEYWAY ARE.

THIS IS THE VILANO ROAD SETBACK AND IT KIND OF DOES DEMONSTRATE, AGAIN, THE BASIC DIFFERENCE.

HERE IS THE 12 FOOT SETBACK.

WE COULD HAVE DONE IT AS A ZERO WITH A FOUR FOOT, BUT WE DID IT WITH A 12 WITH AN EIGHT FOOT AND WHEN WE WENT TO THE MAIN STREET MEETING AND TALK ABOUT IT, ALTHOUGH AS KIM MENTIONED, THIS IS ON THE REGULATORY PLAN THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE COMMERCIAL ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

IT COULD HAVE ALL RESIDENTIAL.

THERE WERE CONCERNS EXPRESSED THAT THEY WANTED THAT TO BE ABLE TO BE COMMERCIAL IF IN THE FUTURE.

WE HAD ARTIE DESIGNED THE UNITS WITH THE 12 FOOT CEILING HEIGHT WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR COMMERCIAL, SO WOOD WAS AN EASY CHANGE AND SO WE ARE ASKING FOR ABOUT FOUR FEET, BASICALLY, TO COVER THE ABILITY TO PUT THE STAIRS WITHIN THE SETBACK AND TO PUT A RAMP IF YOU NEEDED HANDICAP ACCESS RATHER THAN EXTENDED THEM INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

YET ANOTHER REASON IS WE TALKING ABOUT ADDING PARKING ALONG VILANO ROAD AND THAT TAKES OUT SOME OF THE STREET SKATING AREAS, AND WE DID NOT WANT TO ENCROACH IN WHAT WAS REMAINING IN THE AREA.

ON LOJA STREET IS A DIFFERENT STORY.

SO BASICALLY, THE LOT LINE WILL

[02:00:01]

CHANGE ONCE THE PROJECT GOES INTO EFFECT.

LOJA STREET ONLY HAD A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK AND VILANO HAS A 10 FOOT.

SO SIX-FOOT WASN'T SUFFICIENT FOR OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES.

WE ARE ALLOWING FOR THE SAME COMMERCIAL OPPORTUNITIES ALONG HERE WITH THOSE SAME SETBACKS.

AND IT WOULD REFLECT THE HYATT 'S ACROSS THE STREET THAT'S ALSO ADDING SOME SIDEWALK FOR OUTDOOR SPACE.

AND IT'S THE DEVELOPERS SPOTS ABILITY TO ADD THE STREETSCAPE AND THINGS LIKE BENCHES AND ACTIVITIES LIKE THAT.

THIS IS JUST A GENERAL IDEA.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING THE HEIGHT.

WE DID HAVE A REQUEST IN INITIALLY TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT BY THREE FEET TO ALLOW FOR VARIOUS GROUP PICTURES, BUT WE WITHDREW THAT AGAIN AFTER A COUPLE OF THE MEETINGS AND TALKING TO A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN THE AREA AND STAFF.

AND SO THIS BASICALLY REFLECTS THE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS 40 FEET TO THIS LEVEL.

OURS IS ACTUALLY 38 FEET SIX INCHES TO THIS LEVEL.

WHICH IS THE 40 FEET ALLOWED.

AND THEN YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ADDITIONAL FEET FOR ROOF LINES OR ROOFTOP STRUCTURES, AND WE DO HAVE PLAN SO THAT PEOPLE CAN HAVE A ROOFTOP DECK AND WHEN YOU DO THAT ROOFTOP DECK, THE MAXIMUM THAT YOU CAN DO FOR DECK IS 25 PERCENT.

IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED UNDER THE ACT.

THESE ARE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PLANS.

THEY WERE FABRICATED AND WORKED ON TO DETERMINE THE SITE PLAN.

WE DO GO BACK TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD WITH ANY FINAL TYPE OF THINGS, BUT WE ARE NOT PLANNING TO ASK FOR ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THIS OR VARIANCES TO THIS.

AND ONE THING I MENTIONED BEFORE IS THAT 12 FOOT LEVEL ON THE BOTTOM.

NOT REALLY IS FOR THE ONES ALONG VILANO AND LOJA STREET THAT ACCOMMODATES COMMERCIAL THAT COULD ALSO ACCOMMODATE FULL CHANGES IN THE LONG-RANGE FUTURE, WHICH IS AN ASPECT OF THE TOWNCENTER.

WE DID DO SOME FLOOR PLANS JUST TO GIVE A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT COULD BE DONE THAT KIND OF DEMONSTRATES THAT 25 PERCENT, WHICH RELATE IN THIS CASE IS FOR ACCESS AND THEN FOR SOME MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.

ON THE FIRST FLOOR, WE DO SHOW THE GARAGE FROM THE ALLEY.

WE DO SHOW THAT LITTLE FRONT YARD AREA AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EITHER A GUEST ROOM OR SOMETHING.

THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD USE FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES.

THIS ONE SHOWS IT USING IT AS A LITTLE STORAGE FOR ADDITIONAL TOYS.

AGAIN, THESE ARE CONCEPT DESIGNS BUT THEY WERE DEVELOPED TO KIND OF GIVE A FEEL OF HOW THIS WOULD LOOK.

BASICALLY, JUST, AGAIN, WITH KIND OF PLAYED BACK WITH THINGS.

THIS IS A FLORIDA VERNACULAR.

WE ARE REQUESTING THE USE OF THAT AND ASKED FOR THAT APPROVAL SO AS WE GO FORWARD AND DO THE FINAL DESIGN.

AND THESE ARE KIND OF CONCEPT OF THE DIFFERENT ÃTHIS IS THE HYATT PLACE, WHICH IS ACROSS LOJA FROM US.

THIS IS THE HOLIDAY INN THAT WOULD BE NORTH OF US ACROSS VILANO ROAD.

SO AS FOR THE SITE PLAN LAYOUT, ALTHOUGH THAT'S NOT A PURVIEW OF YOU ALL, GENERALLY, WE DID WHAT TO COVER THOSE DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS THAT WERE COVERED IN THAT SITE PLAN FOR THE REASON THAT THE SITE PLAN IS KIND OF TALKING ABOUT THAT ALREADY.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE VEHICLE ACCESS POINTS AND PEDESTRIAN.

THIS IS PUBLIC.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PRIVATE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE GATED.

BUT THE ALLEYWAYS WILL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.

ONCE THE SIDEWALK IS TRANSFERRED OVER THE ADDITIONAL FOUR FEET THAT WOULD BECOME THE COUNTIES RESPONSE ABILITY.

WE ARE ASKING TO MOVE THAT FOUNTAIN.

IT HAS THE BACK TOWARDS OUR SITE AND WE HAVE GOTTEN SUPPORT AND THERE ARE CERAMIC TILES THAT CAN COME OFF OF THAT.

IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE ABLE TO BE REDESIGNED SO THAT ALL COMES BACK TO DESIGN REVIEW ALONG WITH LANDSCAPE PLANS.

THE FULL ARCHITECTURAL, BUT THAT IS RELATED TO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO.

AND I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO INTO THE SITE PLANS, SO I WILL GO OVER TO HEAR.

[02:05:20]

.

AND IT'S HARD TO SEE ON THIS, SO I HAVE ACTUALLY DONE A BLOWUP OF THIS AS WELL, WHICH I WILL ALSO USE.

BASICALLY, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SITE PLAN LOOKS THE SAME, THERE'S BEEN ADJUSTMENT, AND I WILL GO TO ÃI THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD DEMONSTRATION BASICALLY AND I BELIEVE THIS WAS ALSO SENT AT ONE POINT IN TIME TO YOU ALL.

WHETHER YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT OR NOT.

BUT IT KIND OF SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE CHANGE.

THIS IS WHEN WE WERE INITIALLY THINKING 8 1/2 FOOT BUFFER AREA, WHICH WE HAVE NOW CHANGED TO 10.

YOU WILL SEE THE TOWN ON THE NEXT SHEET.

IT DOES KIND OF SHOW YOU HOW EVERYTHING MOVES UP.

THERE'S CHANGE TO THIS BUILDING THAT THEY MOVED TO THE NORTH, AND THERE WILL PROBABLY BE RECONFIGURATION TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

THERE WAS A QUESTION FROM.

SHE DOES HAVE A FENCE THAT FALLS WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE EXISTING ALLEYWAY.

AND I'M GOING TO KIND OF SHOW YOU AS WE GET TO THAT.

WE WERE ORIGINALLY PLANNING TO RELOCATE THAT FOR HER BUT BECAUSE OF THIS BEING A BUFFER AREA THAT WILL BE OPEN THAT WILL BE REMOVED AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

BASICALLY WHAT WE DID IS THERE IS AN EXISTING 20 FOOT ALLEYWAY.

IT WAS PLOTTED AS AN ALLEYWAY AND WE FOUND OUT IT WAS NOT DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY.

AND SO WE ARE USING THE ALLEYWAY AS SHOWN, AND THEN WE ARE ADDING ANOTHER 15 FEET TO THE ALLEYWAY IN ORDER TO DO THE IMPROVEMENTS.

OVERALL, THE ALLEYWAY WILL BE 35 FEET IN WIDTH WITH A 10 FOOT BUFFER.

THAT'S FOR TWO-WAY TRAFFIC.

IT DOES ACCOMMODATE THAT.

MOST OF IT WILL PROBABLY BE ONE WAY UP AND AROUND.

AND WE ARE OFFERING TO DO PLANTINGS FOR FOLKS THAT WANT US TO DO IT.

THEY WERE ALSO ÃEVERYONE ALONG SYRUP MILL ROAD HAS THE ABILITY AND THE ACCESS TO THE ALLEYWAY.

AND SO THERE'S ACCESS POINTS AND IT WILL HELP WITH THAT.

OR DO PLANTINGS.

THERE WAS AN EMAIL THAT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SENT ME YESTERDAY I INCLUDED THAT IN MY EMAIL TO YOU ALL.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT.

BUT BASICALLY, THE IDEA IS EVERYONE WITHIN THE PLOT ÃAND THERE'S AN EXISTING PLAQUE HERE ÃHAS THE RIGHT TO ACCESS THE ALLEY AND TO MAKE REASONABLE IMPROVEMENTS TO IT THAT ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT.

THE INTENT WAS IT WAS PLOTTED AS AN ALLEY AND TO BE USED AS AN ALLEY.

WE ARE IMPROVING IT AS STATED WE ARE USING IT TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS WE'VE MOVED ACROSS WE HAVE HAD CONCERNS WITH NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE ROOFTOP DECK BUT BASICALLY WE FEEL LIKE BETWEEN SOME CHANGES, ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES FOR THAT AND IF WE DO PLANT SOME DECENT TREES WITH AND NOT BUFFER AREA WHERE THEY ARE WANTED THAT THAT WILL ALSO HELP WITH THE ÃWITH BOTH THE NOISE AND WITH THE VIEW OF SOMEBODY LOOKING DOWN INTO SOMEBODY'S BACKYARD OR HOUSE OR THOSE PEOPLE LOOKING UP AND SEEING PEOPLE.

--THIS WAS A CONCEPT OF THE FOUNTAIN JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA.

THIS WAS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT WAS GOING TO BE DISCUSSED.

WE SHOWED YOU THIS WOMAN CAME TO VISIT YOU AND IT WAS A STUDY ABOUT THE ALLEYWAYS THEMSELVES AND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THAT WE ARE PROVIDING AND THE APPLICANT DID GO WITH THE WATER WIWIDER WIT.

THIS IS BEFORE WE DECIDED ON THE CHANGES AND ADDING THE

[02:10:01]

ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PARKING THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE COUNTY RIGHT AWAY.

WAS ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE MAIN STREET FOLKS.

THEY FEEL LIKE THE MORE PUBLIC PARKING THAT CAN BE PROVIDED, THE BETTER.O AS WELL AS DOING THE ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK, WE ARE ALSO PLANNING TO DO THAT AND ALSO ADD THE ADDITIONAL STREETSCAPE THINGS THAT WOULD REPLACE TH AND THAT WAS IN CASE WE HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE ALLEY.

SO HAVE I. JUST TO GO OVER THE CONCERNS.

AGAIN, I KIND OF WENT THROUGH THAT.

IT'S NOT OWNED BY THE COUNTY.

WE ARE INCREASING THAT WITH AND ADDING THAT 10 FEET Ã10 FOOT BUFFER.

AS FOR THE HEIGHT, THERE'S NO VARIANCE REQUESTED IN SOME OF THE LETTERS WE RECEIVED THERE WAS PEOPLE COMPLAINING THAT THIS DOES MEET THE CODE AND IT DOES MEET THE TOWNCENTER GUIDELINES.

THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC.

TRAFFIC WAS ACTUALLY PROVIDED CAPACITY WAS PROVIDED FOR IN THE TOWNCENTER WAS ADOPTED, SO IT WAS ACTUALLY ÃIS COMPENSATED AND IS INCLUDED WITHIN THE COUNTY SPREADSHEETS AND ALL THAT.

TO PRESERVE THAT.O THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY ISSUES.

SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, THE APPLICANT GETS 20 ÃCREDIT FOR 29 UNITS BECAUSE THEY HAD 29 EXISTING LOTS.

AND THERE IS CAPACITY.

THERE'S NO PROPORTIONATE OF FAIR SHARE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE SPIRIT DRAINAGE WAS ALSO ACCOMMODATED BY THE TOWNCENTER DESIGN.

IT'S ALL UNDERGROUND.

IT'S ALL THERE.

THEY JUST HOOK INTO THAT.

ASK FOR THE HISTORIC ÃAS KIM MENTIONED WE ARE PLANNING ON DEMOLISHING THE OLD HOTEL THERE'S A MITIGATION PLAN THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO REVIEW ÃAND WE INDICATED IT WILL READ INCORPORATE SOME DESIGN ELEMENTS POSSIBLY INTO THE SITTING WALL.

THERE IS A SEATING WALL THAT'S REQUIRED ALONG BOTH LOJA AND VILANO.

ABOUT SEATING HEIGHT THAT KIND OF DEFINES THE EDGE TO ADD ADDITIONAL THINGS AND NOT TO ADVANCES THAT ARE HIGH -- AND THAT WAS QUESTIONS.

WE ÃIT'S THE FLOOR AREA RATIO WE ARE ASKING FOR.HE DIFFERENCE IN THE SETBACKS I THINK I'VE GONE THROUGH THOSE.

AND THE SETBACK ÃTHE SITE PLAN IS TO ACCOMMODATE THE SETBACKS.

BUT THERE ARE CONDITIONS WE ARE WILLING TO AGREE TO ON THE SITE PLAN IF IT MAKES IT MORE COMFORTABLE FOR YOU ALL.

THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN.

IT REFLECTS AND MEETS THE INTENT OF THE NORSE COASTAL Ã IVAN IVAN AND IT'S REALLY TALKS A LITTLE BIT I JUST INCLUDED ONE OF THE QUOTES OUT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BECAUSE THIS IDEA OF CREATING THIS DOWNTOWN AND IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE SEE ALL THE TIME.

WE SEE SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT OR WE SEE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS OR THINGS, AND THIS IS PART OF THE VISION.

IT MEETS ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND I CHANGED THIS ONE TO THE 205 BUT WE ARE IN THE 186 SO I WILL GO BACK TO THAT TO ME THE 33 PERCENT.

I THINK EARLIER IT DID SHOW THERE IS THAT PERCENTAGE OF 33 PERCENT RETAIL OFFICE, 33 PERCENT HOTELS.

33 PERCENT HOTELS, 33 PERCENT FOR RESIDENTIAL AND FOUR PERCENT FOR CIVIC SPACE.

AGAIN, I THINK DYLAN HAS A FEW THINGS HE WOULD LIKE TO SAY.

HE IS A LOCAL BUSINESS OWNER.

HE HAS WORKED ALMOST 3 YEARS ON DEVELOPING THIS AND WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY ON THIS.

HE HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF THE MAINSTREET BOARD.

HE IS ÃIN EACH THING THAT WE'VE DONE THAT YOU SEE ARE CHANGES UP TO EVEN THE SITE PLAN TODAY ARE BASED ON TRYING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HE HAS FELT FROM THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE HE IS PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

>> GOOD MORNING.

FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR SPENDING TIME TO HEAR OUR PROJECT AND I WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE OF VILANO MAINSTREET AND ALL THE PEOPLE BEHIND THE VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER PROJECT.

>> SPEAKER: COULD YOU SPEAK UP JUST A BIT?

>> SPEAER: IS THAT BETTER? I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR SPENDING THE TIME TO HEAR ABOUT OUR PROJECT AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS JUST SAY ÃJUST LOOK AT THIS FROM A LITTLE BIT

[02:15:01]

OF BACKGROUND FROM VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER AND THE EFFORTS THAT WE TOOK AND DESIGNED THIS PROJECT TO MEET THE VISION, NOT JUST OF WHAT THIS WOULD BE LIKE BUT HOW IT WOULD BE BUILT OUT AND MEETING THE SPECIFICS OF THE CODE.

THE SPECIFICS THE.

[INDISCERNIBLE] WAS PUT IN AND I WASN'T HERE BUT WHAT I LEARNED WAS THAT ALL THE LITTLE BUSINESSES ON VILANO ROAD ESSENTIALLY DIED ON THE VINE.

TRAFFIC BYPASSED IT AND IT BECAME WASTELAND.

BY 2000 TO 2003 THE COMMUNITY THE CODE SPELLED OUT DENSITY HEIGHT USE AND INCLUDING EVERYTHING INCLUDING THE STORM WATER.

ALL THAT WAS IN PLACE OVER A LITTLE 13 YEARS AGO.

IN 2008, THE FIRST STOP WAS TAKEN TO REALIZE THIS VISION AND TO REALIZE WHAT WE SEE TODAY.

THE WONDERFUL TIMES, THE LIGHTING AND WERE PLACED SWALES WITH OVERHEAD UTILITY WIRES, ETC. A LOT OF WHAT WAS DONE WE DON'T SEE AND THAT'S THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE STORMWATER SYSTEM PUT UNDERGROUND.

ALL OF THAT WAS DONE AND THEN THE CRASH CAME.

IN 2010, I CAME IN EARLY 2010 TO SAINT AUGUSTINE AND THE GROUP THAT I WORK WITH, WE PURCHASED THIS LAND.

WE DID OTHER PROJECTS AS KAREN MENTIONED IN THE TOWN THE ST.

AUGUSTINE BEACH HOUSE SO WE FOCUSED ON THOSE FOR SIX YEARS UNTIL I WAS ABLE TO START DOING THIS.

IN 2016, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE CODE THAT SHIFTED THE DENSITY AS KAREN WENT INTO DETAIL.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS IT WENT FROM EIGHT TO 16.

I MUST SAY WITHOUT THAT CHANGE IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO HAVE CREATED A VIABLE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ON THIS LAND.

IT'S WHAT MAKES IT WORK.

SO HERE WE ARE TODAY IN 2019 WITH THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL PROJECT IN THE VILANO BEACH TOWNCENTER.

AND I SAY ALL OF THIS BECAUSE I THINK I KNOW I WORKED VERY HARD WITH THE PEOPLE BEHIND US AND YOU DON'T SEE THEM IN THE ROOM HERE TODAY AND OUR TEAM HERE TO MEET THE VISION WITHIN THE CODE WITHIN THE LIMITATIONS SET BY THE COMMUNITY OVER 15 YEARS AGO.

THE NEXT THING I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT IS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE COMMUNITY, IN MY OPINION.

AS I MENTIONED IN 2008, THE INFRASTRUCTURE WAS PUT IN AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS ALMOST $30 MILLION WAS SPENT TO DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS OF IT BUT SOME WERE ALL ABOUT IS STILL BEING PAID OFF.

OUR PROJECT I ANTICIPATE WILL GENERATE OVER $300,000 ANNUALLY TO HELP MEET THAT RESPONSIBILITY.

I THINK THESE TOWNHOMES ARE GOING TO INCREASE THE VALUES FOR ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS AND VILANO.

WE WILL TURN IT INTO SOMETHING I THINK THE WHOLE COMMUNITY WILL BE VERY PROUD OF.

SO I THINK THAT ÃI WON'T DETAIL THE SPECIFIC REQUEST ON THE SETBACKS WITH THE RATIO AND THE GENERAL SITE PLAN.

I THINK KAREN AND KIM DETAILED THAT VERY NICELY.

WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR.

I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WE WORKED VERY HARD TO MEET THE VISION, TO STAY WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE CODE APPEAR TO STILL MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR US TO MAKE THIS PROJECT WORK.

AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT.

I WOULD ALSO ADD AS KAREN POINTED OUT, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME LISTENING TO THE CONCERNS AND I THINK WE LAID OUT VERY CLEARLY HOW WE ADJUSTED TO THOSE CONCERNS TO MEET THEM.

WE THINK IT'S FAIR AND TRY TO CREATE A WIN-WIN SITUATION AND CREATE A PROJECT WE COULD HAVE GONE WITH 54 UNITS BUT WE WANTED SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY FABULOUS.

WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THAT.

AND SACRIFICING UNITS FOR QUALITY OF THE PROJECT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: I THINK HE SUMMED IT UP.

[02:20:01]

WE REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T SEE ANY AT THIS TIME.

WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: BEFORE WE GO INTO PUBLIC COMMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK HE HAD AN EMAIL TO ALL OF US THAT WAS REQUESTED TO BE READ TODAY AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY INTENDED ON DOING THAT.

>> SPEAKER: I WAS GOING TO ASK THAT. HAVE THE EMAIL IN FRONT OF ME DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS THREE AND FOUR I WANTED TO ASK IF YOU WANTED ME TO READ THE SHORT EMAIL SENT BY MR. CYNTHIA.

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AND HONOR HER REQUEST.

>> SPEAKER: THIS ONE IS ADDRESSED TO ALL BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BUT SPECIFICALLY MR. PAUL WALDRON AND HENRY DEAN.

DEAR MR. WALDRON AND MR. DEAN I AM CYNTHIA.

AUGUSTINE. AM WRITING YOU TODAY CONCERNING THE BUILDING OF A 49 UNIT TOWNHOME PROJECT BETWEEN PEARL ROAD AND VILANO ROAD.

MY HOME IS LOCATED AT 140 FARRELL ROAD AND BECAUSE OF ITS CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS PROJECT, I CONSIDER THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A SERIOUS PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT TO NOT ONLY MYSELF BUT ALL OTHERS LIVE ON FARRELL.

MY FATHER THE LATE SAM J.

1960.HIS VINTAGE STYLE WAS BUILT IN 1955 BY MR. BUILD ALL OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS AMOUNTS AND MOST OF THE MOTELS ON BOTH VILANO AND DARRELL ROSE.

LOCALS WILL KNOW MY FAMILY OWNED AND OPERATED SINCE 1946.

WE WERE AND ARE A FAMILY BUSINESS LANDMARK.

WHY AM I HAVING THIS LITTLE SLICE OF FAMILY HISTORY? BECAUSE I WANT ALL OF YOU TO REALIZE THAT EVERY LIVING MEMBER OF MY FAMILY HAVE A DEEP LOVE FOR VILANO AND BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT IS A LONG-STANDING PROPERTY OWNER YOU WILL SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.

MR. DILLON.

OF PROPOSED VILANO SPRINGS TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT.

HE AND OTHERS WERE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM HAVE APPLIED TO THE COUNTY PERMITS TO BUILD A 49 UNIT TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT ALONG VILANO ROAD.

ON A, QUOTE, COMPACT THEIR WORDS 3.5 ACRES OF LAND.

IN ADDITION TO THESE PERMITS, THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE COUNTY TO PERMIT THEM TO ENCROACH UPON THE 20 FOOT ALLEY BEHIND THE HOUSE ON FARRELL ROAD.

HOWEVER THIS HAS RECENTLY BEEN DETERMINED BY THE ATTORNEYS OF THE COUNTY TO BE PRIVATE PROPERTY.

FURTHER, ACCORDING TO RESOLUTION 95 -206 ADOPTED BY THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, NOVEMBER 28, 1995 ARTICLE 2 OF THIS RESOLUTION STATES THAT HAVING AFTER.

[INDISCERNIBLE] NO EVIDENCE OF PRESENT OR PAST ST. JOHN'S COUNTY COMPTROLLER INTEREST IN THE ALLEY DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A PARAGRAPH THE ALLEY THAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE ASKING THE COUNTY TO ANNEX, CLOSE PARAGRAPH TO NO PAST OR PRESENT CLAIM TO COUNTY CONTROL INTEREST OR OWNERSHIP IN SEDALIA IS MADE BY ST. JOHN'S COUNTY.

IN SUMMARY THE DEVELOPERS ARE ASKING YOU, THE COUNTY, TO ALLOW THEM TO UTILIZE AND PAVE PROPERTY THAT ST. JOHN'S COUNTY DOES NOT OWN OR CONTROL.

AND THEREFORE THE COUNTY CANNOT AGREE OR GRANT THIS REQUEST.

PLEASE NOTE IF YOU DECIDE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE REQUESTED WILL NOT BE LEGAL AND IT WILL TAKE A LARGE PORTION OF PROPERTY FROM ALL CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF FARRELL ROAD.

WERE THIS TO RESULTS ALLEY, IT WILL DESTROY OUR PEACEFUL AND QUIET FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT POTENTIALLY LOWER THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES AND INCREASE OUR TAXES.

THEREFORE, I IMPLORE ALL OF YOU TO VOTE NO TO THIS REQUEST AND AVOID COSTLY LEGAL FEES AND TIMELINE DELAYS FOR THE DEVELOPERS.

OTHERWISE ON BEHALF OF ALL OF FARRELL ROAD HOMEOWNERS I WILL PERSONALLY FUND A LAWSUIT SEEKING INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST ALL COMMISSIONERS THE COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPERS.

SINCERELY, CYNTHIA LEE BARON COTTO.

>> SPEAKER: WE WILL OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> GOOD MORNING.

ED SLAVEN BOX 3084 CLEANUPCITYOFSTAUGISTINE.

BLOGSPOT.COM UNTIL I HEARD THAT EMAIL I WAS PREPARED TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS BUT HAVING HEARD IT LET ME MAKE A PROCEDURAL SUGGESTION.

DON'T APPROVE IT, DON'T DISAPPROVE IT.

PLEASE REFER TO THE PCA FOR FACT-FINDING.

EVEN THOUGH IT'S A NON-ZONING VARIANCE, THE EMAIL RAISES SUFFICIENT ISSUES THAT I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD APPROVE IT TODAY.

ON THE ONE HAND, I REALLY LIKE THE SOUTH BEACH FEEL OF THIS PROJECT AND THAT'S WHY I WAS PREPARED TO SUPPORT IT.

BUT INFRINGING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS YOU WILL DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.

I THINK BARNETT COUNSEL WOULD PROBABLY ADVISE YOU THAT YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF WHAT WE HEARD ABOUT THE ROSCOE BOULEVARD PROJECT THIS MORNING.

SO AND BOB GRAHAM WROTE A BOOK WITH CHRIS BEHIND I THINK IT IS.

HAND.

I COULDN'T READ MY OWN HANDWRITING.HRIS AND BOB GRAHAM AND CHRIS HAND WROTE A BOOK CALLED AMERICA, THE OWNERS

[02:25:01]

MANUAL.

THE VERY FIRST CHAPTER IN THE BOOK IS ABOUT HOW CITIZENS HELPED TO SAVE THE BEAUTIFUL ART DECO IN MIAMI BEACH.

IN SOUTH BEACH.

AND THIS VILANO PROJECT IS MANY YEARS IN THE MAKING, AND I WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE IN THE DOWNTOWN VILANO PROJECT FOR ALL THEY HAVE DONE.

BUT BASED UPON THE EMAIL, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN APPROVE THIS TODAY.

I THINK THERE'S SUFFICIENT CONCERNS ABOUT THE TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE COUNTY NOT HAVING CONTROL OF THIS.

NOW, I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING AN URBAN STREETSCAPE HERE.

BUT THAT EMAIL RAISES ISSUES THAT WERE NOT PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

AND THAT'S A PROBLEM WITH YOUR STAFF REPORTS.

THEY ARE ONE-SIDED.

THEY ARE DEVELOPER GENERATED.

THERE DEVELOPERS FAVORING.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE RECRUITMENT PATTERN OF THE DEVELOPERS, HOW MANY DEVELOPERS HIRE PEOPLE THAT USED TO WORK ON YOUR STAFF? AND IF YOUR STAFF LEAVES HERE THEY DON'T NECESSARILY GO TO WORK FOR DEVELOPER IN THIS COUNTY BUT THEY WILL GO TO WORK IN ATLANTA OR SOMEWHERE ELSE.

I DON'T KNOW OF ONE SINGLE STAFF PERSON TO SERVE HER LEFT EAR AND IS GOING TO WORK FOR A PREVIEW.

THEY GO TO WORK FOR DEVELOPERS.

KAREN TAYLOR IS A FORMER COUNTY COMMISSIONER.

I THINK YOU NEED TO DEFER ON THIS TO THE PCA LET THEM DO AN OPEN PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE SCOPE TO BE SET IN YOUR MOTION AND HAVE THE EQUITIES AND FACTS WEIGHED OUT THERE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ARE PREPARED TO DECIDED TODAY.

BASED ON THE EMAIL THE LADY IS GOING TO FUND A LAWSUIT.

AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

YOU KNOW WHAT RUBEN ASK YOU SAID SO WAS THE DEVIL.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> HELLO.

VIVIAN BROWNING, PRESIDENT OF VILANO MAINSTREAM.

20 YEAR VOLUNTEER WITH THIS MINK STREET TOWN CENTER I AM AT 30 BEACH WAY OUT AND VILANO.

FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE HAD THIS ON THE BOOKS.

MIXED-USE TOWN CENTER PASSED IN THE EARLY 2000'S AFTER OUR VISIONING WAS PASSED BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER IN 1999.

IT INCLUDED PROPERTIES LIKE THIS, THESE TOWNHOMES.

AND THESE FOLKS ON FARRELL ROAD AND I HAVE UTMOST RESPECT FOR THE FAMILY AND THEIR HISTORICAL CONTRIBUTION, BUT WE ARE IN A NEW TIME.

THIS IS 2019, AND THIS IS THE HEIGHT ÃTHE USE OF THE ALLEY HAS ALWAYS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE TOWN CENTER.

IT'S AMAZING TO ME, AND I DISAGREED WITH THIS LEGAL DECISION ON THE ALLEY.

ALL THE OTHER ALLEYS AND SEE VILANO BEACH PLAT HAVE BEEN ENFORCED BY THE COUNTY AND IS OWNED BY THE COUNTY SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS NOT.

AND WE HAVE HAD HUNDREDS OF PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THIS FOR EVERYONE.

THE BUSINESS OWNERS THE NEIGHBORS AND ALL OF US WHO SUPPORTED THIS.

SO I URGE YOU TO CONTINUE ON WITH THIS TODAY.

I THINK THE 10 FOOT KIND OF SPLITTING THE ALLEY FOR THE NEIGHBORS IS APPROPRIATE, AND JUSTIFIABLE.

THE OTHER ITEM ON THE DENSITY, BACK WHEN PUBLIX WAS DEVELOPED, WE DISCOVERED THAT A OF THE LAND WOULD NOT BE USED -- WE PICTURED IT WITH HOTELS ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

HOTELS CAUSE US TO RELOOK AT THE DENSITY AND FOCUS IT ON CERTAIN AREAS SUCH AS THIS PROJECT TO GET THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL.

THESE PEOPLE WHO BUY THESE TOWNHOMES WILL BE THE ANCHOR FOR THE FUTURE GENERATIONS.

OF HOMEOWNERS.

PUBLIX IS OUR RETAIL ANCHOR.

THERE IS A FEAT, IT'S REALLY THEY ARE FOUR FOOT CLOSER TO THE SIDEWALK.

THEY WANT EVERYBODY ON THE SIDEWALK TO MAKE THIS A 10 FEEL SO WE SUPPORT THESE ITEMS, WE SUPPORT THEIR ADJUSTMENTS ON THE ALLEY, AND WE WANT YOU TO PASS THIS TODAY.

WE ARE ON THE 20 YEAR TIMEFRAME OF GETTING THIS DONE, SO WE WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD MOVE THIS ON AND I THINK YOU ALL AS COMMISSIONERS, THE STAFF, AND OF COURSE THE PROPERTY OWNERS HERE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO ACCOMMODATE THESE FINE NEIGHBORS, BUT THIS IS THE TIME ÃSPACE NEIGHBORS COULD HAVE A THREE-STORY HOME ON THEIR LOT TOO, AND I THINK OVER TIME IT WILL EVOLVE INTO THAT.

SO THREE STORIES IS KIND OF THE STANDARD AND IT WILL BE USED ON THIS PROPERTY.

AGAIN, WE SUPPORTED.

IT PASSED SEVERAL PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THE COMMUNITY AND WE ARE ASKING YOU ALL TO SUPPORT THIS AND NOT LET IT BE TIED UP ON ONE TECHNICALITY OR THREAT.

AGAIN, WE URGE APPROVAL.

THANK YOU.

[02:30:11]

>> SPEAKER: GOOD MORNING.

>> SPEAKER: I AM DOTTIE HUDSON.

>> SPEAKER: PULLED THE MICROPHONE DOWN.

>> MY NAME IS DOTTIE HUDSON.

I LIVE AT 100 FARRELL RD.

I HAVE A SINGLE STORY HOME ON THE CORNER OF FARRELL AND LOJA.

IT'S DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROJECT HERE, AND I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR 53 YEARS.

I SENT YOU ALL A STATEMENT OF FACT AND A STATEMENT, I GUESS, OF OPINIONS.

AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE WORKED WITH ME ON EVERY SPOT ON THIS FORM THAT I SENT YOU, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

THEY HAVE REALLY TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE AND MITIGATE EVERY PROBLEM THAT I SEE ON MY PROPERTY RIGHT BEHIND THIS PROJECT.

SO I JUST WANT TO THANK THEM FOR CONSIDERING THIS, ALTHOUGH WE DON'T GET THE FULL 20 FOOT ALLEY, THAT'S OUR ONLY CONCESSION IS THAT 20 FOOT ALLEY, WHERE GETTING HALF OF IT, IT LOOKS LIKE, AND I THINK, HOPEFULLY, THE REST OF OUR NEIGHBORS, ONCE THEY SEE THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME MEDICATION HERE WILL FEEL A LITTLE BETTER ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU.

.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS THREE AND FOUR.

WE CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: MR. CHAIR BEFORE KAREN DOES HER REBUTTAL, THERE WAS AN ISSUE BROUGHT UP ABOUT LEGALITY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS THAT AND REBUFFED.

I DID SEND A RESPONSE TO THE SENDER OF THE EMAIL YESTERDAY SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO TO THAT.

>> SPEAKER: IF YOU WOULD GO THROUGH IT.

THAT WAY IT'S IN THE RECORD.

>> SPEAKER: SO THIS OFFICE DOES HAVE AN OPINION THAT WE HAVE DONE THE RESEARCH THAT IN OUR OPINION THIS PARTICULAR ALLEY WAS NEVER DEDICATED TO ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY SO IT'S DESIGNATED AS A PRIVATE ALLEY WHICH IN OUR TERMS MEANS IT'S NOT OWNED OR MAINTAINED BY ST.

JOHNS COUNTY.

EVERY PERSON WHO BUYS IN REFERENCE TO A PLAT AND SPECIFICALLY ANYONE WHO BUYS AND REFERENCE TO THE SPOCK HAS AN IMPLIED EASEMENT OF ACCESS BY VIRTUE OF BUYING PROPERTY INTO THE ALLEY AND THAT INCLUDES ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS ON FARRELL ROAD AND THAT INCLUDES MR. DILLON WHO PURCHASED THE PROPERTY NORTH OF THE ALLEY.

IT'S ALL PART OF THE SAME BLOCK.

SO THEY ALL HAVE ACCESS RIGHTS AND THAT IMPLIED EASEMENT INCLUDED IS A REASONABLE RIGHT TO ACCESS, USE AND MAKE REASONABLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ALLEY WAY.

THE OWNERSHIP OF THE ALLEY, TRADITIONALLY, IS THAT WHEN YOU PURCHASE A REFERENCE TO A PLAT, YOU HAVE THE TITLE TO THE REVERSIONARY RIGHT TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE ALLEY.

SO IF THE ALLEYWAY WAS VACATED, THE SOUTHERN 10 FEET WOULD GO TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ON FARRELL ROAD AND THE NORTHERN 10 FEET WOULD GO TO MR. DILLON AND THEY WOULD OWN IT FEASIBLY.

IF THE ALLEY WAS VACATED, IT MEANS IT RETURNS TO ACREAGE.

IT'S NO LONGER AN ALLEY.

IT'S JUST RAW LAND.

BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT IT ON THE PLAT, WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE DESIGNATED PURPOSE OF A PIECE OF LAND AND IT'S FOR AN ALLEYWAY.

SO OUR REVIEW IS THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WHICH IS GOING TO HELP IN ANY FUTURE TIME CONSISTENT WITH BOB DESIGNATED ON THE PLAT? I WILL POINT OUT TO THE BOARD THAT THE GRANTING OF THE NON-SONY VARIANCE HAS TO DO WITH THE THE PROPOSED SETBACKS FROM LOJA AND VILANO AND HAS TO DO WITH THE FLOOR AIR RATIO AND DOES NOT DIRECTLY IMPACT THE ALLEY, THE SITE PLAN IS THERE TO INTERPRET THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE REQUEST.

NOW, THE VILANO BEACH TOWN CENTER DESIGN REVIEW COMPANION, BUT HAS A GENERAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE LOCATION OF THE LANDSCAPING AND THE GENERAL LOCATIONS OF THE BUILDINGS.

AND KAREN HAS PROVIDED YOU WITH A REVISED SITE PLAN TO KIND OF ADDRESS THE CONCERNS RAISED IN THE LETTER IN THE COMMENT ABOUT

[02:35:05]

THE OWNERSHIP OF THE ALLEY.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY CAN'T DETERMINE WHO OWNS THE ALLEY.

WE DON'T HAVE THE JURISDICTION TO MAKE CALLS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, BUT THE GENERAL RULE AND ASSUMPTION IS THAT IF THE ALLEY IS REMOVED, IT'S SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND 10 FEET GOES TO THE NORTH, 10 FEET GOES TO THE SOUTH.

AND SO TO AVOID THAT KIND OF SITUATION, I THINK KAREN HAS PROPOSED THAT THEY WILL JUST PAVE THE NORTHERN 10 FEET, WHICH THEY ARE PRESUMED TO OWN THE UNDERLYING FEE SIMPLE AND LEAVE THE SOUTHERN HALF AS LANDSCAPING WITHOUT PUTTING PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS IN THERE.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO ADD ONTO THAT.

I THINK THAT EXPLAINS IT.

I DO HAVE A COPY OF A MEMO THAT WAS ALSO SAID THAT I COULD SHOW BASICALLY SAYS THE SAME THING.

AGAIN, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD ON THIS.

I WAS ALSO INVOLVED AS A VOLUNTEER WITH THE MAIN STREET ÃTHE VOLUNTEER FOR WORKING ON THIS WITH VIVIAN AND SASHA AND WE SPENT LOTS OF TIME AND LOTS OF THINGS AND I THINK VIVIAN SAID IT PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST WAYS.

I MEAN, THE TIME HAS CHANGED.

AND THE IDEA FOR EVEN THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, THOSE ALL CAME FROM THE VISIONING.

THERE WAS AN IDEA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP SOME OF THOSE AND WHAT THEIR INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS TO KEEP THOSE.

WE ALSO USED THOSE FOR THE TEMPLATE OF WHAT WE KIND OF WANTED THE AREA TO LOOK LIKE, BUT WE WANT TO ACT COMPACT FEEL MORE URBAN FEEL, EVEN WHAT MR. SLAVEN WAS INDICATING.

WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE ACCOMMODATED THE ISSUE WITH THE ALLEY JUST TO RESOLVE THAT, AND I THINK WITH THAT, AGAIN, WE FEEL LIKE THIS WILL HELP BALANCE THE COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE LOTS OF HOTELS GOING IN.

WE WERE EXCITED WITH THE PUBLIC SET CAME IN AND WE FEEL EXCITED THIS WILL ACTUALLY START THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT THAT A MAIN PART OF IT.

WITH THAT WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION.

>> SPEAKER: ANY QUESTIONS? CAN YOU KIND OF GO THROUGH WE ARE ONLY VOTING ON WHAT'S HERE.

BUT ON THE PROJECT ITSELF.

ARE WE VOTING ON THE SITE PLAN? THERE IS A COMPONENT CENTER BECAUSE THEY NEED SITE PLANNING BUT ONLY FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE VILANO BEACH OVERLAY STANDARDS.

SO IT'S NOT A TRUE CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL BUT IT IS MAKING SURE THAT THEY MEET THE KIND OF SETBACKS FOR VILANO AND THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR VILANO AND THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE LANDSCAPING.

SO THERE'S THREE COMPONENTS OF THE VILANO BEACH SITE PLAN THAT IS IN THE COMPANION APPLICATION, MAKING SURE THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE SETBACKS, FLOOR AIR RATIO IN THE KITCHEN OF THE COMPONENTS.

>> SPEAKER: MR. CHAIRMAN, HE RAISED A POINT I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT AND LET ME PREFACE IT BY SAYING MASS.

I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED VERY DILIGENTLY OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS TO MEET THE CONCERNS RAISED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ON FARRELL ROAD.

IT'S A COMPROMISE, NOTHINGS PERFECT IN THIS WORLD.

BUT BASED ON THE CONCESSION MADE AS OF YESTERDAY WHICH YOU HEARD TODAY, THE SETBACK Ã THERE'S NOW 835 PUT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE CLOSEST TOWNHOUSE TO THE RESIDENTIAL INDIVIDUAL HOMES.

35 FOOT SETBACK, A 10 FOOT SETBACK FOR THE SYRUP MILL ROAD HOMEOWNERS TO USE.

ALSO THE VISUAL ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED WITH THE CHANGES PROPOSED.

SO I AM PREPARED AS DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER TO MOVE THESE TWO ITEMS YOU AND FOR, BUT THREE AND FOUR ARE FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO AND THE SETBACKS ON VILANO AND LOJA.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE INCORPORATE THE AGREEMENT BUT HAS BEEN OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT THAT THE APPLICANT PROFFERS IT IF THAT'S THE RIGHT APPROACH OR AT WHAT POINT I WANT TO INCORPORATE BASICALLY

[02:40:02]

THE ITEMS ARE OUTLINED IN THIS SEPTEMBER 16 MEMO TO US FROM KAREN TAYLOR DEALING WITH THE SETBACKS THEY HAVE AGREED TO OR OFFERED AND ALSO THE VISUAL ASPECTS DEALING WITH THE REPAIRMEN.

I WANT TO MOVE THE ITEMS BUT I'M GOING TO INCORPORATE TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE IN SOME WAY TIED DOWN BECAUSE THESE WERE THE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT.

[INDISCERNIBLE] RAISED AND HAS SORT OF ALMOST AGREED TO THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE.O LET'S GET THE MAIL DOWN.

HOW DO WE DO THAT?

>> SPEAKER: YOU CAN EITHER MAKE A SEPARATE CONDITION IN EITHER THE ZONING VARIANCE OR THE VILANO BEACH TOWN CENTER.

IF YOU WANT TO CONFIRM THIS THERE ARE PROFFERS THAT WANT TO BE APPROVED AT A FUTURE DOCUMENT YOU CAN APPROVE RIGHT CONDITIONS ARE WE CAN INCORPORATE THE ACTUAL EMAIL AS PART OF THE APPROVAL.

>> SPEAKER: IF MS. TAYLOR WERE TO TESTIFY SHE AGREES THAT HIS CONDITION OUTLINED IN THE SEPTEMBER 16 MEMO WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE PROJECT ¦

>> SPEAKER: I WILL INCORPORATE THE ENTIRE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT TO YOU AS ADDITIONAL PROFFERS AND PROMISES FOR ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

>> SPEAKER: WE DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE NORTH COASTAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FOR ANOTHER TOWN CENTER REVIEW, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE SITE PLAN.

IT WILL INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

IT WILL INCLUDE THE ARCHITECTURE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS JUST MY THOUGHT HERE IS THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE IT IN THE MOTION FOR THAT PARTICULAR ONE RATHER THAN THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE IS ONLY THE TWO ITEMS AND AM NOT AN ATTORNEY THERE ARE SOME MEDICATIONS FOR EVERY NON-ZONING VARIANCE TO KEEP THAT SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE CODE.

REALLY THE ISSUE IS WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE INCORPORATING INTO WHAT THE BOARD IS APPROVED.

YOU CAN BE VERY SPECIFIC AND RIGHT ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OUTLINE THOSE PARTICULAR PROFFERS OR YOU CAN ATTACH THE EMAIL AS AN ADDITIONAL PROFFER IN SAYING ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT YOU NEED TO APPLY.

>> I WOULD JUST ATTACH THE EMAIL DATED SEPTEMBER 16 TO THE COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE IT OUTLINES CLEARLY IN MY MIND THE TWO AREAS THAT I WANT TAKEN CARE OF.

THE SETBACK ON THE ALLEY AND THE.

[INDISCERNIBLE] THAT WILL REDUCE THE VISUAL DIRECTION.

IT'S ALL OUTLINED IN HERE.

IF WE CAN ATTACH THAT AND THAT LEGALLY BINDS THE APPLICANT TO THESE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION TO INCORPORATE THIS.

>> SPEAKER: WE CAN.

IF YOU MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION I WILL BE ABLE TO DRAFT AN ORDER INCORPORATING THAT THE EMAIL AS AN ADDITIONAL PROFFER FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND COMPLIANCE.

>> SPEAKER: I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE NON-ZONING VARIANCE 2019 Ã07 BASED ON SIX FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO SIX CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

IN ADDITION, I WOULD ALSO MOVE THAT DATE SEPTEMBER 16 MEMORANDUM FROM MS. KAREN TAYLOR TO THE COMMISSIONERS REGARDING THE SETBACKS AND THE VISUAL IMPACTS OF THIS PROJECT BE ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED AS CONDITIONS IN THIS APPROVAL.

>> SPEAKER: I SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

>> SPEAKER: BEFORE THE BOARD VOTES, I DID WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD AS TO THE ALLEYWAY.

FROM ALL THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE SEEN AND MR. GONE OVER THE COUNTY DOES NOT OWN THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY.

IN TERMS OF A PRIVATE PROPERTY INTEREST AND MR. SORIA HAS GIVEN A GENERAL SENSE, ULTIMATELY THAT'S BETWEEN PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS WHETHER SOMETHING IS OVERBURDENED OR THAT TYPE OF THING.

I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD.

MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: ART.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND INCLUDING THE EMAIL WE RECEIVED YESTERDAY.

PLEASE VOTE.LEASE VOTE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. STILL IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM PREPARED TO MOVE ITEM FOR AND

[02:45:02]

WE HAVE TOUGH PUBLIC COMMENT FOUR.

>> SPEAKER: I THINK WE COVERED FOUR AND FIVE.

>> SPEAKER: IT WAS COVERED.

>> SPEAKER: THEN I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE VILANO BEACH TOWN CENTER TOWNHOMES BASED ON ONE FINDING AND SUBJECT TO THREE CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN THE STOCK REPORT.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND HER APPROVE.

>> SPEAKER: THAT MOTION INCLUDES THE AMENDED SITE PLAN THAT KAREN PROVIDED.

>> SPEAKER: YES.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AND THIS INCLUDES THE AMENDED SITE PLAN ALSO.

[Item 5]

PLEASE VOTE.

IT PASSES 5 TO 0.

>> SPEAKER: NUMBER FIVE.

>> SPEAKER: THIS IS YOUR FINAL CLASS I JUDICIAL HEARING IF YOU'VE HAD ANY EXPERT TO COMMUNICATIONS NOW IS THE TIME TO DISCLOSE.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> SPEAKER: NONE.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER SMITH?

>> NOT TO DISCLOSE.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> NONCE, NONE.

>> I DID WRITE DOWN INMAN ROAD LAST WEEK AND LOOKED AT THE SITE.

LOTS OF TREES.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

>> GOOD MORNING.

MEGHAN KEENEMEGAN KUEHNE PRESEN AGENDA NUMBER FIVE INMAN ROAD COMMERCIAL.

HERE IS THE AERIAL MAP.

AS YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NORTH OF STATE ROAD 16 EAST OF AMMON ROAD.

WE SAW THE SOLID YELLOW LINE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT IS REQUESTED TO BE RESUMED THE BLUE DOTTED LINE BELOW IT IS THE REMAINDER OF THE PARCEL.

THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRES OF FROM AN INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE TO RETURN THE ENTIRE PARCEL THE 5.3 COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE TO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BACK IN 1986.

THE ORDINANCE 1986--SIX BUT NEVER DEVELOPED.

AS YOU CAN SEE THE COMPATIBILITY MAP WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THE PORTION THAT'S ASKING TO BE REZONED FROM INDUSTRAL WAREHOUSE TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE LOW IT IS THE REMAINDER OF THE PARCEL THAT'S COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE.

IT'S ABOUT 3.13 ACRES.

THE PARCEL NUMBER ONE ABOVE IT TO THE NORTH IS A PLAN SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS OCCUPIED BY WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION TERMINALS.

PARCEL NUMBER TWO TO THE EAST IS COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE WHICH IS VACANT.

ACROSS INMAN ROAD TO THE WEST WE HAVE PARCEL NUMBER THREE WHICH IS OPEN RURAL AND IT'S VACANT.

BELOW THAT IS PARCEL NUMBER FOUR WHICH IS COMMERCIAL GENERAL AND THAT'S VACANT AS WELL.

HERE IN FIGURE 1 A SHOWS THE USES INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AND COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE ZONING SPIRIT BY REZONING INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL LOSE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES BUT GAIN NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS.

GENERAL BUSINESS, HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL.

STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO REZONING APPEARS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED IS ON A MIXED-USE CORRIDOR WITH POTENTIAL DEVELOP A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD APPLY IN A 10 A BUFFER MAY BE REQUIRED FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE TO THE NORTH.

STAFF IS NOT RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE OR PHONE CALLS REGARDING THE REQUESTED REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY THE PLANNING SUMMIT HCR DECIDING AUGUST 1, 2019 REGULAR MEETING ABOUT IT PATRICK SEIBER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING SUBMITTED.

THE PUBLIC COMMENT WAS PROVIDED.

STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REZONING APPLICATION 2019 Ã6 INMAN RD. COMMERCIAL THAT IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN.

STAFF IS PROVIDED FOR FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT EMOTION.

THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I WILL STAND BY FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.

>> SPEAKER: CAPITAL CITY QUESTIONS.

WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

>> GOOD MORNING.

KAREN TAYLOR 77 SARAGOSSA ST.

AND I HAVE TO APOLOGIZE MY CLIENT WASN'T ABLE TO COME.

HE HAD AN UNEXPECTED MEDICAL THING HAPPENED SO THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY KEITH AND JOYCE

[02:50:07]

CAMPBELL.

AND BASICALLY, THIS REQUEST IS FOR THEM.

THIS IS PROPERTY BOUGHT SOMETHING AND THEY ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO SELL IT NOW.

SO HAVING TWO DIFFERENT ZONING CATEGORIES HAS BEEN AN ISSUE WITH MAC.

SO I THINK YOU'VE GOTTEN A VERY GOOD PRESENTATION FROM MEGAN I WON'T BELABOR ANY OF HER POINTS BECAUSE SHE MADE MOST OF THE REAL POINTS.

I THOUGHT THEY MIGHT KIND OF POINT SOME OF THE OTHER ÃSHE DID THE ZONINGS AND WHAT THE IDEAS WERE BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS SITE OVER AND HERE IS BEING PERMITTED FOR A WAWA AND A CHICK-FIL-A.

IF YOU ALL ÃYOU DIDN'T SEE IT THE PLANNING AND ZONING SOLVING ZAXBY'S'S GOING IN AND WE HAVE SOME WAY HERE AND SO THERE'S A BUNCH OF ACTIVITY GOING ON IN THE AREA.

WE ARE JUST ASKING TO BALANCE OUT THAT PEACE AND MAKE IT ALL ONE ZONING.

THIS SHOWS YOU IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A MIXED-USE DISTRICT SHOWS THE ZONING AND SHOWS THE WHOLE PARCEL AND AM INCLUDING THIS ONE BASICALLY AS AN FYI FOR YOU ALL.

WHEN WE WENT TO GET A LETTER OF AVAILABILITY FROM THE COUNTY OR THE CITY, WE FOUND OUT THAT THIS LITTLE PIECE, FIVE ACRE PIECE IS HALF IN THE CITY AND UTILITY DISTRICT AND HALF IN THE COUNTY UTILITY DISTRICT.

SO THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE IS IN THE CITY.

THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE AVAILABLE FACILITIES UNTIL YOU GET DOWN TO STRATTON ROAD.

STRATTON BOULEVARD WHICH IS DOWN IN HERE.

THE COUNTY HAS LINES THAT ARE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT.

SO I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH TH CITY AND THE COUNTY AND THEY ARE WORKING TOGETHER AND THEY ARE BASICALLY GOING THROUGH THE DIFFERENT SITES BEFORE WHERE THEY CROSS OVER AND THEY COME AND SO THEY ARE GOING TO BE COMING TO YOU IN THE FUTURE TO KIND OF RESOLVE SOME OF THE ISSUES WHERE THE COUNTIES BUILD IN THE CITY DISTRICT OR THE CITIES BUILT IN THE COUNTY DISTRICT AND MAKE THOSE AFFIRMATIVE SO THERE'S NO QUESTIONS IN THE FUTURE.

I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY THIS ONE WILL GO FOR US.

WE ARE HOPING FOR THE COUNTY, MAINLY BECAUSE THE UTILITY LINE IS RIGHT THERE RATHER THAN THOUSANDS OF FEET DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT ANYWAY, I KIND OF EMILY DEEM THAT I THOUGHT I WOULD INCLUDE THAT SO YOU KIND OF KNEW WHAT WAS COMING.

I TALKED TO BILL YOUNG THE OTHER DAY AND I SAID I APOLOGIZE THAT I MADE THIS HAPPEN FOR YOU GUYS TO PUT ALL THIS WORK INTO IT.

HE SAYS IT WAS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.

AND WITH MAC, I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE.

THIS IS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD USE THE SAME USES THAT ARE ALONG WITH SYRIA AND THE VISION FOR THE MIXED-USE DISTRICT, AND WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR APPROVAL.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME SO WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5. [SINGING], MR. CHAIRMAN WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I GUESS WE NEED TO WAIT ON COMMISSIONER JOHNS.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL FILIBUSTER FOR A MINUTE.ARLIER THIS MORNING, I ALMOST GOT A CHANCE TO USE ONE OF THE LITTLE KNOWN SMALL PORTIONS OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION WHICH BASICALLY SAYS THAT ALL REAL PROPERTY DISPUTES, BOUNDARY AND TITLE DISPUTES, CIRCUIT COURTS HAVE ORIGINAL EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION AND THE ACTION IS BROUGHT IN THE COUNTY WHERE THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED.

AND THAT'S ARTICLE 5 SECTION 2.

I HAD TO USE THAT A LOT 40 YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS AN ATTORNEY FOR THE TRUSTEES THAT I WAS REMINDED OF ABOUT 20 MINUTES AGO.

SO THERE YOU GO.

HIS BACK.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

I WILL MOVE TO ENACT ORDINANCE 2019 62 REZONING 2906 INMAN RD.

REZONING APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRES OF LAND FROM INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE BASED UPON THE FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SPEAKER: SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

PLEASE SSES 5 TO 0.

[Item 6]

>> SPEAKER: THIS NEXT ITEM, IT

[02:55:06]

IS A REZONING, IT'S ONE OF YOUR RARE LARGE-SCALE ADMINISTRATIVE REZONING AND IS LEGISLATIVE IN NATURE.

THE ONLY SIMILAR ONE IS HASTINGS REZONED INSTEAD OF REZONED HASTINGS SO THIS IS A REZONING BUT THAT'S COUNTY INITIATED.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU CYNTHIA?

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, CYNTHIA MAY WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THIS IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX ADMINISTRATIVE REZONING OF COUNTY PROPERTIES.

IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPERTIES OWNED BY THE COUNTY TO RESUME ALL OF THEM TO PUBLIC SERVICE.

THESE LANDS ARE OWNED AND USED FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY THE COUNTY.

IT IS A COUNTY INITIATED PROCESS TO DO THE REZONING.

THE PURPOSE IS ONLY TO MAKE THESE PROPERTIES CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT AND INTENDED USES.

THE APPLICATION INCLUDES APPROXIMATELY 24 PARCELS AND THEY ARE GROUPED BY PROXIMITY AND FUNCTION.

THE COUNTY DID MEET THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS PER THE STATE CODE.

THERE WERE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THIS IS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY DID HEAR THIS AND MADE A RECOMMENDATION ON AUGUST 15.

AND THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED AROUND THE COUNTY IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS, BUT THEY INCLUDE THIS BUILDING, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES IS A VACANT PARCEL IN BETWEEN.

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER A FACILITY ON HOLMES BOULEVARD, A FACILITY AT OLD BEACH ROAD.

BOTH TRANSFER STATIONS, ANOTHER ST. JOHNS COUNTY FACILITY ON DOBBS ROAD AND THE FAIRGROUNDS.

THE STAFF FINDS THAT THE PUBLIC SERVICE DESIGNATION WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR ALL OF THOSE COUNTY PROPERTIES LISTED.

WE HAVE ÃWE HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF PHONE CALLS PROBABLY EARLIER ON WHEN THE SIGNS WENT OUT AND EVERYONE WAS INTERESTED IN WHAT WAS GOING ON AND MAKING SURE THERE WAS NOTHING ACTUALLY PROPOSED PHYSICALLY TO GO ON ANY OF THOSE PROPERTIES.

AND NO ACTUAL CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE REZONING 2019 Ã 02 BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

THE REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GOVERNANCE OF PLANNED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

I BELIEVE GAIL IS ALSO HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT A SPECIFIC PROPERTY.

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T SEE ANY OF THIS TIME.

MAY I HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT:

>> OPEN UP AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 64 PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: ED SLAVIN SAINT AUGUSTINE BOX 3084.

THIS IS THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING THAT MIKE TESTIFIED ON THIS MATTER AND I THINK MY TESTIMONY HAS BEEN REBUTTED.

500 OLD BEACH BLVD. SHOULD NOT BE A DECISION.

IT SHOULD BE CONSERVATION LAND.

JUST LIKE THE OUTPOST.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL THREE ACRE PLOT OF LAND WITH OAKS AND MAGNOLIAS AND IN LAKE AND AN ALLIGATOR.

THAT MAN WAS TO TURN IT INTO A FIRE STATION.

IT'S NEXT TO HOMES.

THAT WOULD BE JUST WRONG.

THIS IS A PLACE WHERE THERE OUGHT TO BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER OR A PLACE FOR BASKETBALL FOR KIDS.

IT'S GOT EXISTING STRUCTURES.

IT'S GOT EXISTING TREES AND THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS LET HIM TURN IT INTO A FIREHOUSE.

HE'S A DEVELOPER.

HE THINKS HE'S A DEVELOPER.

IT KIND OF REMINDS ME OF THE JOKE THAT ENDS IN HE THINKS HE'S A DOCTOR.

YOU KNOW THE ONE.

ANYWAY, PLEASE VOTE TO DESIGNATE 500 OLD BEACH BOULEVARD AS CONSERVATION LAND.

DO NOT LET MICHAEL DAVID WANCHICK PUT A FIREHOUSE THERE.

IT WOULD BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE FOR THE PEOPLE LIVING NEXT DOOR.

HE ACTUALLY AT A PRIOR MEETING AT THE BCC DENIED THERE WERE HOMES NEXT DOOR.

THERE ARE HOMES NEXT DOOR.

YOU CAN CHECK.

THERE'S A DIRT ROAD ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PROPERTY.

IT WAS MOSQUITO CONTROL HEADQUARTERS FOR YEARS.

IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE RECORD WHEN HE HAD A CONTAMINATED ÃHE TURNED BUTLER PARK INTO A CONTAMINATED SITE.

IT WAS FULL OF PARKING DEBRIS.

CONTAMINATED SOLID WASTE PILED HIGH ADJOINING THE RIVER AND JOINING THAT PRECIOUS RIVER THAT PEOPLE HAVE WORKED TO SAVE FOR YEARS.

WHEN THE ISSUE WAS RAISED BY A COMMISSIONER AT A COMMISSION CANDIDATE ABOUT THAT, THEY HAD TO GET TRUCKS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT BECAUSE OF A TIDE COMING IN TO REMOVE THE CONTAMINATED SOLID WASTE.

AN ALMOST CONTAMINATED THE RIVER.

IT CAME VERY CLOSE.

HE PILED THE WASTE NEXT TO THE RIVER.

AND WHEN THE ISSUE ROSE IN THE

[03:00:01]

COUNTY COMMISSION, HE SAID, AND I QUOTE, IT'S NOT A PINELLAS PARK.

IT'S A BOAT RAMP.

IT'S NOT A FIREHOUSE.

IT'S A CONSERVATION ZONE.

PLEASE DESIGNATE 500 OLD BEACH RD.

IS A CONSERVATION ZONE.

PLEASE AMEND THIS.

THE TESTIMONY AT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS IS UNDISPUTED.

I WAS AT PCA.

I'M HERE NOW.

NOBODY HAS SAID THEY WANT A FIREHOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY.

NOBODY EXCEPT ROBERT MOSES, JUNIOR OVER HEAR WHO YOU WILL HAVE NOT RENEWED HIS CONTRACT AND HE NEEDS TO GO AND IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE A FIREHOUSE.

AND NEEDS TO BE PRESERVED AS IT IS WITH THE OLD FLORIDA FEEL THAT IT HAS NOW.

AND WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'VE COMMENTED.

THE TESTIMONY IS UNREBUTTED.

HANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6? ZAINAB WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION FOR I WILL DO SO.PPROVE THE MOTION TO ENACT ORDINANCE 2019 Ã63.

ADMINISTRATIVE REZONING 2019 Ã 02 COUNTY PROPERTIES REZONING BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACTS PIERCED.

>> SPEAKER: HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 5 TO 0.

[Item 7]

>> SPEAKER: ARE YOU READY TO MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN?

>> SPEAKER: YES.

>> SPEAKER: MELISSA LUNDQUIST ASSISTANT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.TEM NUMBER SEVEN BEFORE YOU IS TO ACTUALLY CONSIDER THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL AND DESIGNATING IT AS A PLANNING COUNCIL RELATING TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE REINVESTMENT GRANT PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 394 POINT 657 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND RECORDING COUNCIL WAS CREATED IN 2005 UNDER COUNTY RESOLUTION 2005 98.

THEY ARE CHARGED WITH ENSURING THAT THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES IN OUR AREA ARE NOT OVERCROWDED.

ALONG THOSE LINES, THE PUBLIC SAFETY CORRELATING COUNSEL HAD AUTHORIZED EPIC BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE PARTNERSHIP WITH SMA IN THE ST. JOHN'S COUNTY CONSORTIUM TOOK.

[INDISCERNIBLE] SUBSTANCE ABUSE IMPLEMENTATION GRANT BACK AT ITS JANUARY 20 19TH MEETING.

PART OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS THAT ALTHOUGH THE RESOLUTION FROM CREATING THE PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL THAT WAS IN PLACE THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO BE MORE FORMALIZED ALONG THE LINES OF THE 394 STATUTES SPECIFICALLY THE COMMISSIONERS NAMING THE PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL AS THE PLANNING COUNCIL FOR THESE GRANTS.

AND ALSO THE MEMBERSHIP AND DESIGNATING THE INDIVIDUALS THAT STATUTE ALSO INCLUDED THE OTHER STATUTE ÃI'M SORRY ÃTHE PSC WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED UNDER NINE 51.26.

THERE WERE MEMBERSHIPS THAT WERE MORE INTERGOVERNMENTAL.

NOW, THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE ADDED TO THE MEMBERSHIP UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE 394.657.

AND IT INCLUDES SOME CONSUMERS OF THE STUDENT FOR SERVICES.

SO THAT'S THE BASICS OF THIS.

I MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE CONFUSING IN MY EXPLANATION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE IN REGARDS TO IT.

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T SEE ANY AT THIS TIME.

WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: WE NOW OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

SEEING NO PUBLIC COMMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

CAN WE GET A MOTION TO ADOPT?

>> SPEAKER: I WILL MOVE IT, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> SPEAKER: MOMENMOTION TO ADOP DESIGNATING THE ST. JOHN'S COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL AS THE PLANNING COUNCIL RELATED TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE REINVESTMENT GRANT PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 394.657 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

[03:05:07]

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

>> SPEAKER: AND WILL MOVE THE SECOND PART TOO, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> SPEAKER: WROTE A MOTION TO RATIFY THE LIST OF THE ST. JOHN COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY CORRELATING COUNSEL IS PROVIDED ON THE LAST PAGE OF THIS PACKET THEREBY NOTING THE SPECIFIC MEMBER NAMES.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE SECOND.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

[Additional Item]

>> WE WILL MOVE ON TO NUMBER NINE WHICH IS ÃDECLARATION OF EMERGENCY.

>> DARRELL IS GOING TO PUT THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE NEED OF THE DECLARATION INTO THE RECORD.

>> SHE IS GOING TO PASS THOSE OUT TO YOU IT'S ESSENTIALLY JUST AN UPDATE FROM THE ONE THE BOARD HAD CONSIDERED LAST THURSDAY AND IT'S ON YOUR OVERHEAD HERE.

LAST THURSDAY, THE BOARD HAD APPROVED EMERGENCY PROCLAMATION NUMBER 2019 Ã4487 DAY EXTENSION OF THE EMERGENCY DECLARATION THAT WOULD RUN UNTIL THURSDAY, HOWEVER, YOU ARE HERE THIS TUESDAY AND SHOULD THE BOARD WISH TO EXTEND THIS, IT WOULD GO TO YOUR NEXT MEETING NEXT TUESDAY WHICH MAY BOARD COULD RECONSIDER, BUT FOR TODAY, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO EXTEND.

IF THE BOARD TAKES NO ACTION, THIS WILL RUN UNTIL THIS THURSDAY, TWO DAYS FROM TODAY AND THEN EXPIRE.

SHOULD THE BOARD CHOOSE TO EXTEND TODAY, IT WILL RUN FROM SEVEN DAYS UNTIL TODAY.

MR. CHAIR, I BELIEVE ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR LECLAIR IS PREPARED TO BRIEF THE BOARD PERTAINING TO A RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

BOARD MEMBERS WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE THE EXTENSION OF THE DECLARATION.

WE ARE STILL IN THE MIDST OF MAKING THOSE BRIDGE CORRECTIONS IN SUMMER HAVEN.

WE ARE WORKING WITH THE BOARD AND THE DEP AND THROUGH A PARTICULAR PROCESS THE EXTENSION WILL GIVE US THE EMERGENCY UMBRELLA THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK UNDER TO COMPLETE THAT TASK.

IT ALSO MAKES AVAILABLE THOSE EMERGENCY POWERS TO GIVE OTHER COASTAL DEFICIENCIES WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 9.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

>>.

AUGUSTINE.

I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT MR. MCCORMICK WAS SAYING.

WHEN WILL THE DATE BE IF YOU DO ANOTHER SEVEN DAYS? WILL IT BE SEVEN DAYS FROM THE 19 UNTIL WHENEVER THAT DATE IS CORRECT AND ALSO I WANT ON THE RECORD THAT'S ONE ¦ [INDISCERNIBLE] I THINK A LOT OF THE PUBLIC DID NOT REALIZE THAT THE REASON THIS IS EXTENDED IS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE STORMS, HURRICANES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE'VE HAD.

BUT ALSO, WHEN THIS IS DONE, AS A LEGAL MATTER, AFTER SITTING HERE FOR SO LONG AND LISTENING TO A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP, THIS GRANTS AND ALLOWS LAWYERS AND THEIR DEVELOPERS TO EXTEND THE TIME.

WHENEVER ÃAND DIFFERENT PHASES OF PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY ARE INVOLVED IN.

AND I HAVE LEARNED THROUGH LISTENING TO THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE DO THESE THINGS AND THE LAWYERS COME IN AND WANT TO EXTEND IT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET PHASE 1 SO YOU KEEP PUTTING THESE THINGS OFF AND THEN DEVELOPMENTS DON'T GET DONE.

IF THERE'S A RECESSION, WHICH I HOPE THERE WILL BE, THE NEXT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALSO.

BUT FOR A HEAD'S UP TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO KNOW IT'S NOT JUST TO MEET THE NEEDS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY STRUGGLING TO REPAIR THEIR HOMES DURING THESE EMERGENCIES BUT IT ALSO REALLY BENEFIT

[03:10:04]

DEVELOPERS WHO INSTEAD OF GOING AHEAD AND DOING WHAT THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO GET ON AND GET IT DONE.

THEY DRAG THEIR FEET.

IT'S NEVER DONE.

YOU HAVE PROPERTIES NOT DEVELOPED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE, CAN WE BE MORE SPECIFIC AS TO WHEN THE STATE WILL BE UP FOR THIS EXTENSION? THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: PATRICK, IF YOU LIKE.

>> SPEAKER: IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR.

TWO THINGS.

NUMBER ONE, AGAIN, SHOULD THE BOARD WISH TO EXTEND THIS THROUGH THIS EMERGENCY PROCLAMATION IN FRONT OF YOU, IT WOULD RUN SEVEN DAYS FROM TODAY AND GO UNTIL NEXT TUESDAY.

SHOULD THE BOARD DECLINED TO DO THIS EXTENSION TODAY, THEN THE CURRENT SEVEN DAY PERIOD WILL EXPIRE THIS THURSDAY UNLESS ON THURSDAY, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY ATTEMPTS TO GATHER A QUORUM OR IF NOT AVAILABLE THE CHAIR TO EXTEND IT ON THURSDAY.

BUT THE SENSE WAS TO BRING IT TO THE BOARD TODAY THE BOARD IS HERE AND IF EXTENDED THE BOARD WILL BE BACK TOGETHER.

THE SECOND THING THAT MS. PROVISION IN THE FLORIDA LAW THAT WHEN THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER FOR BASICALLY EMERGENCIES HAVE THE EFFECT OF EXTENDING A CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT PERMITS, DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

MR. STOREY COUNTY SPEECH ACT? CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?

>> WHATEVER ACTION THE SPORT GOES FOR LOCAL STATE OF EMERGENCY DOES NOT TOLL OVER ANY ENVIRONMENTS.

>> SPEAKER: HAS THE STATE REMOVED THE DECLARATION?

>> SPEAKER: IT USUALLY DEPENDS ON EXECUTIVE ORDER AND IT USUALLY LASTS 60 DAYS PAST THE NORMAL TIME.

AND THEN THERE ARE SOME GUIDELINES AND TIME FRAMES ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY DISCUSSION?

>> SPEAKER: I WILL MOVE IT.

>> SPEAKER: I MOVE TO EMERGENCY PROCLAMATION NUMBER 2019 ÃFIVE PROCLAMATION EXTENDING THE DECLARATION OF STATE EMERGENCY PROPORTIONS OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY FROM STATE ROAD A1A EXTENDING EASTWARD TO THE ATLANTIC OCEAN IS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 252 PART ONE OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES AND MY ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2019 Ã40.

>> SPEAKER: I SECOND.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE EMERGENCY DECLARATION.

PLEASE VOTE.

[Reports]

PASSES 5 TO 0. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO COMMISSION REPORTS.

COMMISSIONER DEAN.

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TODAY.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER SMITH,

>> JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.

OOD FOR THOUGHT CABBAGE PLANTING HAS BEGUN GROUND PREPARATION IS BEING DONE FOR OTHER WINTER CROPS AS WELL.

BROCCOLI TURNIPS COLLEGE AND OTHER COLD CROPS.

IT'S BEING KNOCKED DOWN FOR POTATOES AND SWEET POTATOES LOOK GOOD AND SOD IS MOVING IN THE MARKET IS STRONG.UST WANT TO MENTION CRACKER DAY IS OCTOBER 19 AT THE ST. JOHN'S COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS.

THEY WILL BE CELEBRATING THEIR 60TH YEAR.

THEY WILL ALSO BE RECOGNIZED IN THE ORIGINAL OR INAUGURAL INDUCTION CLASSES AT ST. JOHNS COUNTY AGRICULTURAL HALL OF FAME WHICH WAS DONE IN 1998 10 CONTRIBUTORS ARE PARTICIPANTS IN THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY WERE RECOGNIZED AT THAT TIME THEY WERE REVITALIZED THAT HALL OF FAME.

I ALSO WANTED TO BRING UP THE CONTRACT THAT WAS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY AS NUMBER 26 AND I APPRECIATE THE PASSING OF THAT ALSO WORKING WITH IT TO MODIFY IT A BIT TOO AMENDED TO BE MORE FAVORABLE TO THE BOARD.

THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> SPEAKER: I WANT TO THANK STAFF WAS NOT CONTINUED CORRESPONDENCE WITH HERSCHEL VINEYARDS THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AT GEAA TO COLLECT THE DATA NECESSARY TO EVALUATE THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS WITHIN ST. JOHN'S COUNTY MANAGED BY AGA.

I REGULARLY GET QUESTIONS FROM PEOPLE WHEN THEY HEAR ABOUT THE POTENTIAL SALE AS TO WHETHER WE CAN BUY IT.

HOW MUCH IT WILL COST, WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON THE RESIDENCE, HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE.

WHAT'S THE QUALITY OF THE

[03:15:01]

SYSTEM.

PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS.

SO YOUR MULTIPAGE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS IS GREATLY APPRECIATED AND NOTICED.I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION.

KEEP UP THE GOOD EFFORTS TO COLLECT THIS INFORMATION NECESSARY TO PROVIDE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS AND INFORMED INFORMATION SO THEY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT IN DETERMINING WHETHER WE WANT TO ACCEPT THAT ASSET SHOULD BECOME AVAILABLE TO OUR COUNTY.I DO WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT OTHER THAN THAT MR. CHAIR, I SPOKE ENOUGH TODAY.

>> SPEAKER: THEY KILL MR. CHAIRMAN.

I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR ALL THE GREAT WORK THAT HAPPENED DURING THE HURRICANE.

EVERYONE CONTRIBUTED TO THAT HE SAW A GATHERING OF ALL THE GREAT EFFORT IN OUR COUNTY AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT CONTRIBUTION ALL THE EFFORT THAT WENT INTO THAT AND THEY WERE THERE LEADING THE EFFORTS.

I APPRECIATE THE LEADERSHIP THAT WAS SHOWN AND DEMONSTRATING AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT EVERYONE TO SEE THE LEADERSHIP AND QUICK DECISION-MAKING.

I HAVE ONE MATTER I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE BOARD PUBLIC ATTENTION PRESENT THIS TO OUR LEGAL STAFF AND TO OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS WELL.

THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, DUVAL COUNTY AS WELL AS BAKER, CLAY COUNTY AND NASSAU COUNTY DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIVES HAVE LOOKED INTO REGIONAL EFFORT TO HELP FORM AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO ASSIST LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO COLLABORATE IN A JOINT EFFORT TO ADDRESS VETERAN SUICIDE BY INTERFACING WITH THE VA AND IS A VETERAN HEALTH AGENCIES.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE WITH ADDRESSING VETERAN SUICIDE IS IT'S A MEDICAL HEALTH ISSUE AND IS A COST TO THE TAXPAYERS.

THE VA GENERALLY IS BETTER FOCUSED ON DEALING WITH A REGIONAL EFFORT.

THERE'S EXAMPLES OF THIS IN THE WESTERN STATES.

REALLY, WHAT THIS IS, THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE HAS CREATED MO YOU.

IT'S BEEN SENT INTO OUR LEGAL STAFF TO REVIEW AS WELL AS AN EFFORT TO CREATE THIS.

THE WAY I UNDERSTAND FROM REVIEWING IT AND GOING THROUGH IT WOULD BE EACH COUNTY WOULD APPOINT A MEMBER TO THE SPORT TO ADVISE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HOW TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE EFFORTS.

AS FAR AS PUBLIC HEALTH.

THERE MIGHT BE A SMALL FUNDING.

I THINK THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE WILL COMMIT ABOUT $70,000 TO THAT.

THEY WOULD HOUSE AND PROVIDE RESOURCES FOR.

OUR CONTRIBUTION WOULD BE VERY SMALL WHICH I THINK WE HAVE A VETERANS BUDGET WE CAN MAYBE LOOK AT, ALLOCATING SOME OF THOSE FUNDS.

I WOULD ASK IF STAFF TO ADDRESS IT BUT I WOULD ASK OUR BOARD IF WE COULD MAKE A MOTION ÃI WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TODAY TO DIRECT OUR STAFF TO FURTHER REVIEW THIS TO BRING IT BACK TO US AND SEE IF THIS IS SOMETHING WE WOULD LIKE TO JOIN IN.

I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE AND WOULD DEMONSTRATE TO THE PUBLIC OUR ONGOING EFFORTS TO BE INNOVATIVE OPEN-MINDED AND CREATIVE IN HOW WE ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS IT MR. WANCHICK YOUR STEPHEN SEALEY THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE BOARD'S PRIOR SUPPORT OF VETERANS IN THIS COUNTY.

HE SAW THAT THIS MORNING ON THE PROCLAMATION, THE FLAG FLYING OVER THE BUILDING AND A WHOLE LIST OF THINGS THE COMMISSION HAS DONE IN THE PAST YEARS.

THAT'S VERY CONSISTENT WITH OUR AGENDA.

ALSO SUICIDE IN GENERAL AND SUICIDE AMONG VETERANS IS A CONCERN OF OUR MEDICAL EXAMINER FOR HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES STAFF.

SO IT WOULD DOVETAIL VERY NICELY SO WE WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE.

>> IF I MAY ADD AS WELL, THIS IS NOT A HYPOTHETICAL OR THEORETICAL CIRCUMSTANCE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.

THIS IS A REAL SITUATION.

IN FACT, IN THE RECENT HISTORY OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY HAS HAD VETERAN SUICIDES OF DIFFERING AGES, AND SO THIS IS NOT A MAY BE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE ÃTO HAVE STAFF REVIEW THIS AND BRING BACK AN ITEM FOR THE BOARD TO REVIEW.

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD SECOND THAT.

ONE THING WE NEED TO LOOK AT IS THE COST IS MINIMAL, FROM WHAT I WAS TOLD YESTERDAY.

THEY ARE LOOKING FOR 30 SPLIT BETWEEN THE OTHER COUNTIES.

SO THIS TIME IT'S NOT REALLY A BIG CAUSE FOR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

AND IT'S NEEDED.

THE ONE THING I DID TALK TO JIM FROM CANINES AND WARRIORS ABOUT OUR RAPID RESPONSE TEAM IS WORKING SO WELL WITH THE KIDS THROUGH EPIC YOUTH SERVICES THAT THAT MAY BE A MODEL FOR THEM TO LOOK AT WHERE VETERANS COULD HELP VETERANS.

HE WOULD LOVE INFORMATION ON THAT.

>> SPEAKER: I BELIEVE IN THE MOU AGREEMENT THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT CLEAR.

AS SOON AS THEY'RE LOOKING FOR ST. JOHN'S COUNTY TO HAVE ÃARE WE APPOINT WOULD BE THE CHAIRMAN OF THIS INITIATIVE.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

AND WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO HIGHLIGHT IT.

I DON'T REMEMBER IF THAT WAS IN THAT LANGUAGE OR NOT.

IF THE BOARD VOTED TODAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS HOW MUCH TIME WITH YOUR STAFF NEED?

[03:20:04]

>> SPEAKER: I WOULD LIKE TO TARGET YOUR NEXT REGULAR BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 1 IF THERE'S SOME RAISING MECHANICALLY IT CAN BE PUT ON THERE THAN THE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING I THINK TARGET OCTOBER 1.

>> THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIRMAN IF YOU WILL ALLOW THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE BOARD TO DIRECT OUR STAFF ÃOUR ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL STAFF, TO BRING US BACK A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON IN THIS REGARD.

OUR NEXT SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING WHICH WILL BE OCTOBER 1.

>> SPEAKER: I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> SPEAKER: PUBLIC COMMENT? WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS MOTION.

WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DIRECT STAFF TO WORK ON THIS MOU AND FUNDING SOURCE.

PLEASE VOTE.

IT PASSES 5 TO 0.

>> SPEAKER: THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>> SPEAKER: I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS.

I HAD A RESIDENT KIND OF REACH OUT TO ABOUT TREATY PARK.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN IN THE AREA YOU HAVE HEARD ABOUT CLEARCUTTING AROUND IT.

SUBDIVISIONS COMING IN AND KIND OF TALKING WITH STAFF ABOUT IT WE KIND OF CAME UP WITH MAYBE USING FUNDS TO PLANT TREES IN THE AREAS THAT WILL NEED EXTRA BUFFERING WANTS THE DEVELOPMENTS ARE BUILT.

THE STAFF CAME UP WITH APPROXIMATELY A $27,000 COST TO PLANT 62 INCH CALVO TREES AND THE TREES WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE MULCHED AND IRRIGATED WITH THEIR THINKING VARIATIONS WILL BE MINIMAL.

I WANTED TO GET THE BOARD PUBLIC THOUGHTS ON THAT AND WHETHER WE SHOULD PROCEED.

COMMISSIONER SMITH MET.

>> SPEAKER: WHAT'S THE PRESENT OF TREES IN THE FUNDING?

>> SPEAKER: I THINK WE HAVE Ã IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY WERE OVER $1 MILLION.

>> SPEAKER: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A NUMBER.

>> SPEAKER: THE ACTUAL NUMBER WE COULD GET.

>> COMMISSIONER DEAN COMMIT.

>> WE REALLY NEED TO DO THAT.

>> SPEAKER: IT'S KIND OF NEEDED BECAUSE WHEN ALL THE TREES WERE AROUND THAT THERE WAS NO NEED TO KNOW THAT THEY ARE NOT IT'S GOING TO BE IN NEED AS REQUIRED TO EXPAND.

SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION WE MOVE FORWARD.

>> SPEAKER: IS THERE A COST OR SOMETHING?

>> SPEAKER: BRIAN CAME UP WITH $27,000, ABOUT 227.

WILL THAT COVER EVERYTHING? WOULD THE 27,000 COVER EVERYTHING?

>> WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK WITH THE EXACT NUMBER CONSENTED ITEM ITEM.

>> DO YOU WANT TO PUT A CAP ON IT OR JUST LOOK AT IT?

>> I WOULD SAY.

[INDISCERNIBLE]

>> SPEAKER: IF WE COULD GET A NUMBER.

IF WE HAVE TO CUT A FEW TREES OUT WE WILL CUT A FEW TREES OUT.

I HAVE A MOTION IN THE SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

>> SPEAKER: OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'M SORRY.

>> SPEAKER: WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, FOR CATCHING THAT.

AND ALSO, I KNOW WE BROUGHT IT UP AND I DON'T ÃWE HAD SO MANY ITEMS FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BROUGHT TO US.

I'M KIND OF THINKING WE SHOULD MAYBE ASK STAFF TO LOOK AT AGAIN WHEN WE HAVE THESE EASEMENT ACCESSES LIKE WE HAVE LESS TIME WITH MS. ROBINSON IT'S CLEARLY FAMILY.

WE HAVE THIS ONE TODAY THAT'S CLEARLY FAMILY THAT WE ARE NOT PUTTING AN UNDUE BURDEN AND TIMING ON THESE FAMILIES BECAUSE THE OLDER FAMILIES WHEN YOU LOOK AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ALL THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO HELP FAMILY BILLS LIVING IN ST.

JOHN'S COUNTY AND WE ARE PUTTING UNDUE BURDENS ON THEM WITH THE TIME AND THE COST AND THIS YOUNG COUPLE TODAY NOT TO SPEAK THEIR BUSINESS BUT THE BANK WAS ON THEM WE HAD A LOAN APPROVAL AND THE TIMING.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU THOUGHT.

I KNOW WE LOOKED OUT AT ONE TIME.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE OVERLOOKED IT OR IF WE HAD MORE TIME TO LOOK AT MAKING IT WHERE IT CAN BE STAFF APPROVED OR PROCESS BE QUICKER.

[03:25:53]

>> SPEAKER: I THINK THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE REQUEST.

WHERE THERE IS A TYPE OF MATTER THAT WILL COME TO THE BOARD IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES AND VIRTUALLY EACH TIME IT'S APPROVED AND THAT MAY BE AN INDICATION OF PERHAPS THE CODE SHOULD BE CHANGED.

WE HAVE SEEN THAT IN SOME OTHER CATEGORIES OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THIS MAY BE ONE.

OF COURSE, THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS.

TO BRING BACK THE CRITERIA THE BOARD WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING ÃALLOWING A STAFF APPROVAL ON AN ITEM.

BUT I THINK WE'LL HAVE DIRECTION.

YES SIR.

>> THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO BRING UP AS I HAD A MEETING WITH STAFF AND ALL OF US EXCEPT FOR JEREMIAH HAVE BEEN THERE TWO DAYS AFTER THE MEETING AND I'VE ASKED THEM TO KIND OF DO A SUMMARY SHEET OF CHANGES THAT WERE MADE ON THE FLOOR WILL SUPERSEDE LIKE WE DID TODAY WAS SUPERSEDE WAS IN THE TEXT.

THAT WAY IT'S CLEAR, CONCISE AND EVERYBODY KNOWS IT FOR THE FUTURE.

THE BOARD WAS ÃTHE STAFF WAS VERY HELPFUL ON THAT AND THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.

I JUST WANTED TO LET THE BOARD NOW.

IT'S NOT 100 PERCENT CLEAR IT BE NICE TO HAVE CLARITY BECAUSE WHEN THIS WAS BUILT FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD WE WILL NOT BE HERE.

SO WHETHER IT'S CAUGHT OR NOT CAUGHT WE HAVE IN SOME OF THE SITUATIONS,.

COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T WANT TO OVER COMPLICATE THE PROCESS.

I LIKE THE IDEA.

DO YOU THINK THE SUMMARY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPLICANT PRIOR TO SIGNATURE? TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THE SAME UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE?

>> SPEAKER: IF I MAY, YOU RAISE A GREAT POINT.

IN FACT, MR. CHAIR, I THINK IT WAS PART OF THE STAFF CONVERSATION THAT PERHAPS IF THERE WERE CHANGES MADE TO A PUD TAX OR SITE PLAN LIKE WHERE A FENCE OR A BUFFER SHOULD BE, THAT TYPE OF THING, BUT THE WRITER OF THE CHANGE SHOULD BE THE STAFF AND THE STAFF SUBMITS IT TO THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BASICALLY THEY ARE READING AT THE SAME WAY.

BUT IT IS THE STAFF'S INITIAL WING WHICH WHICH I THINK WOULD AVOID A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER IS WRITING IT STAFF COULD POTENTIALLY MISS SOMETHING.

SO IF THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE, I THINK IT COULD BE DONE THAT WAY.

AND DON'T FORGET, THERE'S A FAIRLY QUICK TURNAROUND BECAUSE IF THE BOARD APPROVES A Ã ESPECIALLY AN APPROVAL THAT INVOLVES AN ORDINANCE, THERE'S A TIMELINE TO GET THAT TO THE STATE WHICH MEANS IT HAS TO BE KIND OF ¦

>> IF WE HAVE AN EXTRA DAY OR TWO TO GET THAT, I'M FINE WITH THAT.

OKAY.

I THINK THAT'S IT FOR ME.

ADMINISTRATOR?

>> SPEAKER: TWO ITEMS. THE FIRST IS THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION GRANT FOR OUR COASTLINE.OING TO LET DARRELL KIND OF GIVE YOU THE DETAILS ON THAT.

BUT WE WOULD LIKE THE BOARD PUBLIC AUTHORIZATION TO PURSUE IT.

>> SPEAKER: THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR UP TO $75,000.

IT'S A RESILIENCY TYPE GRANT THAT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA HAS APPROACHED US ABOUT, TO PARTNER WITH US, AND WE WOULD LIKE THE BOARD PUBLIC SUPPORT TO PURSUE THAT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA.

IF THE GRANT IS AWARDED, IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR APPROVAL, BUT AT THIS TIME THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, I HAVE UNTIL OCTOBER 1, THEY ASKED IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GET A BOARD CONSENSUS FOR THEM TO BEGIN THE EFFORTS ON APPLYING FOR A GRANT REGARDING RESILIENCY.

A COUPLE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT BUT HAVEN'T ZEROED IN ON YET, ONE WOULD BE

[03:30:09]

HASTINGS LOOKING AT POTENTIAL SEALEVEL RISE AND VULNERABILITY AFFECTS ASSOCIATED THERE.

THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE THE AREA OF NORTH BEACH AND SOUTH PONTE VEDRE.

WE HAVE THE AREA ALONG THE COASTLINE THAT WE ARE VERY MUCH AWARE OF THAT THIS WOULD BEGIN TO FOCUS THE AREA WEST OF A1A.

THE TOPOGRAPHY GETS DOWN ON THE WEST SIDE OF A1A IS NOT REALLY SHOWN A LOT OF ATTENTION TO.

WORK THERE'S THE ABILITY FOR THEM TO DO AN ANALYSIS OF OUR EXISTING COUNTY VULNERABILITY STUDIES AND DETERMINE IF THERE ARE DEFICIENCIES WITHIN OUR EXISTING STUDIES.

SO WE ARE WORKING THROUGH Ã THOSE ARE JUST THREE OPTIONS WE ARE WORKING THROUGH.

WE WILL PICK ONE OF THOSE WITH UF AND I THINK THEY ARE BEST SUITED TO PERFORM.

THEY WOULD BE DOING THE ACTIVITY.

WE WOULD BE THE APPLICANT AND THEY WOULD BE THE ACTUAL ENTITY DOING THE WORK.

PARTNERSHIP WITH US.

WE WOULD LOOK FOR YOUR CONSENSUS AS WE APPLY FOR THE GRANT AS WE ARE FULFILLING WISHES AND DIRECTION.

>> SPEAKER: COMMISSIONER JOHNS?

>> SPEAKER: IS THERE A LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT?

>> SPEAKER: NO MATCH REQUIRED.

>> SPEAKER: WOULD THAT INCLUDE RIVERS AND CREEKS ANALYSIS AS WELL AS D.C. RISES THE RIVERS DO TOO.

>> SPEAKER: IT WOULD THAT'S WHY JESUS WOULD BE A POTENTIAL PROJECT REST LOOK AT AND I JUST LISTED THREE PROJECTS.

WE WOULD JUST BE DOING ONE OF THOSE.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

>> SPEAKER: UNLESS WORKING WITH UF THEY IDENTIFIED ANOTHER AREA THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE BETTER QUALIFIED TO MAKE THE APPLICATION ON.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: LIKE I SAY, IT'S ONLY $75,000 PER STUDY DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE.AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE SCOPE WILL BE LIMITED.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY.

PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> SPEAKER: CAN I SHARE ANOTHER ONE WITH YOU? YOU WILL LIKE THIS ONE.

THIS MORNING I WAS SITTING HERE AND I WAS NOTIFIED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC APPLICATION.

[INDISCERNIBLE] FOR SAFER GRANT TO FUND THE STAFFING REALLY NEW NORTHEAST FIRE STATION WAS APPROVED.

SO THAT'S VALUED AT $2.4 MILLION.

SO FOR THE YEARS TO DETERMINE THE GRANT WERE USUALLY ABOUT TWO YEARS.

SO THAT'S REALLY A VERY POSITIVE THING.

AS YOU KNOW, THE BOARD HAS SUBMITTED THREE PRIOR APPLICATIONS AND THESE ARE VERY COMPETITIVE APPLICATIONS.

WE ARE 444.

WE ARE VERY PLEASED WITH THAT.

FAVORABLE FINANCIAL IMPACT.

AND WE NEED TO SEND A LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVE RUTHERFORD.

HE WAS VERY INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US WORK THIS THROUGH THE PROCESS AS WELL AS JOSH.

DELIVER FOR US.

>> SPEAKER: DO WE NEED PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE GRANT APPLICATION?

>> SPEAKER: FOR GRANT HAS BEEN APPROVED.

>> SPEAKER: COUNTY ATTORNEYS REPORT.

OUR EXPERT THE ONE FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA WE NEED TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA $75,000 FOR PUBLIC RESILIENCY.

A CLOSET FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SPEAKER: WE HAVE A CONSENSUS.

COUNTY ATTORNEYS REPORT.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

I HAD NOT PLANNED REALLY ON A REPORT TODAY BUT KIND OF BASE AFTER THIS MORNING'S PUBLIC COMMENT AND SOME OF THE DISCUSSION, I JUST WANT TO LET THE BOARD KNOW I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL WHEN THE COUNTY DOES SORT OF NOTICES FOR HEARING AND THAT TYPE OF THING TO PUT IN PARTICULARLY FOR THE QUASIJUDICIAL ONE PERHAPS NOTICE SWORN TESTIMONY MAY BE TAKEN, THAT TYPE OF THING.

I THINK THERE MAY BE STATE LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO THAT SO WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT FITS.

BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD.

YOUR NEXT MEETING IS OCTOBER 1.

THE BOARD COULD SORT OF INITIATE THAT BUT I THINK FOR NOTICES GOING OFF ABOUT IT WOULD BE MORE LIKELY THAT IT WOULD BE THE OCTOBER 15.

BUT NOBODY LIKES A SURPRISE AND I THINK IF PEOPLE KNOW AHEAD OF TIME THEY MAY BE SUBJECT TO SWORN TESTIMONY AND GOING BACK TO COMMISSIONER JOHN'S

[03:35:05]

COMMENTS, PUT IT IN THE NOTICE.

WHERE THINGS CAN REASONABLY BE PUT INTO OBJECTIVE NUMBER TYPE THINGS WITH SOME WORK ON THE LANGUAGE.

JUST THAT EXPECTATION THE FULL IDEA REALLY THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IS TO FULLY INFORM THE BOARD.

THE BOARD CAN BE FULLY INFORMED AND THINK WITH A LITTLE MORE GUIDANCE OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE TO ATTEMPT TO INFORM THE BOARD.

SO THAT WILL BE OUR INTENT.

I THINK PROBABLY THE 1 OCTOBER BE QUICK FOR THAT.

BUT I THINK FOLLOWING THAT I THINK WE COULD HAVE SOME NOTICE PUT OUT.

THANK YOU.

>> I THINK THAT'S AN OUTSTANDING IDEA.

I THINK WAY BACK TO THE ONE ISSUE WE TOOK OF EARLIER TODAY, YOU HAD INDIVIDUALS GIVING VERY SPECIFIC FACTS.

THIS OCCURRED I SAW IT HAPPENED. NOW THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED SO I THINK THIS WOULD HELP.

HOPEFULLY HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE WHEN THOSE THINGS COME OFF.

>> SPEAKER: EVERYB

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.