Mar 11, 2025 Land Acquisition and Management Program

[Call meeting to order]

[00:00:08]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THE LAMP

BOARD. ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >>

[General public comment for items not on the agenda - 3 minutes per speaker]

>> NOW, IT'S TIME TO READ THE CAUSE. THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FLORIDA LAW.

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ON PROPOSITIONS BEFORE THE BOARD AS THOSE ITEMS ARE JUST ON THE AGENDA. FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MATTERS NOT BEING CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TODAY, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL BE PROVIDED TO ADJUST THE BOARD ON MATTERS JURISDICTION. EACH PERSON ADDRESSING THE BOARD SHALL LIMIT COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES.

PERSONS SHALL NOT ADDRESS THE BOARD OR MEMBER THEREOF UNLESS SPECIFICALLY RECOGNIZED BY CHAIRPERSON TO DO SO. ONCE RECOGNIZED, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHALL ADJUST THE COMMENTS TO THE BOARD AS A WHOLE. PUBLIC COMMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE BOARD TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEMAND IMMEDIATE RESPONSES FROM THE BOARD OR MEMBERS. BOARD MEMBERS SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE WITH PERSONS MAKING COMMENT UNLESS THE QUESTION OR COMMENT IS DIRECTED TO THE CHAIR OR MADE WITH PERMISSION OF THE CHAIR. AS A REMINDER , ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE US , SPEAK LOUD AND CLEAR INTO THE MICROPHONE FOR UP RECORDING PURPOSES. ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE GO ON? GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. I SEE JUST THE ONE CARD ? YES? THAT IS DIRK SCHROEDER.

GOOD AFTERNOON. >> I WANTED TO TAKE THREE MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THE THREE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES . TWO OF THEM ARE ALREADY ON THE LAND ACQUISITION LIST. IS IT AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO TALK ABOUT THOSE OR DO I WAIT? OKAY. THE NUMBER ONE PROPERTY ON THE LIST IS THE 185 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES .

I ATTENDED THE MOST RECENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING AND THEY MADE A MOTION TO HAVE A NEW APPRAISAL DONE ON THIS PROPERTY . AS I MENTIONED EARLIER , WE TALKED BEFORE THE MEETING, YOUR CHAIR AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CHALLENGE OF ACQUIRING SOME OF THESE SENSITIVE AND UNIQUE PROPERTIES.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS THE APPRAISAL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVERY DAY THAT 185 ACRES WITH FRONTAGE ALONG THE INTERCOASTAL IS SOLD. YOU NEED SEVERAL TO DO THAT , SO I'M GLAD THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION MADE THE DECISION. I HOPE ALL ALSO REPRESENT THE 14 ACRE ISLAND OFF THE WEST SIDE . THE REASON IT WAS PULLED FROM LESTER TO THIS YEAR FOR A PERIOD OF TIME IS BECAUSE THE OTHER CHALLENGE IS THE PRIVATE MARKET. YOU HAVE PRIVATE INVESTORS WHO TIE THE PROPERTY UP AND THEY MADE AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO CONVINCE SOMEONE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AND THAT DIDN'T WORK FOR HIM NOT THE WAY THEY INTENDED.

SOMEONE ELSE MAY BE SUCCESSFUL, SO THAT'S THE SECOND CHALLENGE.

I HAVE BROUGHT ANOTHER PROPERTY FOR YOU FOR CONSIDERATION AND IF IT GIVE ME A COUPLE OF EXTRA MINUTES, I CAN GIVE YOU SOME EXHIBITS. THAT'S UP TO THE CHAIR. THANK YOU. X MARKS THE

SPOT. IS THAT IT? >> THAT WORKS.

[00:05:16]

>> THE OWNER OF THESE THREE INDIVIDUAL COMMERCIAL PARCELS , I HAD REACHED OUT TO HIM, BECAUSE FIVE YEARS AGO , HE CONTRACTED TO PURCHASE THESE PARCELS . THE TWO OUTSIDE PARCELS WERE OWNED BY THE DELTONA CORPORATION AND THE MIDDLE WAS OWNED BY SOMEONE OUT OF COLUMBIA . IT WAS QUITE A CHALLENGE TO PUT THESE PROPERTIES TOGETHER IN THE FIRST PLACE . AS I MENTIONED, WE HAD THEM UNDER CONTRACT AND 2009 , SO THEY WERE UNDER CONTRACT FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS. THE CHALLENGE WAS TO CLOSE WITH SOMEONE IN COLUMBIA , WHICH WAS QUITE A FEAT. ALSO, TO CLOSE WITH SOMEONE IN BELGIUM, WHICH IS THE DELTONA CORPORATION. WE WERE ABLE TO PUSH THE SIMPLY OF THESE THREE PARCELS. THE BUYER HAD INTENDED TO PURCHASE THEM, BECAUSE THEY WERE COMMERCIAL AND BUT HIS OFFICE THERE, BUT HE SAW THE POTENTIAL TO DEVELOP THESE FOR RESIDENTIAL . HE MADE AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO USE THESE FOR 10 RESIDENTIAL HOME SITE , WHICH IS ABOUT 2.7 ACRES AND I WILL GIVE YOU THE EXACT ACREAGE IN A MINUTE WITH THE OTHER EXHIBIT , BUT WE RAN INTO QUITE A NUMBER OF STUMBLING BLOCKS . WE FIRST WENT TO THE COUNTY TO SEE WHAT WAS POSSIBLE AND THE COUNTY POINTED US BACK TO THE AGE AWAY.

THE HLA SAID THAT THE RESTRICTIONS IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO AMEND THEM WOULD REQUIRE 60% IF NOT MORE OF THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF SAINT AUGUSTINE SHORES TO AMEND AND THERE WAS A COUNTER ARGUMENT ABOUT ONLY HAVING THAT PERCENTAGE AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE PERSONS PRESENT, SO WE WENT BACK AND FORTH, THEN FINALLY AT THE END OF ROUGHLY 4.5 YEARS, THE BUYER JUST SAID, I'M GOING TO BUY IT AND WE WILL FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH IT. SINCE THEN, I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH PROVIDING SOME POTENTIAL CONSERVATION PARCELS AND I CONVINCED THESE GUYS TO ALLOW A LAMP ACQUISITION TO BE SUBMITTED. IT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE CANOPY SHORES AND THESE PARCELS ARE DESIGNATED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. I WILL SWITCH THE EXHIBIT FOR JUST A SECOND. I WILL PLEAD GUILTY TO SELLING AT LEAST TWO OF THE PARCELS DIAGONALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE ONE I WAS TALKING ABOUT. LET'S JUST CALL IT THE CAFE CANOPY SHORES PROPERTY. THE TOP PHOTO SHOWS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLIES FOR A PERMIT. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO WORK OUT ENGINEERING AND I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF TREES REMAINING , BUT IT'S A VAST WASTELAND OUT THERE ON THESE THREE PROPERTIES AND THOSE THREE COMBINED PROPERTIES HAVE ABOUT ROUGHLY EIGHT FOOT OF FRONTAGE AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 740 FEET I BELIEVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 730 OR 740. THAT IS THE BOTTOM PICTURE. THE BOTTOM PICTURE SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY , MATURE OAKS AND TREES. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HOPING TO PRESERVE IS THIS PROPERTY FROM WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THE TOP PICTURE. I JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I'M

HERE. >> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. FLOWERS, IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED YESTERDAY TO STAFF, SO WE ARE WORKING ON AN APPLICATION TO GET TOGETHER THE MAPS AND EVERYTHING AND YOU WILL BE SEEING THIS FOR THE FIRST REVIEW IN THE MEETING.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU BOTH. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? EXCUSE ME, AND COUGHING

[00:10:04]

[Approval of meeting minutes from the December 12th meeting]

MOTION? >> MOTION TO APPROVE THE

MINUTES. >> SECOND.

>> DID YOU GET THAT? ALL RIGHT , VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR ? ALL OPPOSED? I LIKE YOU BETTER. I NEED TO SEND THIS BEFORE I FORGET. I WILL FORGET. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS THE APPROVAL

[Approval of current agenda]

>> I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> IT'S TIME FOR A VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE . >> ANY AT ALL OPPOSED? YOU SCARED ME. WE HAVE AN APPROVED CURRENT AGENDA. NOW, TIME THE

[1. Union Land & Timber- Second review and scoring]

AGENDA ITEMS. RYAN? >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, UNION LAND AND TIMBER . YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THIS FROM THE LAST MEETING. THIS IS THE SECOND REVIEW , SO JUST TO RECAP, THIS IS 149 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE WEST CENTRAL AREA OF THE COUNTY, MOLASSES JUNCTION AREA. MORE SPECIFICALLY, LOCATED SOUTH OF 214 AND WEST OF 13 A NEAR THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER. DURING THE LAST DECEMBER MEETING , IT INCLUDES MAPS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY THE LAND TRUST WHO WORKED WITH THE OWNER TO GENERATE THE APPLICATION . THERE IS POTENTIAL THAT THE LAND TRUST WOULD CONCURRENTLY APPLIED THROUGH THE FLORIDA FOREVER PROGRAM AND IDENTFY THE COUNTY AS A MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY. IF THIS OCCURS, IT WOULD BE UNDER PRESERVATION OF THE PROGRAM AND OWNED BY THE STATE AND THE COUNTY MAY BE IDENTIFIED AS A PARTNER. THIS WOULD NEED CONCURRENCE FROM THE BOARD AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THE PROPERTY CONTAINS A SIGNIFICANT TRIBUTARY OF MCCULLOUGH CREEK AND IT DOES HAVE SOME WITH SOME REGENERATING PINE TURBULENCE. LAND-USE IS AGRICULTURE AND ZONING IS OPEN RURAL. THERE IS NO RESOURCES. THE ACCESS APPEARS TO BE LIMITED TO AN FPL EASEMENT LOCATED WEST OF THE PROPERTY.

THERE IS NO CURRENT ROAD ACCESS OR OFFICIAL ROADWAY ACCESS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER BLEW A BOUNDARY, AND SOME DEPARTMENT COMMENTS , PARKS AND REC SAID THAT THERE WERE POTENTIAL CONCERNS THAT INCLUDE THE LACK OF ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY AS THERE IS CURRENTLY NO COUNTY ROAD LEADING TO THE PARCEL. THE RIVERDALE TRACK SERVES AS EASEMENT PROVIDING ACCESS TO PROPERTY, ESTABLISHING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE ROAD MAINTENANCE WILL BE ADVISED, SO THIS IS IN CASE WE LOOK TO DEVELOP PROPERTY FOR ANY USES. TYPICALLY, THE PARTY BENEFITING FROM THE EASEMENT BEARS RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTAINING AND REPAIRING IT AND LEADING TO ADDITIONAL EXPENSES FOR LAND AND RECREATIONAL PURPOSES. MORE THAN HALF OF THE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF WETLANDS, WHICH SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITS THE FEASIBILITY OF ADDING PASSIVE RECREATIONAL ELEMENTS AND ANY RECREATIONAL COMPONENTS ON THE AREAS WOULD NOT BE DEVELOPABLE UNTIL WE ACCESS THE PROPERTIES ESTABLISHED. IF PURCHASED, RECREATION WOULD REQUEST THAT THE UPLAND AREAS OF THE SITE BE DESIGNATED FOR FUTURE RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT WITH MINIMAL TO NO RESTRICTIONS. THIS WOULD ALLOW FLEXIBILITY TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE GROWTH AND IN THE ADDITION OF AMENITIES WITHIN THE AREA. INVOLVING COMMUNITY NEEDS AFFECT ITALY. ANOTHER ASIDE FOR DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY OF PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY WOULD BE REQUIRED. TO FURTHER THE POINT ABOUT THE COUNTY BEING IDENTIFIED AS THE MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY, WE WOULD PROBABLY LOOK FOR LAMP FOR SOME SORT OF A CONSENSUS FOR WORK TO BE CONSIDERED AND CONCURRENT WITH THAT APPLICATION FOR ACQUISITION

[00:15:07]

LETTER FOR THE CHAIR TO SIGN. >> THOUGHTS?

>> TWO QUESTIONS. ONE, THERE LOOKED TO BE A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SIGN ON SHEET . WHAT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE PAST MANDATE?

>> THERE WAS ONE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, WHICH WE CALL A CLT ARE OR CONFIRMATION LETTER , WHICH IS BASICALLY A PRE-APPLICATION TYPE REVIEW WHERE A LIST OF BASICALLY A SMALL PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED OR SUBMITTED -- NOT APPROVED RATHER. STAFF WOULD LOOK AT THAT AND PROVIDE A LISTING OF COMMENTS THAT THE LAND DEVELOPING CODE WOULD LIST.

>> WHAT WAS THE NATURE? >> AT THIS TIME, THE CONFIRMATION LETTER IS BASICALLY JUST REACHING OUT. I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST A BLANK SITE PLAN OR SURVEY SUBMITTED, SO NO DEVELOPMENT OR ACTUAL IMPROVEMENTS PROVIDED.

>> THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE BLUE WAY AND GREENWAY I THINK.

CAN YOU GIVE US A LITTLE EXPLANATION OF WHAT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BEING IN EACH OF THOSE DICTATIONS AND THE TYPES OF LANDS THAT ARE ENCOMPASSED WITHIN THE GREENWAYS AND ABOUT

WAYS? >> THERE ARE TWO IN THE COUNTY AND ONE GREENWAY. BASICALLY, THERE AREAS IDENTIFIED BY THE STATE AND MAINLY THE FLORIDA FOREVER PROGRAM TO BE AREAS OF ELEVATED INTEREST AND ALSO THE STATE HAS IDENTIFIED CORRIDORS AS GOOD CORNERS TO BUILD ON, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR FUNDING FROM THE FLORIDA FOREVER. IT ESSENTIALLY ELEVATES THEM IN THE EYE OF THE STATE IF PROPERTIES ARE WITHIN THESE QUARTERS. FOR THIS ONE , WE HAVE THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER BLEW AWAY AND WE HAVE OCALA IN THE MIDDLE SOUTH-CENTRAL PART OF THE COUNTY , THEN YOU HAVE NORTHEAST FLORIDA BLUE WAY. THOSE ARE OUR

THREE CORRIDORS. >> QUESTIONS WITH THOUGHTS? ONE THING THAT CAME TO MY MIND IS ALSO IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE FLORIDA FOREVER DOLLARS AND I KNOW THE COUNTY HAS DONE SOME, BUT NOT A LOT. YOU WILL HAVE TO DO ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT AND YOU HAVE TO DO -- USE APPRAISERS. THEY WILL PROBABLY REQUIRE TWO APPRAISALS MOST LIKELY , SO YOU NEED TO CHECK WITH THAT, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR DOWN AND TRY TO BE CATCHING UP. THE OTHER THING IS BECAUSE THERE IS NO ROAD ACCESS TO IT, THEY ARE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, BUT THEY WILL REDUCE THAT FROM THE APPRAISAL , SO THAT IS SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS?

>> IF WE WROTE THAT LETTER AND THE FLORIDA RIVER PROGRAM, WHAT PERCENTAGE BUDGET FUNDING LOOK LIKE ? IS THAT APPLICATION FOR FULL FUNDING THERE? IS IT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH US? WHAT DOES

IT LOOK LIKE? >> RIGHT NOW, IT IS PRELIMINARY, SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR FULL FUNDING FOR ACQUISITION FROM THE STATE ON THIS ONE. IT NEVER HURTS TO HAVE A LITTLE MATCH. I WOULD STRONGLY CONSIDER BOTH OPTIONS AND MATCH BEING FAIRLY SMALL ON THE TOTAL PRICE -- WELL, RELATIVELY SMALL. THAT PUTS YOU IN A DIFFERENT REALM WHEN YOU ARE DOING THAT.

>> I HAVE A COMMENT IF I COULD SQUEEZE IN .

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE ? MAGIC. OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A CULTURE OPERATION GOING ON AND I BELIEVE ONE OF THE COUNTY'S OBJECTIVES , I KNOW IT IS ON MCCULLOUGH CREEK.

IT IS TO RESTORE AND CONVERTED TO LONGLEAF PINE, SO THE SITE WOULD ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT IF WE WERE TRYING TO GET SOME MORE MILEAGE FROM THE FUNDING SOURCES THAT THERE WOULD BE THIS LONGLEAF PINE RESTORATION OPPORTUNITY AT THIS PLACE, AS WELL. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE FOR THIS

GROUP TO CONSIDER. >> THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING

[00:20:03]

TO THINK ABOUT. >> I WAS WONDERING IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT WHERE IT IS SURROUNDED BY SOME EXISTING FARMLANDS , AND WHETHER THE FARMING COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE ANY INPUT, ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT I KNOW THE COUNTY IS LOOKING INTO ESTABLISHING AN AGRICULTURAL REVIEW BOARD AND WHERE THIS IS DESIGNATED AS AGRICULTURAL . HOW DOES THE FARMING COMMUNITY FEEL ABOUT CONSERVATION LAND ? WHAT THEY

HAVE ANY INPUT? >> ONE IS THAT TO BE ESTABLISHED? IT IS STILL IN DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW AND I DON'T THINK THERE IS A DATE JUST YET FOR ESTABLISHMENT, BUT I KNOW IT WAS TALKING ABOUT IN THE LAST MEETING. I JUST WANT TO

PUT MY WORK INTO THE TIMEFRAME. >> IT DOESN'T EXIST, BUT THEY

MIGHT HAVE SOME INPUT. >> ANY OTHER?

>> THIS IS A GENERAL COMMENT. I THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PRESERVATION PARCEL AND IT HAS CHALLENGES IN TERMS OF ACTIVE USE AND IT MAY BE THAT FUTURE ACQUISITION OF OTHER PARCELS AROUND IT THAT IT WOULD BECOME MORE ACTIVELY USEFUL AND I THINK

IT'S A GREAT PARCEL. >> SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

LET'S TAKE A COUPLE OF MINUTES. DID YOU HAVE MORE INFORMATION? MOST OF US PRE-SCORED IT, BUT LET'S TAKE A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO GO OVER OUR SCORES, THEN WE WILL SCORE IT. THAT IS THE

PROPER NEXT STEP, CORRECT? >> OKAY.

>> YES. HOLLY HAS A QUESTION FOR

>> HAVE WE HEARD ANYONE OTHER THAN THE LANDOWNER IN TERMS OF

SUPPORT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? >> STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OTHER CORRESPONDENCE. MR. FLOWERS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO

START? >> I NEED TO POINT SOMETHING THAT I POINTED OUT IN OUR LAST MEETING WHEN WE FIRST TALKED ABOUT THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO MY RETIREMENT AT MY OLD LAW FIRM AND AT THE END OF 2023, I DID LEGAL WORK FOR ROBERTS AND IN VARIOUS COMPANIES. I HAVE NO CONNECTION SINCE THE END OF 22 AND THREE AND HAVE NOT HAD ANY DEALINGS WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. THE NORFOLK LAND TRUST WAS ALSO A CLIENT OF MINE PRIOR TO MY RETIREMENT AND HAS NOT BEEN SINCE THEN . WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS LAST TIME, I THINK AGREED THAT THERE IS NO SPECIAL PRIVATE WITH GRADING LEGAL CONFLICT, SO WITH THAT, I

SCORED AT 62. >> THE ROADWAY ACCESS IS A

[00:25:11]

ME. I SCORED 33. >> MICHAEL?

>> I ECHO THAT. MY SCORE WAS MUCH DIFFERENT, 66.

>> MY SCORE IS A 48, HOWEVER GIVEN THE POSSIBILITY OF FLORIDA FOREVER BUDGETING AND THE LOCATION AND GOING THROUGH THE SCORING SYSTEM, I FEEL LIKE IT IS LOWER THAN MY PRIORITY. I WILL LEAVE THAT AND COMMENT THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE TO PURSUE IT FOR SURE. IF WE HAVE TO PUT FUNDING TOWARDS IT TO RAISE THAT, THEN IT WOULD BE WISE ON OUR SIDE FOR SUCH

ACREAGE IN THE LOCATION IT'S IN. >> OKAY. KAUFMAN?

>> I SCORED 47, BUT SIMILAR CONCERNS TO WHAT MR. SMITH HAS MENTIONED. THOSE SCORES MIGHT BE ELEVATED BASED ON FUNDING

DECISIONS AND PUBLIC SUPPORT . >> MR. CHAIR?

>> QUICK COMMENT AND YOU MIGHT HAVE INPUT. THERE IS A BONUS CATEGORY AT THE BOTTOM OF OUR SCORING SHEET EVEN THOUGH THE NUMBERS WE MAY NOT ADD UP, I JUST DO X AMOUNT OF POINTS IF I WANT TO. THAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT BONUS CATEGORY AT THE

BOTTOM OF THE SCORESHEET? >> THERE IS A CATEGORY FOR UNIQUENESS, SO IT'S WORTH FIVE POINTS -- UP TO FIVE POINTS.

>> I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT FOR THE GROUP. I LIKE THE WORD

BONUS. >> I SCORED AT A 52. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT AVERAGES US, BUT WE WILL FIND OUT.

>> LET THE MATHEMATICIAN DO HIS WORK OVER THERE, BUT MAYBE WHATEVER THE ULTIMATE AVERAGE SCORING IS WITH A COMMENT RECOMMENDATION THAT COMES FROM US ACKNOWLEDGES THAT PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY WORK FOR VERY LITTLE INVESTMENT FROM OUR STANDPOINT, MAKE THAT CONNECTION A PRIORITIZED LOCATION.

>> THE AVERAGE SCORE IS 51.3 , SO 51. THAT DOES MAKE IT ON THE

THRESHOLD. CHAIRMAN? >> AT WHAT POINT WILL WE TAKE ACTION TO SEEK FUNDING FROM THE STATE OR OTHER SOURCES? IS THAT AFTER WE FINALIZE OUR LIST FOR THE YEAR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT? I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE TIMING.

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR TO MEMBER FLOWERS, THERE IS A TIME THAT THE LIST GETS APPROVED AT THE END OF THE YEAR AND ONCE THEY APPROVE THAT, THEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVES IT TO DIRECT STAFF TO START NEGOTIATING. IN THE MEANTIME, CERTAIN GRANT CYCLES COME UP AND WE WANT TO BE PREPARED FOR THOSE, SO IT IS A WAY WEIGHING GAME. THAT IS WHEN WE OFFICIALLY WANT TO START NEGOTIATIONS AND SEEK FUNDING.

>> ONE OF MY CONCERNS -- HOW I SEE THIS PIXIE IF WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH FLORIDA RIVER, WHICH IS ALWAYS A GOOD THING, BECAUSE IT IS DEFINITELY LARGER , WE ARE ON THEIR TIMETABLE.

SINCE WE WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT THIS ON OUR RANKING UNTIL NEXT YEAR , I SAY WE CAN BRING OUR PROPERTY ANYTIME TO THE COMMISSION, CORRECT? HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> YOUR ORDINANCE SAYS YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR, SO THERE'S FLEXIBILITY IN THAT. THE COUNTY DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO PURCHASE PROXIES PROPERTIES. IF THIS LAND WERE TO COME FORWARD, ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY AND THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY AND OUR ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF LIKES THE PROPERTY AND THERE IS EXPEDITED

[00:30:02]

OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? >> FOR AN EXAMPLE, WE HAVE THE TWO NORTHERN RANCH LOTS THAT WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT LATER.

THAT IS A POST ACQUISITION EXAMPLE FOR POST ACQUISITION FUNDING I BELIEVE THROUGH THAT PROGRAM, SO THAT'S A STATE RECREATION ACQUISITION FUNDING PROGRAM . THAT IS FOR COST

REIMBURSEMENT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO SEND WORD TO THE COMMISSION WITH THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY AT HAND NOT KNOWING WHEN THE FLORIDA FOREVER CYCLE IS , BUT WITH DIRECTION TO PURSUE THAT FOR STAFF AND BE ABLE TO HAVE A DECISION SOONER

THAN 2026 . >> SINCE WE MET THE BOTTOM THRESHOLD AND WE STILL HAVEN'T, I GUESS WE NEED TO DO A VOTE TO MOVE IT FORWARD. A LETTER GETTING YOU TO DRAFT A LETTER TO STATE LANDS OR WHATEVER WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP IS FOR THE

CHAIRMAN SIGNATURE? >> CERTAINLY. BECAUSE THERE IS ALREADY AN APPLICATION IN PLAY , THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP FOR THAT PROGRAM TO MOVE IT ALONG. THAT IS ALREADY ON ITS WAY.

>> WE NEED TO GET THAT INTO Q AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

>> DO WE ACTUALLY NEED TO TAKE A VOTE? NOW THAT WE HAVE RANKED

IT. >> ESSENTIALLY, CONSENSUS TO MOVE IT FORWARD AND KEEP CONSIDERING IT. WE DO NEED TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY COMMENTS , QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM? SEEING NONE . THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LINKING IT. THAT WAS GOOD

DISCUSSION, AS WELL. >> IT IS EXCITING. MICHAEL IS A GOOD COLLECTOR. I MAY NOT HAVE PUT MY NAME ON MINE. IT'S LIKE MIDDLE SCHOOL THAT YOU PUT YOUR NAME ON THE SHEET BEFORE.

[2. 4405 SR 206- First review and reevaluation (original review in 2022)]

THANKS. AGENDA ITEM 2. >> THIS ONE IS 4405 STATE ROAD 206 AND CONSIDERED THE FIRST REVIEW RE-EVALUATION AND THE PROPERTY WAS PRELIMINARILY REVIEW AS A LISTED PROPERTY FOR SALE ON THE MARKET IN 2022 AND PROPERTY BECAME NO LONGER AVAILABLE ON THE MARKET IN 2023 AND WAS SUBSEQUENTLY REMOVED FROM THE LIST PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS. APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY THE OWNER IN JANUARY 2025 FOR EVALUATION AND CONSIDERATION TO THE PROGRAM. THE PROPERTY IS VACANT RESIDENTIAL FORCED PROPERTY WITH A MIX OF PLAIN PINE FLATWOODS AND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES . THERE APPEAR TO BE AREAS OF THE SITE THAT MIGHT CONTAIN WETLAND AREAS BASED ON VEGETATION AND TOPOGRAPHY , ESPECIALLY ALONG THE ENTRANCE AND THE WEST HALF.

SOME DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS FROM PARKS AND REC, UPLAND AREAS OF THE SITE THAT MAY BE SUITABLE FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES, WHICH COULD INCLUDE MULTIPURPOSE TRAIL THAT WOULD SUPPORT

[00:35:05]

TREE MITIGATION AND LANDSCAPING AS TYPICAL WITH REVIEW. MEDIUM PROBABILITY FOR CULTURAL RESOURCES WOULD BE CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY REQUIRED, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

A FEW OF YOU ON THE BOARD THAT STARTED IN 2022 MAY REMEMBER THIS PARCEL, SO THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED SORT OF A RELOOK OF THE PROPERTY AND IT'S THE FIRST REVIEW, SO IT WOULD BE A FORWARD CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE OR NOT CONTINUE WITH THIS PARTICULAR

APPLICATION. >> THANK YOU.

>> COMMENTS, THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS? THAT IS THE FIRST THING. UP OR DOWN, CORRECT? FOR LACK OF BETTER TERM?

>> GOT A REALLY LOW SCORE IN 2022 AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL GET A HIGHER SCORE THIS TIME, BUT RELUCTANT NOT TO LOOK AT THEM, BUT CREATES WORK FOR STAFF FOR US TO DO THAT AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WOULD NEED TO GENERATE FOR US TO DO SCORING. I'M NOT SURE IT WILL GET A HIGHER SCORE. WE HAVE NEW PEOPLE ON THE BOARD, SO MAYBE THAT'S NOT FAIR FOR ME TO SAY.

>> AS A FRESH PERSPECTIVE AND NOT BEING ON THE BOARD IN 2022, WHERE IT'S LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS TO MAKE IT CHALLENGING TO HAVE A PARK AND RECREATION OPTION ON THIS

PROPERTY. >> MICHAEL?

>> I WAS GOING TO ECHO WHAT FLOWERS WAS SAYING. THOSE OF US WHO DID EVALUATED THE FIRST TIME, IF WE GIVE IT LOW SCORES, IT WILL PROBABLY NOT CHANGE TOO MUCH. I'M ON THE FENCE AS FAR IS IF WE SHOULD PURSUE THIS IN STAFF TIME, OUR TIME AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WHEN LAND BECOMES AVAILABLE, YOU HATE TO NOT CONSIDER IT, SO IT'S A TOUGH ONE. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS?

>> I GUESS WE VOTE. THERE HAS TO BE A MOTION.

>> SOMEONE NEEDS TO MOVE. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE WOULD NEED PUBLIC COMMENT, AS WELL.

>> FIRST. >> ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE 4405

STATE ROUTE 206 PROPERTY? >> I CAN MAKE A COMMENT. WE HAVE HAD THIS PROPERTY ON THE MARKET I BELIEVE LAST YEAR AND I CAN CONFIRM THAT THE WEST AND ALONG THE ROADWAY IS DEFINITELY WET.

THAT'S ALL I KNOW ABOUT IT. NICE AREA OUT HERE, BUT I THINK THE EASIER ACCESS WOULD BE ON 206, BUT THAT'S A LONG

DRIVEWAY. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS TOM DANIELS AND I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. THE WEST END IS AN AREA THAT I WAS WORKING WITH THE FORESTRY DEPARTMENT WITH . THEY DID NOT CONSIDER THAT. MY NEIGHBORS ARE MORE LIKELY -- RELUCTANT TO HAVE HOUSING. I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS? >> FORCE DURING THESE FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS , SO THE FORESTRY DEPARTMENT WAS WALKING THIS DEPARTMENT ALL THE TIME. NOW, THE COMMENT ABOUT THE EASTERN

[00:40:01]

QUESTIONS? >> NO.

>> THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESS TO 206, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA ?

>> 200 FEET. >> JUST JUDGING BY THE TREES AND ALL , WAS THE WETLAND ASSESSMENT DONE OR IS A GENERAL WORKING

KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY? >> IT WAS THE FORESTRY DEPARTMENT. TO GET THE CULTURE DESIGNATION , WE HAD THEM OUT THERE AND FORCED IT INTO PROPERTY AND THEY GOT A CHANCE TO WALK THE PROPERTY AFTER IT WAS FORCED IT AND IT WAS TOTALLY CLEARED OUT. THEY HAD A PLAN FOR FORESTRY PLAN SET UP AND IN THE ONLY AREA THAT THEY FELT REALLY WE HAD TO WORRY ABOUT BEING WETLAND WAS AT EASTERN POCKET AND A DEPRESSED AREA. THAT WAS

FROM THEIR ASSESSMENT. >> BASED ON THE SCALE, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, THE PET STEM COMING IN FROM 206, THAT IS MAYBE 60 FEET WIDE. 50? THAT IS BASED ON THE

SCALE. >> IT COULD BE A LITTLE.

>> ARE USING THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY?

>> THE FLAGPOLE. >> IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BASED ON

THE SCALE. IT'S UNDER 100 FEET. >> IT MIGHT BE CLOSER TO 100.

100 OR 200 FEET AND I KNOW IT'S NOT 60.

>> YOU CAN TELL FROM THE DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL THAT THERE IS A FLOW WAY IN THAT WESTERN PEACE WITHOUT QUESTION.

>> THERE IS WHAT USED TO BE A ROADWAY AND IT WAS DARK OUT.

WHEN IT DOES RAIN , IT'S LIKE A FLOW AND MAYBE THAT'S WHAT THEY

ARE SAYING ON THAT. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER? YES,

MICHAEL. >> I THINK CERTAINLY MYSELF KNOW THAT WETLAND CAN BE VERY COMPLEX AND FORESTRY FOLKS DON'T MAKE FORMAL JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS. THERE IS A SET OF CRITERIA FOR WETLAND DETERMINATION. SOIL, HYDROLOGY, VEGETATION, TOPOGRAPHY. IT'S NOT A SIMPLE PROCESS. I MADE A CAREER OUT OF IT AND HAVE SCAR TISSUE. ALL OF THAT WOULD NEED TO BE DETERMINED BY AN OFFICIAL WETLAND SCIENTIST AGENCY THING BEFORE ANY DOCUMENTATION OR DECISIONS COULD BE MADE.

>> WE ARE OKAY. THAT IS PART OF THE SYSTEM. YOU ARE RIGHT.

>> A GOOD NEGOTIATING CHIP. >> WE NEED A MOTION.

>> THE MOTION WOULD BE TO WITHDRAW THIS FROM OUR CONSIDERATION. IS THAT WHAT ONE OPTION WOULD BE? GOTCHA . I GUESS I WILL START IT AND SAY THAT I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE WITHDRAW THIS FROM OUR CONSIDERATION FOR DISCUSSION ITEMS WE JUST HAD REGARDING THIS PARCEL.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE .

>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? TWO. TO TO GET THAT.

>> YOUR MOTION PASSED? PUBLIC COMMENT? AGENDA ITEM THREE . DID

[3. CR 13 South McCullough Creek- 2025 amended application discussion]

[00:45:02]

THIS PROPERTY, I CAN READ DOWN THE LIST. WE ARE EXPECTING AMENDED APPLICATION AND THIS IS 7.7 ACRES OF LAND ON THE WEST SIDE AND PHASE ONE AGAIN AT 17.74 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE MCCULLOUGH CREEK CONSERVATION AREA AND THE CREEK IT'S SELF.

THE NEGOTIATION PERIOD STALLED IN 2024 FOR THAT PROPERTY, BUT THIS PHASE TWO WITH THE ADDED LANDS , THE OWNER HAS DISCUSSED ABOUT SPENDING REVISED APPLICATION AND THIS WAS JUST IN JANUARY THIS YEAR. THAT IS INCLUDING SOME PROPERTIES THERE AND BRINGING THE TOTAL PROPERTY UP TO 25.54 ACRES. ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS CONTACTED STAFF, REVISED APPLICATION IS YET TO BE RECEIVED, SO IT'S NOT OFFICIAL YET. THERE ARE VARIOUS DIFFERENT OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. ROUTINELY CONTACT TO SEE, CAN YOU SUBMIT AN APPLICATION THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT ? WE STILL HAVEN'T RECEIVED THAT, SO IT'S NOT OFFICIAL AND THAT IS WHY IT IS JUST DISCUSSION ITEM AT THIS POINT. WE DID WANT TO GARNER FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND I BELIEVE MIKE ADAMS , MEMBER ADAMS HAS ALSO TALKED WITH THE OWNER AND MAY BE A TIME OR TWO, SO THAT MAY HAVE STARTED THE DIALOGUE WITH STAFF, SO AGAIN THIS PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE REMAINS ON THE LIST AS AN ASTERIX PROPERTY , SO AN UPDATED CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLAN WOULD HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED. ONCE THAT APPLICATION IS OFFICIALLY RECEIVED. I'M TRYING TO READ THROUGH MY NOTES. THESE PARCELS TOGETHER COULD PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH TRAILS AND RIVER ACCESS ALONG COUNTY ROAD 13 SOUTH AND AT THE MCCULLOUGH CREEK BRIDGE ON THE EASTERN PORTION. BOTH SIDES OF 13 SOUTH ON THE WESTERN PORTION. THE WESTERN PORTION DOES CONTAIN A SMALL POND AND IS FORESTED . A PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY ALONG THE RIVER CONTAINS 1960S RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND ATTACHED GARAGE BUILDING. THE DOCK THAT WAS OUT THERE WAS DESTROYED BY THE PREVIOUS HURRICANE WE HAD AND I BELIEVE IT WAS MATTHEW OR IRMA. THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ARE IN A PARTIALLY DAMAGED STATE , WHICH IS WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER STATED. AGAIN, ACCORDING TO THE HURRICANE DAMAGE OUT THERE. THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DISCUSS ON THIS AGAIN FOR BRIEF DISCUSSION .

>> IN FRONT OF THE OTHER IMAGE? THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. YES?

>> THIS WAS A REALLY SCORE BACK IN 2022 AND IT'S A GREAT PARCEL FOR A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT REASONS AND IT WOULD SEEM TO ME TO BE MORE ATTRACTIVE NOW , WEATHER IT GETS IT INTO A POSTURE WITH THE LAND WHERE THE DEALS POSSIBLE OR NOT AND AM EXCITED ABOUT IT.

>> SMITH. >> I WILL SECOND THOSE COMMENTS

FOR ALL OF THE SAME REASONS. >> WHATEVER THAT COLOR IS, THE BLUISH PURPLE , IS THAT STILL OWNED BY THE PORT?

>> YES, SIR. THAT IS OWNED AND IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT DATED

DEDICATED TO THE HARBOR PROJECT. >> IT IS OWNED BY THEM , BUT THEN THE COURT HOLDS AND IT'S THE SAME WITH THE PROPERTY TO

THE SOUTH. >> THIS PROPERTY NOT ON THIS MAP THAT IS ALSO OWNED BY THE SAME DEAL. I WILL GET BACK ON, BUT WASN'T THERE ALSO DISCUSSION ABOUT TRYING TO -- THE COUNTY

OBTAINED THOSE PROPERTIES? >> THERE HAS BEEN AN INITIAL DISCUSSION ON THAT . IT IS STILL YET TO BE FINALIZED. IT IS AN ONGOING DISCUSSION OF THAT , BUT THERE IS POTENTIAL. THAT MAKES

[00:50:04]

IT EVEN MORE BETTER. ATOMS? >> TWO THINGS THAT I WANTED TO ADD. THE PARCEL THAT I TALKED ABOUT UNDER ITEM ONE UNION LAND AND TIMBER IS JUST NORTH OF THAT PURPLE PARCEL, SO WE ARE GETTING SOME CONTIGUOUS LAND UP HERE , WHICH IS A BIG COMPONENT FOR ITS CORRIDORS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RESOURCE 'S AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN PARTICULAR. THE SECOND THING I WANTED TO MENTION WAS , I FEEL FORTUNATE TO BE TALKING WITH THE OWNER ON THIS AND I JUST TALKED WITH THEM THIS WEEK. GETTING ANOTHER APPRAISAL, SO HE SHOULD HAVE THAT WITHIN 30 DAYS AND WAS TELLING ME THAT WE WILL SEE WHERE THAT SHAKES OUT AS FAR AS FROM THE 2022 APPRAISAL, BUT THOSE PARCELS ON THE WEST SIDE , I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WERE IN HIS APPRAISAL ON THE FIRST GO AROUND IN 2022. I ECHO WHAT YOU TWO ARE SAYING. THIS IS A WONDERFUL CHANCE HERE.

THE REALLY INTERESTING THING ABOUT 17 ACRES IS THAT THERE IS A BOAT RAMP OPPORTUNITY HERE ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND WE JUST NEED TO BE FINE-TUNED A LITTLE BIT. THAT IS A TREMENDOUS RESOURCE ALREADY IN PLACE. ARE PEOPLE ALREADY USE . IF YOU ARE REALLY BRAVE, YOU CAN DROP IT IN THERE, BECAUSE IT IS A PRETTY

SCARY PULL OFF THERE. >> TO SHOW HOW NERDY I REALLY AM, THERE IS A RARE MAIL THAT BEEN FOUND IN THAT LOWER PORTION. TRUE NERD. ALL RIGHT, SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT

THIS? >> YES, ONE MORE. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, MR. ADAMS RECUSED HIMSELF FROM LAST GO-ROUND, BUT I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY THIS TIME. AT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE TOO CLOSE TO IT.

FOR WHATEVER REASON . THIS GO-ROUND, I WOULD THINK THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARY IN MY OPINION . THE STALL OF THE NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE OF THE MARKET VALUE, I'M HOPING THAT THIS TIME IT WILL BE ABLE TO WORK THAT OUT. TO MY MIND, THIS IS THE BEST PROPERTY WE HAVE SEEN SINCE MY TENURE ON THE

BOARD IN 2022. >> DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YOU

ARE LOOKING PUZZLED, WEST. >> AND SORRY I HAVE THAT LOOK.

I'M NOT PUZZLED. >> YOU DEFINITELY HAD -- OKAY.

MY BAD. IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A VOTE FROM US, DOES IT?

>> CORRECT. THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE AND PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> YOU CAN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE ARE WAITING FOR THE NEXT STEP AS MR. ADAMS STATED THE BENEFICIAL APPLICATION IN, THEN WE SET IT FOR THE NEXT MEETING TO ACTUALLY HAVE A VOTE AND --.

>> THIS IS ALSO A PROJECT I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT FOR MANY REASONS. I HOPE THIS MOVES. I WAS QUITE DISAPPOINTED WHEN IT STALLED AND WE HEARD THAT IT WASN'T MOVING FORWARD. THIS IS GOOD NEWS AND WITH THE PROPERTY IS MORE EXCITING. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE SELF MCCULLOUGH CREEK PROPERTY?

>> 1748 AND I WASN'T AROUND IN 2022 TO SEE THIS, BUT THE HOUSE SITTING ON THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS NOT ABLE TO BE KEPT UP OR IS PARTIALLY DEMOLISHED FROM THE STORM. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT

CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> THAT WAS BUILT IN 1966. IS IT GOING TO TAKE EXTRA FUNDS TO DEMOLISH OR REDO IT. THAT'S ALL. IT'S AN AWESOME PROPERTY.

>> IT IS. >> THANK YOU.

>> I'M GETTING TALKATIVE TODAY. DIRK SCHROEDER. I WOULD ECHO HIS COMMENTS ABOUT INVESTIGATING THE HOME FOR POTENTIAL ASBESTOS. I HAVE ALSO SOLD A HOME SITE VERY CLOSE BY TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE FOUND ON THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME WAS A LARGE BARREL, LIKE AN OIL BARREL AND WE INVESTIGATED

[00:55:02]

>> THANKS. >> IT IS A MID-1960S, IT IS POTENTIALLY A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THAT WILL REQUIRE SOME LOOKING IN, AS WELL. ANY OTHER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS OR THOUGHTS? THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. ARE YOU READY? BAILEY RANCH.

[4. Bailey Ranch, 2147 and 2177 Bishop Estates Road- Conceptual management plan revision  Staff Reports  Board]

>> ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS THE BAILEY RANCH AND THIS IS FOR 2147 AND 2177 BISHOP ESTATES ROAD FOR THE CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLAN REVISION. IT'S CURRENTLY ON THE LIST AND THE COUNTY ACTUALLY WENT TO PURCHASE THESE AGREEMENTS FOR THE LOTS AND IT IS A TOTAL OF 2.77 ACRES AND IT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON FEBRUARY . THE EASTERN LOT HAS TWO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND THE REST IS VACANT AND TO PROVIDE ACCESS AS A SMALL ACCESS PARK. THIS WATER ACCESS FOR KAYAKS WOULD PLACE AN ACCESS ON ST. JOHNS RIVER OUT ON ALPINE'S ROAD PARK. THE STRUCTURES ARE BEING RECONSIDERED FOR USE OF OFFICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION BY PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT. AS STATED PREVIOUSLY, THE 67 ACRE PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BISHOP ESTATES ROAD WILL BE REQUIRED THROUGH THE RURAL AND FAMILY LANDS PROGRAM AND IT'S A PROGRAM THAT REQUIRES CONSERVATION EASEMENTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND TO PROTECT FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND ENSURE SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION . THE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL USES WILL REMAIN AS IS UNDER THE PROTECTIVE CONSERVATION EASEMENT . THE EASEMENT ALLOWS THE EXISTING USES AND DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH THE CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVED BY JUNE OF LAST YEAR AND IT WILL BE ENFORCED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND HUMAN SERVICES. A RECENT UPDATE BY THEIR OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PROVIDED THAT THE STATE GRANT FOR PROTECTIVE EASEMENT ON THAT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND PROGRAM WAS SUBMITTED BY A NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR AND AN ADDITIONAL GRANT UNDER THE RURAL CONSERVATION PROTECTION PROGRAM WILL BE SUBMITTED BY THE LAND TRUST IN APRIL THIS YEAR, SO THEY ARE WORKING ON ACQUIRING THAT SOUTHERN PEACE. WE SAW IT ALL AS ONE PIECE LAST YEAR THROUGH ANOTHER MEANS, SO WHAT WE ARE HEARING TODAY IS JUST TO REVISE THAT CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT WE ALREADY HAD ON FILE TO TAKE OUT THE SOUTHERN PORTION AND HAVE IT FOR THE NORTHERN PORTION THAT THE COUNTY JUST ACQUIRED FOR THE PURCHASE OF ACQUIRING. THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR THIS ONE.

>> WHAT ACTION DOES NOT REQUIRE FROM US ? AN AMENDMENT TO THE

CONCEPTUAL PLAN? >> BASICALLY, DRAFT CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLAN REVISED AND TAKING THE SOUTHERN PORTION OUT WAS SUBMITTED AS PART OF YOUR ITEM DOCUMENTS. IT IS AN AGREEMENT UNLESS THERE ARE ANY CHANGES TO APPROVE THAT PLAN

THAT WE HAVE ON FILE. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CHANGES OR THOUGHTS? DOESN'T REQUIRE A VOTE?

>> ESTHER CHAIR WOULD VOTE ON THE PLAN.

>> I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THE AMENDED MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT RECOGNIZES THE CHANGE AND CONFIGURATION OF THE PROJECT THAT PROVIDED US BACKUP MATERIALS.

>> DID I GET THAT RIGHT? VOTE, PLEASE. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE >> NOT IN FAVOR? VERY GOOD. THIS IS ALSO VERY EXCITING. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN BOTH PROJECTS , STATE AND FEDERAL . THOSE ARE GOOD SOURCES. IT IS WONDERFUL TO

[01:00:08]

WOULD BE VERY EXCITED. >> JUST A QUICK COMMENT, HAS THE SALES PRICE BEEN A GREAT TWO HER TO GO FOR THE LOTS?

>> I BELIEVE IT WAS 2.175, THE ACQUISITION COST.

>> THANK YOU. >> MILLION DOLLARS THAT IS.

>> OKAY. THOSE ARE THE FOUR AGENDA ITEMS. DO WE GO ON TO

[Staff Reports]

BOARD COMMENTS. >> FOR STAFF REPORTS, THE CURRENT LAMP BUDGET BALANCE AS OF FEBRUARY THIS YEAR WAS 3,084,540, WHICH IS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE 2.2 MILLION TO ACQUIRE THE NORTHERN BAILEY RANCH LOTS THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED. STAFF WILL BRING FORWARD CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR PROPERTIES NEAR AND NEGOTIATION COMPLETION TO BE INCLUDED . IT IS SIMILAR TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS A REMINDER AND STAFF WILL START THE CONCEPTS OF WHICH THE MEMBERS CAN BUILD. WHEN THEY ARE APPROACHING NEGOTIATION FINALIZATION, THAT IS WHEN WE BRING CONCEPTUAL MANAGEMENT PLANS FORWARD AND WE LOOK AT THEM STARTED FOR YOU ON POTENTIAL THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE AND WE BUILD ON THAT TOGETHER. WE FINALIZE THOSE PLANS PRIOR TO ACQUISITION.

NEXT, REMINDER ABOUT FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OFFICE ONLINE , PREVIOUSLY FORWARDD THAT MESSAGE TO YOU MAY BE A MONTH AGO. JUST A REMINDER FOR THAT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR STAFF REPORTS. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEMS UPDATES, WE ALREADY APPROACHED THAT SUBJECT . AGAIN, PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 4TH AND THE 2024 NOT LIST THAT YOU ALL APPROVED OF DECEMBER LAST YEAR WAS APPROVED ON THE FOURTH OF THIS MONTH IN MARCH AS PRESENTED BY CHAIR ELIZABETH GUTHRIE , SO THAT WAS APPROVED. THOSE OF THE UPDATE FROM STAFF.

[Board Member Reports]

>> BOARD REPORTS ? KAUFMAN, DO YOU WANT TO KICK US OFF?

>> I HAVE NOTHING TO REPORT. >> NOTHING TO REPORT. I HAVE

ALREADY SAID IT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

>> NOTHING TO REPORT. >> THANKS TO RYAN AND HIS STAFF FOR THE WORK THEY DO AND THE BOARD.

>> YES. >> ROUND OF APPLAUSE.

>> IT'S A LOT OF WORK AND WE APPRECIATE IT. THE ONLY THING I HAD TO SAY IS THAT I WOULD BE REMISS TO IF I DIDN'T SAY THAT THERE IS ALSO THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM . THE CITY JUST PURCHASED IT'S SECOND PIECE . I DON'T HAVE A MAP OR ANYTHING. IF YOU ARE GOING OVER THE CAUSEWAY BEFORE WE GET TO THE BIG BRIDGE, THERE IS A SMALL BRIDGE AND ONE ACRE PLUS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE RIGHT ON HOSPITAL CREEK THAT WAS ACQUIRED, WHICH IS A GOOD ACQUISITION. ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES IF YOU KNOW WHERE IT IS , RAVENSWOOD IS A NEIGHBORHOOD. TWO MORE TO COME IN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS. PRETTY EXCITING. ON THAT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR THOUGHTS?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.