[Call meeting to order]
[00:00:09]
>>> ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON, ONE MINUTE LATE, BUT WE ARE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND STANDING, WE ARE GOING TO SAY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE , WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALL RIGHT, DR. HILSENBECK , WILL YOU READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE, PLEASE?
>> SURE. THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE AGENCY'S JURISDICTION, BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING . THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK DURING A TIME IN THE MEETING FOR A LENGTH OF TIME THAT IS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRPERSON, WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND THEN STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY. IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT THE TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OR TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY.
INAUDIBLE ] SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD AND PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARINGS SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE COURT FOR CONCLUSION AND RECORD. THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER WORK, AGENCY, COMMITTEE, OR THE COUNTY INAUDIBLE ]. AGENCY NUMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT THE BEGINNING OF EACH OR ANY OTHER PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM INAUDIBLE ]. THROUGH SUCH COMMUNICATION , THE AGENCY MEMBER SHOULD THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED AND THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION. CIVILITY CLAUSE, WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER, EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE.
WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES. WE WILL AVOID
PERSONAL ATTACKS. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, DR.
HILSENBECK. MR. SMITH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PZA MINUTES
THAT WE HAVE? >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, JACOB SMITH. STAFF HAS SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES TO MAKE TO THE MINUTES, SO I WOULD ASK THAT -- IF WE CAN HAVE THOSE APPROVED NEXT MEETING AND COME BACK TO THE CORRECT MINUTES.
>> SOUNDS GOOD, ANYBODY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT? SOUNDS GOOD.
ALL RIGHT, UM, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, IS
[1. SUPMAJ 2025-06 SJC Pickleball. Request for a Special Use Permit to allow for Indoor Commercial Recreation in Industrial, Warehousing (IW) zoning per Section 2.03.43 of the Land Development Code; specifically located at 6480 US 1 North.]
THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY? SEEING NONE. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 1,MR. LABONOWSKI? >> YES, I VISITED THE SITE AND ALSO RECEIVED TWO EMAILS , AND I TALKED TO THE TENANT AT 6480.
IT'S COMING. THERE YOU GO. >> I DID A SITE VISIT
INAUDIBLE ] >> ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT.
>> I AM BRAD WESTER, DRIVER MCAFEE HAWTHORNE & DIEBENOW . IS THIS THING ON? OKAY.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND IT IS FOR AN INDOOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION FACILITY LOCATED AT 6480 U.S. 1 NORTH POINT THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A SECOND ENCLOSED PICKLEBALL FACILITY AND WAREHOUSING ZONING AND IT IS IN THE BUSINESS PARK, AND THAT IS LOCATION , REFERENCING NORTH OF THE AIRPORT AND U.S. ONE, AND ZOOMED INTO THE BUSINESS PARK ITSELF, AND THEN MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE CAN COME BACK TO THESE IF NEEDED. HERE IS THE ENTRANCE OFF U.S. 1 , YOU CAN SEE THE FACILITY UTILIZES THIS ACCESS ROAD TO THE REAR. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP COVERAGE IS MIXED-USE, AND THE ZONING IS INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN , IT IS A PART OF
[00:05:05]
THE REVIEW. YOU CAN SEE THE YELLOW IS THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA FOR THE PICKLEBALL USE. THIS IS THE AERIAL SHOWING THAT SAME SITE PLAN OVER THE AERIAL WITH THE VARIOUS USES DESCRIBED. AND THEN PER INAUDIBLE ], IT IS LOCATED WHERE THERE IS CLEAR SEPARATION TO OTHER ADJACENT AND COMPATIBLE USES. IT IS ACTUALLY 175 FEET FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENCE TO THE REAR. THERE ARE BUFFERS AMATEUR EXISTING VEGETATION WILL REMAIN.WITH LIGHTING AND WIDESPREAD THE USE IS LOCATED IN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUSINESS PARK WITH AN IMPROVED PICKLEBALL PARK. THAT WAS APPROVED AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AS WELL IN 2024. THE USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN, MIXED-USE DESIGNATION, AND THAT IS A LONG THE CORRIDOR AND ADJACENT TO MANY COMMERCIAL GENERAL, COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, INAUDIBLE ]. YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE SEPARATION DISTANCE IN THE CORRIDOR SOUTH, I WILL GO THROUGH THE SEPARATION. THIS IS THE FACILITY RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD , ROUGHLY 190 FEET TO THE BUILDING, BUT IT IS SEPARATED BY AN EXISTING STORM WATER POND AND REALLY MATURE EXISTING VEGETATION, TREES ALONG THE EDGE. A BUSINESS LOCATED TO THE SOUTH. THIS IS ALL OWNED BY ONE ENTITY HERE, THIS PSD, PUB THERE. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HERE THE CORRIDOR ITSELF IS OUTLINED WITH THE NUMBER OF USES THERE, AND YOU CAN SEE THE COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, COMMERCIAL GENERAL, COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSING, AND THE LIKE. AND THEN CORRIDOR. JUST REFERENCING THE COMPATIBILITY OF THIS TYPE OF USE AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND REQUEST FOR THE REQUEST OF USE DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE SURROUNDING CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND WILL HELP BUY SERVICES SUPPORT TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES OF FAMILIES IN THE AREA FOR INDOOR RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES IN A CONTROLLED SETTING. IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE THE OWNER HERE, THE ENGINEER AS WELL. QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS. >> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS? MS.
SPIEGEL? >> YEAH, SO YOU ARE HERE FOR APPROVAL LAST NOVEMBER, WAS THAT RIGHT?
>> YEAH, I WASN'T SPECIFICALLY, BUT THE OWNER, GUESTS.
>> YEAH, FOR THE SITE THAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? AND SO NOW THEY WANT
TO DOUBLE THAT? >> THAT'S RIGHT. CURRENTLY, THERE ARE TWO COURTS WOULD BE FACILITATED IN THE CURRENT APPROVED FACILITY, AND THEN THIS NEW ONE , IT'S A BIGGER SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT WOULD ONLY BE TWO RECORDS AS WELL, SO IT WOULD BE FOUR COURTS. X SO, TWO COURTS IN THE LARGER BUILDING, AND TWO COURTS IN THE SMALLER BUILDING COULD AND THEN YOU'VE GOT ADEQUATE PARKING, SO PEOPLE WOULD BE DRIVING ON NORTH 1 DRIVE, THEN TURNING RIGHT, COMING BACK OUT, AND JUST GOING RIGHT THROUGH? STACKING THE CARS --
USES, AND WE DO KNOW THAT THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE ADJACENT OWNERSHIP IN THE BUSINESS PARK WITH OVERFLOW PARKING. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME TRENDS IN THE PAST WITH SOME PARKING FROM OTHER USES. BUT WE ARE HERE TO TELL YOU THAT BASED ON THAT, WE WILL ALSO PROPERTY, SO CONDITIONS APPROVAL, IF WE GO THAT ROUTE, TO ADD SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE PICKLEBALL . ANY PICKLEBALL PATRONS WILL ONLY PARK IN THE PICKLEBALL DESIGNATED SPOTS, AND THAT THERE IS NO OVERFLOW PARKING AROUND.
>> AND LIKEWISE, THE OTHER PEOPLE CAN'T PARKING YOUR
PICKLEBALL SPOTS. >> WE WOULD HOPE NOT. AND THE OWNER ACTUALLY OWNS AND RUNS A BUSINESS IN THAT SAME WAREHOUSE, SO THEY ARE THERE AND THEY WILL SEE THIS ALL COME TO FRUITION, AND SO THEY HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GENERAL BUSINESS
COMMUNITY. >> WELL, I AM INTERESTED IF THERE IS ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> WHAT ARE THE HOURS OF
OPERATION GOING TO BE? >> ROUGHLY 9:00 TO 9:00. YEAH. I THINK THE OTHER ONES HAD DIFFERENT HOURS OF OPERATION.
THIS WAS ACTUALLY LESS THAN 9:00 IS THE MOST ADEQUATE TIME FRAME. FOLKS DO LIKE TO PATRONIZE AFTER TYPICAL WORK HOURS.
>> THE UTILITIES THERE? >> YES, CLIMATE CONTROL, YES, SIR. AND ALL INDOORS, SO THERE IS NO LIGHTING -- PICKLEBALL TYPICALLY HAS SOME NOISE NUISANCE ASSOCIATED WITH IT,
[00:10:01]
RIGHT? BUT THIS ONE IS TOTALLY ENCLOSED. X SEWER AND WATER?>> YES. >> OKAY. THERE WERE A COUPLE EMAILS I RECEIVED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC COMING IN THERE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE LARGE TRUCKS COMING IN AND OUT, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGER CONCERNS,
>> YES, SIR. AND REGARDING THOSE USES, I MEAN, YOU CAN ALMOST CONSIDER IT A SMALL INDOOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE, BUT IT IS TIED TO A SPECIFIC BUILDING OR SPECIFIC SITE, SO WE HAD TO AND MEET THE ADJACENCY STANDARDS AND THE LIKE, BUT THIS PICKLEBALL USE IS IN IW, AND I THINK THE CODE CAN SPEAK FOR ITSELF. THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER USES IN IW THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE OF A NUISANCE WITH POTENTIAL BOAT TRAILER PARKING , RV PARKING, INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING, THEY COULD GO THERE AS OPPOSED TO SINGLE POV TYPE VEHICLES THAT ARE
PATRONIZING PICKLEBALL USE. >> I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOME
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 1? ANYPLACE WAS FINE.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS RICK SMITH, I AM HERE FOR SALES AND SERVICE WORK. 130 8P NORTH 1 DRIVE BUT I HAVE BEEN A TENANT THERE FOR ABOUT 14 YEARS.
TIME TO CONSIDER BOTH SIDES OF THIS. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY THIS BESIDES THEY ARE TRYING TO DO, BUT EVEN IF I WASN'T A TENANT, I WOULD HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE SAFETY ASPECT OF THIS.
INAUDIBLE ] WHERE WE ARE AT IS AN INDUSTRIAL PARK, IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE AN INDUSTRIAL PARK. IT HAS TRUCKS, USING THAT SAME ROAD THEY ARE DESCRIBING. THE SEMIS WHEN THEY COME AND HAVE TO GO TO THE END, BACK UP INTO THAT AREA, AND COME BACK AROUND. THESE DRIVERS TYPICALLY ARE UNDER PRESSURE AND THEY ARE IN A HURRY, INAUDIBLE ] . THEY COME TO THE END, THE TURNAROUND, THE BACKUP, THEY COME IN, WAREHOUSE DESIGNED AS INDUSTRIAL, IT WASN'T DESIGNED SO, WHEN THESE DRIVERS COME IN, THEY ARE USED TO COMING IN TO INDUSTRIAL PARKING, THEY'RE NOT USED TO COMING IN WHEN I GO TO PLACES THAT ARE RECREATIONAL, YOU KNOW, PARENTS WHEN THEY GO TO RECREATIONAL, SOME ARE MORE RESPONSIBLE WITH THEIR CHILDREN THAN OTHERS.
PARENTS WATCHING? THIS IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE A PICKLEBALL COURT, CHILD, TWO CHILDREN TO RUN OUT THERE PLAYING? PLAY CATCH, WHATEVER IT IS. THERE IS A RETENTION POND RIGHT FIRE THAT IS NOT SECURED. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING THIS DIRECTLY RIGHT INSIDE THE RETENTION POND. THE TRUCK SAFETY OF WATCHING FOR CHILDREN AS PEOPLE COME IN. THE ACTIVITY, I JUST DON'T SEE THE COMPATIBILITY. WHEN I GO TO A SPORTS COMPLEX, I DON'T SEE LOADING DOCKS, I DON'T SEE 18 WHEELERS INAUDIBLE ] THEY WILL TRY TO DOUBLE PARK IN THE ROAD THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING USED.
BEEN CONSIDERED? ANYWAY, THOSE ARE THE THINGS WITH THE PARKING AT THE BACK, AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO THINK THAT EVERYBODY FOLLOWS THE SIGNS. BUT WE HAVE RUN INTO THESE CONFLICTS BEFORE. WHEN YOU COME INTO THIS COMPLEX, INAUDIBLE ] PARKING RIGHT THERE TO THE LEFT AS YOU COME IN, IT IS VERY EASY TO THINK I WILL DO WHAT PEOPLE DO, WHAT'S EASY, INAUDIBLE ]. I DON'T SEE HOW THAT DOESN'T BLEED OVER AND AFFECT OUR BUSINESSES. THE SAFETY ASPECT OF IT IS MY BIGGEST PART OF THE WHOLE THING. BUT THE OTHER ASPECT IS DOESN'T FLOW WITH WHAT IS THERE? WE HAVE TWO TRUCKS SET OUT THAT HAVE VERY LARGE HAVE SECURITY SYSTEMS IN THEM, SO EVERY TIME A VEHICLE SHOWS
[00:15:01]
UP, IT SENDS US A NOTICE.AN INDUSTRIAL PARK, SO AFTER 5:00 OR 6:00, MYSELF, I DON'T WANT 9:00 PAGES ARE OKAY, THEY ARE SECURE, ARE THEY SAFE? THE SECURITY SYSTEM PICKS UP EVERY VEHICLE COMING AND GOING, SO IT IS GOING TO AFFECT WE DO. SO, THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS IS DOES IT OPEN PANDORA'S BOX? IT COULD BE DONE SOMETHING ELSE LATER?
>>> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHARLIE HUNT.
>> GO AHEAD. >> OKAY, LAUGHTER ] OKAY. UM, BUT YES, PARKING AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IF YOU HAVE A HIGH TURNOVER OF VEHICLES, THAT IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE PUT FIRST AND FOREMOST, BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW IT'S GOING WITH THE PICKLE MAFIA, OKAY? WHERE IT'S AT , THEY START TAKING IT UP AND TAKING IT OVER, IT DOES AND IT WILL. THESE ARE JUST TWO SMALL BUILDINGS BEING PUT AT THE END OF THE ROAD WITH ONLY 20 PARKING SPOTS, WITH FOUR COURTS. YOU DO THE MATH, I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE MORE VEHICLES. EITHER THEY ARE GETTING THEIR TO PLAY OR GETTING THEIR PLANE, OR THEY FINISHED PLAYING, THEY ARE STAYING THERE, WOULD THAT 20 PARKING SPOTS BE ENOUGH FOR WHAT THEY START PARKING ON THE GRASS, PARKING NEAR THE LAKE , OR START -- OH, THERE IS A PARKING SPOT OVER THERE, MIGHT AS WELL GET IN THAT BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE IS THERE.
SO, TO HAVE -- IT'S JUST TWO COURTS, BUT Y'ALL KNOW THE RULES LIKE I DO WHEN -- THAT MAFIA FINDS OUT WHERE THE COURTS ARE, THEY ARE ON IT, OKAY? I MEAN, THEY ARE ON IT, AND THEY LIKE TO BE VERY TERRITORIAL. SO, IF IT'S PROVIDING 20 PARKING SPOTS FOR THE TWO COURTS AND IF THIS IS APPROVED, TWO ADDITIONAL, FOUR, THAT DOESN'T ADD UP PROPERLY. THEY WOULD NEED MORE PARKING THAN THAT. I GUARANTEE IT. Y'ALL KNOW IT, TOO, BECAUSE YOU HEAR THE STORIES ABOUT THE PICKLE MAFIA, THEY GET AROUND. SO, CONSIDERATION ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL PARKING, IF THEY HAVE IT, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE PROVIDING, BUT WILL IT BE FEASIBLE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING FOR A LIVING, NOT JUST PLAYING A RELAXING SPORT ? OKAY? BECAUSE THEY WORK EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK. ALL DAY LONG. SO, THEY ARE IN AND OUT, THEY DON'T JUST SHOW UP FOR ONE HOUR AND HANG AROUND AND SOCIALIZE LATER ON ABOUT THE NEW PICKLEBALL PADDLES OR WHATEVER IS GOING ON WITH THAT. SO, BUT TAKEN IN CONSIDERATION, ALL RIGHT? PEOPLE WORK RIGHT THERE. THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, MR. HUNT. DID YOU SAY PICKLE MAFIA?
>> I'M SORRY? YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT FROM THE RECORD.
YOU. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS MATT AND I AM AT 138 NORTH 1, UNIT D. MY COMMENTS ARE NOT DRIVEN WITH MALICE OR ILL INTENT FOR BUSINESS OWNERS, THEY ARE INSTEAD DRIVEN FROM COMMON SENSE, BUSINESS, AND INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS. SIMPLE PRAGMATISM AND ABOVE ALL ELSE, SECURITY. THIS IS THE WRONG PLACE FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE A MATURE BUSINESS CENTER THAT IS AND WAS ZONED AS A BUSINESS CENTER.
LOCATED AT THIS COMPLEX. OUR LEASES WERE EXECUTED WITH THIS ZONING PROTECTION IN MIND. THE COMPLEX OPERATES DAILY, SUPPORTING NINE BUSINESSES WITHOUT ISSUE AND VERY SUCCESSFULLY. THERE ARE ZERO RETAILER DESTINATION BUSINESSES IN THE LOCATION. THERE IS NO CRIME OR THEFT. THERE IS NO RETAIL TRAFFIC AND NO PARKING CONGESTION. THERE IS A TIGHT, BUT WELL-PLANNED TURNAROUND AREA FOR FOUR TO FIVE DAILY 52 FOOT CARRIERS THAT DELIVER AND PICK UP THE PRODUCT AND MERCHANDISE NECESSARY FOR THESE BUSINESSES. DESTINATION OF RETAIL TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO GET THESE TRUCKS IN AND OUT TO DELIVER NECESSARY INVENTORY TO
[00:20:01]
BUSINESS OWNERS. THIS IS THE WRONG PLACE FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE NO CRIME AND A VERY SAFE WORKPLACE AT ALMOST ANY HOUR. RELEASES DICTATE TO COPTER 4:00 PARKING SPACES. THIS WORKS PERFECTLY FINE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RETAIL TRAFFIC. WE HAVE SEEN THIS MODEL BEFORE WHEN THERE WAS A BUSINESS IN OUR COMPLEX, 20 TO 40 CARS DAILY TO THIS SMALL BUSINESS CENTER, DECORATED FRUSTRATIONS, ANGER, OR BUSINESSES WOULD MOVE CONSTRUCTION ZONES, CREATING NEAR PHYSICAL ALTERCATIONS. TRUCKS WERE TURNED FROM ROUTES AND HAVE NO PLACE TO PARK. THE ONLY TIME WE HAD CRIME ISSUES AND THEFT IN THIS COMPLEX WAS DURING THE TIME WHERE THERE WERE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED TRAFFIC COUNTS BUT WINDOWS WERE BROKEN AND BUSINESSES WERE ROBBED. SINCE THAT BUSINESS DEPARTED, THERE HAS BEEN ZERO CRIME OR THEFT, NONE OF OUR BUSINESSES CAN TAKE THAT CHANCE AGAIN. THIS PICKLEBALL BUSINESS IS EVEN WORSE AS IT WILL DRIVE TRAFFIC LATE AT NIGHT WHEN OUR BUSINESSES ARE CLOSED AND WHEN SECURITY IS IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE THESE PEOPLE WERE OAK PARK, EVEN WITH DEDICATED PARKING LOT, ANY ADDITIONAL PARKING WILL REQUIRE EXTENSIVE DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER RUNOFF SYSTEMS THAT WILL IMPACT FLOODING RISKS TO AN ALREADY CHALLENGED COMPLEX PARKING LOT. THE RETENTION POND DOES NOT BELONG TO THE PICKLEBALL OWNER, AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE CURRENT OWNER HAS PARTIES, NOT THE PLACE FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS. MY VOICE SPEAKS ON BEHALF OF NINE BUSINESS OWNERS, SOME WERE AT WORK AND CAN'T BE HERE TODAY.ZONING. JUST SAY NO TO THIS, THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES FOR PICKLEBALL, JUST NOT IN OUR BUSINESS CENTER. WRONG PLACE FOR
THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 1? ALL RIGHT, MR. WESTER,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND? >> THANK YOU, BRAD WESTER, DRIVER MCAFEE, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON SOME OF THE THREE GENTLEMEN THAT CAME UP AND SPOKE. AND I WILL START WITH MR. SMITH TALKED ABOUT SAFETY , THE INDUSTRIAL PARK, SEMI TRUCKS, TRUCKS COME IN HOT. WELL, I HOPE NOT. REGARDLESS WHO IS WORKING OR PATRONIZING THE BUSINESS PARK. BUT WE ARE HELD TO A STANDARD THAT IS REVIEWED BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT , TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, AND THE FIRE MARSHAL. AND THEY HAD NO COMMENTS, THEY REVIEWED OUR TURNING RADIUS IS FOR UP TO A LADDER TRUCK FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, 40 FOOT LADDER TRUCK, NO COMMENTS. THE CIRCULATION MATCHES AND MEETS THE CODE REQUIREMENT FOR CIRCULATION BUT I CAN'T ATTEST TO THE DRIVERS THEY HAVE THAT ARE COMING IN HOT AND DOING THEIR DELIVERIES AT WHATEVER TIME OF THE DAY. WE HAVE A PARKING LOT, AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, THAT IS OFF OF THAT ENTRY DRIVE, RIGHT? THAT ENTRY DRIVE IS FOR COMMON USE FOR EVERYBODY IN THE FACILITY, WHETHER THIS IS A PICKLEBALL COURT OR NOT. SO, WE DON'T PLAN, NOR WILL WE BE BLOCKING THAT ENTRY ROAD INTO THE OVERALL BUSINESS PARK. SO, THE PARKING LOT IS OFF OF THE MAIN ENTRY ROAD THERE, AND WE SOUTH PARK EVERYTHING. WE HAVE 30 SPACES. THE SPORTS COMPLEX , AND I THINK WE ALL KNOW PICKLEBALL, AND IF WE ARE REFERRING TO MAFIA, I DON'T KNOW ANY CHILDREN THAT ARE IN A MAFIA, BUT I WILL TAKE THAT RUNWAY, BECAUSE MOSTLY, PICKLEBALL IS OVERWHELMINGLY, MAJORITY ADULT, NOT CHILDREN COULD THIS ISN'T A DAY CARE, WE ARE NOT DROPPING CHILDREN OFF TO GO PLAY PICKLEBALL AND MOM AND DAD CAN PICK THEM UP LATER. OVERWHELMINGLY ADULTS. SO, I WOULD LIKE THE MAFIA COMMENT TO STAY ON THE RECORD, PLEASE, AND I THINK IT IS DISCRIMINATORY. WE ARE NOT IMPEDING ANYBODY'S TRUCK MOVEMENTS. WE HAVE BEEN CLEARED BY TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION NO SAFETY CONCERNS BUT AND WILL DUE TO THE FACT THAT TO TRUCKS PARKED OUT THERE AND THERE IS INVENTORY, WHICH WE WILL RESPECT, WE ALSO HAVE CAMERAS FOR OUR BUSINESS AND OUR PATRONS. AND TO SPECULATE THAT OUR PATRONS, THEY ARE USING AN INDOOR RECREATION FACILITY AFTER WORKING , ARE GOING TO THEN GO BECOME THEFTS AS THEY LEAVE THE FACILITY IS JUST SPECULATIVE AND IT IS DISCRIMINATORY. MR. HUNT, HE SAYS IT'S A HIGH TURNOVER, AGAIN USING THE WORD PICKLE MAFIA. THERE ARE 30 PARKING SPOTS, NOT 20, DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM. WE WILL AND WE DO PLAN TO SELF PROFFERS SIGNAGE, SO ALL PICKLEBALL PATRONS WILL ONLY PARK IN OUR PARKING LOT. SO, AGAIN, MR. HUNT SAID YOU ALL KNOW THE RECORD, I GUESS THERE IS SOME TRAFFIC RECORD WITH PICKLEBALL AND HOW NASTY IT IS. SO, I THINK IT IS DISINGENUOUS AND I THINK IT IS DEROGATORY AND IT IS HERE CONJECTURE AND CLAIM MARIE. THE OTHER GENTLEMAN THAT CAME UP AND SPOKE LAST, YES, IT IS A MATURE CENTER, IT IS A BEAUTIFUL CENTER. SO, WHETHER PICKLEBALL GOES HERE OR NOT, THIS FACILITY WILL BE DEVELOPED IN CONCERT WITH THE OVERALL LOT COVERAGE
[00:25:01]
AND THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIOS, WHETHER THIS IS A BUILDING OR A PARKING LOT, OKAY? OUR TENANT ON THEIR PROPERTY IS ABLE TO DEVELOP IT WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH SOME OF THOSE USES. SO, SET ASIDE THE SEPARATE TITLE AND RESTRICTION MATTERS ABOUT WHAT IS ALLOWED AND WHAT IS NOT. IT IS NOT A PUD, SO THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS, OTHER THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED IN IW INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE ZONING, RIGHT? WE ARE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT RESTRICTIONS OR THE TITLE OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT. SO, WE TALKED ABOUT TURNED AROUND, LATE AT NIGHT, WE ALREADY HAVE HOURS OF OPERATION, 9:00 P.M., THAT IS NOT LATE. THERE ARE NO HOURS OF OPERATION RESTRICTIONS FOR BUSINESSES THAT WORK IN THERE BUT IF THERE IS A WELDING SHOP THAT IS MAYBE COMING IN THE FUTURE AND THEY WANT TO WORK UNTIL MIDNIGHT, THAT IS THEIR PREROGATIVE AS A BUSINESS TO GET THE JOB DONE. SO, AGAIN, I THINK THEY ARE CLAMORING, I THINK IT IS DISCRIMINATORY COMMENTS ABOUT PICKLEBALL AND THE TYPE OF USE. BUT I DID, FOR THE RECORD, WANT TO GO THROUGH AND SPECIFICALLY LIST SOME OF THE USES THAT ARE ALSO IN IW, JUST SO WE ARE ALL VERY CLEAR, SINCE WE DID TALK ABOUT, IT IS AN INDUSTRIAL ZONED PROPERTY. THESE ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT. BOAT AND RV STORAGE BY RIGHT. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE WITH PUBLICLY BETTER PROCESS BY DOING RV AND BOAT STORAGE. WITH OUTDOOR LIGHTING , A HIGH FENCE, POSSIBLY SOME SECURITY ISSUES. LIGHT MANUFACTURING, VEGETABLE AND FOOD PROCESSING, PRODUCTION PACKAGING AND ASSEMBLY PLANTS, WAREHOUSING WITH DISTRIBUTION CENTERS, LUMBER YARDS, LARGE-SCALE PRINTING PLANTS, NEWSPAPER PRINTING OPERATION DISTRIBUTION, BUSINESS AND COMMERCE PARK, OKAY? CONTINUING ON, OFFICE SHOWROOMS, EXTERMINATION AND PEST CONTROL, SOME THERE NOW. STORAGE YARDS FOR EQUIPMENT, MACHINERY, BOATS, SUPPLIES, TRAITS, AND CONTRACTORS. AGAIN, LANDSCAPING SERVICES, GARBAGE HAULERS , APPLIANCE REPAIR SHOPS, MACHINE SHOPS, VEHICLE REPAIR OF ALL TYPES, MANY WAREHOUSING AND SELF STORAGE. INDOOR KENNELS AND OTHER BOARDING, VETERINARY OFFICE, GROOMERS, VOCATIONAL, TECHNICAL, AND TRADE SCHOOLS. A LOT OF THOSE TECHNICAL TRADE SCHOOLS WILL HAVE NIGHT CLASSES, THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. WE WOULDN'T BE HERE, SETTING THIS PUBLICLY. SO, I THINK IT IS A BUNCH OF CLAMORING. I THINK PICKLEBALL HAS A BAD RAP. I UNDERSTAND THERE IS LESS ASSOCIATED WITH PICKLEBALL, THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ENCLOSED, CLIMATE CONTROLLED FACILITY, AND WE ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON EXPERT TESTIMONY. I HAVE MY CIVIL ENGINEER HERE AS WELL, HAS DONE ALL THE MOVEMENTS, PARK, AND BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED, WE DO PLAN TO DO SIGNAGE ON OUR PARKING LOT. AND LET ME REMIND YOU, OUR PARKING LOT IS NOT WHERE TRUCKS ARE COMING IN HOT.WE HAVE A PARKING LOT THAT IS DEDICATED ON OUR PROPERTY FOR OUR FACILITIES AND IT MEETS THE CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SELF PARKING. I ASKED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS APPROVAL FOR PICKLEBLL USE. THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS NOT A REZONING AND IT IS TIED SPECIFICALLY TO THE SITE PLAN, THE HOURS OF OPERATION, AND PARKING ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR THE OWNER OR THE CIVIL
ENGINEERS WILL, THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL.
MR. WESTER, CAN YOU GO BACK TO YOUR SITE PLAN? I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. UM, SO, AT THE WESTERN CORNER, SO THAT WILL ROAD, NORTH 1 DRIVE, IS A SHARED ENTRYWAY TO THE ENTIRE --
>> CORRECT. THAT'S SO, YOUR ONLY INGRESS AND EGRESS IS AT THE VERY END TO THAT RIGHT MR. MARK
>> OUR PROPERTY LINE IS THIS RIGHT HERE, BECAUSE OF THIS LAND AROUND THERE. SO, THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THESE BUILDINGS HERE WILL BE THIS PARKING LOT AND THE END HERE AT THIS T INTERSECTION.
>> YES. >> BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IT IS BASICALLY SECLUDED, SO ANYBODY THAT IS GOING TO GO TO THAT BUILDING IN PARTICULAR HAS REASON TO BE THERE, SPECIFICALLY
PICKLEBALL, RIGHT? >> THAT'S CORRECT, UNLESS THEY'RE COMING IN HOT, DOING A U-TURN AT THIS INTERSECTION, BUT YES, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY OUR DEDICATED ENTRANCE TO THIS
PARKING LOT. >> AND YOU ARE NOT CONNECTED TO ANY OTHER BUILDING? X NO, WE ARE NOT.
>> AND THERE IS NO WAY TO ACCESS OTHER BUILDINGS? I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
>> THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE THAT THE OWNER IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO UTILIZE THE HOLDING POND OUT THERE, IS THAT EVEN
POSSIBLE? >> I DON'T THINK IT IS. WE MEET THE REQUIREMENTS , MATTER OF FACT, WE ARE BELOW THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE RATIO AND THE FLORIDA RATIO FOR THIS SPECIFIC, SO WE ARE NOT EVEN MAXIMIZING THAT FOR THE IW LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
BELOW THAT AS FAR AS OUR LOT COVERAGE. BUT WE CURRENTLY MEET ALL THE REGULATIONS FOR OUR STORMWATER AND IMPERVIOUS USES.
YEAH? >> I HAVE A SMALL COMMENT. MR.
GREEN? >> WHO ACTUALLY OWNS NORTH 1
[00:30:02]
DRIVE? IS THAT THE -- IS THAT A PRIVATE ROAD?>> IT IS PRIVATE, YES, IT IS FOR THE BUSINESS PARK. SO, THERE IS AN ASSESSMENT, THE OWNER CAN SPEAK MORE TO IT IF YOU NEED, BUT THERE ARE ASSESSMENTS PAID INTO IT FOR MAINTENANCE AND EVERYTHING. BUT THE OWNER CONTROLS THAT, NOT MY CLIENT OF OUR PROPERTY, BUT
AND THE LIKE. >> SO, THERE IS NO RESTRICTION ON THE ROAD?
>> OKAY, UM, OUR DETERMINANTS GOING TO BE PLAYED HERE?
>> WE DON'T ANTICIPATE DETERMINANTS, THIS IS JUST A PRIVATE, MEMBERSHIP BASED RECREATIONAL FACILITY FOR PICKLEBALL, AND IT WILL HAVE UP AND ASSUMING THERE IS A COURT AVAILABLE, YOU WILL KNOW THAT AHEAD OF TIME. SO, IT IS A VERY CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT , VERY RESPECTFUL, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, ADULTS. IF THERE ARE KIDS THAT WANT TO COME PLAY, THAT'S GREAT, BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT PICKLEBALL IS OVERWHELMINGLY, MAJORITY ADULTS.
IT IS NOT A DAY CARE. >> YES, ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT AND PUBLIC MEETINGS IS THAT PEOPLE GET A CHANCE TO HEAR WHAT THE CODE SAYS. WE DON'T ALWAYS HAVE A REALLY CLEAR IDEA, WE KNOW AS THINGS ARE CHANGING AND THIS IS GOING TO BE BAD AND I FORESEE TROUBLE, BUT THIS IS ALLOWABLE.
YOU JUST WANT THE SPECIAL USE. BUT I DROVE BY IDP THERE IS A BIG INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE PARK THERE, THEIR STANCE AND CHEERLEADING AND EVERYTHING RIGHT THERE, AND IT JUST CAUGHT MY EYE. THIS IS A SIMILAR THING. SO, I THINK THIS IS ABSOLUTELY ALLOWABLE. ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST, I'M ALL ABOUT COMMUNITY AND COMMUNICATION. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST MAYBE -- I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE FACT THAT YOU WANT TO DO THE SIGNS, YOU ARE TRYING TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND A GOOD PARTNER IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK MAYBE SOME OF THE FEARS ARE HOPEFULLY ALLAYED BY UNDERSTANDING WHAT ELSE COULD BE THERE. AND SO, I JUST WANTED TO SAY POSSIBLY, IF THERE COULD BE A REACH OUT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS REALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE A COMPROMISE, I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE YOURSELVES FAIRLY WELL LAID OUT, BUT JUST AN EFFORT TO WORK TOGETHER IN -- YOU KNOW, AS A COMMUNITY. SO, I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MISS SPIEGEL. WE DID REACH OUT, THE OWNER SPECIFICALLY, WHO DOES WORK IN THIS WAREHOUSE, SHE WENT OUT AND DORA KNOCKED AND REACHED OUT. SOME WERE WILLING TO TALK AND STILL EXPLAIN THE OPPOSITION AND SOME WERE NOT WILLING TO TALK AT ALL. BUT REGARDLESS, SHE IS STILL GOING TO BE A PROPRIETOR THERE, A BUSINESS OWNER FOR THE WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITY THAT SHE RUNS. BUT YOUR COMMENT, I DID WANT TO FURTHER -- UNDER RECREATION, IT DOES TALK ABOUT COMMERCIAL RECREATION, YOU TALK ABOUT CHEERLEADING, GYMNASIUMS, FITNESS CENTERS, PAINTBALL FACILITIES, AEROBICS STUDIOS, AND SIMILAR USES, PICKLEBALL, THAT REQUIRE LARGE OPEN WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS, I.E. THIS TYPE OF FACILITY. MAYBE PERMITTED AS A SPECIAL USE WITHIN DISTRICTS LIKE THIS, IW, AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR, THANK YOU.
>> MR. LABONOWSKI? >> I DID HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE RUNOFF OUT OF THE PARKING LOT, WHERE IT WAS GOING TO GO. SO, WE ARE GOOD THERE, BUT HOW MANY COURTS DID YOU SAY WERE GOING TO
BE IN THERE, FOUR? >> FOUR BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, SO TWO IN THIS CURRENT REQUEST.
>> TWO IN THE SPIRIT >> YES, SIR.
>> ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE PUT FORWARD A MOTION? MR. GREEN?
>> YEAH, I THINK IT'S VERY REASONABLE, IT IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SO I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. 2025-06 , ST.
JOHN'S, I GUESS, PICKLEBALL . BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONDITIONS IN OUR STAFF REPORT.
>> OKAY, A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. MR. LABONOWSKI?
>> THE SIGNS, YET. >> IF MR. GRAHAM WOULD LIKE TO AMEND HIS MOTION AND IT IS OKAY WITH THE APPLICANT.
>> I JUST SPOKE TO JACOB ABOUT THAT, TOO, AND I'M GLAD YOU READ MY MIND. WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT CONDITION FOR THE
RECORD. >> WITH THE CONDITION THAT YOU
WANT TO PUT IN THERE -- >> WE WILL PROVIDE SIGNAGE THAT MANDATES -- I WILL WORK WITH KEALEY ON THE LANGUAGE ON THIS, BUT MANDATES SIGNAGE SPECIFICALLY FOR PICKLEBALL.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WILL ADD TO MY MOTION.
>> SECOND. >> PERFECT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. ALL RIGHT,
[2. MINMOD 2025-06 Veterans Plaza. Request for a Minor Modification to the ICI Middlebourne PUD (Ordinance 2018-29, as amended) to allow for the sale for off-site consumption of Alcoholic Beverages as an allowed use together with a request for relief from the required 1,000-foot separation between Churches/Schools. Specifically located on the northeast corner of the Veterans Parkway and Longleaf Pine Parkway.]
THAT MOTION PASSES, 6-0. THANK YOU, MR. WESTER. ALL RIGHT, ON TO ITEM NUMBER 2.[00:35:01]
>> OKAY, YES, I VISITED THE SITE ON JUNE 21ST.
>> IT IS SPIEGEL? >> YES, I VISITED THE SITE AS
WELL. >> I VISITED THE SITE AS WELL.
>> ANYBODY ELSE? GO AHEAD, SIR. >> MY NAME IS JASON HILL, LAW FIRM OF LIPPES MATHIAS, I AM HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT, PROJECT LONGLEAF, WITH REGARD TO MODIFICATION, INAUDIBLE ] AND THEY ARE THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND PURSUING THIS MINOR MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING MIDDLEBOURNE PUD TO REQUEST A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND WAIVER OF SECTION 2 .0 3.02, THE ST. JOHN'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR A LIQUOR STORE WHICH IS CLASSIFIED AS A PACKAGE STORE TO BE ESTABLISHED WITHIN 1000 FEET OF AN EXISTING CHURCH AND SCHOOL, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER AT THE INTERSECTION OF LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY AND VETERANS PARKWAY. PROPERTY OWNER INTENDS TO CONSTRUCT A 64,000 SQUARE FOOT PUBLIC SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE 2100 SQUARE-FOOT PUBLIX BRANDED LIQUOR STORE, IN ADDITION TO 11,200 FEET OF ADDITIONAL IN MY RETAIL AND TWO OUT PARCELS. THIS IS THE LOCATION. AS YOU JUST MENTIONED, AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF VETERANS PARKWAY AND LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY. HERE IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE LOCATION, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IS STILL WHAT IT AND ALL AROUND IT IS WOODED, EXCEPT TO THE SOUTHEAST, WHICH IS WHERE THE CHURCH OF 1122 IS BEING CONSTRUCTED, AS WELL AS THE CURRENTLY EXISTING HIGH SCHOOL. AND THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT IS 14.84 ACRES, THAT IS THE SIZE OF THE LOT, BUT AS YOU WILL SEE WHEN WE SHOW YOU THE SITE PLAN, THE ACTUAL PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S DEVELOPED IS LOCATED PRIMARILY TO THE WEST. AND SO, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWS THAT IN ADDITION TO OUR PROPERTY BEING LOCATED IN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, IT IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL B, RESIDENTIAL SEA TO THE NORTH, PARKS AND RECREATION IN THE NORTHWEST, AND RURAL TO THE SOUTHEAST, WHICH IS WHERE CREEKSIDE HIGH SCHOOL IS LOCATED. IT IS CURRENTLY PART OF THE EXISTING ICI MIDDLEBOURNE PUD. AND THE ONLY OTHER USES AROUND THERE THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE PUD ARE THE OPEN ROADS TO THE NORTHWEST, WHICH IS A PARK, AND AS I MENTIONED, "TO THE SOUTHEAST, WHICH IS CREEKSIDE HIGH SCHOOL. SO, THE APPLICABLE REGULATION THAT WE ARE HERE TODAY ON HIS WITH REGARD TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY LAND DEVELOPER AND CODE SECTION 2.0 3.02 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES , NEARBY CHURCH, NEARBY SCHOOL. AND THAT PROVIDES UP BEVERAGES THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY SHALL MAINTAIN A PLACE OF BUSINESS WITHIN 1000 FEET OF AN ESTABLISHED SCHOOL OR WITHIN 1000 FEET OF AN ESTABLISHED CHURCH LOCATED IN THE INCORPORATED OR UNINCORPORATED AREA OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND IN THE CASE OF THE CHURCH, THIS IS MEASURED FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE PERMITTED AS A SPECIAL USE WITHIN THE DISTRICTS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2.0 3.01, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS BUT A SPECIAL USE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY, ONLY UPON THE DETERMINATION THAT APPLICATION AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO ESTABLISH THAT. THE SPECIAL USE CAN BE GRANTED WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD AND WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIR THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE CONFERENCE A PLAN OR THIS CODE. THE USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CONTIGUOUS AND SURROUNDING AREA AND WILL NOT IMPOSE EXCESSIVE BURDEN OR HAVE SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING OR ADJACENT USES OR COMMUNITY FACILITIES OR SERVICES. AND FINALLY, THE USE, WHICH IS LISTED AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED COMPLIES WITH ALL REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS OF THIS ARTICLE 2, AND THUS A GREATER AND MORE STRINGENT REGULATIONS INAUDIBLE ] OR ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE FOR THE SPECIAL USE. NOW, WITH REGARD TO A REQUEST FOR SEPARATION, INVOLVING A CHURCH OR SCHOOL, IT MUST MEET ZONING, WHICH IT DOES IN THIS INSTANCE, AND A VARIANCE IS A RELAXATION OF THE TERMS OF CODE WHERE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AND WHERE BY REASON OF THE EXCEPTIONAL NARROWNESS, SHALLOWNESS, OR UNUSUAL SHAPE OF A SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS COLD VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CODE. SO, HERE IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE
[00:40:03]
DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED TO THE FAR WEST PORTION OF THE PARCEL.AND -- THIS LARGE SECTION HERE, WHICH ESSENTIALLY IT LOOKS LIKE THE HANDLE OF A HAMMER, IS WHAT EXTENDS EXTENSIVELY EAST, AND THAT IS TO PROVIDE FOR DRAINAGE AND ENTRY INTO THE PARK. AND SO, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ACTUAL DISTANCE FROM PROPERTY LINE OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE HIGH SCHOOL, IT IS APPROXIMATELY 441 FEET, AND TO PROPERTY LINE, PROPERTY LINE, FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO CHURCH OF 1122'S PROPERTY IS 100 FEET ACROSS THE FOUR LANE DIVIDED PARKWAY. SO, MOVING ON TO SPECIAL USE CONSIDERATION ITEM NUMBER 1, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH THE PUBLIC LIQUOR STORES TO BE LOCATED, ALTHOUGH THE PROPERTY LINES ARE LOCATED WITHIN 1000 FEET OF THE HIGH SCHOOL PARCEL AND 1122 PARCEL, IT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIR THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE CONFERENCE A PLAN AND CODE AS THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE PUBLIC LIQUOR STORE WILL BE LOCATED MORE THAN 1000 FEET FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL PARCEL AND ACROSS THE FOUR LANE DIVIDED ROAD KNOWN AS LONGLEAF ARCHWAY, WHICH PROVIDES A SPECIFIC BUFFER BETWEEN PUBLIX LIQUOR, THE HIGH SCHOOL, AND THE CHURCH PROPERTY. CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE HIGH SCHOOL PARCEL IS THE RESULT OF THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY, AS I POINTED OUT WHEN I CIRCLED THE HANDLE OF HAMMER, EXTENDING MORE THAN 750 FEET TO THE EAST FOR THE PRIMARY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO PROVIDE SOLELY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETENTION POND AND ACCESS DRIVE.
THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE IS MORE THAN 591 FEET FROM THE NEAREST POINT OF 1122 PARCEL, WHICH IS THIS DISTANCE RIGHT HERE. AND THROUGH TECHNOLOGY, I WAS ABLE TO CUT AND PASTE A MORE RECENT VERSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 1122 PARCEL INTO ITS CURRENT LOCATION, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS NOT DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, IT IS ACTUALLY TO THE SOUTHEAST, WHICH IF WE WERE TO DRAW A LINE FROM THERE DOWN TO THE BUILDING, THAT IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN 1000 FEET AS WELL. MOVING ON TO SPECIAL USE CONSIDERATION, ITEM NUMBER 2, WHICH DOVETAILS CONSIDERATION ITEM NUMBER 1, THE PROPOSED LIQUOR STORE IS A RETAIL BUSINESS THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THAT AREA, WHICH IS CURRENTLY COMPRISED OF MIXED USES. BOTH THE GROCERY STORE AND THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE WITHIN THE PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO SEVERAL OTHER PUBLIX LOCATIONS THAT ARE LOCATED AROUND ST. JOHNS COUNTY. AND IT WILL PROVIDE THE RESIDENCE OF DURBAN CROSSING WITH THE SAME CONVENIENCE THAT OTHER RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY CURRENTLY ENJOYING THIS RUNNING DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS SOUTHAMPTON, SHEARWATER, ROPE GOLF VILLAGE -- NOW, THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED IN THE RAPIDLY GROWING INTERIOR PORTION OF DURBAN CROSSING. AND IT IS ALONG THE MAIN EAST-WEST CORRIDOR KNOWN AS LONGLEAF PINES PARKWAY.
AND DURBAN CROSSING RESIDENTS IS CURRENTLY TRAVEL TO COUNTY ROAD 210 OR RACETRACK ROAD TO SHOP FOR GROCERIES AND ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. AND RESIDENTS, BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THAT, ARE NOW ACCUSTOMED TO GOING TO THE PUBLIX PLAZA AND GETTING BOTH THEIR GROCERIES AND THEIR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN A SINGLE LOCATION, SO THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE A HARDSHIP ON THE PUBLIC IF THE PROPOSED PUBLIX DID NOT ALSO CONTAIN PUBLIX LIQUOR, AS CUSTOMERS WOULD HAVE TO TRAVEL TO THE SEPARATE LOCATIONS TO COMPLETE ALL OF THEIR SHOPPING, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE ALREADY CONGESTED AUTOMOBILE TRAFFIC IN THIS AREA OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WITH REGARD TO SPECIAL USE CONSIDERATION ITEM NUMBER 3, THE SALE OF ALCOHOL IS GENERALLY APPROVED AS A SPECIAL USE WITHIN A NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, AND THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF ALCOHOL SALES AT THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE IS TO BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY, APPEARS TO MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN ARTICLE 2 OF THE LAND DEVELOPING CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WITH REGARD TO VARIANCE CONSIDERATION, ITEM NUMBER 3, THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF SECTION 2.0 3.02 OF THE CODE WOULD CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR PUBLIX TO CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CODE AS PUBLIX WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RECONFIGURE ITS ENTIRE SITE PLAN AND OPERATION FOR THIS ONE LOCATION, DESPITE PREVIOUSLY HAVING THE EXACT SAME PLAN APPROVED THROUGHOUT LOCATIONS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WITH REGARD TO VARIANCE CONSIDERATION ITEM NUMBER 4, THE COUNTY'S APPROVAL OF VARIANCE TO WAIVE THE 1000 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CODE, WHICH INTENT APPEARS TO BE TO PREVENT THE STANDALONE LIQUOR STORE FROM BEING CONSTRUCTED NEXT TO AN
[00:45:01]
EXISTING SCHOOL OR CHURCH THAT CAN POSE A RISK TO STUDENTS OR PARISHIONERS , EASY ACCESS FOR STUDENTS AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITY PERPETRATED BY PATRONIZING SUCH STANDALONE LIQUOR STORES. THE PROPOSED LIQUOR STORE FOR PUBLIX, HOWEVER, IS OPERATED AS A FIRST-CLASS FACILITY, JUST LIKE ALL THE PUBLIX STORES THROUGHOUT ST. JOHNS COUNTY, WHICH ONLY STEALS BEER, WINE, ALCOHOL, MIXERS, AND ICE , AND RELATED PRODUCTS, NOT CANDY, SNACKS, AND OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD ATTRACT CHILDREN. AND IN FACT, THIS IS A PICTURE RIGHT NOW OF INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY ON STATE ROAD 60 WERE SIMILAR PERMITS HAVE BEEN GRANTED. IN THIS INCIDENCE, THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE , WHICH IS LOCATED RIGHT HERE, IS LOCATED WITHIN 1000 FEET OF MILLCREEK ACADEMY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AS WELL AS THE CHURCH . BOTH OF WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE. AND JUST RECENTLY, AN ABC LIQUOR STORE, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED WITH THE ORANGE STAR, WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN 40 FEET OF THE VILLAGE CHURCH, AND THIS WAS RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE COUNTY LAST YEAR ON AN APPEAL FROM THE APPLICANT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DENIED. SO, THE PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER, INCLUDING THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE, WILL BE A VALUABLE AND WELCOME ADDITION TO THE DURBAN CROSSING COMMUNITY, ADDING TO THE -- ADDING TO AND ENHANCING THE EXISTING USES, AND PUBLIX LIQUOR WILL RESPONSIBLY PROVIDE A NEEDED AND CONVENIENT AMENITY TO THE COMMUNITY'S RESIDENTS AND THEIR VISITORS.SO, THEREFORE, THE PROPERTY OWNER HEREBY RESPECT THE REQUEST APPROVAL OF ITS MINOR APPLICATION. THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND A WAIVER OF SECTION 2.0 3.02 OF THE CODE TO ALLOW FOR PUBLIX LIQUOR TO BE CONSTRUCTED, OPENED , AND OPERATED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTS THAT ALL SUCH APPROVALS FROM THE COUNTY WILL BE GRANTED TO PUBLIX AS THE TENANT OF THE PROPERTY AND HOLDER OF THE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR THE OPERATION OF THE PUBLIX LIQUOR STORE ON THE PROPERTY. AND WITH THAT, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND AM OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. AND WE HAVE THE OWNER, PAUL, WITH US AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS? MR. LABONOWSKI?
>> JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK ONES . DID YOU TALK TO THE CHURCH, BY
CHANCE, ACROSS THE STREET? >> WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE.
THAT'S OKAY, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, I KNOW A NUMBER OF PUBLIX ARE NOW SERVING BEER AND WINE IN THE STORE, IS THIS GOING TO ALSO BE DONE IN THE LIQUOR STORE ITSELF?
>> IT IS NOT GOING TO BE, THERE'S GOING TO BE NO SERVICE IN THE LIQUOR STORE OR IN THE PUBLIX ITSELF.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> IT IS STRICTLY FOR OFF-SITE
CONSUMPTION. >> ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENTS, ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM
NUMBER 2? >> CHARLIE, MILLCREEK ESTATES.
MY QUESTION IS WHY ISN'T THERE A REGULATION ON THIS? WHY? OKAY? THE VILLAGE CHURCH , YES , WAS RIGHT NEXT THERE ORDER -- WHY -- BECAUSE I DRIVE BY THAT PLACE EVERY DAY WHEN I AM LEAVING THAT CONGESTED INTERSECTION, OKAY? WHEN THE PASTOR WAS SPOKEN TO, AND I STOPPED BY AND SPOKE WITH HIM A FEW TIMES, HE SAID THAT HE PUT IT OUT TO ABC, THEY WOULD HELP THEIR YOUTH EVENTS. HE HASN'T FELT ANYTHING BAD ABOUT IT, OKAY? THAT IS ALL THAT BBC NEEDED, OKAY? AT -- THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NEEDED TO HEAR, FROM THAT, OKAY ? ALSO, WHEN IT GOT APPEALED, THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO GO BACK AND THEY PUT THROUGH THE CHANGE TO WHERE THEY HAD TO SPLIT THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE YES, IT WAS STILL TECHNICALLY WITHIN 1000 FEET OF MILLCREEK ELEMENTARY. SO, THEN YOU HAD THE OTHER ONE A FEW MONTHS AGO WHERE IT WAS A PEER LIQUOR STORE, NO MATTER HOW MANY NIGHTS VERBS ABOUT IT, ABOUT COMING IN AND WINE TASTING AND THIS AND THAT. HEY, IT IS HARD LIQUOR, IT'S A LIQUOR STORE, AND IT WAS BACKED UP RIGHT TO THOSE GROUNDS. THEY TALKED TO THE GUY, THE PRINCIPAL, HE SAID HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH ME. ALL RIGHT, THAT'S ALL WE NEEDED TO HEAR.
THAT GOT APPROVED. RIGHT HERE. THIS , MAKING A CORPORATION FOR
[00:50:04]
THE SOUTHEAST I MEAN, YALE APPROVED THIS, IT IS ALMOST LIKE WHY ARE WE BUILDING IT WHEN WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A LIQUOR STORE RIGHT BESIDE IT? IF YOU REALLY THINK THIS IS A SPECIAL REQUEST, IT'S SO MONOTONOUS OF HEARING THAT, WHERE IT COMES FROM A MASSIVE CORPORATION OF A SPECIAL REQUEST FOR A LIQUOR STORE. BUT THIS DOES REFLECT THE POOR VARIANCES OR HOW PEOPLE THINK AND SEE ABOUT WHAT THE REGULATIONS ARE FOR THESE LIQUOR STORES. IF IT IS 1000 FOOT, IT IS 1000 FOOT, NOT SOMEONE SOMEWHERE WITHIN THAT -- THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER. OKAY? 1000 FOOT IS 1000 FOOT. PROPERTY LINES, OKAY? THOSE LIQUOR STORES SELL WINE. THOSE LIQUOR STORES SELL BEER, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SHOWED UP THERE. BUT THE MAIN THING IS HARD LIQUOR. SO, THAT IS MY EXPRESSION ON WHAT IS GOING ON IN NOT JUST THIS COUNTY, BUT EVERYWHERE. IF YOU'RE BIG ENOUGH, YOU WILL GETIT. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR THIS ITEM? MR. HILL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?
>> ALL RIGHT, WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY, WE MAY HAVE A FEW
QUESTIONS. >> I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. YES,
>> YES, PLEASE. >> SO, NOT JUST SPEAKING TO AN EMPTY PODIUM, THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS IS KIND OF BECOMING A BRANDING THING WITH PUBLIX, RIGHT? THIS IS JUST KIND OF PART OF WHO WE ARE. FORTUNATELY OR UNFORTUNATELY, I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH MR. HUNT, I THINK THE CODE IS THE CODE, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE PRECEDENTS, BUT THESE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DECIDED ONE AT A TIME. THERE IS A CHURCH RIGHT THERE, AND I THINK THAT ONE ITEM THAT YOU MISSED ON YOUR LIST OF REASONS THAT WE HAVE THIS 1000 FOOT VARIANCE, IS THAT PEOPLE CAN'T GET ALCOHOL AND ACCESS THOSE ROADS, THAT FOUR LANE ROAD WITH HEAVY TRAFFIC, AND OUR HIGH SCHOOL KIDS DRIVING AROUND THERE AS WELL, SO THAT IS A CONCERN TO ME, SO I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST
THIS, PROBABLY. >> I RESPECT YOUR POSITION. THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS I APPRECIATE THE POSITION THAT THEY COULD BE GETTING ALCOHOL AND GETTING ON THE ROADS, BUT BECAUSE IT IS FOR OFF-SITE CONSUMPTION, THEY WOULDN'T BE GETTING -- THEY WOULDN'T BE BUYING THE ALCOHOL AND THEN GETTING THE ROAD, THEY WOULD SIMPLY BE PICKING UP ALCOHOL AND
TAKING IT HOME. >> ONCE THEY OWN THE ALCOHOL, THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH IT -- SO, FOR LEGAL, WE DO KNOW THAT. THAT IS PART OF THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE, AND I THINK I'M GOING TO STAND AND ENFORCE THAT.
>> IS THIS TYPICAL PUBLIX, WHERE THE ALCOHOL STORE IS SEPARATELY LOCATED ? IN THE STORE. SO, I SCHOOLKIDS USED TO STOP BY PUBLIX ALL THE TIME TO PICK UP STUFF FOR LUNCH WHEN THEY WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL AND THEY STARTED DRIVING. IT'S TOTALLY SEPARATE,
CORRECT? >> YES, SIR, IT'S A SEPARATE ENTRANCE, NOT CONNECTED WHATSOEVER TO THE PUBLIX GROCERY
STORE. >> WE HAVE A SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE, IS ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD ON THIS ITEM, I MEAN, DID THEY RESPOND TO IT?
>> WE DO NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES WHEN WE PUT THIS OUT.
>> I HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD ABOUT IT.
>> THEY DIDN'T SEND AN OFFICIAL LETTER.
>> NO, THEY DO NOT MAKE A AND THE OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION. THEY
NEVER TELL ME HOW TO VOTE. >> I DON'T EXPECT THEM TO, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY COMMUNICATED.
>> THEY DID SAY THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME APPROVED IN THE PAST.
THANK YOU, SIR. >> YES, WE DO NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY AN OBJECTION TO THE APPLICATION.
>> MR. OLSON? >> YES, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT I VISITED THE SITE. AND SAW THE LONGLEAF PARKWAY AS BEING QUITE A BARRIER IN ITSELF, IT IS NOT QUITE THE THING THAT YOU STALL ACROSS. I THOUGHT TODAY, THE TESTIMONY SHOWED THAT THE SEPARATION WAS ADEQUATE , SO, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
I THINK ACTUALLY, A LOT OF -- MAYBE THIS FEATURE IN OUR ORDINANCE -- THIS FEATURE MIGHT BE FROM WHEN MOST OF THE COUNTY WAS SORT OF A RURAL, MORE RURAL. AND I THINK THERE IS PROBABLY A LOT OF ADJUSTMENTS IN OUR CODE THAT NEED TO RECOGNIZE THE URBANIZATION OF OUR COUNTY , SO THAT IS MY THOUGHTS.
[00:55:04]
>> DR. HILSENBECK? >> SO, YOU STATED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED NO OBJECTIONS WHATSOEVER, NO OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD VIA LETTER OR EMAIL OR
WHATEVER? OR THE 1122 CHURCH? >> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> SO YOU KNOW, I HAVE VOTED FOR SOME VARIANCES LIKE THIS, AND I HAVE VOTED AGAINST SOME. I VOTED AGAINST THAT 40 FOOT ABC LIQUOR STORE NEXT TO THE CHURCH AND SCHOOL OVER THERE OFF OF 70. SO, I DON'T MIND VOTING AGAINST THINGS, BUT I THINK THAT YOU HAVE SHOWN A GOOD CASE FOR THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE, SO I
AM GOING TO SUPPORT IT. >> MR. LABONOWSKI?
>> SINCE IT IS NOT GOING TO BE ON THE SITE DRINKING, I AM IN SUPPORT OF IT, AND I WILL MAKE THE MOTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
>> I WAS SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE MINMOD VETERANS PLAZA BASED ON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND 10 CONDITIONS AS PROVIDED BY THE STAFF REPORT.
>> ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND BY MR. OLSON. ALL RIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND REGISTER THE BOAT. ALL RIGHT,
[3. MINMOD 2025-04 Woods Pavillion. Request for a Minor Modification to The Preserve at St. Johns PUD (Ord. 1987-48, as amended) to allow a Rear Yard setback of three (3) feet in lieu of the required ten (10) feet and an Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR) of 53% in lieu of the maximum 50% ISR to allow for a covered pavilion, specifically located at 169 Coppinger Place.]
THAT MOTION PASSES 5-1. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. LET'S ALL RIGHT, ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3, IS THERE ANY
INAUDIBLE ]? MR. OLSON? >> SO, YES, ON JUNE 21ST, I CONTACTED THE APPLICANT , SEEKING TO -- JENNIFER WOODS, WHO I GUESS IS HERE RIGHT NOW, WAS SEEKING TO -- YEAH, HER OKAY, IF I COULD JUST WALK ON FOR THE PROPERTY AND JUST VIEW THE SITUATION ON THE SITE. SHE WAS -- SHE URGED ME TO NOT DO THAT. SHE PREFERRED NOT. AND SO, SHE WAS OUT OF TOWN, BASICALLY.
AND WANTED TO BE THERE WHEN SOMEONE DID THAT. SO, THAT IS MY
EXTENT OF MY EX PARTAKE. >> MRS. SPIEGEL ? ANYBODY ELSE?
>> I VISITED THE SITE JUST AS A DRIVE-BY.
>> OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM STEVE WOODS, THIS IS MY WIFE, JENNIFER. WE ARE THE HOMEOWNERS AT 169 COPPINGER PLACE, WHICH IS A LOT 32 ON THE PRESERVE AT ST. JOHN'S, AND WE ARE REQUESTING A MINIMUM MODIFICATION THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO BUILD A STANDALONE , COVERED ROOF OVER OUR EXISTING PAVER PATIO. WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE MODIFICATION, SO WE CAN ENJOY THE PATIO , FREE OF THE SUN AND RAIN, AND SPECIFICALLY, THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR ARE A THREE FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 10 FOOT SETBACK, AND ALSO, AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO OF 53% VERSUS 50% ON OUR LOT. HOW WE LEARNED WE NEEDED THIS, WE CONTRACTED WITH AN OUTDOOR CONTRACTOR TO BUILD THE PAVER PATIO AND A STRUCTURE OVER IT. THE PAVILION. AND WHEN WE DID, WE TOLD -- WE WERE TOLD THAT WE DO NOT NEED ANY APPROVAL FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY FOR THE PAVER PATIO AT ALL, AND FOR THE STRUCTURE OF THE ROOF OVER IT, WE ONLY NEEDED APPROVAL, WHICH THEY SAID WAS THE PERMIT. WE WEREN'T AWARE OF THESE OTHER TWO THINGS THAT WE NEEDED THE MODIFICATION FOR, AND SO, THE COMPANY CERTAINLY BELIEVED IT, TOO, AS THEY WENT AHEAD AND APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT AND FOUND OUT THAT THEY COULDN'T DO THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT THESE MODIFICATIONS, SO I BELIEVE THEY BELIEVED WHAT THEY SAID, AND THAT'S WHEN WE LEARNED THAT WE NEEDED THE MODIFICATION OF 53% VERSUS 50%, AND THE SETBACK LINE OF THREE POINT -- OR THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES VERSUS 10 INCHES. A COUPLE POINTS BEFORE WE GET TO THE VISUALS, WE DO HAVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION APPROVAL ON THE PATIOS AND THE PROPOSED PAVILION. THIS STRUCTURE DOES NOT IMPLICATE THE LOT ADJACENT TO US, AND OUR ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. THIS PROJECTS FOR THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE POND THAT DOES NOT ENCROACH PAST THE PROPERTY LINE. IN FACT, THIS IS FULLY WITHIN OUR FENCED PROPERTY LINE BY THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES.
SO, IT PROJECTS TOWARDS THAT POND, BUT DOESN'T GO TO IT, BEYOND OUR OFFENSE, THERE IS A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PROPERTY
[01:00:01]
WHERE THEY HAVE THAT TO MAINTAIN THE POND. WE ACTUALLY MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY THERE. YOU WILL SEE IN PICTURES THAT THERE IS GRASS THERE THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO MOW AND MAINTAIN AND ALL THAT.BUT OUR FENCE IS ON THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THE STRUCTURE IS WHOLLY WITHIN THAT. THE PAVILION WILL OBSTRUCT THE VIEWS OF ANY NEIGHBORS, AND AS I SAID, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. IT WILL HAVE PROPER DRAINAGE, AND GUTTERS AND EVERYTHING THAT WILL GO OUT LEADING TOWARD THE STORM WATER POND. I WILL GET TO SOME VISUALS. ON THE LEFT IS THE FULL AREA VIEW, AERIAL VIEW. OUR PROPERTY HAS THE BLUE OR TURQUOISE LINE AROUND IT, SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT IS SITUATED. TO THE RIGHT IS A VIEW OF OUR PROPERTY THAT IS ZOOMED, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACK, THERE IS A SCREENED PATIO IN THE MIDDLE , DIRECTLY OUT THE BACK, TO THE LEFT, THERE IS A PAVER PATIO, WHICH WE ARE NOT REQUESTING TO BUILD A STRUCTURE THERE. THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE ON THE ONE TO THE RIGHT AS WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TOWARD THE HOUSE, SO THAT IS KIND OF THE AERIAL VIEW OF THAT. I WILL GO TO THE NEXT. AND THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM A SURVEY, THIS SHOWS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. ON THE LEFT THERE, YOU WILL SEE THE 10 FEET, THAT IS JUST AN ACCESS EASEMENT, SO IF THE ASSOCIATION AND THE CONTRACTORS CAN GET BACK AND MAINTAIN THE POND, THAT'S WHY ON THE FENCE WE HAVE GOT A GATE IN THE BACK, SO THEY CAN COME AND GO WHEN THEY NEED TO.
WE HAVE GOT THE PAVER PATIO ON THE LEFT, BUT WE DON'T INTEND -- OR WE ARE NOT SEEKING TO PUT A STRUCTURE OVER. ON THE RIGHT, THAT IS WHERE -- THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THERE. SO, YOU WILL SEE THAT THE EXISTING PAVER PATIO IS IN BLUE. AND THEN THE PAVILION STRUCTURE IS THE ORANGE AND THE SOLID LINE , AND THE EAVES WOULD GO OUT TO THAT DOTTED ORANGE OR BROWN LINE , SO THAT IT IS FLUSH WITH THE BOTTOM OF THE PAVER PATIO. SO, THAT KIND OF DEPICTS WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND YOU WILL SEE, THE MAIN ISSUE HERE IS THE BACK RIGHT CORNER. BECAUSE OF THE CURVATURE OF THE LOT, IT COMES CLOSER THERE , IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WAY THE HOUSE IS ANGLED AND SITUATED. WE ARE STILL LIVING -- PROPOSING TO LEAVE THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES, SO WE CAN GET BACK THERE AND GO TO AND FROM. AND THEN BEYOND THAT LINE WHERE IT SAYS C2, WE HAVE A FENCE THERE. BEYOND THAT IS 15 OR MORE FEET OF GRASS, WHICH IS THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND THEN THERE IS THE POND. THIS IS A RENDERING OF WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING -- PROPOSING TO MAKE A NICE ONE, WE HOPE. IT IS GOING TO MATCH THE HOUSE, THE COLORS, THE ROOF, THE SHINGLES, EVERYTHING IS GOING TO MATCH. IT IS A STANDALONE STRUCTURE, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO ATTACH THIS TO THE HOME, AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE EAVES WILL COME DOWN AND WE PLAN TO HAVE THOSE AT THE SAME HEIGHT. IT WILL HAVE GUTTERS AROUND IT AND PROPER DRAINAGE, AND SO, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS AWKWARD OR BIGGER THAN THE HOUSE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT IS GOING TO MATCH ITS COLOR, AESTHETICS, SIZE, AND EVERYTHING. THE STAR IS WHERE OUR HOUSE IS LOCATED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. I DON'T REALLY KNOW MUCH ABOUT ALL THAT, I AM NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER, BUT THAT IS WHERE WE ARE LOCATED AND WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT MAP UP THERE, SO YOU CAN HAVE A VISUAL OF WHERE WE ARE AT. THIS MAYBE WILL HELP A LITTLE BIT. THIS THREE-FOOT 10 INCHES HERE, I MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAYING EIGHT, I GUESS IT IS 3'10" INCHES. THIS IS WHERE THE BACK CORNER IS THE TIGHTEST, AND YOU CAN SEE WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF SPACE THERE. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE GRASS GOING DOWN TOWARD THE POND. THIS STRUCTURE IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THAT AND WITHIN OUR FENCED LINE, AND STILL LIVING THAT 3'10" INCHES. AND THEN YOU WILL SEE THE VIEW FROM THE OTHER SIDE, WE HAVE GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE ON THE OTHER SIDE. THAT GIVES YOU THE VIEW OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT, AND THAT IS THE SIDE OF THE PATIO THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO PUT THE STRUCTURE ON. THIS IS THE EXISTING PATIO THAT WE HAVE , TWO VIEWS OF THAT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SHADOW IS A LITTLE BIT THERE, SO THE SUN RISES TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND SETS TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, SO, WHEN THE SUN IS IN THE BACK, I THINK IT IS PROBABLY A CLOSE APPROXIMATION
[01:05:03]
OF THE SURFACE OF THE SUN BACK THERE, SO, WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO BE ABLE TO USE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, ESPECIALLY THIS TIME OF YEAR. SO, THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO COVER THAT. AGAIN, IT IS A STANDALONE STRUCTURE AND IT IS GOING TO MATCH THE HOUSE IF WE ARE INDEED APPROVED. AND WITH THAT, I WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.>> THANK YOU. MR. OLSON? >> YES, A FEW QUESTIONS THAT I HOPE YOU MIGHT RESPOND TO , AND SOME OF THEM RELATE TO QUESTIONS THAT -- TO RATIONALIZE A VARIANCE . I DON'T SEE ANY SPECIAL OR UNIQUE SITE FEATURES THAT IS UNIQUE TO THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL, THAT MIGHT BE A JUSTIFICATION . I WOULD JUST GO THROUGH THE QUESTIONS, AND THEN YOU CAN MAYBE FIELD WITH DISCUSSION. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THIS WITH THE ADJACENT ONES THAT ARE ADVANCING TOWARD THE WATER LIKE YOU ALL ARE. YOU ARE QUITE A WAYS FURTHER TOWARD THE WATER THAN THE OTHER STRUCTURES , AND INCLUDING THE FENCE THAT I AM NOT SURE IF THE OTHER PROPERTIES HAVE FENCE OUT THERE. SO, I GUESS THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION FOR VARIANCE IS, YOU KNOW, ALSO, NOT SURE I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS THAT WOULD JUSTIFY IT. AND MY FINAL QUESTION IS WHAT IT BE POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUCT THE PAVILION WITHIN THE REQUIRED SETBACK AND NOT HAVE IT EXTEND AS FAR TOWARD THE WATER , GIVES YOU A NARROWER PAVILION, BUT STILL, I BELIEVE, WOULD BE USABLE FOR , I GUESS OUTSIDE ENJOYMENT. SO, IF YOU WOULD RESPOND TO ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR
WHAT THEY MAY BE. >> I AM NOT SURE IF I GOT AN EXISTING -- A SPECIFIC QUESTION, BUT I WILL BE GLAD TO ADDRESS
THE POINTS. >> NO, I WILL GO BACK. WHAT ARE THE SPECIAL SORT OF UNIQUE SITE FEATURES THAT ARE DIFFERENT FOR YOUR PROPERTY FROM OTHERS THAT DON'T HAVE THE VARIANCE?
>> WELL, THE DEPTH OF THE LOT AND THE CURVATURE OF THE LOT AND HOW NARROW IT IS. ALSO, WE KIND OF GOT INTO THE POSITION BECAUSE WE CONTRACTED WITH THE CONTRACTOR THAT BELIEVED THEY COULD DO THIS AND INDEED APPLY FOR A PERMIT, NOW THAT WE'VE GOT THIS, WE INTENDED ALL ALONG TO PUT THE STRUCTURE THERE, AND THAT WE LEARNED THAT WE NEEDED TO GET THIS MINOR MODIFICATION TO DO SO. YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS NOT GOING BACK AS FAR AS WE ARE THERE, BUT OUR LOT DOES GO BACK FARTHER THAN THEIRS AND DOES NOT IMPEDE ON THEIR VIEW. THEY HAVE NOT CHOSEN TO TRY TO GO BACK FARTHER, AND IN FACT, OUR ADJACENT NEIGHBORS ARE SUPPORTIVE AND LOOKING FORWARD TO US DOING THIS. SO, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVEN'T GONE BACK THAT FAR REALLY AFFECTS WHETHER -- HOW WE USE OUR PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF OUR USE OF PROPOSED USE.
>> OKAY, THE OTHER ONE THAT I HAD ON MY LIST, THAT I ASKED, WAS CAN THE PAVILION FEASIBLY BE CONSTRUCTED TO BE WITHIN THE
SETBACK? >> THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT I SHOULD HAVE PICKED UP ON. SO NO, WE WOULDN'T DO IT, WE WOULD HAVE NEVER DONE THE WHOLE THING IF WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE DONE THAT. THAT INDEED WOULD LOOK AWKWARD. TO HAVE A PATIO THAT IS TWO THIRDS COVERED , WITH THE SUN COMING IN FROM THE BACK ENTRANCE, WHICH FROM THE BACKSIDE OF IT, THEN YOU YOU ARE LEAVING ONE THIRD OF IT UNCOVERED AND YOU HAVE GOT THE SUN COMING INTO MAYBE THE SECOND THIRD OF IT, IT IS JUST KIND OF USELESS, FRANKLY, AND WE WOULD HAVE NEVER DONE THE PROJECT AT ALL, HAD THAT BEEN THE CASE. SO, WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING THAT. WE WILL UNFORTUNATELY ABANDON THE PROJECT IF WE AREN'T ABLE TO DO THIS, AND I GUESS WE WILL HAVE TO GO TALK TO OUR CONTRACTOR THAT WE HAD BEFORE ABOUT THAT. I HOPE TO NOT HAVE TO DO THAT, BECAUSE I THINK IT IS A REASONABLE REQUEST FOR
[01:10:04]
THE USE OF OUR PROPERTY, AND IT IS WHOLLY WITHIN OUR PROPERTY, WITH ROOM TO SPARE, AND THEN THERE IS A BUFFER BEHIND THAT THAT IS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PROPERTY, AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AND THE REQUEST IS TO JUST GO THREE MORE PERCENT ON ISR, AND SEVERAL FEET ON THE STRUCTURE, AND IT Dā OESN')T IMPEDE ANYBODY'S VIEW, IT DOESN'T IMPACT A SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER. IN FACT, I DON'T RECOGNIZE ANYBODY HERE AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS WHATSOEVER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MISS
SPIEGEL? >> I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. SMITH. MR. SMITH, IS A PATIO THAT IS ENCROACHING WITHIN THE SETBACK? SO, WHAT'S ALREADY THERE IS A PROBLEM , RIGHT? WE HAVE TOO MUCH ISR BY 3%, AND THEN PATIOS WITHIN THE SETBACK, IS THAT CORRECT? OR DOES THE PATIO NOT COUNT BECAUSE IT IS
NOT A STRUCTURE? >> CERTAINLY, THANK YOU, MISS SPIEGEL. JACOB SMITH FOR THE RECORD. JUST LOOKINGAT THIS IMAGE WE HAVE UP ON THE SCREEN, IT LOOKS LIKE THE HEIGHT OF THIS PATIO MAY BE APPROXIMATELY THREE FEET, SO, THAT HEIGHT TECHNICALLY IS A STRUCTURE AS OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SO THIS WOULD BE INCLUDED, THAT AREA IS INCLUDED IN REALLY WHAT THE REQUEST IS, BUT YES, AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD APPEAR IN COMPLIANT, SO PART OF THIS REQUEST WOULD EVEN BRING THE
PATIO BACK INTO COMPLIANCE. >> OKAY, SO , IF THERE ISN'T ANY OTHER COMMENTS, I AM PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> WE HAVEN'T HAD PUBLIC COMMENT YET.
>> AND MR. LABONOWSKI, YOU HAVE A COUPLE.
>> YES, REAL QUICK, AS FAR AS YOUR 10 FOOT EASEMENT THERE, WHO HAS ACCESS TO THAT EASEMENT QUESTION DOES THE HOA HAVE ACCESS TO THAT EASEMENT IF THEY HAVE TO DUPONT REPAIRS? EASEMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE. I AM NOT SURE WHAT ALL --
>> YEAH, THERE IS ONE DOWN BETWEEN THE TWO HOMES.
>> CORRECT. TO THE LEFT, THERE IS AN ACCESS EASEMENT THERE.
>> THE BUT THERE IS ALSO THE 10 FOOT EASEMENT IN THE BACK, POSSIBLE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. DOES THE HOA HAVE ACCESS TO THAT, TOO, IF THEY HAVE TO REPAIR THE POND BANK WANTS TO
MARK >> THEY DO, AND IN FACT, THEY HAVE A MAINTENANCE COMPANY, AND THEY COME THROUGH THERE ALL THE TIME. WE ACTUALLY FENCED THAT, AND OF COURSE, WE HAD A GATE IN THE FRONT, BUT WE SPECIFICALLY PUT ONE BACK THERE WHERE THAT 10 FOOT EASEMENT IS ON THE BACK LINE, SO THAT THE ASSOCIATION
COULD GET THROUGH THERE. >> OKAY. MOST COMMUNITIES, THEY DO ALLOW PEOPLE TO PUT THEIR FENCE UP WITHIN THE STANDING THAT IT MUST BE REMOVED AT THE HOMEOWNERS EXPENSE IF THEY HAVE TO DUPONT WORK BACK THERE. THERE IS CONCERNS BECAUSE IT IS AN EASEMENT. IF THEY HAVE TO WORK ON THAT POND BANK, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO GO IN THERE AND TEAR OUT YOUR STRUCTURE. IF THEY HAVE TO, THEY WOULD, BUT I WOULD HATE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN, BECAUSE THERE IS A STRUCTURE THERE NOW WITH THE WALLS, SO, I AM
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. >> I HAVE A CLARIFYING COMMENT TO THAT. YOUR POND EASEMENT IS BEYOND YOUR FENCE, CORRECT? SO, THAT 10 FOOT YOU ARE LOOKING ON THE SITE PLAN IS JUST THE BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE, THAT IS NOT AN EASEMENT FOR THE HOA.
>> THE BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY GOT THE TOP OF THE BANK.
>> THERE IS -- I THINK YOU SAID 15 FOOT ORIGINALLY, BUT IT IS EITHER 10 OR 15 FOOT FROM THE TOP OF THE BANK TO THEIR FENCE LINE, THAT GIVES THE HOA THE CAPABILITY TO MAINTAIN THE WHOLE ENTIRE POND. ALONG WITH THE 10 FOOT THAT THEY HAVE ON THE LEFT
SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. >> OKAY, I WISH I COULD SEE THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AS BELTS, BECAUSE IT WILL SHOW ON THERE THAT THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THERE FOR THAT. MAYBE
MR. SMITH COULD -- >> IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT FROM
THE SITE PLAN. >> JUST TO PROVIDE A BIT OF CLARIFICATION, YES, SO, THE SITE PLAN THAT IS SHOWN UP HERE SHOWS A 10 FOOT RESTRICTION LINE ON PROPERTY, THAT IS THEIR PROPERTY, IT IS NOT AN EASEMENT AREA OF ANY SORT. THE EASEMENT AS DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN IS ON THE LEFT, OR I BELIEVE WEST SIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY, AS PART OF AN OVERALL 25 DRAINAGE EASEMENT, 10 FOOT OF IT IS ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND BEHIND THE FENCE, AGAIN, THAT IS THE STORMWATER AREA, SO AGAIN, IT IS
NOT ON THEIR PROPERTY AT ALL. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 3? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MISS SPIEGEL?
>> YES, I DO SEE THE HARDSHIP AND I DON'T THINK IT CAUSES ANY KIND OF NUISANCE OR HARM TO ANYBODY, SO I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE MINMOD WOODS PAVILION BASED UPON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AND SUBJECT TO SEVEN CONDITIONS
[01:15:01]
AS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT BUT>> OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND? AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.
ALL RIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES 5-1, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[4. REZ 2025-05 940 State Road 16. Request to rezone approximately 0.24 acres of land from Commercial Neighborhood (CN) with conditions to Commercial General (CG) with conditions.]
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR REQUEST,
MUCH APPRECIATED. >> ALL RIGHT, ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, IS THERE ANY
>> ALL RIGHT. MR. HARDEN, GO AHEAD.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, I DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT, BUT I HAVE SOME
MAPS. >> THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT
BETTER. >> FOR THE OVERHEAD? GREAT.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, GUYS, I AM ALEX HARDEN WITH THE DOUGLAS LAW FIRM, 309 KINGSLEY LAKE DRIVE.
ON THIS GUY? >> FILLABLE ZOOM IN FOR YOU.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. SO, THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE, THIS IS 940 STATE ROAD 16. THIS IS ABOUT A QUARTER OF AN ACRE, .24 OF AN ACRE, THIS IS ZONED CN, AND REQUESTED ZONING IS GO TO THE CG CATEGORY OF REZONING. THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST IS THE EXISTING ZONING IN 1988 HAS CONDITIONS ON THE ORDINANCE, WHICH ALLOWS ONLY A CLEANING SERVICE OFFICE, AND THEN IT ALSO REQUIRES THAT YOU HAVE NO SIGNS ON THE PROPERTY, SO REALLY, THERE'S ONLY ONE THING YOU CAN DO WITH THIS PROPERTY. IT SEEMS THAT IN THE 80S, HAD A SPECIFIC USER OR SPECIFIC INTENT THAT IT WOULD BE USED FOR, AND THAT NEVER CAME TO BE. THE CURRENT OWNERS BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 2022, WITH THE INTENT OF USING IT AS JUST THE OFFICE FOR THEIR BUSINESS. THEY OWN A LOCAL REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE AND THOUGHT AT THIS LOCATION WOULD BE GOOD FOR THAT. SINCE THEN, REALIZING THAT THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THERE ARE LESS SURE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE GOING TO USE IT FOR THEIR OWN OFFICE, BUT THEY DO WANT TO REZONE IT TO GET RID OF THAT RESTRICTION AND JUST MAKE IT CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA AS THEY DETERMINE AND FIND A USER. SO, THE SURROUNDING USES AS THE STAFF REPORT POINTS OUT, TO THE WEST, YOU HAVE IW, THAT IS AN AUTO STORAGE YARD OUTDOORS, AND THAT BUTTS UP RIGHT TO OUR PROPERTY. AND TO THE EAST IS THE CGA, WHICH WE WOULD BE CONTIGUOUS AND COMPATIBLE TO, AND THAT IS CURRENTLY USED AS A GARDEN SUPPLY STORE AND A MEDICAL OFFICE, SO THEY HAVE GOT RATHER INTENSE USES FOR THE CATEGORY THERE IN TERMS OF FOR THAT MEDICAL OFFICE. TO THE SOUTH, YOU HAVE A PUBLIC SHOPPING CENTER HERE. AND IN THAT PUBLIC SHOPPING CENTER, YOU'VE GOT RETAIL . TO THE WEST THERE, YOU HAVE A FULL-SERVICE GAS STATION, LIQUOR STORE, AND A FULL-SERVICE CAR WASH. A LOT OF TO THE EAST OF WHERE THE MALL IS , AND MOST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE NEEDED THERE FOR THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION, THIS IS A SLIGHT LANE HIGHWAY AND TWO LANES ON EACH SIDE, SO THE TRAFFIC GENERATION THAT WOULD COME FROM THIS SITE, WHICH IS ONLY .24 OF AN ACRE WOULD BE MINIMAL. GIVEN THE SMALLER SIZE OF THE SITE, YOU ARE REALLY RESTRICTING MORE INTENSE USES .
THIS WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO GET RID OF THE CONDITION THAT IT CAN ONLY BE USED AS A CLEANING SERVICE OFFICE, AND THEN MAKE IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA AND GOOD ZONING PRINCIPLES . HAVE IT BE MORE CONSISTENT IN THAT REGARD. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS, BOTH AS THE USES AND WITH THE USES AS IT IS CURRENTLY USED, AND AS THE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE TODAY. TO THE NORTH THERE, I BELIEVE IT IS RESIDENTIAL. IT IS O.R., BUT IT HASN'T BEEN USED FOR RESIDENTIAL IN A WHILE. IT IS VACANT RIGHT NOW, SO IT COULD BE USED AS A RESIDENCE, OF COURSE, WE HAVE GOT INCREASED BUFFERING THERE BECAUSE OF THE NONCOMPATIBLE USES, WHICH WILL DEFINITELY BE IMPLEMENTED, BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, THERE IS NOT A HOUSE THAT IS SITTING RIGHT THERE. AND GIVEN THE MORE INTENSE USES TO THE WEST, EAST, AND SOUTH, WE FELT THIS WAS CONSISTING AND COMPATIBLE, AND WE REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, CM NON-, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 4 ?
[01:20:01]
>> WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION.
>> I DON'T MIND REZONING THIS PROPERTY, BUT AT 47 FEET, IT IS EXTREMELY NARROW. I BELIEVE TO HAVE A 10 FOOT BUFFER ON THE WEST SIDE, 37 FEET TO BUILD SOMETHING, THAT IS MIGHTY NARROW. SO, WHAT DO YOUR CLIENTS PLANTO PUT THERE?
>> SO, I HAVE RAISED THIS WITH THEM, AND I WOULD JUST NOTE REALLY QUICK, IT IS 50 FEET, IT IS A BIG RESTRICTION HAZARD AT 50 FEET. I BELIEVE 47 MAY HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM EITHER THE PROPERTY APPRAISER OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT IT IS 50 FEET AND THREE FEET, I GUESS IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE ONCE YOU IMPLEMENT ALL THE SETBACKS AND BUFFERS. BUT THERE WAS A HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY BACK IN 2016 UNTIL 2021. AND THAT WAS DEMOLISHED.
AND SO, NOW IT IS VACANT, BUT THERE WAS A HOUSE THERE. THERE IS ALREADY AN EXISTING CURB CUT, SO AT LEAST THE OWNERS KNOW THAT YOU CAN AT LEAST BUILDING A FOOTPRINT, AND LOOKING AT -- HE LOOKED AT THE SETBACKS AND BUFFERS, ONCE THOSE ARE IMPLEMENTED, THERE IS STILL ENOUGH ROOM TO DO AN OFFICE OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT, SO WHILE IT IS VERY SMALL, IT RESTRICTS THE MORE INTENSE USES, BUT IT STILL OPENS UP WE CAN DO, BESIDES JUST A
>> ALL RIGHT, THANKS. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, WE'RE BACK INTO AGENCY
>> YOU'VE GOT TO PRESS THE BUTTON FIRST. THERE YOU GO.
>> THIS WAS POINTED OUT, A VERY, VERY SMALL LOT, DIFFICULT TO REALLY BUILD ANYTHING OF IMPACT. I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE -- REZONE 2025-5 AT 940 STATE ROAD 16 BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACTS IN OUR STAFF REPORT.
>> OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. OLSON. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE BOAT. ALL RIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES 6-0. THANK YOU, MR. HARDIN. ALL RIGHT,
[5. REZ 2024-18 Enclave at World Golf (Workforce Housing). Request to rezone approximately 18.5 acres of land from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Workforce Housing (WH), located at 3740 Pacetti Road.]
WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.IS THERE ANY EX PARTE FROM AGENCY MEMBERS? HERE WE GO.
>> ANYONE ELSE? MS. SPIEGEL FIRST.
>> YES, MADAM CHAIR. I DID VISIT THE SITE.
I SPOKE WITH THE REALTOR ABOUT THIS.
I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH ST. JOHNS WATER DISTRICT, A WOMAN NAMED QUINN. I HAD A PHONE
>> YES, I VISITED THE SITE JUNE 21ST.
I GUESS ONE THING FOR THAT VISIT, I DIDN'T NOTICE THE HEARING NOTICE SIGN. THERE WAS NONE I BELIEVE.
>> OKAY. >> IT WAS ON THE GROUND AND I PICKED IT UP AND PUT IT BACK IN
>> IT WAS THERE YESTERDAY WHEN I WAS THERE.
>> ANY OTHER EX PARTE? OKAY. MR. GABRIEL? THEY BROUGHT THE BIG GUNS IN TODAY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. JASON GABRIEL HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT DEVELOPER/OWNER.
I'M HERE TODAY WITH OUR TEAM. WE HAVE CHRISTINA EVANS, OUR CHIEF PLANNER WITH MATTHEWS ENGINEERING.
WE HAVE MR. TROY HILLBERT WHO IS THE DEVELOPER OF THE LAND AND APPLICANT.
WE HAVE ROJ SCHINDOLOR. I'LL GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW AND THEN HAND IT OVER TO CHRISTINA WHO WILL DO THE SLIDES. QUICKLY AND GENERALLY, THIS IS A REZONING APPLICATION FOR ABOUT 18 1/2 ACRES LOCATED OFF THE ROAD, 3740 PASETTI ROAD. THE APPLICATION IS TO REZONE THE SITE FROM A 21 SINGLE-FAMILY HOME HUD DEVELOPMENT TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT WHICH ALLOWS WORKFORCE HOUSING, IN THIS CASE 30%. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED --
[01:25:06]
CURRENTLY LOCATED IN A RESIDENTIAL B, AND THAT WILL REMAIN THE ZONE. THE ZONING REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT OVERRIDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. A NORTHWEST COMMUNITY MEETING Ć·Ć·WAS HELD ON JANUARY 13TH, EARLIER THIS YEAR. I BELIEVE THERE WERE APPROXIMATELY 130 FOLKS WHO SHOWED UP, AT LEAST WERE SIGNED IN. THEIR COMMENTS ESSENTIALLY -- I'M SOMEWHAT OVERSIMPLIFYING, BUT CAN BE CATEGORIZED IN TWO BUCKETS. ONE IS TRAFFIC AND TWO IS THE NATURE OF THE RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT AND WHAT WORKFORCE HOUSING MEANS. AS YOU'LL SEE FROM THE PRESENTATION TODAY AND THE FACTS PRESENTED, THEY DICTATE THAT WITH RESPECT TO TRAFFIC THIS PROJECT IS CONSIDERED A MINOR PROJECT WITH A MINIMAL ADDITION OF 25 P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS ADDED TO THE FACILITY.THAT SEGMENT WILL REMAIN UNDER CAPACITY.
WE HAVE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC REPORT THAT WE'LL PUT INTO THE RECORD AS WELL.
YOU HAVE ONE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
I THINK WE WERE PRESENTED WITH NEW NUMBERS FROM APRIL THAT WE UPDATED OUR TRAFFIC REPORT TO ACCOMMODATE. WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE RECORD SHORTLY. THAT COUPLED WITH, BY THE WAY -- THIS IS SET FORTH IN YOUR STAFF REPORT -- TWO SUBSTANTIAL TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS PROJECTED FOR COMPLETION NEXT YEAR IN 2026 THAT WILL FURTHER IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.
AGAIN, EVEN WITHOUT THAT, THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS UNDER CAPACITY. AND ON THE SECOND ITEM I BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF THE PRODUCT, YOU'LL SEE THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER, HILLBERT PROPERTY -- HE'S HERE TODAY. HE OWNS THE LAND.
HE HAS SKIN IN THE GAME AND MOST IMPORTANTLY HE HAS A PLETHORA OF HIGH- QUALITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY, WHICH WE'LL SHOW YOU AND CAN BEERY VISITED. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MS. CHRISTINA EVANS FOR THE SLIDE PRESENTATION.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL. THANK YOU.
>> SO THIS IS THE REZONING APPLICATION AND AS GABRIEL MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF MR. HILLBERT'S PREVIOUS PROJECTS. HE'S THE PRESIDENT AND OWNER OF HILLBERT PROPERTIES. THESE ARE SOME OF HIS PROPERTIES WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
HE'S THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT 3740 PACETTI ROAD.
THE PROPERTY WAS APPROVED FOR 21 SINGLE FAMILY MARKET RATE HOUSES IN 2016. OUR APPLICATION IS FROM THAT PUD. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL B LAND USE. IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DEVELOPMET AREA.
IT'S AN AREA WHERE THE COUNTY'S PLAN SAID THERE SHOULD BE URBAN AND PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT WHERE SERVICES EXIST.
THAT APPLIES TO THIS PROPERTY AND THIS PROJECT, PARTICULARLY INFIELD DEVELOPMENT.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF PUD, RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY.
THE RESIDENTIAL B LAND USE PROVIDES FOR SINGLE AND MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.
THIS IS THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE 21 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON A CUL-DE-SAC. YOU HAVE THE AREA OF LARGE PRESERVE WETLANDS IN BLUE AND THE WIDE PERIMETER BUFFERS IN GREEN THAT ARE STANDARD FOR THE NORTHWEST SECTOR.
JUST TO MAKE THIS CLEAR, THIS IS NOT A CONCEPT PLAN THAT IS APPROVED AS PART OF THE REZONING.
IT'S JUST CONCEPTUAL. SO THE FINAL LAYOUT
[01:30:03]
COULD CHANGE, ALTHOUGH IT'S VERY NARROW. THERE'S LIMITED SPACE TO REALLY REVISE ANYTHING. WE HAVE THE SAME PRESERVED WETLAND AREAS, RECREATION AND THEN JUST A SINGLE DRIVEWAY. SO WITH THE REZONING INTO WORKFORCE HOUSING, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE PERMITTED TO DEVELOP UP TO 63 TOWNHOMES, 70% MARKET RATE AND 30% WORKFORCE HOUSING. WE WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL THE STANDARD CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NORTHWEST SECTOR.SO THOSE LARGE BUFFERS AREN'T CHANGING.
WE WOULD MEET THE MAXIMUM DENSITY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT EDGES.
OURS HAS A 35-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE ALONG THE PROPERTY AND THE OTHER PUDS HAVE A 35- FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE. THERE'S ABOUT 70 FEET OF DENSE GREEN BETWEEN THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
THEN ALSO 75 FEET ALONG PACETTI. 19 TOWNHOMES WOULD BE LIMITED TO WORKFORCE HOUSING AS ESTABLISHED IN THE COUNTY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE COUNTY IDENTIFIED WORKFORCE HOUSING AS A SIGNIFICANT NEED AS THE COUNTY GROWS AND BECOMES MORE EXPENSIVE, TOO EXPENSIVE FOR MANY PEOPLE. THE PURPOSE OF THE WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING IS TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXTURE OF HOUSING TYPES WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL LAND USE THAT IS AFFORDABLE TO THE UPPER LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE. THE AVERAGE MEDIAN INCOME IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS $102,500.
THIS WAS UPDATED IN APRIL THIS YEAR.
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED AT OUR COMMUNITY MEETING. THE MAXIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME FOR A HOUSEHOLD OF ONE AT 120% AMI Ć·Ć·IS 86,160.
THEN YOU CAN SEE AS IT GOES DOWN HOUSEHOLD OF TWO IS 98,400.
THESE ARE RESIDENTS OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND FUTURE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE STEADY INCOME, GOOD CREDIT.
THEY CAN QUALIFY FOR A MORTGAGE OR GET APPROVED FOR A RENTAL AGREEMENT.
IF THE APPLICANT DECIDES TO SELL THESE TOWNHOMES, 30% OR 19 CAN ONLY BE SOLD TO THE PEOPLE MEETING THOSE INCOME THRESHOLDS.
THE MAXIMUM INITIAL SALES PRIZE IS $267,000, WHICH IS ALMOST HALF OF WHAT THE MARKET RATE OF 500,000. SO IT'S A PRETTY STEEP DISCOUNT.
IF HE DECIDES TO RENT THE TOWNHOMES, 30%, 19, CAN ONLY BE RENTED TO PEOPLE MEETING THOSE INCOME THRESHOLDS. THE MAXIMUM RENTAL RATE FOR THE FOUR- BEDROOM PRODUCT IS $2,080. THE OTHERS CAN BE RENTED AT THE FAIR MARKET RATE, OVER DOUBLE, 4,020, A SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS FOR THE ST. JOHNS WORKFORCE. THESE NUMBERS ARE BASED ON FOUR BEDROOMS. THERE MAY BE SOME THREE- BEDROOM UNITS. IT WOULD FOLLOW THE SAME -- YOU WOULD GET THE DATA FRO THE SAMEĆ·Ć·PLACE.
IT WOULD JUST BE -- IT'S STILL A SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS, BUT IT DIFFERS BY THE NUMBER OF Ć·Ć·BEDROOMS. HERE'S THE SLIDE WHERE IT SHOWS FOR FOUR BEDROOMS IT'S $2,080.
FOR THREE BEDROOMS $1,865. THE FAIR MARKET OF THAT IS $3,250 FOR THREE BEDROOMS. AGAIN, A HUGE SAVINGS.
THESE ARE THE PROPOSED TOWNHOMES.
IT'S A FARM HOUSE STYLE WHICH MATCHES THE NORTHWEST SECTOR RURAL CHARACTER. FOR THE FOUR BEDROOMS THEY WOULD BE 2,000 SQUARE FEET, TWO STORIES WITH A ONE- CAR GARAGE. INITIALLY IT WAS PROPOSED EVERY UNIT WAS GOING TO BE THIS. NOW THERE MAY BE THREE BEDROOMS, BUT THEY WOULD BE DISPERSED THROUGHOUT ALL THESE BUILDINGS. THEY WOULD BE THE SAME QUALITY AND STANDARD AS THE MARKET RATE.
AS JASON SAID, THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR AGENDA WAS COMPLETED A FEW WEEKS BEFORE THE NEW TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET CAME OUT.
WE'VE UPDATED IT, PASSED IT OUT TODAY.
THE PROPERTY IS ALONG SEGMENT 21.2, WHICH WITH THE REVISED NUMBER IS AT 90.6% PERMITTED
[01:35:03]
CAPACITY. THE SECOND SEGMENT TO THE SOUTHSOUTH IS AT 58.9.>> DO WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK?
>> OKAY. SO ROJ IS GOING TO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC MORE. WE ANALYZED THE TRIPS GENERATED BY 63 TOWNHOMES VERSUS 21 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
THE CHANGE IN THE A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS IS MINOR.
IT'S 24 AND 25. IN TERMS OF THE DIRECT SEGMENT CAPACITY, TABLE FOUR AT THE BOTTOM, THE 48 P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS GENERATED FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD ONLY INCREASE THE COMMITTED CAPACITY FROM 90. 6 TO 92%. ONLYĆ·Ć· A 1.4% INCREASE.
EVEN LESS IF YOU CONSIDER THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY ENTITLEMENTS. SO THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CREATING ANY DEFICIENT ROADWAYS.
THERE'S STILL EXCESS CAPACITY ON THAT SEGMENT.
KNOWING THAT SOME OF THE TRIPS FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL HEAD NORTH TOWARDS STATE ROAD 16 WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF TRAFFIC ISSUES, THERE ARE SEVERAL CAPACITY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS IN DESIGN AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS STATE ROAD 16. IT WILL ADDITIONAL CAPACITY WITH THE ADDITIONAL ROADWAY AND THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS WILL RESULT IN LESS DELAYS.
SILVER LEAF TO STATE ROAD 16 IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THE ESTIMATED TIME OF COMPLETION WOULD BE WHEN THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT STARTS HAVING RESIDENTS THERE. IT'S GOING TO GIVE RELIEF -- THAT ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT WILL GIVE RELIEF BY THE TIME THE RESIDENTS ARE STARTING TO MOVE IN AND UTILIZE THOSE ROADWAYS. THE PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
IT'S INFILL WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
THERE ARE EXISTING URBAN FACILITIES AND SERVICES WITH CAPACITY SUCH AS UTILITIES. AGAIN, ONLY A MINIMAL INCREASE Ć·Ć·IN THE COMMITTED CAPACITY ON THE ROADWAY. THE WETLAND IMPACTS ARE THE SAME AS THEY WERE FOR THE PUD. THEY'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY BEEN MITIGATED AND THE CREDITS FINALLY PURCHASED.
THE PUD PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED 243 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE AND IT WENT FROM AFFORDABLE -- MODERATE INCOME ALL THE WAY DOWN TO LOW INCOME.
SO THERE ARE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING JUST LIKE THIS PROPOSAL TODAY.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE.
I HIT A LOT OF THEM EARLIER. THIS IS JUST TO SHOW HOW MANY OF THE POLICIES AND GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN PROJECT MEETS. WE'RE NOT EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT AREA. WE'RE STILL REQUIRED TO MEET ALL THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COMP PLAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THIS IS ALSO A VERY SMALL DEVELOPMENT AT ONLY 63 UNITS. IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR THEY SAY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE GENERALLY UP TO 400 UNITS.
THESE POLICIES HERE ARE SPECIFIC TO THE NORTHWEST SECTOR. OUR DEVELOPMENT IS PROVIDING A BALANCE OF LANDS USES AND HOUSING OPTIONS.
IT REDUCES STRESS ON THE REGIONAL ROADWAY NETWORK WHEN PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE WHERE THEY WORK INSTEAD OF COMMUTING FROM JACKSONVILLE OR PUTNAM.
THE LAST POINT STATES A DEVELOPMENT SHOULD PROVIDE A MIXTURE OF HOUSING TYPES AND PRICING RANGE TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL RESIDENTS AND BENEFIT THE AREA'S ECONOMY. THESE ARE POLICIES FROM THE HOUSING ELEMENT STATING THAT THE COUNTY'S GOAL IS TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN HOUSING IN VARIETY OF
[01:40:01]
TYPES, SIZES AND LOCATIONS AT AN AFFORDABLE COST.THE COUNTY CONSIDERS THIS SO IMPORTANT THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING INCENTIVES TO PROMOTE THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS BEING PROPOSED TODAY.
AGAIN, MORE POLICIES ABOUT A MIX OF HOUSING, SINGLE AND MULTI- FAMILY, TO SERVE A RANGE OF INCOME LEVELS INTEGRATING THE MARKET RATE WITH THE AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE HOUSING. 19 UNITS WILL BE DISPERSED THROUGHOUT ALL THE TOWNHOMES.
THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE SEPARATE AFFORDABLE BUILDINGS VERSUS THE MARKET RATE.
SO JUST TO REITERATE THE FINANCIAL BENEFIT FOR THE WORKFORCE UNITS, THE SALE WILL BE DEED RESTRICTED FOR TWO YEARS AFTER THE INITIAL SALE.
IT WILL ONLY BE $267,000, NEARLY HALF OF THE MARKET RATE OF $500,000.
THE RENTAL UNITS WILL BE DEED RESTRICTED FOR FIVE YEARS AFTER THE FINAL CO. BASED ON THE FOUR BEDROOMS RENTED AT LESS THAN HALF OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE. THIS REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL B LAND USE.
THE OBJECTIVES AND GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, SPECIFICALLY THE NORTHWEST SECTOR AND THE HOUSING ELEMENT. IT'S COMPATIBLE IN FILL, NOT SPRAWL. THE DIRECT ROADWAY HAS CAPACITY FOR THE SMALL AMOUNT OF TRIPS.
WE HAVE THOSE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA THAT WILL ALIGN WITH OCCUPANCY OF THE FIRST UNITS AND THE WETLAND IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MITIGATED. I THINK ROJ IS GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT TRAFFIC.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, FOR THE RECORD I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THERE WAS A NEW TRAFFIC REPORT PROVIDED ON MAY 16, 2025, WHICH I ASSUME REPLACES THE REPORT IN YOUR AGENDA PACKAGE DATED MARCH 25,
CHRISTINA KIND OF PROVIDED THE TRAFFIC DATA IN DETAIL.
I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE MUCH TIME ON IT.
THE PROPOSED ELEMENT WHICH IS GOING TO HAVE 63 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS EXPECTED TO GENERATE 48 PEAK P.M. TRIPS, WHICH IS CLASSIFIED AS A MINOR PROJECT.
THE EXISTING TRAFFIC IS ABOUT 72.27% OF CAPACITY AND THE RESERVED TRIPS FROM OTHER PROJECTS TAKES US TO 90.6%. OUR PROJECT IS GOING TO ADD 1.5% FOR ALL 63 UNITS. IF YOU CONSIDER THE APPROVED 21 UNITS, IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN THAT.
WITH THE ADDED TRAFFIC FROM THE PROJECT, THE TOTAL TRAFFIC WILL GO UP TO 92% WHICH IS STILL BELOW THE CAPACITY OF PACETTI. TWO PROJECTS IN THE VICINITY OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS GOING TO ADD CAPACITY, THE CURRENT -- THAT IMPROVEMENT IS EXPECTED TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ON 16 AND THE INTERSECTION OF 16 AND IGP.
THE COUNTY AND DOD IS WORKING ON THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THAT INTERSECTION.
IT'S GOING TO REDUCE CONGESTION AT 16 AND IGP. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF WORKFORCE HOUSING ON TRAFFIC. I KNOW IT'S GOING TO ADD SOME TRIPS TO THE NETWORK, BUT THERE'S MORE BENEFIT TO THE AREA ALLOWING THIS WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THIS AREA BECAUSE THESE ARE THE BUSINESSES, ESPECIALLY WITHIN THE 16 IGP INTERSECTION. ALL THOSE BUSINESSES WILL BE SERVED WITH PEOPLE WHO CAN LIVE HERE IN THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT'S GOING TO REDUCE PEAK HOUR CONGESTION BECAUSE THE COMMUTE WILL BE SHORTER.
PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO TRAVEL FROM JACKSONVILLE TO WORK HERE. THERE ARE SIDEWALKS ON PACETTI AND BICYCLE LANES ON PACETTI.
PEOPLE COULD TAKE OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, EITHER BICYCLE OR WALKING TO THOSE AREAS.
THAT'S GOING TO BE GOOD FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC.
[01:45:01]
ALSO, WORKFORCE HOUSING HELPS THE BALANCE BETWEEN JOBS AND THE LOCAL HOUSING IN THAT AREA BECAUSE IT'S SO EXPENSIVE AND PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE CLOSE TO WHERE THEY WORK.THEN, ALSO, DURING EMERGENCIES, Ć·Ć·YOU KNOW, ANY ESSENTIAL STAFF REQUIRED TO SERVE THE COMMUNITIES, THEY DON'T HAVE TO TRAVEL FURTHER.
THEY'RE LOCALLY PRESENT AND WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC AS NEEDED.
WITH REDUCED TRAFFIC, IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE LESS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDING TO THE IMPROVEMENTS ALREADY THERE. I FEEL THERE'S ENOUGH CAPACITY TO SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY
ANY QUESTIONS? MR. OLSON, PRESS YOUR BUTTON.
>> OKAY. THE TWO ROAD IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU LISTED, WHAT IS THE PROJECTED COMPLETION DATE FOR EACH OF THOSE?
>> I THINK THE FIRST ONE STATE ROAD 2219 THAT'S CONTEMPLATED BY ENDS OF 2026 TO BE COMPLETED ALL THE WAY FROM SILVER LEAF TO 216.
THE SECOND ONE, THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, IS CURRENTLY UNDER DESIGN BY THE COUNTY.
COMPLETION. >> BECAUSE A LOT OF THE TRIP ASSIGNMENTS GO IN THE DIRECTION OF THOSE
>> THE IMPROVEMENTS AT IGP IN PACETTI WAS AWARDED AT A COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING, THAT CONTRACT HAS APPROXIMATELY AN 18-MONTH TIMELINE TO COMPLETION OF ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. I WOULD ANTICIPATE TO BE SOMETIME AT THE ENDS OF 2026 OR BEGINNING OF
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ROJ OR MS. EVANS? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, ROJ. ANY HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE?
>> HELLO. I'M A RESIDENT OF SAMARA LAKE.
THIS PROPERTY DOES ABUT UP WITH MINE.
I WOULD URGE YOU NOT TO PERMIT THIS REZONING.
AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING IN JANUARY, EVERYONE WAS QUITE ADAMANT WE ARE A NEIGHBORHOOD OF OVER 800 HOMES.
WE'RE MADE UP OF WORKFORCE INDIVIDUALS.
I FIND I WOULD QUALIFY FOR THAT, BUT I LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALSO, WHILE THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY MARKET RATES MIGHT BE HIGHER, A GOOGLE SEARCH SHOWED ME A THREE-BEDROOM HOME IN SAMARA LAKE IS $2,700, FAR BELOW THE $4,000 THEY'RE QUOTING. ALSO OF CONCERN IS TRAFFIC.
WE ARE IMPACTED BY STATE ROAD 16 AND THE OTHERS AS I TRAVEL TOWARD JACKSONVILLE FOR WORK. I'M COMING OFF THE HIGHWAY AND PASS THE CONSTRUCTION AND TRAFFIC. THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS PACETTI ROAD. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT THEY ALREADY U- TURNING WHERE CHILDREN CROSS TO MIDDLE SCHOOL. THE STOPLIGHT HAS CAPACITY FOR MAYBE FIVE OR SIX CARS IN THE LEFT- TURN LANE. THEY WOULD HAVE TO U- TURN THERE WHICH IS WHERE THE CHILDREN CROSS. THEY HAVE CROSSING GUARDS AROUND 8:00 A.M. AND 2 TO 3:00 P.M.
IT WILL EXACERBATE THAT TRAFFIC WITH THE U-TURNS.
I CANNOT BE CONVINCED GOING FROM 21 HOMES TO 63 HOMES IS ONLY GOING TO INCREASE TRIPS BY 3 OR 6. WORKFORCE HOUSING ESPECIALLY ARE GOING TO BE DUAL- INCOME HOUSEHOLDS WHERE YOU'LL HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS MAKING MULTIPLE TRIPS A DAY WHETHER TO THEIR JOBS, COMING HOME FOR LUNCH, TAKING CHILDREN TO SCHOOL. IT'S MUCH MORE WHEN YOU'RE TRIPLING THE NUMBER OF HOUSES.
IT WILL AT LEAST DOUBLE THE TRIPS.
I CANNOT BE CONVINCED. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY DID THEIR TRAFFIC STUDY TO GET THESE NUMBERS, IF IT WAS DURING A
[01:50:01]
SCHOOL HOLIDAY OR WHAT. IT IS GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT AND ADDS SIGNIFICANT DANGER FOR CHILDREN WALKING, RIDING BIKES OR RIDING SCOOTERS TO SCHOOL. I WOULD URGE YOU TO DENY THE REZONING. THANK YOU.I'M HERE AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FAMILY THAT LIVES CONTINUOUS TO THIS PROPERTY.
THIS PROPERTY WAS PREVIOUSLY OWNED OF THE BROTHER-IN- LAW BY MRS. ROBINSON THAT LIVES THERE. THEY HAVE ZERO ISSUE WITH THISTHIS PROMPT.
THEY'RE FINE WITH THE TOWNHOMES.
THEY'RE EXCITED FOR WORKFORCE. MRS. ROBINSON HAS THREE DAUGHTERS THAT WORK IN THE ST. Ć·Ć·JOHNS COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM. TWO OF THEM LIVE WITH HER.
THEY WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD AND LIVE NEAR THEIR MOTHER. CAN I HAVE A CLARIFICATION? CAN WE PUT THE SITE PLAN -- I KNOW IT'S NOT THE EXACT SITE PLAN, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE ONE BACK UP.
THERE'S AN EASEMENT THAT RUNS PARTIALLY ON BOTH PROPERTIES. SO WHERE MS. ROBINSON COMES IN THE EASEMENT IS 100% ON HER SIDE.
THIS WOULD BE ON THE BACK PORTION, THE NORTHERLY PART.
THE EASEMENT IS 100% ON HER SIDE. AS IT GETS ABOUT HALFWAY BACK, PROBABLY THE FIRST, SECOND -- ABOUT THE SIXTH BUILDING, THE EASEMENT IS WHOLLY ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND BECAUSE -- THE DEVELOPMENT EDGES THERE. THAT'S GREAT.
SHE HAS NO ISSUE BACKING UP TO THESE HOMES.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE ACCESS THIS FAMILY HAS USED SINCE THE '60S IS NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED. I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES THE COUNTY HAS AN ISSUE WITH A ROADWAY BEING ON A DEVELOPMENT EDGE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FAMILY THAT CURRENTLY USES IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO USE IT.
IT'S AN EASEMENT IN EXISTENCE. THEY WHOLEHEARTEDLY SHARE THIS DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THE WAY IT LOOKS, THE NUMBER OF UNITS, TRAFFIC, ANYTHING. THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEIR ACCESS POINT REMAINS. THANK YOU.
>> YES, MS. BREEDING, QUICK QUESTION.
>> IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION THERE WAS A FENCE FOR THE 21 HOMES, THE ONE THAT'S APPROVED BETWEEN MS. ROBINSON'S PROPERTY AND THIS PROPERTY.
IS THERE STILL A FENCE? I DIDN'T SEE IT.
THAT'S A CONCERN OF HERS. IT WAS JUST A
QUESTION. >> I WAS LITERALLY THERE TWO NIGHTS AGO AND HAD DINNER WITH THE FAMILY.
I DIDN'T SEE A FENCE. I WILL TELL YOU THERE'S A LOT OF WOODS THERE AND SO I CAME UP THAT ROADWAY.
>> HE REQUESTED A FENCE BE PART OF THE 21 HOMES PREVIOUSLY IN THE LAST APPLICATION.
I DIDN'T SEE A FENCE MENTIONED IN THIS APPLICATION.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF SHE STILL WANTED THAT CONDITION.
>> THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO KNOW. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M RIGHT ACROSS THE ROAD FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT COMING UP. YES, IN 2016 I WAS HERE WHEN THEY APPROVED IT. I WAS SURPRISED .
NOW, IT'S TURNED FROM 21 APPROVED TO A MAXIMUM OF 64. IT'S OUTRAGEOUS IN THAT SMALL LITTLE AREA.
ALL RIGHT. FIRST OF ALL, LET'S GET SOMETHING STRAIGHT, 2209 WILL NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE TRAFFIC.
THIS IS NOT IN THE VICINITY OF 2209.
IF YOU LOOK AT ONE OF THE DEVELOPMENTS UP -- RIGHT THERE ON 16 -- YES, 2209 IS RIGHT THERE BESIDE IT.
THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE HUDSON HIGHWAY, 2209 ITSELF.
OKAY. WHY DON'T THEY SHOW THE GOODEN TRI ENTRY AND EXIT POINT? I IMAGINE IT'S ONLY RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT. IT SAYS $260,000.
THAT STARTED AT 260 AND THEN THEY ADD ON THE FEE FOR THE -- THE BUILDER'S FEE WHICH CAN BE 3%.
NOW IT'S 2.8. THAT'S WHAT ADDS 7,000 MORE.
THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL UP TO $7,000 THAT CAN BE PLACED ON THESE FOR CLOSING COSTS, OTHER LEGAL FEES, DOCUMENTS, WHATEVER. CLOSE TO $275,000 AFTER ALL THAT STUFF IS DONE. IT LOOKS GOOD.
IT'S HEART BREAKING. I LIVE THERE ON SILO ROAD.
[01:55:04]
I'M NOT JUST HERE BECAUSE OF THAT.THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THATĆ·Ć·AREA.
WE'RE GETTING SQUEEZED IN ON SILO ROAD.
THERE'S MANY PEOPLE -- THAT PLACE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1930 AND THEN THE 1980S THE BACK PART WAS LAID OUT. ALL RIGHT.
DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS SUCH A GREAT IDEA BECAUSE IT'S WORKFORCE HOUSING. IT'S BECOME A HIGHLY DILUTED EXPLANATION OF PUTTING MORE HOUSES ON PROPERTY.
OKAY. WHAT'S NEXT? I MEAN, WILL THEY GO LIVE LOCAL IF THIS DOESN'T PASS? I'M CURIOUS ON THAT RIGHT THERE.
YEAH, THE LIVE LOCAL WORKFORCE HAS BECOME DILUTED.
WHEN IT FIRST STARTED WHEN HOUSING WERE 210 AND IT WAS 40%,Ć·Ć·THAT WAS FINE. THAT WAS FINE.
AS THE MARKET WENT UP AND GOT MORE EXPENSIVE AND MORE EXPENSIVE, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO.
MAKE IT WORKFORCE SO WE CAN PUT MORE ON IT.
ALL RIGHT. THEN IF IT'S A TWO-YEAR SALE SO Ć·Ć·THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT IT IN THEIR THIRD YEAR CAN FLIP IT AND MAKE 100K AND GET OUT.
MILLCREEK ESTATES IS THE ESSENCE OF THAT AREA.
>> THANK YOU. SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK?
>> MY NAME IS OWEN HOPPER. I LIVE IN SAMARA LAKE.
MY CONCERN IS TRAFFIC, IN AND OUT IS GOING TO CAUSE MORE U- TURNS, MORE TRAFFIC. THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE OFF SILO ROAD I FEEL SORRY FOR THEM. IN THE HEAVY TIMES THE TRAFFIC -- I'VE SEEN PEOPLE SIT THERE FOR OVER A HALF HOUR TRYING TO GET OUT ON PACETTI.
NOW YOU'RE WANTING TO PUT IN 63 MORE HOMES? I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE 21. IT'S JUST -- AND THEN THE CONGESTION, YOU KNOW, AND THE KIDS IN THE AREA.
>> THIS IS MY FIRST TIME BEING HERE.
IT'S QUITE AN INTERESTING -- I WANTED TO SAY --
>> CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS?
>> MY NAME IS PETER POPE. I LIVE IN MCKENZIE CIRCLE IN THE ME MEADOWS.
TRAFFIC IS QUITE BOTHERSOME MOST OF THE TIME.
I UNDERSTAND THEY DID A TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. WHAT WAS NOT STATED WAS IS THAT THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS BELOW WHERE WE ALL LIVE IS STILL BEING BUILT.
THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC BESIDES WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND THAT IS NOT WHAT'S TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. I LIVE APPROXIMATELY FOUR MILES FROM INTERSTATE 95. WHEN SCHOOL'S NOT IN, I CAN SPEND 20 MINUTES TRAVELING FOUR MILES. WHEN SCHOOL'S IN, IT'S 30.
THAT'S NOT TO CONSIDER WHAT'S COMING BELOW US WITH THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE KIDS WHO ARE CROSSING RIGHT THERE, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SCHOOL GUARDS. NOT ALL THE KIDS ARE COMING OUT OF THE SCHOOL AT THE SAME TIME.
THERE ARE STRAGGLERS WHEN THE SCHOOL GUARDS ARE GONE.
IT CAN BE VERY WORRISOME WHAT COULD HAPPEN.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT TAKE PLACE.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? YES, MA'AM?
>> HI. MY NAME IS MORGAN MILANO.
I LIVE IN SAMARA LAKE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS MENTIONED FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT SPOKE IS THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. BECAUSE I DO WORK IN THE DISTRICT, DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR IT TAKES ME ABOUT 25 MINUTES TO GET TO WORK WITH THE
[02:00:01]
TRAFFIC THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. THEY HAD A GREAT POINT ABOUT THE U- TURNS GOING IN. YOU HAVE TO TURN INTO SAMARA LAKE WITH ONE WAY IN AND OUT.THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE A LOT OF U-TURNS.
ANOTHER POINT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS CROSSIN FOR STUDENTS COMING IN AND OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS. IT'S ONLY GUARDED FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. THERE'S STRAGGLERS THAT COME THROUGH. AS N A AN EDUCATOR, THAT IS WORRISOME SEEING THE STUDENTS CROSSING WITH THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
YOU. >> HI, I'M TRACEY PERNELL.
WE TEACH TOGETHER. I'M HERE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.
THE HOUSES THAT WERE ALREADY APPROVED, THAT TRAFFIC IS MORE ACCEPTABLE THAN THE 64. YOU'RE BUILDING THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM TOWNHOMES. AS A MOM WITH TWO TEENAGERS, THAT'S FOUR DRIVERS. I DON'T SEE HOW TWO TRIPS WITH TWO PEOPLE DRIVING IN AND OUT WHEN IT'S MORE LIKE FOUR.
AS FAR AS THE CHILDREN GETTING HURT, I WAS DRIVING TO PUBLIX LAST NIGHT AND THERE WERE TWO CHILDREN CROSSING THE STREET RIGHT THERE AND THERE'S NOT A TRAFFIC GUARD THERE EVERY DAY.
THERE'S ACCIDENTS CONSTANTLY. I WOULD SAY A FEW TIMES A MONTH THERE'S ACCIDENTS ON PACETTI IN THAT EXACT AREA. AS FAR AS THE -- ALLEVIATING THE TRAFFIC THE SILVER LEAF AND THE 16 AND 95 CORRIDOR THERE, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PACETTI.
THAT WON'T EASE ANY OF OUR TRAFFIC.
THAT'S EASING THE TRAFFIC FOR PEOPLE TRAVELING TO SILVER LAKE.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? MR. GABRIEL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?
>> THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
I KNOW THIS HAS GONE ON A LITTLE BIT. I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY BRIEF.
I'LL ADDRESS THIS -- A COUPLE BRIEF THINGS AND MR. HINDLOR WILL ADDRESS THINGS. IT WAS SAID THE WORKFORCE HOUSING WAS IN THE $2,700 RENT RANGE AND SHE MENTIONED WE STATED $4,000. THE $4,000 WAS FOR THE NONWORKFORCE HOUSING. FOR THE WORKFORCE HOUSING WE STATED $2,080. APPRECIATE THE COMMENTARY ON BEHALF OF THE LAND OWNER, MRS. ROBINSON.
WORKED WITH THEM 100%. THERE WILL BE NO EFFECT ON THE ACCESS. MR. HUNT MENTIONED WORKFORCE HOUSING IS AN EXCUSE TO PUT MORE HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY. LOOK AT YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YOUR OWN DEFINITIONS. THIS IS ON PAGE SIX OF YOUR STAFF REPORT. IT SAYS, WORKING CLASS HOMES ARE THE MISSING SEGMENT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THERE'S A NEED FOR IT.
IT SAYS IT IN YOUR CODE. LASTLY ON THE TRAFFIC ITEMS, ROJ IS GOING TO GET UP HERE AND ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AND HE HAS SOME SOLUTIONS TOO.
>> THANK YOU AGAIN. DEFINITELY WITH THAT LOCATION THIS PROJECT'S GOING TO HAVE A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.
AS CONTEMPLATED, BASED ON OUR PREDICTIONS THE TRAFFIC IS PREDOMINANTLY GOING TO BE GOING TOWARD STATE ROAD 16 AND MINOR TRAFFIC WILL GO TOWARDS THE SOUTH. BASED ON THE DISTRIBUTION WE ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY 2:00 A.M. PEAK U- TURNS AT THE NORTHERN LOCATION AND ONE P.M. PEAK U- TURN, VERY MINIMALLY, AT THE NORTHERN OPENING.
OF COURSE, AT SILO, WE EXPECT Ć·9:00 A.M. PEAK U- TURNS OR 28 P.M. PEAK U- TURNS AT THAT LOCATION. HOWEVER, WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING A NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE. THAT WAY THAT TRAFFIC THAT'S TURNING INTO THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT IMPEDE THE
[02:05:01]
TRAFFIC VOLUMES.AT THE SAME TIME WE ARE GOING TO REACH OUT TO THE STAFF TO SEE IF THEY CAN ALLOW US TO HAVE A SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN DIRECTLY INTO THE PROJECT. THAT WAY THAT TRAFFIC WHICH IS CONTEMPLATED TO MAKE U-TURNS AT SILO DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO SILO AND MAKE A U-TURN.
THEY COULD MAKE A LEFT TURN INTO THE PROJECT IF STAFF ALLOWED FOR THAT ONE. I THINK OUR CLIENT IS WILLING TO PAY FOR THAT CURRENTLY. IF STAFF ALLOWS IT, WE'LL GO FORWARD WITH THAT DESIGN AND MAKE SURE TRAFFIC DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO SILO TO MAKE U- TURNS AND COME UP.
I ALSO WANTED TO STATE IN GENERAL IF YOU LOOK AT THE LATEST DOD APPROACH, THEY REALLY DON'T CREATE LEFT TURNS OUT. THEY WANT YOU TO MAKE RIGHT OUT AND U- TURNS BECAUSE THAT'S MORE SAFER AND THAT'S NOT BASED ON JUST PERCEPTION.
THAT'S BASED ON ACTUAL DATA AND FACTS.
IF YOU LOOK AT ANY OF THE DOD HIGHWAYS, THEY'RE NOT LETTING YOU PUT LEFT TURNS OUT. THEY WANT YOU TO MAKE RIGHT TURNS AND U-TURNS. IT IMPROVES EFFICIENCY AND SAFETY. THAT'S A PROVEN FACT BASED ON THE NUMBERS THEY COLLECT STATEWIDE. I WANT TO PUT THAT STATEMENT UP THERE. NOT JUST THIS PROJECT SPECIFICALLY, BUT IN GENERAL MOST OF THE PROJECTS FOR DOD THEY DON'T LET YOU LEFT OUT ANYMORE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL BE GOING FORWARD AND THEY'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON SEVEN DESIGN PROJECTS AND MOST OF THEM INCLUDE RIGHT TURNS AND U- TURNS, BUT NO LEFT TURNS. THAT'S THE FUTURE.
>> MAKES SENSE WHY WE'RE SEEING IT MORE
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER?
>> STAND BY. WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
DR. HILSENBECK, YOU'RE FIRST UP.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE IS THE WORKFORCE HOUSING WITHIN SAMARA LAKE? I GUESS I'M TALKING TO --
>> EITHER GABRIEL OR MS. EVANS.
>> ONE OR THE OTHER, I DON'T CARE.
>> IF I UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION,Ć·Ć·WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT THE SLIDES BACK ON AND SHOW AN AERIAL.
HOWEVER, I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE WORKFORCE HOUSING IS ON SAHARA LAKE.
I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE CROWD MIGHT HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
>> I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE TO ME IT BOILS DOWN TO COMPATIBILITY OR INCOMPATABILITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT IF SOMEBODY COULD POINT IT OUT. THERE'S A GENTLEMAN IN THE AUDIENCE. WILL THE
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JERRY ANDREWS.
I LIVE AT 406 SAMARA LAKE. I BELIEVE THERE'S 40% WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THE SUBDIVISION.
AS YOU COME IN, IT'S ON THE RIGHT.
IT'S SINGLE CAR GARAGE, SMALLER HOMES.
THE OTHER AREAS IN THE COMMUNITY I WOULD CONSIDER AFFORDABLE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RENT OF $2,000 FOR A TOWNHOUSE. I WOULD SAY YOU COULD EASILY RENT A NICE HOME ON SAMARA LAKE FOR THE SAME.
THERE ARE RENT SIGNS ALL THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU COULD EASILY GET IN FOR AROUND THE $2,000 MARK.
THE QUESTION WOULD BE A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE, IS THERE REALLY A NEED HERE? IS THE NEED --
QUESTION. >> WE'RE KIND OF GETTING OUT OF ORDER HOW WE USUALLY DO THINGS.
TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, YOU SAID WHEN YOU FIRST ENTER THE SUBDIVISION THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WAS ORIGINAL TO THE SUBDIVISION IS ON THE RIGHT, I BELIEVE WINFIELD
CIRCLE. >> I BELIEVE IT WAS 30%.
WHAT I'M GETTING AT THE OTHER AREAS THAT ARE CONSIDERED --
>> JUST TO MAYBE PIGGYBACK, I THINK I HAVE SOMETHING TO HOPEFULLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE. WE JUST DID A SEARCH ONLINE TO SEE WHAT THE CHEAPEST HOUSE IN SAMRAL LAKE IS FOR SALE. $297,000 AND IT'S 1,200 SQUARE
[02:10:03]
FEET, WHICH IS $30,000 MORE EXPENSE AND 800 SQUARE FEET LESS THAN THE PROPERTY PRODUCT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH WORKFORCE HOUSING.ALSO, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL -- CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE PEOPLE AND THE NEIGHBORS WHO KNOW THE AREA, THESE ARE GENERALIZED CONCEPTS THAT ARE BEING THROWN ABOUT AS TO WHAT THE DEFINITION OF A WORKFORCE HOUSING PRODUCT IS AND WHETHER THERE ARE OR NOT IN THE AREA.
I THINK THAT'S LEFT TO BE DEBATED. THANK YOU.
>> WELL, I ACTUALLY CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO SAMARA LAKE BECAUSE I DID RESEARCH ON IT.
I'M THE SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND A MEMBER OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE.
I DID A LOT OF DIGGING ON THAT. THIS WAS APPROVED IN 2003 AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS 2005.
THEY HAD 180 UNITS WERE AFFORDABLE. I DROVE THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND HE'S CORRECT THERE'S A PORTION OFF TO THE RIGHT THAT HAS SMALLER HOMES.
THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALLER HOMES INTERSPERSED BETWEEN THE LARGER.
I SAW BETWEEN 1,200 SQUARE FEET OF AIR CONDITIONED SPACE AND UP TO 4,000 IN SOME OTHERS.
THERE'S LARGE AND SMALL THERE. I LOOKED UP ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WEBSITE, MOST OF THE HOUSES PURCHASED THERE ARE STILL RETAINED BY THE SAME OWNER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DEED RESTRICTION IS.
I'M SURE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS HAVE EXPIRED ON THAT. IT LOOKS TO BE INTERMIXED, BUT THERE'S ONE SECTION THAT WAS DEFINITELY ALL SMALLER HOMES. IT'S A LARGE AREA.
IT'S VERY NICE. KB HOMES DID IT.
IT'S VERY NICE. I HAVE QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS.
>> I WANTED TO -- I WANTED TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I APPRECIATED YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT WORKFORCE HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, GETTING CARS OFF THE ROAD INSTEAD OF CAUSING MORE CARS ON THE ROAD.
IT'S A QUANDARY AND I APPRECIATED YOUR COMMENTS ON THAT AND ALSO THE U- TURN COMMENT.
THAT WAS THE THING WITH OUR COMMUNITY.
FDOT LIKES U-TURNS. I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON TRAFFIC. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT.
MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS I DO UNDERSTAND 21 HOMES HAVE BEEN APPROVED ALREADY AND EXPANSION OF THIS NUMBER TO ALLOW FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WELL OUR WORKFORCE HOUSING IS ACTUALLY WORKING FOR THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW YOU QUOTED A PRICE OF $267,000. I BELIEVE ON JULY 1ST, EVERY WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT IS ELIGIBLE TO INCREASE THE BASE COST BY UP TO 3%, WHICH I THINK Ć·Ć·MR. HUNT SAID 2.8.
THAT'S ADDITIONAL. UP TO 272,000 OR SO ON THIS JULY 1ST AND EVERY YEAR THAT CAN GO UP.
I'M ALSO A BOARD MEMBER OF MY HOA.
WHEN I REALIZED YOU PUT IN YOUR COVENANCE IN HERE -- I READ THROUGH EVERY WORD OF YOUR COVENANCE.
THERE'S A LOT OF LANGUAGE IN THERE.
THIS IS A REALLY BEAUTIFUL PROJECT.
I LOVE THE TOWN, THE TOWNHOMES. THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL.
IT'S LOVELY. IT SOUNDS VERY HIGH END.
THERE'S A REALLY HIGH MAINTENANCE COST.
THE ROADS ARE YOU AND IT SAYS IN THE HOA DOCUMENTS THAT THETHE OWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE FOR EVERY UNIT, OF THE LAWNS, OF THE LANDSCAPING, AS WELL AS THE STORM WATER SYSTEM. THAT'S A HIGH HOA FEE TO ADD ON TO SOMEBODY. THERE'S A NEW STUDY OUT BY THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ABOUT THE SALARY RANGE OF SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD $260,000 AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WORKFORCE HOUSING. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE TWO.
THERE'S VERY FEW PEOPLE THAT WORK THAT COULD BE A SINGLE PERSON MAYBE WITH KIDS. THAT'S A THREE- PERSON HOUSEHOLD. THE THRESHOLD GETS EVEN HIGHER. THEN YOUR DEED RESTRICTION.
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LATER THIS AFTERNOON. THE DEED RESTRICTION HAS BEEN EXTENDED TEN YEARS. IT DOESN'T BENEFIT THE COUNTY.
WE NEED TO BE HERE TO BE ADVOCATES FOR OUR COUNTY
[02:15:02]
AND TO BE THE GATE KEEPERS FOR WHAT WE ALLOW AND DON'T ALLOW. WE NEED THINGS THAT ARE REALLY GOING TO BENEFIT THE COUNTY.YOUR RENTAL RESTRICTION IS FIVE YEARS, WHICH IS BETTER.
IT'S RENTED, NOT OWNED. THERE'S NUANCE ABOUT PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO MAKE MONEY ON THEIR PROPERTIES.
THE TEN- YEAR DEED RESTRICTION IS JUST -- IT ALMOST SHOULDN'T EXIST. THERE'S LANGUAGE TO INCREASE THAT TO TEN YEARS. THAT'S A CONCERN FOR ME.
I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC SO MUCH.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT AS FAR AS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE THE QUAD PLEXES YOU HAVE ON YOUR PICTURE, IT'S NOT A SITE PLAN.
I COUNT 52. NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL 10 WANTING TO GO IN THERE SOMEWHERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK, BUT THAT'S FOR YOU TO FIGURE OUT. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS PARCEL WOULD EVER BE ELIGIBLE FOR LIVE LOCAL, IS THAT CORRECT, MS. WEST? UNLESS IT'S REZONED, YEAH. FOR RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT.
DEED RESTRICTION. THESE ARE HIGH- END HOMES.
IT IS BEAUTIFUL. THEY ARE LOVE LIVE TOWNHOMES.
THEY REALLY ARE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE PROPERTY. AS FAR AS BEING A BENEFIT TO THE COUNTY FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, I DON'T SEE IT PERSONALLY. I AM NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL. THANK YOU.
>> ANOTHER QUESTION? MS. EVANS, CAN YOU COME UP HERE, PLEASE. JUST A FEW CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.
63 IS THE MAX YOU CAN DO ON THE SITE?
>> RIGHT NOW YOUR SITE PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE.
YOU HAVE 52 UNITS. IT COULD GO UP.
YOUR SITE IS NARROW. YOU'RE LIMITED IN HOW MANY UNITSĆ·Ć·YOU CAN PUT ON THE PROPERTY, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> YEAH. WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING INSTEAD OF FOUR, GROUPS OF SIX, AND ADDING THE THREE BEDROOMS. MAYBE THESE ONES WOULD BE SMALLER.
WE DO HAVE 52, BUT WE WANT TO ASK FOR THE MAXIMUM.
>> RIGHT. THEN THE OTHER -- SAMARALAKE WAS BROUGHT UP SAYING THERE WAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THAT AREA. THE HOUSES VARY IN SIZE.
ARE THERE OTHER AREAS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE TOWNHOMES OR DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPE THAT IS ARE CLOSE BY?
>> I WILL SAY SAMARA LAKE HAD TO SUPPLY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL -- AFFORDABLE UNITS AND THEY EXCEEDED IT.
IT WAS LIKE 160 AND THEY ENDED UP DOING 240, BUT IN THE GENERAL AREA, MULTI- FAMILY ONES, I KNOW THAT SAMARA LAKE HAD DIFFERENT UNIT TYPES.
>> SAMARA LAKE, THAT'S DIFFERENT. THIS IS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY. YOU HAVE VARYING TYPES ALREADY.
WE'RE ENCOURAGED TO PUT MIXED HOUSING WITHIN RESIDENTIAL.
I THINK THIS FITS, ALTHOUGH IT GOES UP IN DENSITY FROM 21 UNITS TO THE MAX OF 63. WE NEED WORKFORCE HOUSING.
IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOMETHING IN THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY, THIS IS PROBABLY THE AREA TO DO IT.
IT DOES INCREASE THE TRAFFIC, BUT NOT BY A LOT AS ROJ HAS STATED.
ALSO, YOU HAVE SOME RELIEF COMING. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S STILL UNDER CAPACITY, FULL CAPACITY, FOR THOSE ROADS. IN MY OPINION I THINK THIS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DR. HILSENBECK?
>> I'LL TELL YOU A COUPLE THINGS I LIKE ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT'S AT 70% OF AMI.
THAT'S WHAT YOU MEANT BY 70% MARKET RATE, 70% AMI.
>> THAT'S HOW THEY DETERMINE THE RENTAL RATE FOR THE AFFORDABLE
UNITS. >> YOU'RE AT 70, NOT 80 TO 120.
WORKFORCE HOUSING CAN GO UP TO 120% OF
AMI. >> YEAH, THAT'S THE INCOME QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE
[02:20:02]
AFFORDABLE. >> EVEN COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST SAID IT'S 70%. I LIKE THE ARCHITECTURE. THE RENDERINGS YOU HAVE ARE NICE. THEY'RE GREAT.
I THINK IT'S INCOMPATIBLE OVERALL GIVEN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND PARTICULARLY LANDS TO THE WEST, THOSE TO THE NORTH, THOSE TO THE SOUTHEAST, NOT DISCOUNTING THOSE ON WHAT ARE PROBABLY WINFIELD CIRCLE. WHEN THOSE WORKFORCE HOUSING WERE BUILT IN 2023 IN SAMARA LAKE, DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT THE DENSITY WAS ALLOWED? I DON'T KNOW.
WAS IT STILL 13 PER ACRE? WAS THERE A DENSITY BONUS? I'M TALKING WORKFORCE HOUSING.
>> IT WASN'T DESIGNATED WORKFORCE HOUSING.
>> IT WAS BUILT AS WORKFORCE HOUSING IN 2003.
>> AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DENSITY BONUS THEY
THEY GOT EXTRA BONUS FOR PROVIDING LOW INCOME
CATEGORIES. >> THE DENSITY ON THAT WAS SET AT WHAT LEVEL?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK. I HAVE THE ORDINANCE
>> IT HAS A CURRENTLY LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RESIDENCE B.
I BELIEVE IT HAD THAT DESIGNATION AT THAT
TIME. >> WHICH IS TWO PER ACRE?
>> THAT'S STILL REZ B, WHICH IN MY MIND MAKES IT MORE INCOMPATIBLE. I LOOK AT THE LAND USE -- THIS AERIAL PHOTO IS SCREAMING INCOMPATIBLE TO ME.
PEOPLE SEE THINGS DIFFERET. I HAVE AN OBSERVE.
THAT WAS Y'ALL HAVE MORE WETLANDS THAN YOU DID WHEN IT WAS APPROVED FOR 21 HOUSES.
>> YES. >> TO ME THAT SPEAKS TO SOME POTENTIAL -- I'M NOT GOING TO CALL IT AN ENCROACHMENT, BUT THE NEIGHBORING AREAS -- NEIGHBORING HOUSING UNITS HAVE CAUSED POTENTIAL FLOODING ON TO YOUR SITE. WHY ELSE WOULD YOU HAVE MORE WETLANDS THERE, UNLESS IT WAS COMING FROM A NEIGHBORING -- ADJOINING, CONTINUOUS RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IT'S JUST AN OBSERVATION. A LOT OF THESE AREAS ARE WET THROUGH HERE. I'VE HEARD STORIES IN NEIGHBORHOODS BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH OF YOU.
MY MAIN ISSUE HERE IS NOT THE TRAFFIC.
IT'S COMPATIBILITY OR INCOMPATABILITY.Ć·Ć·IN MY MIND, THE WAY I SEE IT, IT'S INCOMPATIBLE.
>> SO TO THE WEST, THAT IS A REZ A WHERE YOU HAVE THE LARGER LOTS. THAT'S A DIFFERENT LAND USE.
I DON'T SEE THE POINT THAT SINGLE FAMILY IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH MULTI- FAMILY, WHETHER IT'S AN APARTMENT. THESE PUDS HAVE THE SMALL
DENSITY. >> IT'S PERMITTED IN THE CODE AND THE LAND USE.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M ALL FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WORKFORCE HOUSING IN A REALLY GREAT SPOT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COUPLE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ALL WORKFORCE HOUSING.
I THINK THERE'S ONLY ONE IN THE COUNTY I'M AWARE OF.
MAYBE BETH BRADY KNOWS OF OTHERS.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE INSTEAD OF THIS 30%.
40% WOULD HAVE BEEN GREAT, BUT Ć·Ć·THAT WAS SHOT DOWN A FEW YEARS BACK.
ANYWAY, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> YES, QUESTION. THE PROPOSAL IS TO TAKE THIS PROPERTY FROM A PUD TO A WORKFORCE WH ZONE.
THE PLANS AND DESIGNS AND TREATMENTS THAT ARE BEING ILLUSTRATED, THOSE AREN'T TIED TO ANY -- ANY APPROVAL THAT MAY COME TO YOU, ARE THEY?
>> NO, JUST THE ZONING DESIGNATION.
>> RIGHT. SO EVERYTHING WE'RE LOOKING AT, EVEN, YOU KNOW, SAYING THAT LOOKS LIKE A QUALITY DEVELOPMENT, IT COULD ALL -- ALL OF IT COULD BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
SO WE'RE SIMPLY LOOKING AT -- WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ZONING FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING AT THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU'RE
[02:25:03]
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR AĆ·Ć·MOTION. MR. GREENE?
>> YEAH. I'M SORT OF GOING ALONG WITH YOUR COMMENTS. I MEAN IT'S A SMALL 18- ACRE PIECE. IT'S DEFINITELY AN IN FILL.
I DON'T SEE WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO 63 UNITS WITH THE WETLANDS, RETENTION, PARKING.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 2024-18 AT WORLD GOLF VILLAGE, WORKFORCE HOUSING BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF
FACT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION OF APPROVAL.
I'LL SECOND IT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ONE THING TO NOTE, MS. EVANS, ON YOUR DEED RESTRICTION, LOOKING AT IT, YOU'RE MISSING THE TWO- YEAR RESTRICTION. IF THIS MOVES FORWARD, YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT THAT IN. MR. OLSON, TO YOUR COMMENT, WHEN THE DEVELOPERS GET UP HERE WITH A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN, THAT ONE IS PRETTY DETAILED COMPARED TO THE BUBBLE PLANS WE MAY SEE. A LOT OF MONEY AND TIME WITH GO INTO THAT. SO ALTHOUGH THE SITE MAY MOVE AND CHANGE A LITTLE BIT, THEY HAVE AN INVESTED ITEM IN THAT SITE PLAN.
IT MAY NOT CHANGE A WHOLE LOT. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST SO CONCEPTUAL NATURE THAT YOU JUST DISMISS IT IN THAT SENSE.
I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW IT IS AN INVESTMENT. WE SPEND, AS DEVELOPERS, SPEND A LOT OF MONEY TRYING TO GET THE SITE PLAN PERFECT SO WE KNOW IT CAN BE ENGINEERED ONCE WE GET TO THAT POINT IN THE PROJECT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> IN TODAY'S TECHNOLOGY ABOUT GENERATING ILLUSTRATIONS, IT DOESN'T TAKE A BIG EFFORT TO DO IT. I WORRY IT'S MORE TO SELL US SOMETHING THAT --
>> THAT MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT IN THE
IT HAPPENS. VALID POINT. I JUST WARRANTED NTED TO GIVE YOU MY TWO CENTS. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT MOTION FAILS.
IT'S GOING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THE MOTION FAILS UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT ANOTHER MOTION SO YOU DON'T HAVE A VALID APPROVAL. IT'S UP TO THE WILL OF THE BOARD IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO FORWARD A MOTION FOR DENIAL. RIGHT NOW YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE DID FAIL.
>> OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO PUT FORWARD?
>> YES, MA'AM. MY REASONING REALLY IS THERE'S A LEGITIMATE PURPOSE TO KEEP THE ORIGINAL -- THEY HAVE 21 HOMES AND THAT'S BETTER FOR WORKFORCE RIGHT NOW THE WAY THINGS STAND.
I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF REZONING 2024-18 WORLD GOLF WORKFORCE HOUSING BASED UPON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AS FOUND IN THE
REPORT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, LET'S REGISTER THE
>> A YES IS TO DENY. THAT MOTION PASSES.
THANK YOU, MR. GABRIEL AND MS. EVANS.
[Items 6 & 7]
APPRECIATE IT.>> NOTHING PERSONAL. BEAUTIFUL PROJECT.
>> ALL RIGHT. ON TO ITEMS NUMBER SIX AND SEVEN. IS THERE ANY EX PARTE?
>> MADAM CHAIR, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH MR. LAHTI ON THE PHONE. THERE WAS MY MR. LAHTI CONVERSATION. I WENT TO THE SITE AND SOME
>> I SPOKE WITH MATT LAHTI A COUPLE DAYS AGO.
HE GAVE ME A CALL AND WE CHATTED ABOUT THE PROJECT.
>> I DID A DRIVE- BY AS WE PLAYED PHONE TAG, MR. LAHTI AND MYSELF. WE WEREN'T ABLE TO
>> YES. I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MR. LAHTI YESTERDAY AND I HAD QUESTIONS FOR HIM ABOUT THE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC AND WE HAD A BRIEF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
>> YES, I ALSO HAD A DISCUSSION WITH MATT OVER THE
[02:30:04]
SITE REALLY. >> SOUNDS LIKE YOU WERE BUSY, MR. LAHTI. I TALKED TO YOU TOO YESTERDAY.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION AND THIS ONE BEFORE US TODAY.
AS MOST OF US DISCUSSED, WE'RE BACK WITH THE DEER PARK BOAT AND RV STORAGE.
THIS IS LOCATED AT COUNTY ROAD 210, TWO PARCELS HERE, 3845 AND 3844. JUST THE SAME PRESENTATION AS WE WENT THROUGH LAST TIME. WE HAVE MADE SOME REDUCTIONS IN INTENSITY BASED ON WHAT WE HEARD HERE LAST TIME. SO THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANNED AMENDMENT IS A REQUEST TO REZ C.
WE ELIMINATED THE USES TO THE PUD. THE APPLICANT IS HERE. AS MENTIONED LAST TIME, THEY'RE A LOCAL FAMILY. THEY INTEND TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE THIS LOCALLY AND THEIR INTENT HERE IS TO MOVE TO AN AREA THAT IS HONESTLY A LITTLE BIT LESS INTENSELY DEVELOPED. I'M GOING TO LET COREY GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF HER BACKGROUND HERE AND I'LL STEP IN AND GIVE YOU GUYS A LITTLE MORE OF THE TECHNICAL COMPONENTS OF THE PRESENTATION.
>> HELLO, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS COREY VICKLER.
I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT MY FAMILY'S LAND HERE, LAND THAT'S BEEN HERE SINCE THE MID '90S AND PASSED DOWN TO MY HUSBAND AND BROTHER IN 2010.
I MOVED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY IN 2000 WHEN I WAS 11 YEARS OLD. WITH AN EXCEPTION OF A BRIEF TIME, I CONTINUE TO RESIDE IN THE COUNTY.
I TEACH AT THE HIGH SCHOOL. BOTH MY BOYS WILL ATTEND SWITZERLAND MIDDLE SCHOOL. MY HUSBAND BRUCE AND I ARE ROOTED IN THIS COMMUNITY. HE'S A THIRD GENERATION OWNER OF WILFORD BUSINESS CENTER.
IT'S THE BOTTOM PICTURE UP ON THE SCREEN.
THE BUILDING ON THE RIGHT SIDE WAS THE ORIGINAL SHOP AND THEY ACTUALLY LIVED ON THE TOP FLOOR.
12 YEARS AGO WE RELOCATED THE BUSINESS TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY ON PHILLIPS HIGHWAY. WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL TO BE PART OF THIS GROWING COMMUNITY. AS OUR FAMILY STEPS INTO A NEW CHAPTER, WE'RE PREPARING TO MOVE TEN MINUTES DOWN THE ROAD AND TO MY HUSBAND'S CHILDHOOD HOME.
HIS PARENTS ARE HEADING TO MONTANA TO LIVE WITH HIS BROTHER AND HIS FAMILY.
HE'S NOW THE SHERIFF OUT THERE IN PARK COUNTY, SO OVER YELLOWSTONE. WE'RE PREPARING TO MAKE IT OUR FOREVER HOME. WHAT MAKES THIS TRADITION MORE MEANINGFUL IS OUR PARENTS LIVE WITH US AND THEY'LL BE JOINING US IN OUR MOVE AND WILL BE SIDE BY SIDE WITH US.
IT'S ADVENTURE WE PLAN TO LAUNCH ON OUR CURRENT PROPERTY, A BOAT AND V STORAGE.
IT'S A FAMILY EFFORT. WE PLAN TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.
OUR GOAL IS TO PROVIDE SOMETHING RELIABLE, SAFE AND FAMILY OPERATED ON OUR PROPERTY MAINTAINING IT FULLY FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT WE CARE SO DEEPLY ABOUT. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF OUR STORY. WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUE GROWING ROOTS AND GIVE BACK AND BE A PART OF ALL THINGS HAPPENING HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. SITE LOCATION, WE ARE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 210 HERE DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH OF US IS THE 210 TOWN CENTER, THE HELO PROPERTIES. THIS SITE IS JUST OVER TEN ACRES. CURRENT ZONING IS OR.
OR HAS CERTAIN USES WITHIN IT. JUST A REGIONAL MAP ZOOMED OUT.
YOU CAN SEE THE PUD SURROUNDING US.
[02:35:01]
THERE'S A FEW SITES LEFTLEFT IN OR ON THE SIDE OF 210 HERE. WE'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE THIS TO PUD. CURRENT LAND USE IS AGRICULTURE.WE HAVE REZ A AND B HERE. ZOOMING OUT YOU CAN SEE THE CENTRAL CORDON OF REZ C THERE, MIXED USE AND RURAL AGRICULTURE. PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE IS REZ C. OUR PUD PROPOSING SOME NONRESIDENTIAL USES, RV, BOAT STORAGE, NO DRIVE- THROUGH RESTAURANTS, RETAIL, MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL, OUTDOOR STORAGE, DAYCARE AND VETERINARY OFFICES. THAT'S LIMITED TO 106,000 SQUARE FEET.
THIS IS OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN. I DID IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH MS. SPIEGEL YESTERDAY PREPARED AN EXTRA EXHIBIT HERE THAT I DID SHARE WITH YOU GUYS, JUST GETTING SOME EXTRA DIMENSIONS ON THERE WITH THE BUFFERING. SO PER THE NORTHWEST SECTOR WE HAVE ON THE WEST AND SOUTH ENDS A 35- FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE. YOU CAN SEE ON THAT WESTERN EDGE WE'RE PROVIDING 35- FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE, BUT ABOUT 177 FEET TO THE NEAREST STRUCTURE HERE.
ON THE SOUTH END WE HAVE THE SCHOOL HERE.
ON THE DIAGONAL THE DISTANCE TO THE SCHOOL IS ABOUT 600 FEET TO THE FIRST BUILDING HERE. WE'RE ABOUT 800 FEET IN THIS DIRECTION TO THE SCHOOL. ON OUR EAST SIDE WE HAVE THIS WETLAND CORRIDOR HERE. WITH THAT 35- FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE OUR MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT EDGE IS ACTUALLY ABOUT 89 FEET THROUGH HERE UP TO ALMOST 180 FEET RIGHT HERE. ANOTHER ALMOST 200 FEET TO THE NEAREST STRUCTURE. SO, AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE MET AND EXCEEDED -- MET OR EXCEEDED THE BUFFERING. ALONG COUNTY ROAD 210, WE HAVE THE 30- FOOT SCENIC EDGE. OUR FIRST PARKING SPACE HERE IS ABOUT 120 FEET OFF OF COUNTY ROAD 210.
ON SITE WE PROVIDE ABOUT 136 LINEAR FEET OF STACKING BEFORE OUR GATE.
SO SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF STACKING THERE TO PROVIDE ON SITE. TO TALK TO MR. OLSON'S TRAFFIC POINT, ROJ WAS UP HERE FOR THE LAST APPLICATION, HE WORKED WITH ME YESTERDAY TO PREPARE A TRAFFIC MEMO.
BASED ON THE MINI USE AND THE 151 CODE AND THE ITE AND OUR 161 PROPOSED SPACES, OUR PROJECT WILL GENERATE ABOUT 26 DAILY TRIPS AND TWO A.M. AND TWO P.M.
PEAK HOUR TRIPS. SUMMARIZING A FEW OTHER THINGS IN THE MEMO WE PROVIDED HERE TODAY, ALSO DISCUSSED SOME OF THIS IN THE LAST HEARING AND I THINK IT'S FAIRLY INTRINSIC TO THE OPERATION OF BOAT AND RV STORAGE THAT THESE AREN'T PEAK USERS.
MOST OF THE OPERATORS NO PEAK TRAFFIC AND THEY'RE NOT DESIRING TO USE THIS FACILITY AT A PEAK TIME. IT'S NOT A DAILY OPERATION. IT DOESN'T HAVE DEFINED OPERATING HOURS. THERE'S A KEY PAD WITH 24- HOUR ACCESS. MOST OF THE USERS ARE TRAINED AND AS IT RELATES TO SOME OF THE CAPACITY ISSUES ON COUNTY ROAD 210, IN ITS CURRENT STATE AT THE FOUR- LANE CAPACITY, IT'S ABOUT 72% OF CAPACITY WITH THE FOUR- LANE PROPOSAL.
WHEN YOU ADD THE DEVELOPMENT TRIPS, IT GOES TO ABOUT 117%.
THE TPO STUDY REGARDING THE OUTER BELTWAY SHOWS ONCE THE OUTER BELTWAY IS IN PLACE THE TRAFFIC IS REDUCED UP TO 30%.
ULTIMATELY, YES, TECHNICALLY WITH THE EXEMPTED TRIPS AND THE FOUR- LANE CONDITION, IT'S OVER CAPACITY. DID SOME RESEARCH BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION OF SOME OF THE MORE ADJACENT, IF YOU WILL, COMPETITION COMPETITION.
[02:40:04]
ON THIS SLIDE HERE WITH THE OVERHEAD IN RED, BLACK, GREEN AND YELLOW, WE HAVE WHAT WE COULD FIND AS THE NEAREST ADJACENT COMPETITION, IF YOU WILL. NEAREST ONE BEING 4. 2 ROAD MILES. FURTHEST ONE JUST OVER 9 ROAD MILES FROM THIS SITE. AGAIN, JUST QUICKLY USING GIS, DRAWING A ONE- MILE RADIUS AROUND OUR SITE, THERE'S ABOUT 1,000 HOMES AND TRYING TO ROUGHLY CALCULATE IT BASED ON PARCELS WITHIN THAT FIVE- MILE RADIUS ABOUT 30,000 HOMES.Ć·Ć·I'M NOT SURE -- I THINK CURRENTLY THERE MAY BE PLENTY OF USERS IN THIS RADIUS THAT ARE DRIVING DOWN COUNTY ROAD 210 AND BACK TO THEIR HOUSE THAT MAY ACTUALLY BE ADDING TRIPS IN SOME OF THESE OUTER SEGMENTS. BY PUTTING THIS FACILITY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE USERS, IF YOU WILL, IT SHOULD THEORETICALLY REDUCE SOME OF THE TRAFFIC GOING FURTHER EAST ON 210 TO USE THE EXISTING FACILITIES .WHAT YOU SEE IN DARK HERE IS A FENCING PLAN.
THIS IS SHOWING YOU WITH NO OTHER LAYERS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TURNING ON -- WHERE THAT SOLID LINE SHOWS IS WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING TO FENCE OUR SITE. WHILE IT MAY BE OPENED UP IN THEORY WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, IT'S FULLY FENCED AND I THINK WILL ACTUALLY ADD A LITTLE BIT OF INCREASED SECURITY FOR THE SCHOOL BY FULLY FENCING OUR BOUNDARY HERE AND BETWEEN THE CAMERAS AND SECURITY AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WILL BE THERE FOR THE USERS OF THIS, I DO BELIEVE IT WILL MAKE THE AREA LASTLY, THE APPLICANT SECURED A FEW LETTERS OF SUPPORT. I'LL JUST READ THIS ONE BRIEFLY HERE AND ENTER IT INTO THE RECORD. IT'S FROM DAVID BUNCH AT COUNTY ROAD THE 210 WEST ADDRESSED TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
I'VE BEEN A HOME OWNER SINCE THE 1990S.
I'VE SEEN HOW MUCH THE AREA HAS GROWN OVER THE YEARS AND I CARE ABOUT THE DIRECTION MY COMMUNITY IS HEADING. I'M WRITING TO SHOW MY PROPOSED SUPPORT FOR THE RV STORAGE FACILITY. I LIVE NEXT DOOR AND KNOW THE PROPERTY OWNER PERSONALLY. THEY'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY SINCEĆ·Ć·1996. I APPRECIATE THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR PROJECT LOCALLY OWNED.
I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WITH SO MANY HOVS LIMITING BOAT STORAGE ON LOTS, THERE'S CLEARLY A NEED. THIS WILL NOT ONLY HELP HOME OWNERS FOLLOW HOA RULES, BUT IT WILL IMPROVE SAFETY AND CLUTTER ON THE STREET.
IT'S A PROJECT THAT'S A NEED FOR LOCAL FAMILIES.
CONSIDERATION. OUR TIME AND - FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT.
THE SECOND LETTER OF SUPPORT IS FROM GEORGE LEWIS.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT ALONG COUNTY ROAD 210 FOR DECADES. ONCE A QUIET COMMUNITY TURNED INTO A BUSY PART OF THE COUNTY.
I'VE TAKEN PRIDE IN BEING PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CARE ABOUT HOW IT DEVELOPS. I LEND MY FULL SUPPORT TO THE PROPOSED BOAT AND RV STORAGE FACILITY AT COUNTY ROAD 210 WEST. I LIVE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY.
KNOW THE OWNERS WELL. THEY ARE FOLKS I TRUST TO DO RIGHT BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT REFLECTS THE SAME. I WON'T CONTINUE READING THAT.
WITH THAT, WE CAN FINISH MY POWERPOINT SLIDES.
AGAIN, WE HIT ON THE BUFFERING WITH THE UPDATED EXHIBITS THERE. THE BUFFER IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES FOR THE BUFFER OF THE BUILDING SETBACKS AND THE 20- FOOT SCREENING.
HAVE THAT FENCING PLANNED. DID A LITTLE BIT BOLD AND RED HERE JUST TO ALIGN WITH THE SAME SLIDES FROM LAST TIME WITH THE AESTHETIC GATES. LOOKING AT AN AESTHETIC VERSION OF SIGNING AND A FEW OTHER COMPETITORS THAT WE SHOWED, THESE ARE THE ONES ON THE EAST SIDE HERE. WE DIDN'T USE THE ONES WEST OF THE RIVER IN OUR ANALYSIS.
AGAIN, TALKED ABOUT THE BUFFERING.
GOING TO BE SET WELL BACK FROM ANY OF THE EXISTING AND FROM COUNTY ROAD 210. THIS WILL BE A PRETTY LOW VISIBILITY SITE AS YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN COUNTY ROAD 210. SITE IS CURRENTLY UNDER
[02:45:02]
CONSTRUCTION. I DON'T SEE OUR FACILITY OPENING BEFORE THAT CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE. IT WILL MOST LIKELY TIME UP WITH OR SHORTLY AFTER THE OPENING OF THE WIDENING OF COUNTY ROAD 210. WITH THAT, WE'RE HERE TO OPEN UP TO ANY BOARD QUESTIONS OR PUBLICCOMMENT. >> THANK YOU, MR. LAHTI.
ANY QUESTIONS? MR. LABANOWSKI?
>> I'M GLAD TO SEE YOU'RE KEEPING WITH THE LOW PROFILE SIGN.
>> ONE OF THE CONCERNS -- I'M AN RV OWNER.
I USED TO BE A BOAT OWNER. I'M LOOKING AT GETTING OUT ON TO 210.
IS THERE ANYWAY OF HAVING AN ACCELERATION LANE THERE? THAT'S A BUSY ROAD. WHEN YOU'RE COMING OUT WITH LARGER EQUIPMENT LIKE THAT, IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO GET UP TO SPEED WITH THE FLOW OF THE TRAFFIC?
>> WE CAN ADDRESS THAT IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
WE WERE LOOKING AT WIDER COMING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY THERE. IMPROVING THE FOUR LANE, I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED THAT ACCELERATION LANE.
>> I WOULD PREFER WE GET THE QUESTIONS OUT FIRST AND WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> YES. I GUESS -- I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT -- I MEAN, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE OF CHANGING A LAND USE TO -- IN THIS SITUATION WHERE IT BECOMES ESSENTIALLY A CATEGORY THAT WOULD ALLOW A NUMBER OF USES, ALL OF WHICH WILL ADD TRAFFIC TO A ROAD SYSTEM THAT IS CURRENTLY AT CAPACITY. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IMPROVEMENTS ARE UNDER WAY. SOMEWHERE I SAW THEY DON'T -- THE CURRENT IMPROVEMENTS DON'T SOLVE THE CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS ON THE COUNTY ROAD 210.
THIS OTHER LONGER TERM IMPROVEMENT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO TAKE 30% AWAY MAY BE A LONGER TERM SOLUTION, BUT HOW DO WE -- HOW HAS -- I GUESS I'M INTERESTED IN ANY PERSPECTIVE OF HOW THE BOARD HAS HANDLED THE PRINCIPLE OF CHANGING, ALTERING A LAND USE IN A SITUATION WHERE THE ROAD SYSTEM IS NOT AT A CURRENT STATE TO ACCOMMODATE THE RANGE OF USES POSSIBLE ON THAT LAND USE CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE WANTS TO ENLIGHTEN ME ON
THAT. >> I THINK THAT'S A LOADED QUESTION. EVERYTHING VARIES.
I KNOW THAT DR. HILSENBECK OFTEN MAKES A COMMENT THAT HE TENDS NOT WANT TO CHANGE LAND USE TO ANYTHING ELSE. HE WANTS TO KEEP IT RURAL.
IN THIS AREA IT HAS GONE FROM RURAL TO DEVELOPMENT, HIGHLY DEVELOPD AND YOU HAVE HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL ACROSS THE STREET.
AS FAR AS THE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, IT FITS.
THE TRAFFIC IS CONCERNING. I THINK ROJ COULD ADDRESS CONCERNS ABOUT INPUT THEY'RE PUTTING ON THE ROADS. MR. LAHTI STATED IT'S A MINIMAL INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. OF COURSE, IF YOU PUT MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL, THAT WOULD INCREASE. WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO PUT THERE RIGHT NOW IS GOING TO BE A MINOR INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. YOU KNOW, IT'S -- YOU HAVE TO WEIGH THE BENEFITS TO WHAT'S GOING IN THERE.
SOMETIMES THIS IS PROBABLY MORE OF A BENEFIT TO THE AREA THAN A DETRIMENT IN MY OPINION.
ROJ, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC?
>> THIS LAND USE IS NOT REGIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATOR.
IT SERVES THE LOCAL RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN COMMUNITIES NEARBY.
THOSE PEOPLE MAY BE USING OTHER FACILITIES WHICH ARE FURTHER AWAY FOR THE SAME KIND OF LAND USE. THIS IS NOT GOING TO ATTRACT TRIPS FROM OTHER COUNTIES OR FURTHER AWAY FROM THE LOCAL VICINITY. THEN, THESE TRIPS ARE KIND OF LIKE NONPEAK HOUR TRIPS, WHICH IS NOT TYPICALLY
[02:50:03]
HAPPENING DURING THE A.M. PEAK OR P.M.PEAK TRIPS. THEY HAPPEN EARLY IN THE MORNING OR EARLY IN THE EARNING OR DURING THE HOLIDAYS.
WITH THAT CONCERN, IT'S VERY MINIMAL TRIPS.
FOUR TRIPS ON THE P.M. PEAK, TRAFFIC ENTERING AND EXITING, ON A ROADWAY WITH A CAPACITY OF 3,500 TRIPS IN THE PEAK HOUR.
WE THINK IT'S A MINIMAL IMPACT TO THE SYSTEM.
ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS -- WITH THE SYSTEM, NORMALLY THE TRAFFIC FOR THE LONG TERM SOLUTION WITH THE EXPRESSWAY COMING IN, THAT NORMALLYĆ·Ć· REMOVES TRAFFIC ON 210 AND THEN ALSO WITH THE WETLANDS PARKWAY CONSTRUCTION WHICH IS ALREADY COMPLETED, WAITING FOR THAT TO BE OPENED UP, THAT'S GOING TO FURTHER REDUCE TRAFFIC ON 210 ON THAT SECTION OF THE ROADWAY.
IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC, YES WE'RE GOING TO ADD A FEW TRIPS.
THAT'S NOT VERY IMPACTFUL TRIPS IN MY
THEN ONE MORE SORT OF QUESTION. WOULD THE APPLICANT -- THE OTHER IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED IN THE QUESTIONS -- A QUESTION WAS AN ACCELERATION LANE FOR VEHICLES LEAVING THE SITE TO MERGE INTO THE TRAFFIC FLOW ON 210 BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE -- I LIVE VERY NEAR PLACES THAT GENERATE BOAT AND RV TRAFFIC. MOST OF THEM -- A LOT OF THEM ARE TWO VEHICLES. ONE VEHICLE TOWING ANOTHER AND THEY MOVE AWAY FROM -- THEY MOVE OUT AND GAIN SPEED TO MERGE MUCH MORE SLOWLY.
IS THAT IN ITSELF -- THAT IN ITSELF IMPEDES TRAFFIC. THE POINT THAT WAS MADE -- THE QUESTION THAT WAS POSED ABOUT AN ACCELERATION LANE TO HELP THOSE VEHICLES MERGE INTO THE MOVING TRAFFIC ON 210, THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA. IN FACT, THE CAMPER PARK THAT I LIVE CLOSE TO HAS SUCH A
FEATURE. >> DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT QUESTION?
>> WE WOULD NOT PERMIT AN ACCELERATION LANE.
OFTENTIMES DOT IS AGAINST ACCELERATION LANES.
THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS BY PROVIDING FOR A WIDER RADIUS.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT ACCELERATION LANES ON COUNTY RIGHT OF WAYS.
>> OKAY. THAT SOUNDS LIKE A NEW TWIST BECAUSE THE CAMPER PARK I LIVE CLOSEST TOO JUST GOT ONE A COUPLE YEARS
AGO. >> AND IT IS LIKELY IT'S NOT ON A COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY.
>> THAT'S A STATE FACILITY. WE'RE NOT SEEING THOSE TYPICALLY IN STATE FACILITIES EITHER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK MS. VICKLER FOR SHARING HER SPEECH. I LIKED THAT A LOT. OKAY.
MY QUESTIONS ARE HOW MANY SLOTS ARE YOU FIGURING, GUESSTIMATING?
>> 161 SLOTS. YOU SAID UNMANNED, NO EMPLOYEES, 24- HOUR ACCESS.
>> LIGHTING COMMENSURATE WITH HOUSES IN THE
>> I APPRECIATE YOUR ACCOMMODATING THE SCHOOL AS FAR AS INCREASED SECURITY.
THAT'S A BIG CONCERN FOR ME. OKAY.
I ALSO SHARE -- HAVING READ THROUGH THE ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE OF WHAT'S COMING LATER ON IN THE MEETING, THERE'S A LOT OF LANGUAGE ABOUT PRESERVING RS AND AI AND NOT DOING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN IT.
I DO UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT THIS AREA HAS CHANGED.
THERE'S A LOT. I LOOK AT THE 2025 MAP AND THE CURRENT DRAFT MAP. THERE'S A -- RS HAS SHRUNK IN THAT AREA. THIS IS JUST A TINY SLIVER AND IT'S ALL TOUCHING DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY. I UNDERSTAND.
I THINK I'M PROBABLY OKAY WITH THAT. WHAT MY QUESTION IS IS THERE A POSSIBILITY SINCE THIS IS A FAMILY- RUN BUSINESS, A FAMILY DREAM, SOMETHING THEY INTEND TO KEEP AROUND, IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER RESTRICTING THE USE TO THE BOAT AND RV STORAGE IF THEY'RE GOING UP TO REZ C
[02:55:07]
TO LIMIT THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING DRAMATICALLY INTENSE GOING IN THERE? IS THAT A DISCUSSION THAT MIGHT BE HAD BEEN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS?>> I CAN ASK. THE CURRENT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS FOR THE BOAT AND RV STORAGE. THE OTHER USES THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE COMMENSURATE WITH THE ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN REZ C. ANY OTHER CHANGE HAS TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND BE CURRENT?
>> IT'S STILL A JUMP FROM OUR AGRICULTURE TO PUD.
THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. I'M TRYING TO FIND A MIDDLE GROUND HERE BECAUSE I REALLY WANT TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.
>> WELL, NORMALLY HAVING 117% OF CAPACITY OUT THERE ON COUNTY ROAD 210 WEST, THAT'S A NONSTARTER FOR ME.
BUT I DO SEE THAT THE 30% REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC IS COMING, AS WELL AS THIS USE IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE LOWEST TRAFFIC GENERATORS OUT THERE.
AND I LIKE YOUR STATISTIC THAT SEVEN -- THERE WOULD BE SEVEN MORE DAILY TRIPS THAN CURRENTLY EXIST ON THE PROPERTY WITH TWO RESIDENTIAL AREAS THERE, 26 TOTAL DAILY.
THOSE ARE REALLY A DROP IN THE BUCKET COMPARED TO ACROSS THE ROAD, THAT 1.45 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT'S COMING, INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL.
I CAN GET OVER THE 117% FOR NOW. THAT'S TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC.
>> AS FAR AS THE RURAL AGRICULTURE, THIS IS COMPLETED SURROUNDED BY OTHER DEVELOPMENT.
THIS ISN'T REALLY A VIABLE PARCEL, IN MY OPINION, SADLY ANYMORE. I WOULD LIKE YOU ALL TO AGREE TO LIMIT THIS TO THE BOAT AND RV STORAGE.
I KNOW YOU SAID, IF YOU CHANGE IT, YOU HAVE TO COME BACK.
WOULDN'T IT BE JUST GREAT RIGHT NOW TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO LIMIT THIS AND RESTRICT IT TO THE BOAT AND RV STORAGE AS WE'RE PROPOSING.
I ALSO LIKE YOUR WETLAND PRESERVATION, THAT YOU'R NOT TOUCHING THE WETLANDS OVER ON THE EAST AND SOUTHEAST SIDE. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MY COMMENTS.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU WERE HERE IN MARCH, I BELIEVE, IT WASN'T THAT ENAMORED WITH THE PROJECT BEING PROPOSED AND I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST IT. RIGHT NOW I CAN SEE MYSELF VOTING FOR THIS. I WOULD LIKE SOME GUARANTEE THIS IS GOING TO BE RV AND BOAT STORAGE WITH THE LOWEST POSSIBLE TRAFFIC GENERATION.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO PUBLICĆ·Ć·COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS OR SEVEN?
>> BETH BREEDING, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.
I HAVE NO SPECIFIC -- NO SPECIFIC COMMENTS ABOUT THIS PROJECT, BUT THIS LEADS MORE INTO THE COMP PLAN THAT'S COMING. EVERYTHING IS DEVELOPED AROUND IT BUT IT'S RURAL CULTURE. WHEN WE DON'T MAKE CHANGES TO THIS MAP AND WE HAVE ALL THESE ENCLAVES AROUND IT, THIS IS WHY THE MAP HAS TO BE UPDATED.
I FULLY SUPPORT APPROVING THIS. THE MAP SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED A LONG TIME AGO SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE AT
ALL. >> ARE YOU ENDORSING WHAT TOM INGRAM SAID BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT WE SHOULD DO AWAY WITH RURAL CIVIC
CULTURE? >> NO, I THINK RURAL CIVIC CULTURE HAS A PLACE IN THIS COUNTY.
THERE'S MANY PLACES THAT DESERVEĆ·Ć·TO BE IT, BUT IT'S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RURAL CLASS ROAD. THE MAPS NEEDS TO BE UPDATED TO GET RID OF THE PIECES OF TEN ACRES IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. IT'S THE SEED IN THE PEACH, BUT
[03:00:01]
THE PEACH IS SOMETHING ELSE. THOSE NEED TO BE CLEANED UP BY THE COUNTY. INSTEAD WE'RE SWEEPING IT UNDER THE RUG AND MAKING PEOPLE COME IN AND BEG LIKE THIS. IT'S NOTRIGHT. >> I DON'T THINK THEY'RE
>> IT LOOKS LIKE IT? WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE P THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DO THESE ONE BY ONE. WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE? THOSE DECISIONS SHOULDN'T JUST BE MADE WILLY NILLY.
I WOULD LIKE THEM TO BE DELIBERATIVE AND CONSIDERED BY THIS BODY AND OTHERS.
>> WELL, THAT'S SORT OF THE POINT OF GOING THROUGH THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. >> THAT'S ALL THE
SUBJECT. >> WE'RE GETTING WAY OFF SUBJECT. THANK YOU.
>> HI, MY NAME IS ANNA RYAN. I WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S REALLY A NEED FOR THIS FACILITY. THERE'S AN RV AND BOAT STORAGE ON ST. JOHNS PARKWAY. THERE'S THE REC NATION BY RIVER TOWN AND RV PARK ON CHAPEL. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. THERE'S ONLY A FEW BOATS AND RVS THERE. DO WE REALLY NEED THIS? WHAT HAPPENS IF THE STORAGE FACILITY DOESN'T MAKE A PROFIT? ARE THEY GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING ELSE HERE OR SELL IT AS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY BECAUSE THE DESIGNATION WAS CHANGED? IF IT'S APPROVED AS COMMERCIAL AND THEY CHANGE THEIR MIND, WHAT WILL WE HAVE IN THAT PLACE? TRAFFIC IS AN ISSUE.
HOW WILL THEY ENTER THE FACILITY FROM THE EAST? I TALKED TO THE PERSON BUILDING 210. HE SAID THERE'S ONLY GOING TO BE TWO OUTLETS BETWEEN THE CREEK AND THE PARKWAY OF CARS TO BE ABLE TO TURN LEFT. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHERE THOSE OUTLETS ARE GOING TO BE, WHICH MEANS ALL THESE RV AND BOATS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO U- TURNS UP AND DOWN 210.
HOW ARE THEY GOING TO TURN WEST? YOU CAN'T TURN WEST OUT OF THERE EITHER. THERE'S GOING TO BE EVEN MORE U-TURNS. THE OTHER THING, ACCORDING TO THE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET, THE TRAFFIC FROM GREENBRIAR TO SIMARON IS 122% OVER CAPACITY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HAS CHANGED. WE SPOKE ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT THE FRONT OF SHEAR WATER.
THEY TOLD US AT THAT TIME EVEN THE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS WOULD NOT CHANGE. THERE'S NO FUNDING FOR ANYMORE CHANGES FOR 210. I'M GLAD THEY'RE THINKING OF PUTTING UP THE CAMERAS AND THE FENCE AROUND THERE BECAUSE THERE'S AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
SINCE IT'S NOT MANNED, CAN SOMEBODY DRIVE THEIR RV IN THEREĆ·Ć·AND STAY INSIDE BECAUSE THERE'S NOBODY WATCHING THE PROPERTY? WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO IT AND THE COUNTY SCHOOL CHILDREN ARE GOING TO BE SAFE.
THERE'S GOING TO BE INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ON THE OTHER SIDE. WE ALL KNOW THAT, BUT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE RESTAURANTS, STORES, RETAIL. IT'S GOING TO BE FOR A LOT BIGGER GROUP OF RESIDENTS. THIS IS GOING TO CATER TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE RVS AND BOATS. I DON'T THINK PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SLOW DOWN. I DRIVE DOWN 210 EVERY DAY.
THOSE CARS DO NOT SLOW DOWN WHEN PEOPLE PULL OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE'S A GODDARD SCHOOL AND A NURSERY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 210 FROM LONG LEAF TO SOUTH HAMPTON. THAT'S A DIFFERENT OF FIVE TO SIX MILES. THE REST OF THE SOUTH SIDE OF 210 IS RESIDENTIAL.
SOME OF US WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR ITEMS SIX OR SEVEN? MR. LAHTI, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?
>> THANK YOU. THEY'LL HAVE A TON OF DIRECT REBUTTAL TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT. TO THE SUGGESTION FROM MS. Ć·Ć·MS. SPIEGEL AND DR. HILSENBECK, ALLOWABLE USES UNDER
[03:05:02]
THIS PUD IS MINI WAREHOUSE, RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AND BOAT STORAGE, ALLOWING THE MEDICAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES TO REMAIN AND OUTDOOR STORAGE, DAYCARE AND VET OFFICES ARE ALREADY ALLOWED UNDER RO ZONING.>> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THAT?
>> LET'S SAY IT WAS MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, THAT'S GOING TO CREATE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC, AS WELL AS A VET WOULD. I GUESS SOMEONE WITH KNOWLEDGE COULD SPEAK TO THAT. YOU HAD ABOUT THE LOWEST TRAFFIC COUNT YOU COULD HAVE WITH RV AND BOAT STORAGE. THESE OTHERS WOULD INCREASE THAT TRAFFIC, WHICH IN MY MIND IS NOT WELCOME. THE WOMAN THAT JUST SPOKE, HER POINT ABOUT ALL THE U- TURNS -- YOU CAN'T ENTER THE SITE POTENTIALLY FROM THE EAST.
YOU CAN'T EXIT IT AND GO WEST UNLESS THERE'S A CUT- THROUGH THERE ON 210.
DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OR -- DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF --
>> IT WILL BE RESTRICTED ACCESS THROUGH THERE.
IT WILL BE A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT DRIVEWAY.
>> YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM DICK ALSO.
>> YES, SIR. I'M NOT 100% FAMILIAR WITH THOSE PLANS. THAT'S A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. THERE WILL BE MEDIAN CUTS.
I KNOW FOR A FACT ACROSS THE STREET FOR THAT PUD THERE ARE PREPLANNED ACCESS POINTS INCLUDING DIRECTIONALS AND ONE FULL SIGNAL INTERSECTION.
THERE WILL BE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE THE U- TURN, LEFT MOVEMENT THROUGHOUT THERE.
IT'S GENERALLY GOING TO MEET OUR ACCESS STANDARDS FOR THAT CLASS ROAD WHICH IS CLASS 5.
WE'RE LOOKING AT A HALF MILE SPACING FOR SIGNALS AND QUARTER MILE SPACINGS FOR FULL OPENINGS AND THAT'S ABOUT A TWO, TWO AND Ć·Ć·A HALF MILE STRETCH OF ROADWAY THEY ARE IMPROVING.
FACTOR IN EVERY QUARTER MILE YOU'LL HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE A LEFT TURN.
>> MS. SPIEGEL, YOU HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE USES PROVIDED.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT TO THAT?
>> WELL, THAT'S BETTER, BUT I -- I REALLY WANT TO BE OKAY WITH THIS. I'M JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO PONDER. I'M NOT GOING TO COMMENT.
I WOULD PREFER A LITTLE MORE RESTRICTED -- I UNDERSTAND DAYCARE AND VETERINARY OFFICES ARE ALLOWABLE USES AS STANDS
ANY MORE INTENSE PROPOSED USES WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE TECHNICAL PERMITTING, WHICH WOULD TRIGGER ANY OF THE CAPACITY REVIEWS OR ANYTHING BASED ON THOSE INCREASED USES.
YOUR APPROVAL HERE DOESN'T MEAN THAT SOMEBODY CAN GO OUT THERE TOMORROW AND BUILD AN INTENSIVE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE.
THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH TECHNICAL REVIEW AND HAVE TO MEET ANY DEFICIENCIES BASED ON THE TRIP GENERATION FOR THAT TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT.
CURRENT USE WE'RE SEEKING APPROVAL FOR IS THE BOAT AND RV
STORAGE. >> THIS AREA IS CHANGING A LOT WITH ALL THAT COMMERCIAL ALLOWED RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
>> BUT IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO US
WOULDN'T. >> THAT'S WHAT YOU JUST SAID, RIGHT?
>> NO. IF YOU HAVE ANY OF THOSE LISTED USES, HE CAN DO IT. HE WOULD NOT HAVE TO COME BACK.
IF YOU ELIMINATE ALL OF THEM, RIGHT, YOU RESTRICT HIS RIGHTS SO MUCH SO THAT --
>> -- YOU'RE IMPEDING HIS ABILITY TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY IF HE DOESN'T GET A BUYER FOR THAT RV AND BOAT STORAGE, HE HAS TO COME BACK HERE. IT'S NOT CHEAP TO DO A PUD.
IT'S TIME CONSUMING. IT'S NOT FAIR, IN MY OPINION, TO ASK AN APPLICANT TO LIMIT TO JUST ONE USE.
THEY'RE TRYING TO DO A PUD THAT PUTS MORE RESTRICTIONS ON HIM. HE'S TRYING TO DO THE BEST HE CAN WITH HIS PROPERTY AND HAVE OPTIONS IN CASE SOMETHING WERE NOT TO
HAPPEN. >> GOVERNANCE IS LOOKING OUT FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD, AS WELL AS PROTECTING PEOPLE'S RIGHTS.
IT IS A BALANCE. I DO UNDERSTAND.
[03:10:03]
>> MR. LABANOWSKI, YOU'RE NEXT.
>> JUST REAL QUICK. I'M TRYING TO SEE THE REAL FINE PRINT ON THIS. IT'S KIND OF LIKE SHADED.
GOING WEST ON 210 YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LEFT HAND TURN DIRECTLY INTO THE DRIVEWAY.
>> YOU DEFINITELY HAVE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.
LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A CUT THROUGH GOING WEST ON
THERE MAY BE A DIRECTIONAL LEFT THERE AT THAT
>> YES. I GUESS I'M BACK TO MAYBE A TECHNICAL QUESTION ABOUT APPROVAL WITH RESTRICTION ON USE.
WE CAN -- CAN WE ATTACH A RESTRICTED USE TO CHANGE IN THE COMP PLAN LAND USE OR WOULD THAT BE ATTACHED TO THE ZONING ACTION?
>> YOU CAN RESTRICT A LAND USE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
THIS PARTICULAR YOU WOULD JUST ELIMINATE THE USES WITHIN THE PUD.
IT'S REZ C. HE WOULD STILL HAVE THAT USE AS REQUESTED. IF THE BOARD WERE TO LIMIT THE USES, HE WOULD NEED TO AMEND THE
>> I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF RESTRICTING ANY TYPE OF USE.
YOU HAVE TO GO BACK ALL THROUGH DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW, TRAFFIC SURVEYS. I THINK IT MESSES -- I WANT TO PASS IT AS IS PRESENTED.
>> OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. MR. GREENE, WILL YOU MAKE A MOTION?
>> I CERTAINLY WILL. I MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF 2024-13 DEER PARK BOAT AND RV STORAGE BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
I SECOND IT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.
>> WE'RE VOTING ON THE LAND USE, THAT IS CORRECT.
>> I BELIEVE AN RV PARK WAS MENTIONED IN THE MOTION.
>> THAT'S BECAUSE THAT'S THE NAME OF WHAT THEY HAD IT IN THE MOTION, DEER PARK.
THIS MOTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT.
>> SO THAT IS A TIED MOTION AND THAT MOTION FAILS, CORRECT?
>> ESSENTIALLY, YES. THE MOTION
WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PUD NOW, 2024-12 FOR THE DEER PARK.
>> THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND BY MS. SIEGEL.
>> YES. I THINK THATTHAT I BE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ON THE PUD PART, EVEN THOUGH I VOTED AGAINST THE LAND USE, IF WE COULD ATTACH THOSE CONDITIONS THAT THE LAND OWNER HAS AGREED TO.
>> I WILL VOTE AGAINST MY OWN MOTION IF THAT'S THE CASE.
I'M NOT -- I MADE THE MOTION. I'M NOT RECOMMENDING
VOTE FOR THAT. >> THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE, IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES TO THE MOMENT, THERE CAN BE AN AMENDMENT.
YOU VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. IF THEY FAILS, YOU'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.
>> NO. GENERALLY IF YOU VOTE AGAINST THE LAND USE, YOU WOULDN'T VOTE AGAINST THE PUD.
[03:15:02]
THAT'S THE CONFUSING LOOK.>> THIS IS NUANCED. THIS IS HARD.
IT'S A DIFFICULT ONE. I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE LAND USE IF I THOUGHT THERE WERE RESTRICTIONS TO WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO.
DIDN'T SOUND LIKE THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE CASE.
>> THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE. ARE YOU WILLING TO AMEND?
>> UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO AMEND MY MOTION AND WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT, CORRECT?
MOTION. >> I'M NOT GOING TO AMEND MY
MOTION. >> ANYONE CAN OFFER AN AMENDMENT?
>> HE WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO IT.
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE AMENDMENT WOULD
BE. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT?
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE FUTILE. HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO THINK WHAT HE --
>> MATT, DO YOU WANT AN AMENDMENT ON IT?
>> GOING FORWARD IT MIGHT BE BETTER IF IT'S A
3-3. >> BUT WE CHANGED THE LANGUAGE WHICH MAKES NO SENSE IF WE PASS THE PUD?
>> IS THAT RIGHT? IT WON'T MAKE SENSE?
>> AT THE END OF THE DAY WE NEED A MOTION TO PASS OR FAIL. WE'RE JUST A
>> THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO OBLIGE DR. HILSENBECK AND MS. SPIEGEL AND REMOVE THE RESTAURANT AND RETAIL FROM THE PUD.
>> OKAY. LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT.
YOU'RE ELIMINATING -- CAN YOU PUT THE USES BACK UP?
>> LET ME JUST BE CLEAR. I WASN'T ASKING FOR THIS IN THIS PARTICULAR MOTION.
>> YOU'RE ONLY WILLING TO ELIMINATE THE TWO OTHERS, BUT NOTHING ELSE, CORRECT?
>> WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO AMEND MR. GREEN'S MOTION? GO AHEAD.
>> IS THIS AN ARM WRESTLE? I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND -- OFFER TO AMEND MR. GREEN'S MOTION TO INCLUDE THE STRIKING OF THOSE TWO RETAIL RESTAURANT WITH NO DRIVE- THROUGH AND -- WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE -- A STORE, RIGHT?
>> THAT'S AN AMENDMENT ELIMINATING THOSE TWO USES. THAT AMENDMENT NEEDS TO BE SECONDED. YOU WOULD THEN VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AND THEN VOTE ON THE MOTION ON THE TABLE AS AMENDED. IF THERE'S NOT A SECOND TO THAT, IT DIES.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION AGAIN?
>> THE MOTION IS JUST TO APPROVE THE PUD AS IS WITH NO DELETIONS OR ELIMINATIONS FROM USES, AS IT STANDS IN OUR STAFF REPORT.
>> THE PUD IS FOR AN RV PARK AND BOAT
STORAGE. >> CORRECT, WITH ADDITIONAL USES THAT ARE ALLOWABLE WITHIN THE
CORRECT. >> THAT'S THE LIST WE WERE LOOKING AT?
>> WE DIDN'T ACT ON THE LAND USE
THAT WAS THE VOTE WE JUST TOOK AND SO --
>> RIGHT. EXCUSE ME FOR ASKING.
>> HOW CAN WE -- IF THE RV BOAT STORAGE REQUIRES IT TO BE C-2 LAND USE DESIGNATION, IF THE LAND USE DESIGNATION DID NOT PASS HOW DO WE ACT ON THE PUD?
>> THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS. RIGHT NOW YOUR FIRST -- ON THE LAND USE, THE AMENDMENT IS A TECHNICAL DENIAL.
YOU STILL NEED YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PUD.
YOU'RE ONLY MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
FINAL APPROVAL IS WITH THE VOCC. THEY STILL WANT THE INPUT
[03:20:04]
OF THIS BOARD.>> IF BY VOTING FOR THE RV PARK, THE CURRENT MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE, BY VOTING FOR THAT WE'RE NOT OPENING THE DOOR TO RETAIL, RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT?
>> THOSE ARE INCLUDED USES WITHIN THE
OH. >> BUT NOT PROPOSED ON THE CURRENT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
>> BUT IT WOULD HAVE -- IT WOULD COME BACK TO -- GO THROUGH THE PROCESS IF THERE WAS A CHANGE FROM AN RV PARK?
>> NO. THEY'RE ALLOWABLE USES.
>> OH. WELL, I GUESS MY OBSERVATION IS WHY ARE WE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME FOCUSING ON THE RV PARK?
>> BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR APPROVAL FOR THE PUD.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND REGISTER THE VOTE.
>> THAT MOTION FAILS 3-3. THANK YOU.
[8. ZVAR 2024-27 233 Hidden Dune Court. Request for a Zoning Variance to Table 6.01 of the Land Development Code to allow for an encroachment of three feet, five inches into the required twenty-five (25) foot Front Yard setback to allow for a constructed second-story balcony.]
I TALKED TO GENTLEMAN THERE, BUT HE WAS JUST CLEANING THE WINDOWS. THAT'S IT.
>> I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH MR. WHITEHOUSE ON JUNE 24TH.
>> I VISITED THE SITE YESTERDAY MORNING.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. FOR THE RECORD, JAMES WHITEHOUSE.
[9. 2050 Comprehensive Plan - Transmittal Hearing. The County's Comprehensive Plan requires an update pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3184 and 163.3191. The St. Johns County 2050 Comprehensive Plan, prepared by the County's consultant, Inspire Placemaking Collective, is scheduled for transmittal at the Board of County Commissioners meeting on July 22, 2025. The Planning and Zoning agency may propose changes and make a recommendation on the transmittal of the 2050 Comp Plan to the Board of County Commissioners. The 2050 Comprehensive Plan has previously been heard at two public hearings before the Board of County Commissioners, on May 20, 2025, and June 3, 2025. Both the Board of County Commissioners' recommendations and public input from these meetings have been incorporated into this Transmittal item.]
[03:31:03]
>> WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH
[03:31:05]
COMMISSIONERS. THEY HAVE SEEN THIS, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES. WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, LET'S CALL IT THE BLUE LINE, IS WHAT THE COMMISSION HAS MOVED FORWARD FOR YOU TO LOOK AT AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ISSUES. BUT I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THEY LOOK AT THIS QUITE A BIT AND WE NARROWED ANY OF THE POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT HAVE COME FORWARD TO WHERE WE ARE AT AGAIN. NOT SAYING ANYBODY CAN'T GIVE ANY FEEDBACK. MIGHT WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT IS THE BOARD. ANY BLUELINE, THEY'VE BEEN OKAY WITH THAT TO THIS POINT. THAT SAID, CHRIS WILL KIND OF GIVE AN UPDATE AND GO THROUGH THOSE COMPONENTS, WHAT WE HAVE LEFT ON THEIR AND THEN WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO ANY FEEDBACK YOU HAVE TO GIVE US. WE ARE ON A TIMELINE. THIS WILL GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE ONE JULY MEETING. THAT IS OUR TRANSMITTAL MEETING . IF THEY APPROVE EVERYTHING, IT WILL GO TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, AND IT WILL SATISFY OUR REQUIREMENT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A DEADLINE TO MEET IN AUGUST SO WE NEED OUR GEAR STANDARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT LATE SO THAT SAID, LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR INPUT AND I APPRECIATE AND I'LL HAND IT OVER TO CHRIS.>> GOOD EVENING MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY, CHRIS DOERING WITH INSPIRE PLACE MAKING COLLECTIVE. I DO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION. WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH KIND OF THE BIG PICTURE HIGHLIGHTS. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO YOU AND KIND OF SUM UP EVERYTHING TO DATE YET WITH THE AGENCY SO WE'VE DONE THIS PRESENTATION MAYBE FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT TIMES BUT WE ARE GLAD WE ARE FINALLY IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TO SHARE WHAT WE HAVE. DO WE HAVE THAT PRESENTATION? ALL RIGHT. EXCELLENT. OKAY. SO WE ARE GOING TO QUICKLY SUMMARIZE THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS THAT MIKE TALKED ABOUT, THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UP DATES, AGAIN, WE WENT BACK AND DID A LITTLE BIT OF BIG PICTURE STATUTORY COMPLIANCE, DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT WITH YOU ALL TONIGHT AS WELL. AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT EACH ONE OF THE ELEMENTS, AND NOT JUST THE CHANGES THAT WE PROPOSED ORIGINALLY, AND THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TWEAKED, BUT WE HAVE SOME RECENT CHANGES TO SHARE WITH YOU AS WELL THAT HAVEN'T GOTTN BACK TO THE BOARD YET BECAUSE WE'VE RECEIVED DIRECTION FROM THEM RECENTLY. OKAY. SO AS MIKE MENTIONED, WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD PUBLIC OUTREACH CAMPAIG DURING THE VISIONING PROCESS. WE HAD A PROJECT WEBSITE, WAS REALLY A RATE AVENUE TO SHARE THE WORD. WE HAVE NEARLY 1500 RESPONSES AGAIN FROM A COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, WE DON'T USUALLY GENERATE A LOT OF HOAX UNLESS IT'S CONTENTIOUS, AS YOU KNOW. SO THAT IT HAS BEEN REALLY WELL RECEIVED IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE HAD LISTENING SESSIONS WHERE WE LISTENED TO A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ACTIVISTS IN THE COMMUNITY, AND DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS. WE HAD FOCUS GROUPS WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT VERY SPECIFIC TOPICS AND ISSUES. WE HAD THOSE SIX COMMUNITY MEETINGS OR WORKSHOPS THROUGHOUT THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS OF THE COUNTY. AND THEN WE HAD THOSE OPEN HOUSES HERE WHERE WE ACTUALLY DUG INTO STRATEGIES AND KIND OF STARTED TALKING ABOUT POLICY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS REALLY EXCITING. THIS IS JUST SOME OF THE COMMUNITY INPUT BY THE NUMBERS. NEARLY 11,000 VISION TALLIES ON THE PREFERENCES AND WE HAD 1500 SURVEY RESPONSES, NEARLY 11,000 WITH SITE VISITS.
SO AGAIN, REALLY GOOD TURNOUT AND SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD BE PROUD OF. WHERE DID THIS ALL LEAD TO? THIS LED TO
[03:35:06]
SOME THEMES OR AS WE ARE CALLING, VISION INITIATIVES. WE HAVE QUITE A FEW SO I'LL JUST QUICKLY GO THROUGH THEM REAL QUICK. CONSERVE AND PRESERVE THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, ENSURE RESIDENTS LEVELS OF HOUSING AND THIS WAS REALLY WITH HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, DEVELOPING MORE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE, TECH AGRICULTURAL LANDS BY DIRECTING GROWTH TO AREAS ALREADY SERVED BY INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU'LL START TO SEE THE SEAMS AND THE CHANGES. YOU SHOULD BE SEEING A LOT OF THIS RESONATE IN THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEFORE YOU. PROTECT AND GROW THE COUNTY'S WATER SUPPLY. PRESERVE RURAL AREAS AND CHARACTER. WE RECEIVE SOME FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL THE FIRST GO-ROUND, BUT I HOPE YOU ALL WILL SEE HERE IN JUST A MINUTE.MAINTAIN IMPROVED ROADWAYS. EXPAND AND ENHANCE THE PARK SYSTEM. RECOGNIZE AND PROTECT HISTORIC RESOURCES. IMPROVE THE COUNTY SCHOOLS SYSTEM. OKAY. I THINK I SHARED SLIDE WITH YOU ALL LAST TIME. OF COURSE EVERY SEVEN YEARS A COMMUNITY MUST LOOK AT THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL PROCESS. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THE REPORTS ANYMORE. THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT USED TO BE IN PLACE. NOW WE JUST SIMPLY SUBMIT A LETTER AND LET THE STATE KNOW WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGES OR NOT. THAT LETTER WAS SENT IN AUGUST OF 2024. WE DID TRANSMIT AN EAR THAT ADDRESSED 10 YEARS. THE STATE SAID NO, WE CAN'T DO THAT. WE WANT TO SEE THE FULL 20 YEARS, WHICH IS THE 10 AND 20 YEAR PLANNING PERIODS, SO WE TRIED. THAT'S NOW WE'VE KIND OF BEEN ON THIS TIMELINE WHERE WE HAVE TWO FINISH UP BY AUGUST OF 2025. AND AGAIN ADDRESSING THE 10 TO 20 YEAR PLANNING PERIOD, SO THE MINIMUM HORIZON, THE PLAN HAS TO BE 2045. THE BOARD HAS CHOSEN TO GO WITH A 2050 HORIZON SO THAT IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. THAT IS IN THE PLAN, AS OF RIGHT NOW, AND THEN THE BOARD ACTUALLY ASKED US TO CHANGE THE PROJECTIONS SO WHEN WE CAME TO YOU, I BELIEVE LAST TIME WE WERE LOOKING AT THE HIGH. WE ARE NOW DOWN TO THE MEDIUM PROJECTION, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM PROJECTION REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. WHAT ELSE DID WE TALK ABOUT? AGAIN, THE YEAR PROCESS REQUIRES YOU TO A DATE THE PLAN WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF SUBMITTING THAT LETTER, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE IN THAT HARD DEADLINE. THIS IS JUST AGAIN, A REMINDER OF GOING BACK TO THE STATUTES, THIS IS WHAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE ARE DIGGING THROUGH COMP PLANS AND MAKING SURE WE ARE COMPLYING WITH THE STATUTES. THIS IS A REMINDER OF THE 10 AND 20 YEAR HORIZON. WE DID IDENTIFY, IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT DATA ANALYSIS, THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT POTENTIAL FUTURE DEFICIT OF HOUSING UNITS. AGAIN THAT'S BASED ON THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF FUTURE LAND USE. THIS IS SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT WITH YOU ALL BEFORE. WE ARE PROPOSING TO INCREASE DENSITIES THROUGH INCENTIVES, NOT NECESSARILY BROAD BRUSH ACROSS ALL FUTURE LAND USES, BUT WITHIN THE BOUNDARY. AND THEN LOOKING AT KIND OF FILLING IN THOSE ENCLAVES, IF YOU WILL, WHAT WE ARE CALLING INFILL PIECES. AND NOT NECESSARILY EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY. SO THAT IS NOT THE STRATEGY AS OF RIGHT NOW, BUT WE DO RECORD HIGHS THAT AT THE PROBABLY SEVEN-YEAR MARK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER HARD LOOK AT HOW WE ARE GOING TO ACCOMMODATE THE MEDIAN PROJECTION. THAT'S JUST THE REALITY, BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE HAVE TO DATE. SO THAT'S JUST, AGAIN, THAT'S SOME OF THE INFORMATION WE PROVIDED. THE BOARD, WE BROKE IT DOWN TO KIND OF THREE SIMPLE, BROAD OVERVIEW OF THE VISION. SO IT'S PLANNING FOR CURRENT RESIDENCE, PLANNING FOR THE CURRENT WORKFORCE, AND THEN THAT PRESERVATION CATEGORY. SO EACH ONE OF THOSE VISION INITIATIVES WERE KIND OF SLOTTED IN THOSE THREE BIG PICTURE VIEWPOINTS. WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE, AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A REMINDER FOR YOU ALL, BECAUSE I THINK WE PRESENTED THIS SLIDE LAST TIME.
SO YOU'LL SEE STRAIGHT AND UNDERLINE. WE ARE UPDATING THE PLANNING HORIZON, SO YOU'LL SEE THAT. YOU'LL SEE THE REFERENCES TO CHANGES IN AGENCY NAMES, LIKE THERE'S A DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, NOW FLORIDA COMMERCE OR THE STATE LAND
[03:40:06]
PLANNING AGENCY, DEPENDING UPON THE STATUTE. OF COURSE WE UPDATED THE STATUTE REFERENCES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CODE REFERENCES, UPDATED THE MAP SERIES. WHAT ELSE? CONSOLIDATED THE LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD. WE DID RECOMMEND TO SPLIT COASTAL MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION INTO TWO SEPARATE CATEGORIES OR TWO SEPARATE ELEMENTS, PARDON ME, AND THEN WE CREATED A NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS BEING DEVELOPED SO WE WORK WITH YOUR STAFF ON THAT TO MAKE SURE THOSE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES ARE IN LINE WITH THE STRATEGY THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS COME UP WITH. OKAY. SO WE ARE GOING TO DIG INTO EACH ONE OF THESE ELEMENTS. S AGAIN WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THE IDEA IS NOT TO MOVE THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY RIGHT NOW. SO WE DID CREATE CRITERIA TO ALLOW FOR THAT TO HAPPEN IF IT NEEDED TO HAPPEN. WE ALSO PROVIDED FOR FLEXIBILITY AND DEVELOPING THOSE INFILL LOCATIONS THAT ARE JUST ADJACENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY THAT MAKES SENSE , AND OF COURSE GIVEN THAT PRIORITY OVER DOING MASS EXPANSIONS OF THE BOUNDARY.BUT AGAIN, WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO REASSESS THIS IN SEVEN YEARS WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL PROCESS. WE PROVIDED FOR INCREASED DENSITY FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, MESSY MIDDLE. THERE WERE LITTLE TWEAKS TO THAT. WE CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT BUT THERE WERE PERCENTAGES USED AND REALLY WEREN'T GETTING MUCH.
YOU WERE GETTING LIKE ONE ADDITIONAL UNIT, MAYBE TWO. WE JUST -- WE PUT HARD NUMBERS ON IT SO IT'S EASIER TO FOLLOW, AND THEN PROVIDED FOR A CAP ON THE DENSITY BONUS. OKAY.
CONTINUING ON WITH THE LAND-USE ELEMENT, PROVIDED FOR ENHANCING HISTORIC PRESERVATION MEASURES, INCLUDING HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIONS FOR THE RURAL AREA.
THIS IS THE COMMON COMMENT I WAS REFERRING TO BEFORE, WHEN THIS AGENCY RECOMMENDED WE DO A RURAL ADVISORY BOARD. SO THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REALLY LIKED THAT IDEA. SO WE'VE GOT THAT INCLUDED IN THE PLAN. WE DID MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, INCREASING THE ACREAGE FROM 10 TO 40 ACRES, AND THEN NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRING PUDS FOR CERTAIN LAND-USE CATEGORIES. SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU WOULD HAVE A BY RIGHT ZONING DISTRICT THAT WOULD HELP YOU IMPLEMENT THAT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, AND I BELIEVE THERE IS A MIXED-USE LAND-USE I THINK IS THE REQUIREMENT. FOR TRANSPORTATION, THERE WERE SOME OLD REFERENCES TO THE TRAFFIC ELEMENT THAT HARKENS BACK TO PROBABLY 20 YEARS AGO AND THE STATUTES. IT IS, IN FACT, A TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT. IT CAN BE A MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT. NAME IT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS. BUT THAT WAS AN ACTUAL NUANCE IN THE STATUTE.
CONVERTED SOME OF THE TEXT TO TABLES FOR READABILITY, REQUIRING SEPARATE BIKE LANES FOR ROADS THAT ARE OVER 30 MILES AN HOUR, INCORPORATING COMPLETE STREETS AS A CONCEPT FOR NEW ROADWAYS. I THINK YOU ARE ALREADY USING THAT IDEA ALREADY.
SO JUST MAKING SURE THAT WAS MEMORIALIZED. REQUIRING COORDINATION FOR POTENTIAL NEW PASSENGER RAIL, IF AND WHEN THAT MAY OR MAY NOT COME ABOUT. BUT JUST KIND OF STAY IN THE TO DATE ON THAT. NOT NECESSARILY BE IN THE FRONT LEADER ON THAT. JUST KIND OF KEEPING AN EYE ON IT AND THEN POLICY TO EXPAND FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT. OKAY. SO WITH HOUSING, AS YOU HEARD ME MENTIONING, EMPHASIZING INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY AND A VARIETY OF HOUSING SUPPLY, AND THAT MEANS PROVIDING FOR INCENTIVES FOR MISSING MIDDLE, FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE LIKE. AND THEN INCREASING THE COORDINATION AND COOPERATION ACROSS ALL OF THE AGENCIES AND PROVIDERS WITHIN THE COUNTY AND THE REGION. AND THEN ENHANCING AND ENSURING THAT RESPONSIBILITIES DO INCLUDE PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS ON
[03:45:08]
AFFORDABLE PROGRAMS. AGAIN, WE THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE A REALLY STRONG INVOLVED IN THE IDEAS OF PUSHING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY HERE IN THE COMMUNITY. WITH INFRASTRUCTURE, DID SOME CONSOLIDATION OF POLICIES. A LOT OF REPETITION IN THIS ELEMENT.REALLY THEY WERE NEARLY ONE AND THE SAME, SO WE DID SOME CONSOLIDATION, STRENGTHENED THE LANGUAGE OF ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR WHERE YOU HAVE WATER AND SEWER LINES.
AGAIN, THAT KIND OF GOES BACK THOSE VISION INITIATIVES. AND THEN MAKING SURE THAT YOUR CAPACITY REMAINS, YOU KNOW, AT THE LEVELS BASED ON THE LEVEL OF SURFACE STANDARDS AND WITHIN THOSE PLANNING TIME FRAMES, SOMETHING THAT WE HEAR THAT MAYBE INFRASTRUCTURE LAGGING BEHIND DEVELOPMENT, MAKING SURE WE ARE OUT IN FRONT OF THAT. WE ARE DOING A BETTER JOB HERE IN THE COUNTY THEN WE HAVE IN THE A LITTLE MORE BULLISH ON METAL CAPACITIES AS WELL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS. INAUDIBLE ] THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT LANGUAGE ON INAUDIBLE ] PRESERVATION WORKING WATERFRONTS. LIMITING PHIL OF WETLANDS IN OPEN WATER. RELATED USES. LIMIT LEVEL RISE MAKING SURE THAT WE IMPLEMENT THE INAUDIBLE ] TO LOOK AT MORE RESILIENT PROJECTS AND THINGS FOR THE COAST. OKAY. FOR CONSERVATION, ARE LOOKING AT PROPOSING -- UPDATING THE LAND OF TO REQUIRE INAUDIBLE ] NATIVE LANDSCAPING OR FLORIDA ENCOURAGES IT BUT WANT TO MAKE SURE ARE REQUIRING IT.
INAUDIBLE ] THAT WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT JUST NOW. AND THEY'RE REQUIRING REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES. WE ARE GOING IN DEVELOPING NEW LAND, CREATING A RURAL LANDS CONSERVATION PROGRAM
[03:50:20]
>> CLIENTS WHO MAY HAVE 20 OR SO MUNICIPALITIES THAT THEY HAVE TWO COURT DATE WITH, SO YOU DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF THAT. WE JUST DID SOME STREAMLINING AND REMOVING DUPLICATIVE POLICIES AND JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE STILL MAINTAINING THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH JACK'S USA AND THAT ORTNER SHOULD. AGAIN, THAT'S IN YOUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT AS WELL, JUST ACHING SURE WE ARE CONTINUING TO DO THAT. SO AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, AGAIN STAYING AHEAD OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, MAKING SURE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE ISN'T LAGGING BEHIND DEVELOPMENT , THE COUNTY HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB MAKING THOSE PROJECTS ARE COMING ONLINE. SOME OF THIS IS JUST FLORIDA STATUTE CLEANUP SO AGAIN ENSURING THAT YOU ESTABLISH SEPARATE ACCOUNT FOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS, WHEN ACCEPTING CONTRIBUTIONS FROM MULTIPLE APPLICANTS, AND THAT'S FOR SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S AGAIN, THAT'S IN THE STATUTES ESTABLISHING A LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR TRAILS AND BEACH ACCESS AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT CAME UP DURING THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. SO .1 MILE PER THOUSAND RESIDENCES THE PROPOSED OS FOR PAVED TRAILS AND THEN ONE ACCESS FOR EVERY HALF MILE OF SHORELINE, OF BEACH ACCESS. AND AGAIN, WE UPDATED THE LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR PARKS. FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE STRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THAT'S I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FINALIZED BUT WE WORKED WITH THEM AS THEY WERE PUTTING THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON THAT WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOLKS HERE AT THE COUNTY. BUT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS MAKING SURE THAT WE RETAIN AND FACILITATE THE EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING HIGH-GROWTH BUSINESSES, CONTINUING TO ATTRACT HIGH-GROWTH BUSINESSES, SUPPORT STARTUP AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY, ESTABLISH A HEALTHY WORKFORCE PIPELINE AND THAT'S JUST MAKING SURE WE ARE COORDINATING THE CURRICULUM WITH THE INDIVIDUAL INDUSTRIES TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE WORKFORCE AND THE BUILDING TO MAINTAIN THOSE PARTNERSHIPS TO SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. WE DO HAVE TWO NEW POLICIES TO ANNOUNCE, SO LET ME GET THESE.
I'M GOING TO PUT THESE ON THE OVERHEAD HERE IN JUST A MOMENT BUT THE BOARD WANTED US TO LOOK AT PROVIDING FOR ART IN PUBLIC SPACES, SO THERE IS A NEW POLICY THAT LOOKS AT EXPLORING ESTABLISHING A PROGRAM FOR THAT, AND THEN THE OTHER IS FOR IDENTIFYING MANUFACTURING SITES. SO THAT ONE IS GOING IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- I'LL PUT THIS HERE ON THE PROJECTOR BUT THE OTHER ONE IS IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, SO THE ART IN PUBLIC SPACES IS IN FUTURE LAND USE AND THE MANUFACTURING SITES IS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SO -- AND THOSE TWO POLICIES ARE IN THE BLUE HIGHLIGHTS THEIR, WHICH ARE PROBABLY REALLY DIFFICULT TO READ. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT OCCURRED AFTER THE LAST BOARD MEETING FOR POLICY A 127. THAT WAS THE INCENTIVIZING INFILL DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE GETTING RID OF BUILDING HEIGHT ALTOGETHER. THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON THE TABLE, SO JUST LEAVING BUILDING HEIGHT AS IS, THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED. AND THEN PROVIDING FOR MISSING MIDDLE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEFINITIONS. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP A COUPLE TIMES, AND SO WE MADE SURE THAT WE PROVIDED FOR THOSE. THAT'S UNDER THE DENSITY FACTOR TABLES. AND THEN FOR A 113 1I, WE REVISED THE LINK TO THE WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT. SO THAT WAS TWO YEARS AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO 10 YEARS. AND YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT EARLIER, YES. JUST A
[03:55:09]
REMINDER WE ARE ON THE SCHEDULE TO GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON JULY 22ND. THAT WILL BE THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REVIEW OF THE PLAN AS WELL AS THE TRANSMITTAL HEARING.SO THAT WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED ON JULY 22ND. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY
PRESENTATION. >> THANKS, CHRIS. THAT WAS A GREAT REASON TITIAN. ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS. WILL HUGHES PUSHED THE BUTTON?
ROBERT OLSON FIRST. >> I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS A PROCEDURAL ONE. WHAT IS SPECIFICALLY BEING ASKED AND EXPECTED OF THE PCA FOR INPUT INTO THE PLAN RIGHT NOW? AND THEN, MY OTHER ALLIED PROCEDURAL QUESTION IS HOW DO WE EFFICIENTLY PROCEED ON THAT SINCE I ASSUME A NUMBER OF US HAVE GONE THROUGH THE COMP PLAN AND HAVE COMMENTS TO MAKE. ARE THESE ALL COMMENTS THAT ARE CONSOLIDATED AND SENT ON TO BCC, OR WHAT HAPPENS TO THE COMMENTS? ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, SO YEAH, AT THIS JUNCTURE YOUR FEEDBACK WILL BE TAKEN AND AS WITH THIS, THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE MATTER.
YOU'LL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. ANY OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS WILL BE TAKEN UP TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BUT THEY HAVE THE
FINAL AUTHORITY. >> WILL WE VOTE ON THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AS A PCA? >> HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT.
>> WHAT? >> HOWEVER THE CHAIR DIRECTS YOU TO DO THAT, IF YOU WANT TO CONSOLIDATE AND VOTE ON ALL YOUR SUGGESTIONS YOU MAY DO THAT OR YOU CAN PUT FORTH TIMES, HOWEVER
YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT. >> OKAY.
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. WAS THAT IT, MR. OLSON?
>> YES. JUST FOR CEDRO TO START OFF.
>> OKAY, ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FIRST ?
>> THANK YOU. I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH MS. PERKINS AT THE BEGINNING, THE FOR THE MEETING STARTED, AND SHE SAID ONE WAY THAT WE COULD HANDLE THIS, IF THE BOARD IS IN AGREEMENT, IS THAT WE CAN VOTE FOR THE TRANSMITTAL AFTER WE'RE DONE HAVING OUR DISCUSSION, AND THEN HAVE THEM WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY CONSIDER OUR COMMENTS THAT ARE ON THE PUBLIC RECORD. SO WE DON'T -- BECAUSE WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO AGREE ON EVERYTHING AND WE COULD JUST BE HERE ALL DAY VOTING ON EACH ITEM, AND THEN THEY CAN LOOK AT WHAT WE SUGGESTED AND SEE IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY WANTED. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE PROCEDURALLY FOR YOU? IS THAT BETTER? IS THAT AN ANSWER FOR YOU? SO WE TALK AND THEN WE VOTE ON THE THING AND THEY LISTEN TO WHAT WE SAY, OR HOPEFULLY. THANK YOU.
>> WELL I COULD HONESTLY SPEND AN HOUR OR AN HOUR AND A HALF WITH ALL THE NOTES THAT I HAVE, AND JEN LOMBERG, WHO'S THE MATANZAS RIVER KEEPER, HER PARTICULAR COMMENTS, BUT I THOUGHT WE'D HAVE A LARGE PUBLIC TURNOUT AND WE HAVE ALL THESE PUBLIC SPEAKERS, BUT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. MAYBE THEY'LL BE AT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON JULY 22ND, I BELIEVE WE SAID. SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO JUST STREAMLINE THIS BUT I HAVE TO SAY THERE'S A LOT TO COMMENT ON HERE. SO I WAS SURPRISED IN MY MATERIALS, THERE WERE NO MAPS WHATSOEVER. SO I GOT ONE MAP AT THE END. I KEPT WAITING TO GET TO A MAP SECTION AND AT THE END THERE WAS ONE OF HASTINGS. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OTHERS SAW THAT BUT THAT'S ALL I GOT IN TERMS OF MAPS.
>> HASTINGS INCORPORATED AREA. THERE WERE ADJUSTMENTS.
UNINCORPORATED NOW. BUT I DIDN'T GET THE MAPS, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN HELPFUL. BUT YES, MR. SMITH.
[04:00:06]
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, MR. CHAIR, AS PART OF THE AGENDA PACKET, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALL OF ITS CONTENTS AND ELEMENTS AND SO FORTH, AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THAT, SHOULD'VE BEEN, AND IT WAS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE TRANSPORTATION MAP, THE TRANSPORTATION MAP IS UPDATED TO REFLECT CURRENT STATUS OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE COUNTY.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS BROADLY SPEAKING, IT IS UNCHANGED. IT IS CHANGED ONLY IN THE CONTENT OF 2050 AS WE ARISE
HORIZON YEAR SO THERE IS NO -- >> WE HAVE SEEN PREVIOUSLY
>> WE ARE NOT PROPOSING CHANGES, OTHER THAN THE TRANSPORTATION TO OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OTHER THAN THE HORIZON DATE TO
THEM. >> I KNOW BEEN BREEDING HAD A COMMENT THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ABOUT AT LEAST WITH THE CONSERVATION AREAS ON THE MAP, LIKE SHE MAY STATE THAT AGAIN TODAY BUT I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. ANYWAY, I THOUGHT THE PLAN WAS GREATLY IMPROVED FROM WHAT I SAW FOR THE FIRST REDLINE. I MEAN REALLY SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVED. I WAS VERY GLAD, IN PART, THAT IT WAS APPROVED. BUT I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT MOVING SECTIONS AND PROVISIONS FROM THE COMP PLAN TO THE LEC AND WILL ONE OF THE REASONS IS ELLEN AVERY SMITH, WHO I REALLY RESPECT AS AN ATTORNEY, AND HER KNOWLEDGE, SHE HAS STATED ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS, OR NUMEROUS PERHAPS, THE COMP PLAN TRUMPS CLEC SO WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO, AS IT CAME OUT IN ONE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION MEETINGS, I'VE GOT IT WRITTEN DOWN HERE SOMEWHERE. I'VE GOT SO MANY COMMENTS. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT OVERREACHING DEVELOPMENTS, YOU MIGHT HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF DOING THAT, OF ADDRESSING THOSE, WITH COMP PLAN PROVISIONS RATHER THAN LEC. I JUST WANT ASSURANCE, AND I KNEW A COUNTY ATTORNEY, IT WASN'T YOU, I DON'T BELIEVE, BUT ONE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS GAVE AN ASSURANCE THAT OH, THE LDC IS JUST TOO STRONG. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE BUT I'D LIKE
SOME ASSURANCE ABOUT THAT. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR --
>> I HATE TO MAKE OUR REALLY GOOD AND STRONG COMP PLAN POLICIES LESS AFFECTED BY MOVING THEM TO THE LDC.
>> SO THROUGH THE CHAIR, MR. SMITH CAN SPEAK TO IT AS WELL, THE CURRENT VERSION THAT YOU HAVE, THOSE MATTERS WERE PUT BACK IN THE COMP PLAN. WE HEARD THE BOCS HE HAD THE SAME CONCERN AS WELL AS PUBLIC CONCERN SO WE HAD MOVED THOSE BACK AND SO
THOSE CHANGES -- >> A COUPLE THAT GOT MOVED BACK, CERTAINLY. THERE WERE TWO REALLY MAIN ONES.
>> ALL OF THEM GOT MOVED BACK SO WE'VE NOT TAKEN ANYTHING OUT OF THE COMP PLAN TO MOVE TO THE LDC.
>> OKAY. ONE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS I'M SURE, CHRIS, THAT YOU KNOW AND THAT ABOUT SENATE BILL 180, SOME PEOPLE CALL IT THE HURRICANE BILL AND WHAT THAT DOES, I COULD READ FROM 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA EMAIL I GOT ABOUT URGING ME TO CONTACT THE GOVERNOR. BECAUSE THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE PASSED IT AND IT'S SITTING, LAST I HEARD, AS OF THIS MORNING, IT'S STILL SITTING ON THE GOVERNOR'S DESK, EITHER WAITING FOR A SIGNATURE TO APPROVE, A VETO, OR NO SIGNATURE AND SO MANY DAYS ELAPSED AND IT BECOMES LAW. THAT WOULD REALLY CURTAIL COUNTY'S ABILITY TO DO LOCAL PLANNING. SO YOU KNOW ALL ABOUT SENATE 180.
AND THE RAMIFICATIONS THAT HAS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. IF THEY WEAKEN THEIR COMP PLAN THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO STRENGTHEN THAT COMP PLAN FOR AT LEAST THREE YEARS. SO WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY -- OR IT'S AS A DEVELOPER'S APPROVAL ON THAT, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS REALLY STRANGE. WHY NOT A VETERINARIAN OR MEDICAL DOCTOR OR SOMEBODY? BUT THAT CONCERNS ME , SENATE BILL 180 AND WHETHER THAT'S GOING TO PASS OR NOT, WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO. SO AS LONG AS THESE PROVISIONS ARE STILL GOING TO REMAIN IN OUR COMP PLAN, AND I WILL HAVE TO SAY NOW I CAN SAY I'VE READ THE ENTIRE COMP PLAN FROM FRONT TO BACK AND I'VE LOOKED AT EVERY WORD AND IT AND THERE'S A LOT THERE. SO TO ME, WE ARE JUST GETTING -- I KNOW JEN AND HE ALL WORKED REALLY HARD TO GET THIS REVISION TO US A WEEK IN ADVANCE SO THAT WE HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT BUT 268 PAGES OF A LOT OF LEGALESE
[04:05:06]
AND A LOT OF POLICIES, MANY OF WHICH I HAD, WE HAVEN'T UTILIZED, WAS TOUGH TO DIGEST ALL THOSE AND THEN BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MEANINGFUL FEEDBACK TO YOU TODAY. IN FACT I WAS GOING TO ASK IF I COULD SOMETIME MEET WITH YOU AND MIKE AND GO OVER, AND JACOB, AND GO OVER ALL THESE CHANGES RATHER THAN TORTURE EVERYONE IN HERE WITH ALL OF MY MINUTIA HERE. THERE'S SOME TYPOS, LIKE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS STILL APPEARS ONCE IN THEIR . DIVISION OF FORESTRY IS IN THERE A COUPLE Ć FOREST SERVICE. JUST LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT BUT I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS ON SPECIFIC POLICIES. SO PERHAPS I COULD MEET WITH YOU AND JUST GO OVER THIS LIST, AND NOT HAVE EVERYONE HAVE TO SUFFER THROUGH THIS. SO WE ARE DOWN TO THREE OR FOUR WEEKS NOW SO LET ME ASK HOW YOU ARRIVED AT THE 37,028 HOUSING UNIT DEFICIT THAT YOU HAD UP THERE WITH THAT BUCKET AND THEN AT THE TOP OF THE BUCKET THERE WAS A REDLINE WITH A DEFICIT. IGUESS THAT WAS A BUCKET. >> MR. CHAIR.
>> PLEASE SPEAK. >> WE DO HAVE DATA AND ANALYSIS THAT HAS GONE THROUGH THE BOARD MULTIPLE TIMES. THIS JUST MADE AWARE IT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. BUT ESSENTIALLY WHEN WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE ENTITLEMENTS, AND AGAIN, THIS IS LOOKING AT -- WE ARE LOOKING AT RAW FUTURE LAND USE ALLOWANCES ACROSS THE BOARD FOR VACANT LANDS . THAT'S KIND OF THE BASELINE. THEN WE GO INTO OUR SECOND EVALUATION, WHICH IS ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT. WE GET ALL OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE EITHER VESTED OR ENTITLED AND THEN WE PLUG ALL OF THOSE IN. WE HAD OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH NAPA ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF HOW MANY UNITS ARE AVAILABLE. THEY BELIEVE THERE ARE LESS UNITS THAN WHAT WERE SUGGESTED.
>> I'VE HEARD THAT, YEAH. BUT HAS THAT BEEN PROVEN?
>> WELL THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE ZONING SIDE OF THINGS, WHEREAS WE ARE LOOKING AT THE COMP PLAN SO THEY'RE KIND OF APPLES AND ORANGES BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT BASICALLY THE MAXIMUM THEORETICAL BASED ON THE COMP PLAN AND DOING SO, OUR EVALUATION DETERMINED THAT WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO RUN OUT AT ABOUT BETWEEN 2035 AND 2040, IF WE CONTINUE THE SAME TRENDS.
>> OKAY. WHAT WE HAVE APPROVED BUT UNBUILT RIGHT NOW WOULD TAKE US THROUGH THAT YEAR, THOSE TWO YEARS, THE RANGE YOU GAVE US?
>> AND THAT'S WHY WHAT WE ARE SUGGESTING IN THE SEVEN YEAR MARK WHEN WE ARE COMING BACK UP FOR OUR NEXT EVALUATION, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO REALLY TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY, POTENTIALLY INCREASING DENSITIES, AND WE DID A LITTLE BIT, A LITTLE TWEAKING, BUT AGAIN, THE BOARD WASN'T REALLY EXCITED ABOUT WHOLESALE CHANGES .
>> THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? I DIDN'T ATTEND THE MEETINGS BUT I WATCHED THEM ON GTD. OKAY. SO THREE YEARS AGO WE HAD OVER 60,000 APPROVED BUT UNBUILT UNITS AND I KNOW THAT FIGURE HAS BEEN DISPUTED. BUT AS IT DROPPED DOWN TO 37 28, IS
THAT THAT FIGURE? >> NO, THAT'S JUST LOOKING OUT BASED ON THE PROJECTION. THAT'S HOW MANY WE WOULD NEED TO 2050.
>> AND PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT OUR SALESIAN RATE, HOW MANY HOUSES WE BUILT A YEAR, AND BOUGHT, AND LIVED IN, ET CETERA, THAT'S ALL BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR. OKAY. SO I NOTICED IN ONE POINT THEY'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY HAVING AN URBAN SERVICES AREA BOUNDARY, THAT THAT MIGHT BE ON THE TABLE. AND IN ADDITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY, IS THAT TRUE?
>> YES I DO. SORRY, JACOB. >> A LOT OF COUNTIES HAVE LARGE URBAN SURFACE AREA BOUNDARY SO I JUST WONDERED , MR. CHAIR, THE URBAN SERVICES LANGUAGES EXISTING WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IS WRITTEN IN THERE TWICE.
[04:10:03]
>> MAYBE I READ IT THE FIRST TIME SINCE I DIDN'T HAVE THE
ENTIRE PLAN. >> BROADLY SPEAKING WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AREAS THAT ARE SERVED OBVIOUSLY BY VARIOUS
UTILITIES AND SO FORTH . >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WATER AND SEWER UNDER INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> BUT THERE WAS NO CHANGE TO THAT LANGUAGE IN EITHER OF THOSE TWO SECTIONS WERE THAT IS USED IN THE COMP PLAN.
>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND I REALLY WISH WE'D HAD THIS HEARING ON A SEPARATE DAY. I THAT DOWN, RATHER THAN AT THE END OF A MEETING. THAT'S WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE. SO UNDER OBJECTIVE A .1 .3, AND I SWORE I WASN'T GOING TO DO THIS, BUT I'M GOING TO READ SOME OF THESE. CONTROL OF URBAN SPRAWL. SAYS THE COUNTY SHOULD CONTROL URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERIZED BY LEAPFROG DEVELOP, STRICT BATTLEMENT, LIVING DENSITY OVER A LARGE AREA. ARE THERE STANDARD DEFINITIONS OR SHOULD THEY BE PUT IN THERE FOR WHAT IS LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT OR WHAT IS A LARGE AREA? SHOULD THOSE BE DEFINED OR ARE WE GOING TO KNOW
IT WHEN WE SEE IT? >> I BELIEVE THAT'S TAKEN
STRAIGHT OUT OF THE STATUTE. >> THE STATUTES LIKE 163? OKAY.
BECAUSE WE HAD A PROPOSAL COME BEFORE US A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, AND I HEAR IT'S COMING BACK IN A DIFFERENT FORM THAT WAS TERMED LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT. SO IS THERE A STANDARDIZED DEFINITION? I THINK JACOB WAS HERE AND I KNOW HE WAS HERE, GAVE US SOME GUIDANCE ON THAT, AND MAYBE MIKE WAS, TOO. BUT ANYWAY, OKAY. IN 8.1.4.16 IT TALKS ABOUT THE COUNTY'S WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT AND I KNOW A FEW YEARS AGO WE TALKED ABOUT A WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT BUT IT HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED LATELY AND FOR EXAMPLE, TODAY WE HAD THAT WORK WAS HOUSING ITEM AND NOBODY MENTIONED A WORKFORCE HOUSING DISTRICT, ZONING DISTRICT. IT WAS MENTIONED THAT IT'S INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY BUT WHAT IS THE COUNTY'S WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT? I DON'T KNOW OFF HAND, WHAT IT IS, WHERE IT IS, SO -- JACOB, SORRY.
>> MR. CHAIR, THE APPLICATION YOU HEARD TODAY WAS A REQUEST TO REZONE TO WORKFORCE HOUSING ZONING. SO DISTRICT IS IMPLIED IN THAT SENSE BUT IT IS A ZONING DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE , BROADLY SPEAKING. IT HAS SOME PERIMETERS. TYPICALLY IT'S MORE FLEXIBLE IN ALLOWING A SMALLER LOT SIZES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, DUPLEXES, TOWNHOMES MAKING THAT MORE ACCESSIBLE POINT
>> OKAY. SO AN INDIVIDUAL REZONING TO WORKFORCE HOUSING WOULD RESULT IN A WORKFORCE HOUSING DISTRICT. THERE ISN'T JUST SOME AREAS ON THE MAP. OKAY, THAT JUST SHOWED MY IGNORANCE BUT THANK YOU FOR CORRECTING ME ON THAT.
APPRECIATE THAT. I'M GLAD WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER. THAT'S GOOD. OKAY. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO READ THAT. I WILL. 8.1.7.2 SAYS RESIDENTIAL AND RELATED DEVELOPMENT OF LANDS DESIGNATED RURAL CIVIL CULTURE AND AG INTENSIVE SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE LDC. SO IS THAT GOING TO BE AS MUCH PROTECTION FOR RURAL AND CIVIL CULTURE AND A I LANDS IF IT'S IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE LDC OR AS IT EXISTS NOW IN THE COMP PLAN? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S AN ADEQUATE PROTECTION THAT REMAINS HIGH, BECAUSE OF SENATE BILL 180 AND SOME OTHER THINGS.
>> YES OR, SO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS MORE STANDARDS. THEY ARE JUST MORE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY FALL TO THE LEVEL OF COMP PLAN SO THAT WAS JUST A LITTLE ADDITION THERETO CROSS-REFERENCE THE LDC.
>> RIGHT. AND JIM LOMBERG DISCUSSES SOME OF THAT, I BELIEVE. OKAY. HAVING NOT READ THE ENTIRE COMP PLAN BEFORE, AND I HATE ADMITTING THAT, BUT IT'S TRUE. THE COUNTY STAFF DOES A GREAT JOB IN THE AGENDA ITEMS WE GET, OF PULLING OUT RELEVANT COMP PLAN POLICIES FOR US TO CONSIDER SO THERE HASN'T, IN MY OPINION, BEEN A GREAT NEED FOR ME TO PLOW THROUGH THE ENTIRE COMP PLAN AND READ EVERY WORD UNTIL NOW BECAUSE THE COUNTY STAFF DOES A GREAT JOB OF DOING THAT BUT I WAS SHOCKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS APPROVED IN PRD , EXCUSE ME,
[04:15:06]
PLAYING RURAL DEVELOPMENT REZONING. SHOULD BE 500 A YEAR.I KNOW YOU DIDN'T CHANGE THAT BUT THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE A LOT AND THEY CAN'T ROLLOVER, ET CETERA, BUT AT 500 A YEAR AND IF THAT GOT APPROVED OVER TIME, THAT WOULD VERY QUICKLY ERODE OUR AGRICULTURAL BASE HERE. OBJECTIVE A .1 .8, RURAL AREAS ESTABLISHING AND IMPLEMENT A COMPREHENSIVE RURAL AREA STRATEGY, YOU MENTIONED THAT IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT'S EXCELLENT. ELLEN A BREE SMITH HAD MENTIONED BEFORE TRANSFERRING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM AG AREAS TO MORE URBAN AREAS. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA, BEEN INVOLVED THROUGH SOME PRDS BEFORE AND THAT'S A GOOD THING, AND GO AFTER RURAL AND FAMILY LANDS PROTECTION PROGRAM AND OTHER CONSERVATION FUNDING, GREAT. OKAY. AND A .1 .11 .1 IT SAYS INTENSITY OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE LIMITED TO 75% OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE EACH YEAR AND IT WAS CHANGED TO 150% OF FLOOR AREA RATIO. SO THE BAR HAD BEEN 70% BEFORE. AND IT'S JUMPED TO 150. SO IS THAT CORRECT? DID I
READ THAT CORRECTLY? >> YES SIR, YOU DID READ THAT CORRECTLY. A LOT OF THE IDEA BEHIND THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IS TO JUST PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT. RIGHT NOW WE REQUIRE -- WE BASICALLY FORCED DEVELOPMENTS TO SPRAWL ON THEIR OWN SITE --
>> THE LOWER FA ARE THAT WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING IN TURN AFFECTS NOT EFFICIENT COMPACT DEVELOPMENT SO WE ARE LOOKING TO ADD SOME FLEXIBILITY SO THAT WE CAN LEAN TOWARDS THAT WAY BECAUSE IT'S INCONGRUENT WITH THE COMP CLAIM LEADING US TO BE EFFICIENT COMPACT ELEMENT.
>> OKAY, UM, AT THE TABLE IN TENSE DID DENSITY AT THE TOP OF PAGE 34, THE LAST TWO FIGURES IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HAND CORNER, AND MAYBE THE LINE THAT WENT THROUGH THE 4, BUT LOOKS LIKE 94, DO YOU SEE THAT? I MEAN, I DON'T SEE THAT LINE. IT MUST BE
>> I MADE THE SAME COMMENT. IT'S A STRIKE THROUGH.
>> IT'S A STRIKE THROUGH BECAUSE LOOKED LIKE THE DENSITY
>> AND THEN FOR WORK FORCE HOUSING, I GUESS THAT JUMPED UP TO 19.5 WITH DENSITY BONUSES AND WETLAND PRESERVATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THAT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING. I KNOW MIAMI, TAMPA, ORLANDO, WHAT THEY ALLOW IS FAR GREATER, BUT I DON'T THINK ANYONE WANTS ST. JOHNS COUNTY TO BE ANYTHING LIKE THOSE. HAVING BEEN BORN AND RAISED IN MIAMI, I SURE DON'T WANT TO GO BACK. SO, BUT 19.5. OKAY. LET ME JUST ASK YOU THIS QUESTION, YOU'VE PROBABLY HAD IT BEFORE, CHRIS. WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? THAT'S USED THROUGHOUT, BUT WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
IN YOUR OPINION? >> YOU KNOW, THAT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE SUSTAINABILITY BECAME A BUZZ WORD, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS IT, TEN YEARS AGO? MAYBE 15 YEARS AGO.
>> YEAH, 15. >> YEAH. AND WHILE IN GRAD SCHOOL WE TALKED ABOUT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. THAT WAS 20 YEARS AGO. AND, YOU KNOW, NOW IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING IT'S LIKE THEY'VE CHANGED THE, THE IDEALS OF SUSTAINABILITY, I GUESS FROM WHAT WE LEARNED IN GRADUATE SCHOOL. TO ME A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IS ONE THAT PROVIDES FOR A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES. A MIXTURE OF USES PROVIDING FOR MULTIPLE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. HOPEFULLY PROVIDES A WALKABLE FOOTPRINT.
IT'S PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY. I MEAN, THERE ARE ALL THESE, YOU KNOW, WONDERFUL QUALITIES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE, WE STRIVE FOR, BUT WE DON'T ALWAYS GET THERE UNFORTUNATELY. BUT THAT'S
KIND OF AN IDEAL -- >> CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION
[04:20:01]
WOULD BE PART OF THAT? >> PART OF THAT AS WELL,
ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE THAT DEFINED IN SOME MEANINGFUL WAY SOME DAY. ON THE TOP OF PAGE 8 UNDER TRANSPORTATION, AND EACH PAGE CHANGES ON US. BUT THE TOP OF PAGE 8 UNDER THE TRANSPORTATION SECTION, THERE WAS A STATEMENT ON PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE THAT WAS STRUCK THROUGH, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. OFTEN WHEN YOU STRIKE THROUGH SOMETHING YOU HAVE A LITTLE SHORT NOTE OF WHY IT WAS STRUCK THROUGH, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ONE FOR THAT, SO I WONDERED. I SEE JACOB READING IT AND LOOKING AT IT. AND I JUST HAVE THIS PAD, I DON'T HAVE A COMPUTER, SO. WHILE YOU'RE TRAFFIC, AND THAT S CROSSED OUT. NOW, DOWN BELOW IT SAID THEY HAD TO BE ABLE TO GET UNDER THERE DURING HIGH WATER, BUT IT WASN'T GOING TO ALLOW THEM NECESSARILY TO BE INTERFERED WITH WITH PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC. IN ANOTHER LIFE PRIOR TO THIS I WORKED A LOT ON PANTHER ISSUES, FLORIDA PANTHERS IN SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AND WILDLIFE CROSSINGS FOR FLORIDA PANTHERS, AND THAT WOULDN'T CUT IT FOR FLORIDA PANTHERS. THEY, THEY, YOU DON'T WANT THEM TO BE HIT BY CARS. A RACCOON IS A LOT DIFFERENT OR A RABBIT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT I JUST WONDERED WHY THAT WAS CROSSED
OUT, SO. >> I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE ABOUT
THE WILDLIFE CROSSING. >> OKAY. I HAVE A LOT OF THOSE TYPE OF THINGS, SO THAT'S WHY I'D LIKE TO SIT DOWN WITH Y'ALL AND GO THROUGH THEM. I WONDER, IT WASN'T MENTIONED, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF THERE HAS BEEN, I KNOW IT WAS DISCUSSED SEVERAL YEARS AGO, PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE HAVE COME UP IN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETINGS AND SO FORTH AND MENTIONED ESTABLISHING A ST. JOHNS COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY. IT GOT A LITTLE TRACTION INITIALLY, BUT IT HASN'T HAPPENED. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT I RECALL IN THERE ON A ST. JOHNS COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY THAT MIGHT HELP US COMPETE FOR FEDERAL GRANTS, ET CETERA. I WONDERED IF THAT HAD BEEN CONSIDERED. UM, WELL, I'M NOT GONNA READ THAT.
>> JUST ON THAT NOTE, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS ON THAT, BUT THE THE COMP PLAN ISN'T AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THAT BECAUSE IT'S A CREATURE OF STATUTE, SO IT'S NOT A MATTER GENERALLY INCLUDED IN THE COMP
PLAN. >> BUT THE COUNTY COULD DO IT?
>> THERE WOULD, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE STATUTE, AND THEN THE GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE TO APPOINT THE MEMBERS.
>> OKAY, THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU.
>> MR. CHAIR, THE BOARD HAS, UM, MADE A DECISION ON THAT MORE RECENTLY. THE THOUGHT IS THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT DOING IT RIGHT
>> THAT QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED BY THE BOARD.
>> I THINK I KNEW THAT THEY WEREN'T PLANNING TO DO THAT.
>> THAT'S WHY IT DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD.
>> OKAY. WHAT ARE PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANTS? THIS IS UNDER SECTION D TALKING IN REGARD TO WASTE WATER SYSTEMS?
>> THOSE ARE SMALL -- >> JUST SMALL, I FIGURED THEY
WERE SMALL. >> BUT THEY'RE PRIVATE WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES FOR ONLY RELATIVELY SMALL DEVELOPMENTS AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE OVERSIGHT THAT MAYBE
YOUR PUBLIC UTILITY DOES. >> OKAY. AT ONE POINT IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL DISCOURAGE THE DISCHARGE OF ANY NEW OR UPGRADED PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER FACILITY INTO THE WATERS OF THE COUNTY. NUMBER ONE, THAT MAKES IT SOUND LIKE THE SANITARY SEWER FACILITY WOULD BE DISCHARGED INTO PEDESTRIAN WATERS, SO THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. BUT LATER ON UNDER THE CONSERVATION SECTION IN F.1.5.6 IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL PROHIBIT THE DISCHARGE OF ANY NEW PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SEWAGE FACILITY INTO THE WATERS OF THE COUNTY, SO THOSE ARE AT ODDS. ONE SAYS SHALL
[04:25:04]
DISCOURAGE, ONE SAYS SHALL PROHIBIT. UM, I DIDN'T LIKE, BECAUSE I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT, PROBABLY, THERE WAS A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT MUCH OF THE POTABLE AND WASTE WATER SYSTEMS UP TO D.1.4 IN TERMS OF SEPTIC TANKS. THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF MY EXPERTISE, SO I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY SPECIFIC THINGS THERE.I'LL TALK TO Y'ALL PRIVATELY ABOUT THAT. ONE THING I'D LIKE TO SEE, AND THIS IS BASICALLY FALLS UNDER F.1.6.4B ON PAGE 10, THE SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES. I KNOW THIS WOULD GET A LOT OF PEOPLE UPSET IF THIS HAPPENED, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SCRUB BY FLATWOODS PUT IN, AND I'M NOT JUST TALKING PINE PLANTATIONS. AND MOST PINE PLANTATIONS ARE DEVELOPED AND PLANTED OVER, UM, BUT ARE OR WERE FORMALLY MUSIC FLATWOODS AND WE USED TO HAVE A LOT OF THEM, BUT WE DON'T ANYMORE.
THIS IS AN ENDEMIC, BOTH OF THEM, ENDEMIC NATURAL COMMUNITIES TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA. YOU CAN SEE THINGS IN SOUTH GEORGIA, SOUTHEAST GEORGIA, AND OVER IN MISSISSIPPI, PARTS OF THERE, ALABAMA, MISSISSIPPI, THAT LOOK KIND OF LIKE MUSIC FLATWOODS, BUT THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE MORE WET FLATWOODS. BUT I REALLY WISH THERE WOULD BE SOME CONSIDERATION. AND EVEN IF THEY WERE PUT INTO SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES ON SITE ONLY 10% WOULD STILL NEED TO BE CONSERVED UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT AND COMP PLAN. AND 10% OF A NATURAL COMMUNITY TYPE THAT IS A MATRIX COMMUNITY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT MOST OTHER TYPES OF COMMUNITIES OCCUR EMBEDDED WITHIN IS NOT MUCH TO ASK. SO I WISHED SOMETHING COULD HAPPEN WITH THAT. UH, GLAD THAT THE COUNTY IS CONSIDERING DEVELOPING A CONSERVATION OVERLAY THAT IDENTIFIES POTENTIALLY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS. I THOUGHT THE CONSERVATION SECTION OVERALL WAS EXCELLENT. THE THE SECTION IN SOME OF THOSE IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, I GUESS THAT'S SECTION I, UM, I JUST WONDER HOW, AND MOST OF THOSE WEREN'T CHANGED UNDER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SECTION THAT I.1.6.7 THINGS LIKE THAT. I JUST WONDER HOW NOT CHANGING THOSE IS GOING TO HELP US GET OUT OF WHAT IS AT LEAST THREE YEARS AGO WAS REPORTED TO BE A $500 MILLION DEFICIT IN TERMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND NEEDS. SOME PEOPLE SAY IT'S NOW OVER A BILLION. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS. BUT IT'S HIGH. SO, AND I'VE SAID THIS TO ELLEN AVERY SMITH BEFORE, AND SHE CALLS BACK ON FLORIDA STATUTES, WHICH SHE'S RIGHT TO DO, BUT HOW, THE PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE, IT HASN'T WORKED OUT. IF WE'RE 500 TO A BILLION, 500 MILLION TO A BILLION IN THE HOLE ON INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS FOR ROADWAYS, THIS IS ROADWAYS APPARENTLY, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW NOT CHANGING ANY OF THOSE THINGS OR TWEAKING THEM IS GOING TO HELP US GET OUT OF THE HOLE. THAT'S WHY HENRY DEAN PROPOSED THAT TAX REVENUE AMENDMENT. IT WAS A BALLOT INITIATIVE SOME TIME BACK. ANYWAY, SO I, NO I WON'T READ THOSE. I'LL GO OVER THEM WITH YOU LATER. I RUSHED THROUGH THAT AND DIDN'T GET TO HALF OF IT, BUT JEN WITH THE RIVER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN HER COMMENTS, BUT I JUST GOT THESE YESTERDAY. AND SHE HAS A LOT OF SUGGESTED CHANGES. SOME ARE QUITE GOOD. YOU KNOW, I COULD SUGGEST AND MAYBE ASK THAT WE HAVE A MOTION TO, UM, ADOPT
[04:30:02]
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
>> OKAY, BUT THESE ARE NEW TO THE BLUE LINE.
>> OKAY, I HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE. >> AND Y'ALL DID A GREAT JOB ON THE BLUE LINE. MICHAEL SAID Y'ALL WERE TRYING TO STREAMLINE IT AND MAKE IT MORE COMPACT SO WE COULD REVIEW IT IN NOT TOO PAINFUL A MANNER, AND IT WASN'T THAT PAINFUL. YET, I'M GOING TO CALL ON YOU RIGHT NOW, ROBERT. YOUR MIC WENT OFF AGAIN. I
DON'T KNOW WHY. >> I'M JUST WONDERING WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A SEPARATE MEETING AT WORKSHOP OR SOMETHING, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE FIVE MEMBERS HERE ARE, I MEAN, WE ONLY HAVE FIVE. WE'RE NOT REALLY INTERACTING ABOUT THESE. WE'RE HEARING THEM, AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHETHER THIS WOULD BE MORE, WE'D BE MORE RESPONSIBLE TO HAVE A SEPARATE
[04:35:09]
WORKSHOP FOCUSED ON THE PZA INPUT ON THE COMP PLAN RATHER THAN TRYING TO SLOG THROUGH A BUNCH OF COMMENTS HERE. THAT'SMY THOUGHT RIGHT NOW. >> TO THE CHAIR, THIS IS TRANSMITTAL, SO I DON'T THINK YOU'VE DEALT WITH COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS MUCH, SO THESE COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS WHETHER FROM A DEVELOPER OR THE COUNTY, FIRST THEY GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS WITH PZA THEN THE BCC, THEN IT'S TRANSMITTED TO THE STATE, THEN ACTUALLY COMES BACK THROUGH AGAIN FOR ADOPTION, AND IT WILL ULTIMATELY GO TO THE BCC AND I THINK LIKELY WE'LL BRING IT BACK THROUGH YOU ALL. THE STATE DOES ALLOW, SO FIRST I WOULD SAY WE'RE ON A TIME CRUMPLE CRUNCH HERE TO GET IT TO THE BCC.
THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS, AND WE HAVE TO GET THIS FOR THE JULY 22ND MEETING. HOWEVER, GIVE YOU A LITTLE COMFORT THAT WHEN IT COMES BACK, YOU CAN ALSO INTRODUCE ADDITIONAL THINGS SHOULD YOU SEE SOMETHING WE MISSED OR YOU THOUGHT ABOUT OR A CONSTITUENT CAME TO YOU. THIS PROCESS ALLOWS THAT. I CONFIRMED THAT WITH THE STATE. THAT ALLOWS OPPORTUNITIES TO INSERT OR
REVIEW, THAT TYPE OF THING. >> SO WE SLOG FORWARD.
>> I WOULD SUGGEST SO. >> OKAY. WELL, I DON'T WANT TO BE NEXT BECAUSE I'M, FROM A SENIORITY STANDPOINT, I DEFER TO
OTHERS. >> I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS.
BUT MS. SPIEGEL HAS INDICATED SHE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, SO I
WILL RECOGNIZE HERE. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. APPRECIATE THAT. WELL, I DID WANT TO SAY THIS HAS BEEN A TWO AND A HALF YEAR PROCESS, AND THERE'S BEEN MEETING OF MEETING AND MEETING AND BOOKS AND MEETINGS AND READINGS AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT.
SO YOU'RE JUST COMING INTO IT RIGHT NOW. IT'S TOTALLY OVERWHELMING. I REALLY DO UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> I'VE BEEN TO SOME PUBLIC MEETINGS ON IT.
>> SO AS FAR AS BEING PREPARED, I THINK PERHAPS MAYBE I'M INCORRECT IN THIS ASSUMPTION, BUT I THINK IF THEY'RE JUST LOOKING FOR IF SOMETHING IS JUMPING OUT AS FAR AS THIS IS WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS WERE KIND OF OKAY WITH, BUT RIGHT NOW THEY WANTED TO HEAR WHAT WE HAD TO SAY AND WOULD CONSIDER THAT.
MAYBE HOW I'M UNDERSTANDING IT IS THAT WE'RE NOT HEAR TO LIKE REWRITE IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE I'M MISUNDERSTANDING. I WONDERED ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT IF WE WANTED TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE TALK OR TALK FIRST AND THEN HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO TALK? YEAH, THERE'S ONE. ANYWAY, I
JUST -- >> I'M FINE WITH PUBLIC COMMENT
>> UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK FIRST.
>> I'D LIKE TO SPEAK AFTER. >> OKAY, LET'S MOVE TO PUBLIC
COMMENT, THEN. MR. HUNT? >> I'M GONNA TRY AND KEEP THIS WITHIN THE THREE MINUTES HERE. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. CHARLIE HUNT. SHOWING UP THERE IS THE CHANGE OF THE TEN YEAR WORK FORCE HOUSING. IS THAT, WHAT DOES THAT APPLY TO? DOES IT APPLY TO SALE OF THE HOME OR RENT OF THE HOME? BECAUSE IT, IN THE REGULATION IT SHOWS CURRENTLY TWO YEARS FOR ONCE THE HOUSE IS SOLD, INITIAL SALE, AND FIVE YEARS FOR RENT.
SO IS THAT GOING TO BE UPDATED A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC? AND ALSO THE RECESS OR REASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO SEVEN YEARS, IS THAT A MANDATE? DOES IT HAVE TO BE DONE IN SEVEN YEARS OR IS THAT JUST SOMETHING ADDED INTO SO IT CAN BE LOOKED AT AND EASILY MOVED BACK UP TO THE MEDIUM HIGH DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING ON? I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES, BUT IT'S BACK IN THE COMP PLAN. THAT DEFINITELY WAS A BIG ISSUE RIGHT THERE. ALL RIGHT, I GUESS WE CAN CUT IT
SHORT THEN. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT PLEASE.
[04:40:08]
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. AUSTIN NICHOLAS, REPRESENTING THE NORTHEAST FLORIDA BUILDER'S ASSOCIATION. NFBA HAS RECENT CONCERNS ABOUT THE MOST RECENT RED LINE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ONE IS A.1.2.3 SAYING THE CITY WOULD REQUIRE NUMEROUS NEW REQUIREMENTS. THESE WILL MAKE COUNTLESS PROJECTS NOW UNFEASIBLE. WE WOULD MAYBE UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENTS IF IT WAS A THOUSAND ACRE PROPERTY, BUT MANY PROJECTS ARE TEN ACRES ARE LESS. WE DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN REALISTICALLY ACHIEVE THE REQUIREMENTS IF YOUR PROPERTY IS NOT MASSIVE, AND THERE'S NO PROPERTY LIMITATIONS. IT WILL CONTINUE TO MAJOR HOMES IN ST.
JOHNS COUNTY UNATTAINABLE EVIDENCED BY THE MEDIAN SALES PRICE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WE ASK THE SECTION BE REMOVED DUE TO ITS MASSIVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. WE ALSO HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE COUNTY OVERREACHING ON ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES SUCH AS E.1.2 SUBSECTION G AND SECTION E.1.4.4. THESE ARE ISSUES TYPICALLY HANDLED BY DEP, WHICH IS A STATE AGENCY, AND ARMY CORE OF ENGINEER, A FEDERAL AGENCY. WE JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED MORE DUPLICATED REGULATION. AND ST. JOHNS COUNTY PLANNED FOR GROWTH WITH THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT, NOT DO WHAT IT CAN TO STOP IT. WITH THE COMP PLAN ESSENTIALLY NOT CHANGING WE'RE CONCERNED IT'S NOT PLANNED ADEQUATELY FOR GROWTH, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP HASN'T BEEN UPDATED IN OVER 20 YEARS, AND I THINK THE COUNTY HAS CHANGED A LOT IN 20 YEARS. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I DID HAVE TWO OTHER SPEAKERS HERE, BUT THEY HAD TO LEAVE EARLY.
>> SURE, SURE. HI, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU'RE HERE. WHAT WAS THE FIRST POINT ABOUT THE 40%?
>> YES, IN A.1.2.3, IT'S NEAR THE BEGINNING AND JUST LISTS WITH A SHALL NOW, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE PROJECT.
>> IS THAT NORTHWEST? >> SHE HAS IT ALL PRINTED OUT
OVER HERE. >> YEAH, NO PROBLEM.
>> SORRY, A.1.2. YOU SAW IT? I DIDN'T SEE THAT ONE. THERE'S SO MUCH HERE. AND I HOPE YOU CAN APPRECIATE THAT LOOKING AT THIS FROM A NORMAL, NOT NORMAL, BUT FROM A CITIZEN'S PERSPECTIVE OVER A DEVELOPER'S PERSPECTIVE, IT'S REALLY DIFFERENT, AND I REALLY TRIED TO LOOK AT THIS FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT ANGLES.
>> WHAT PAGE? >> WE'RE MOVING ON 86 NOW, AND I'M ON 8.2.1. 2. YEAH, THIS IS NORTHWEST SECTOR. PAGE 4 OF THE
UP COMP PLAN ELEMENT. >> OKAY, I WAS LOOKING FOR 8.2.
FORGIVE ME. >> AND ANOTHER THING --
>> OKAY, PRESERVATION OF NATURAL SYSTEMS INCLUSIVE OF 40% SHALL WEIGH THE BENEFIT OF A POTENTIAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.
OKAY. THAT'S BIG. THAT'S A LOT. I THINK THIS IS KIND OF
LAND GRAB. >> IF I MAY, I WOULD JUST SAY ANOTHER THING ON THERE IS IT SAYS YOU CAN'T, UM, YOU KNOW BUILD OUTSIDE OF A QUARTER MILE FROM INFRASTRUCTURE, FROM UTILITIES ESSENTIALLY. SOMETIMES A DEVELOPER WILL COME IN AND SAY I'LL PAY FOR IT TO GO A HALF MILE, AND THEY'RE SAYING BASICALLY YOU CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE.
>> THAT'S A CONVERSATION I ACTUALLY JUST HAD WITH LEX TAYLOR ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO YEAH. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY I KNEW EXACTLY WHERE YOU
WERE ADDRESSING, THANK YOU. >> LET ME ASK YOU BECAUSE
[04:45:01]
COMMERCIAL PART, DID YOU NOTICE THAT THERE'S RESTRICTIONAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 818 NORTH AND SOUTH. BERTRAM SCENIC HIGHWAY STATE ROAD 13 AND 206. I UNDERSTAND THE NORTH A1A, BUT WHERE'S SOUTH? WHERE ARE THE DEFINITIVE LINES? ONCE I CROSS OVER THE THREE BRIDGE AM I ON SOUTH A1A, SO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ANYWHERE SOUTH? IN 206, I MEAN WE HAVE A LOT OF ROOM ON 206. SAME THING WITH THE QUARTER MILE SERVE. THAT'S GONNA, I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL. HEY, I WANT JOBS, I WANT A GOOD TAX BASE.>> AND UNFORTUNATELY YOU DON'T GET THAT WITHOUT --
>> AND ALSO THAT IT'S, THE STRIP CENTERS AREN'T SO MUCH ALLOWED FOR THE SMALLER BUILDINGS. HOW ABOUT THE POOR ONE-MAN CPA OR, YOU KNOW, MEDICAL CARE, ORTHODONTISTS. YOU LOOK IN A STRIP CENTER, AND IT DOESN'T PAY TO BUILD A THOUSAND OR 1500 SQUARE FOOT SMALL INDIVIDUAL UNIT. IT'S COST PROHIBITIVE. THEY MENTIONED STRIP CENTERS BEING RESTRICTED.
WELL, THEY GOT THE GOOD AND BAD, EVERYTHING DOES. BUT THEY HAVE A LOT OF SERVICE INDUSTRY, THE HAIR INDUSTRY. WHERE DO THESE FALL, SERVICE INDUSTRIES THAT WE GO TO ALL THE I'M? YOU KNOW? MY DENTIST IS IN A LITTLE STRIP CENTER. SO, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT I CAN YOU AND REPRESENTING THE COMMERCIAL STUFF, AND I WAS GOING TO BRING UP THE 40%. I THOUGHT I READ THAT WRONG AND INTERPRETED IT WRONG. SO THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, AND COMMERCIAL, THERE'S STRANGE LANGUAGE I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND IN THAT. I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE REALLY SQUEEZING TRYING TO GET THE QUALITY OF LIFE HERE WITH EMPLOYMENT AND TAX BASE AND THEY DON'T SEND THE KIDS TO SCHOOL. IT'S JUST HARD TO REALLY DO THIS IN THIS SETTING. I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO REALLY START. BUT I'M GLAD YOU CAME, AND PLEASE KEEP THE PRESSURE ON FOR THE COMMERCIAL STUFF.
>> YES, SIR, WE WILL. THAT'S A CONCERN FOR US AND WE ONLY HAVE
SO MUCH TIME. >> THE OTHER ONE, I'M TRYING TO FIND A NOTE ON IT WHERE WE HAVE NO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, BUT A LOT OF COMMERCIAL DEPENDS ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY. IF WE CAN'T BUILD A COMMERCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE HAVE NO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, IT'S JUST, I MEAN I THOUGHT MAYBE I'M NOT COMPREHENDING IT RIGHT, BUT I'M READING IT AND THINKING THIS DOESN'T SOUND GOOD. DON'T
MEAN TO TAKE UP A LOT OF TIME. >> WE HAVE TO GET YOU ON THE
SEASON SUNSHINE BUS. >> YEAH, THE SUNSHINE BUS THAT DOESN'T ROUND AROUND THE COUNTY MUCH.
>> YEAH, NOT TOO FAR. >> BUT IN SOME OF THE RURAL OR, YOU KNOW, MORE DEVELOPED AREAS IN THE NORTHWEST ARE NEEDING SERVICES. PEOPLE ARE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE THE PRIMARY CARE, THE WHATEVERS. THERE'S LACK, LIKE ALL THE COMMERCIAL IS CATCHING UP WITH IT, BUT IT'S A LONG STRUGGLE.
>> AND WE WILL WITH MEETING WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THIS STUFF, BUT I DID HAVE THE TWO OTHER SPEAKERS WHO WOULD HAVE COVERED MORE, BUT THEY HAD TO LEAVE.
>> WE HAVE TO REALLY CONCENTRATE ON SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL STUFF AND GO THROUGH IT MORE. I KNOW I JUST SCRATCHED THE SURFACE OF THINGS THAT JUST SORT OF SHOCKED ME. AND THE 40%, DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S A BAD THING THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO EXPAND IT ANOTHER HALF MILE OR MILE. THAT'S NOT ALWAYS A BAD THING.
MAYBE YOU'RE GETTING SOME SEPTIC TANKS OFF THE TANK LIST,
[04:50:01]
EXTENDING IT BY MANDATING WHOEVER HOOKS UP WHEN IT GOES BY. ALL RIGHT, I'LL GET OFF MY SOAP BOX.>> ALL RIGHT, MS. SPIEGEL. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO LOOK AT THIS NOT FROM A DEVELOPER'S PERSPECTIVE AND THE THREE LAYERS I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT ARE CURRENT RESIDENTS FIRST, AND THEN THE CURRENT WORK FORCE AND THE FUTURE OF PRESERVATION WERE THE THREE MAIN THRUSTS BASED ON COMMUNITY INPUT. AND SEEMED TO ME THAT THE FLAVOR WAS, IT LOOKS VERY DIFFERENT IF YOUR WORLD VIEW IS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR WHEEL HOUSE AND HOW YOU THINK, AND YOU'RE PART OF THAT.
MOVEMENT THAT KEEPS US GOING AND I THINK THAT THE IDEA IS MAYBE LET'S JUST LOOK AT THIS FROM THE OTHER SIDE AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO. BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF COMPROMISE, AND THAT'S REALLY GOOD. I'M JUST THANKFUL FOR THAT. I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU HAD TO SAY, AND THERE WERE THINGS I DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE BECAUSE I CAN'T HAVE THOSE FILES OPEN IN MY BRAIN. THE ONE THING I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS DEFINING THE WORD SHALL. DOES IT MEAN YOU HAVE A DUTY OR OBLIGATION TO OR DOES IT MEAN YOU SHOULD OR MAY? I'VE SEEN IT DEFINED LEGALLY DIFFERENT IN BOTH WAYS. THERE'S A BIG, THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.
>> IT'S NOT PERMISSIVE. >> IT'S NOT PERMISSIVE? WHAT
DOES THAT MEAN? I'M SORRY. >> IT'S A MUST.
>> IT IS A MUST. >> NOT PERMISSIVE MEANS YOU CAN'T MAKE A CHOICE AS TO HOE IMPACTFUL THAT STATEMENT IS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CLARIFYING THAT FOR ME. I THINK HE ADDRESSED JEN'S COMMENTS. SHE HAD SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS.
I'LL SKIP THAT. OKAY I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT LAND USE FIRST.
8.1.2.6. THE COUNTY SHALL PRIORITIZE AND ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT ON A VACANT PARCEL OF LAND SURROUNDED BY EXISTING BUILT AREA. THEY SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND IT SAYS IN FILL DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED EXCEPT IN AREAS A.I. ENCLAVES AND CIRCLED BY THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO THE RV PARKING STORAGE THAT WAS COMPLETELY ENCIRCLED BY THAT. THEN IT SAYS SUBJECT TO COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS THE CITY WILL CONSIDER RESIDENTIAL DENSITY. I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT PERHAPS WHEN THEY DO THE LDC UPDATE WE CAN IDENTIFY AREAS THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT CONSIDERATION. WE HAVE CERTAIN AREAS, I THINK IT MIGHT SET A LOT BETTER FOR PEOPLE.
THIS IS THE PLACE WE'LL HAVE THE INCREASED DENSITY, AND WE NEED MORE ATTAINABILITY HOUSING, INCREASED DENSITY OR WE'LL NEVER GET WORK FORCE HOUSING DONE. IF ANYONE SAYS IT HAS TO LOOK LIKE MY NEIGHBORHOOD OR IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE, THEN WE JUST NEED SINGLE FAMILY EVERYWHERE. THAT'S JUST ONE THING I WANTED TO HAVE LOOKED AT. A.4.1.7, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG A1A THAT I BELIEVE MY COLLEAGUE JUST MENTIONED SHALL BE PERMITTED ONLY ON LAND ZONED TO PERMIT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. CONSISTENT WITH THE USE. AND IT SAYS AT THE END, THE THE FUTURE LAST USE MAP AND APPROVAL THROUGH THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS STANDARDS AS PROVIDED IN THE LDC OR SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROVIDED, AND I WOULD LIKE MIKE ROBINSON TO SPEAK TO THIS. I SEE THIS COMMENT, PLAN APPROVAL BY THE PZA12, MAYBE 14 TIMES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THIS ENTAILS AND LOOKING FORWARD HOW THE THE PLANNING COULD BENEFIT THE COUNTY BY PROVIDING BETTER COORDINATION AND OVERSIGHT.
>> SURE, THROUGH THE CHAIR. IF YOU LIKE IT, I PUT THAT IN THERE. IF YOU DON'T, JACOB DID.
[04:55:06]
>> ILIKE IT I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD.
>> IT'S AN ENDEAVOR THE COUNTY IS TRACKING FROM THAT POINT FORWARD AND OPENS FOR MODIFICATION WHERE YOU'RE TRACKING. JUST FROM, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES IT SPECIFIC. THERE ARE SOME ADVANTAGES. BUT DOING THIS, YOU INCREASE THE THRESHOLD TO A 40-ACRE PARCEL. SO IN THE AREAS WE REQUIRE A PUD IT GOES FROM 10 ACRES TO 40 ACRES, YOU WOULD GO TO PUD. SO THAT'S CLEAR. HOW IF YOU'RE UNDER 40 ACRES IN THOSE AREAS, INSTEAD OF GOING TO PUD, CHOOSE THE ZONING YOU NEED. SAY COMMERCIAL GENERAL FOR EXAMPLE.
AND YOU WOULD THEN GO, YOU STILL GO THROUGH A REZONING, SO YOU'RE STILL GOING THROUGH PUBLIC, PZA, STILL GOING TO BCC AND ASKING FOR WHAT YOU WANT. BUT IT'S A STRAIGHT ZONING. IT'S NOT THE SPECIFIC ZONING OR CONDITIONAL ZONING. SO IF APPROVED, THEN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AS WE SUGGEST THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATION, IT COMES TO PZA FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. I THINK SOME COMMISSIONERS AND PZA MEMBERS LIKE YOU HAVE TO DO 25% OPEN SPACE. THAT'S NOT GUILTY IN OUR STANDARD CODE, THAT'S IN A PUD REQUIREMENT. SOME LIKE IT MAYBE HAVING SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES. THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS WE CAN STILL KEEP, AND YOU CAN PUT THEM IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS MUD ORDINANCE. I THINK WE SEE IT AS THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS. YOU STILL SEE THE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC GETS TO COMMENT, AND YOU GET TO DECIDE AND TWEAK THAT AND HELP THE DEVELOPER DEVELOP A SITE PLAN THAT'S REASONABLE, BUT YET IT'S NOT THIS, I'LL USE THE WORD CUMBERSOME PROCESS. THAT'S FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO I MENTIONED THE BENEFIT TO EVERYBODY, NOT JUST STAFF. BUT IT'S HARD TO TRACK THAT AND KEEP IT ON TRACK AND ENSURE THINGS ARE RIGHT AND EVERYBODY IS DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF, I THINK JACOB ACTUALLY PUT IT IN, AND I APPRECIATE HIM THINKING ABOUT IT THAT WAY. AS A PLANNER FROM 2007 TO NOW, I'VE STRUGGLED WITH THAT. I'VE ALWAYS SAID WE HAD SO MANY PUDS. SO WE THINK THIS IS A POTENTIAL WIN. HOW IT WOULD WORK IS IF THE BOARD ULTIMATELY AGREES WITH THAT, WE WOULD COME BACK WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES THAT WOULD STILL BE LOOKED AT FOR EVERYBODY'S CONVERSATION AND FINE TUNE THAT.
BUT THAT'S HOW WE SEE IT. >> SO IT WOULD BE MORE SITE SPECIFIC, AND LIKE HE SAID IF THERE WAS ONE OF THOSE NATURAL HABITATS ON THERE PERHAPS THAT ISN'T IDENTIFIED IT COULD BE LIKE WELL, THIS MIGHT BE A CONDITION IF THE PZA AGREES YOU COULD CONSERVE MORE OF THIS AREA LIKE THAT? MAYBE NOT MAKING IT MORE ONEROUS, BUT JUST MAKING A BETTER PLAN THAT FITS FOR EACH PARTICULAR PLAN SO WHEN THEY COME IN FOR STRAIGHT REZONING THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO PRESENT ANY OF THIS, BUT STILL HAVE TO
COME BEFORE US OR MAYBE NOT -- >> THAT'S RIGHT. SAY THEY GET THE ZONING AND COME IN. NOW IT'S ABOUT COMPATIBILITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF NEIGHBOR AND HELPING THE DEVELOPER TOO.
YOU'RE NOT REQUIRING NEW REGULATIONS, THAT'S NOT YOUR ROLE. IT'S HEY, WE HAVE SOME COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, CAN YOU INCREASE THAT BUFFER. THAT'S THE IDEA. WE HAVE THE AGRICULTURAL OUT BY THE AG CENTER AN OLD ORDINANCE THAT
REQUIRES SITE PLAN APPROVAL. >> YEAH, IT WAS THE GAS PLACE,
THE NATURAL GAS. >> RIGHT, ANY PARCEL WITHIN THERE COMES BACK, AND WE HAD ONE REQUIRED DOWN IN THE SOUTH END OF THE COUNTY WITH THAT PROVISION. SO YEAH IT WOULD JUST BE KIND OF YOU STILL GET A LITTLE BIT OF THE PUD ASPECT.
[05:00:01]
>> YEAH, I LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'VE GOT THERE'S DEMONSTRATED EFFICIENCY OF OTHER AVAILABLE LANDS DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL TO FIT THE PROPOSED USE. THE COUNTY WILL ADOPT POLICIES AND STANDARDS REDUCING PARKING REQUIREMENT, AND MY COMMENT WAS CONSIDER THIS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THEN I FOUND IT IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SECTION, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. SECTION C ADDRESSES THAT, WHICH IS GOOD. THE COUNTY SHALL ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING TYPES INCLUDING SMALL SCALE MULTIUNIT HOMES, ATTACHED TOWN HOMES, COTTAGES, DUPLEXES, ET CETERA. THAT'S OUR DEFINITION OF MISSING MIDDLE THAT GIVE AFFORDABLE DIVERSE OPTIONS. I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE DETAILS. AND 8.1.4. 16, ABOUTS A.1.8 AND THE FOLLOWING ALL REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I SAY YES TO ALL. THEY'RE ALL BLUE LINE. IN THE WORK FORCE HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT, AT LEAST 30% MUST BE DEDICATED TO WORK FORCE HOUSING FOR A MINIMUM OF TEN YEARS. AND I NOTICED IT'S 80% INSTEAD OF 80 TO 120 FOR THE WORK FORCE HOUSING. THAT'S ALSO A BENEFIT. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
I THINK THAT'S GOOD. I THINK THE OVERSIGHT MECHANISM MIGHT BE AN ISSUE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT INSPIRE KNOWS ABOUT. I KNOW JOE CONE AT HEALTH AND HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES IS LOOKING INTO HOW OTHER COUNTIES OVERSEE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. THE DO WE NEED ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT OR EMPLOYEES? THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT PART OF THE COMP PLAN AND TWO ON THE LIST OF PUBLIC CONCERNS. I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT. ALSO CARVING OUT THE MILITARY EXEMPTION.
REPRESENTATIVE REVIEW OF OLD AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEIGHBORHOODS. IT LOOKED LIKE ALMOST EVERYONE THERE HAS OWNED THEIR HOME FOR ALMOST 15 YEARS. SO YOU DON'T ALWAYS WANT TO TURN AROUND AND SELL IT AND MAKE A PROFIT, SO I LIKE THAT.
MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THIS. I'M ON MY LAST PAGE. ELEVATED AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE HAVE A FEW THINGS THAT HELP AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THE FACT IT'S ELEVATED IN THE PLAN IS A REAL FOCUS, AND I THINK WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH REAL MEAT TO THIS. OUR PROGRAM OR ZONING DISTRICT INITIATED IN 2019 WAS REALLY GOOD, BUT I THINK IT'S REVEALED SOME GLITCHES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX. THEY'LL EXPLORE MORE STRATEGIES TO INCENTIVIZE. JUST SEEMS A LITTLE WEAK, THAT SHALL EXPLORE. A LITTLE NEBULOUS. AND THE EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS IN C.1.4.12, WE DO HAVE THE EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS WHICH ARE REALLY GOOD. AND MY LAST COMMENT WAS ON H1.8 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PAGE 12 OF SECTION H, AND IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL CONTINUE TO ISSUE INTERGOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION, AND ONE OF THE NORTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL COUNCIL LISTED, ONE IS SEEK FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL FUNDING FOR REHAB OR DEMOLITION OF SUBSTANDARD HOUSING, WHICH WE HAVE NOW, AND THE COUNTY SHALL CONTINUE TO COORDINATE WITH THE
[05:05:02]
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF RESOURCES, BUT DO ANY OF THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING? IT WAS THE ONLY THING UNDER AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THAT SECTION. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY, AND THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.>> GREAT, MR. LABANOWSKI. >> ARE WE GOING TO HAVE DINNER BROUGHT TO US SHORTLY?
>> I SENT AN E-MAIL WITH REGARDS TO JEN. WE JUST GOT AN E-MAIL FROM HER TODAY, SO I FORWARDED THAT TO YOU. I WOULD RECOMMEND WE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT SHE PUT OUT THERE
AND TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION. >> I THINK WE HAD RECEIVED, UM, WE HAD RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM HER. WE'LL MAKE SURE IT'S NOT NEW, AND INCLUDED IT WITH MINUTE OF THE BOARD STAFF REPORTS TOO. I BELIEVE THEY'VE SEEN ALL THAT. BUT WE'LL
CONFIRM THAT'S THE SAME THING. >> OKAY. NOW THERE'S A NORTHWEST SECTOR. WHY ISN'T THE WHOLE COUNTY UNDER THE SAME
THING? >> THE NORTHWEST SECTOR IS AN OVERLAY DISTRICT CREATED BEFORE I GOT HERE IN THE EARLY 2000S, MAYBE EVEN BEFORE THAT. THAT WAS PART OF THE COMMUNITY UP THERE THAT WAS VERY ACTIVE, CREATED THE SCENIC HIGHWAY AND ALL THAT, AND THEY DECIDED TO HAVE AN OVERLAY BOUNDED BY 95 TO THE EAST AND COUNTY ROAD 208 TO THE SOUTH. THAT'S JUST THE WAY THANKS TRANSPIRED. THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE BIG THINGS WITHIN THAT SECTOR ARE THE SCENIC EDGES AND DEVELOPMENT EDGES. THE BIGGER BUFFERS. THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN A SEPARATE MEETING BY A COMMISSIONER, BUT THERE WAS NO WILL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH USING THE BUFFERS FOR ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTY.
BUT TO YOUR DIRECT QUESTION, THAT'S JUST WHAT HAPPENED.
THERE'S AN OVERLAY DISTRICT CALLED THE NORTHWEST OVERLAY.
>> SO THERE'S NO THOUGHTS OF TAKING IT ON AROUND THE WHOLE
COUNTY? >> I WAS SAY NO BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT UP AND THERE WAS NO WILL TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I WOULD LOVE TO SEE ALL THE MAPS UPDATED. I WENT TO A MAP
TODAY, YESTERDAY, 2008. >> WE WILL UPDATE, AGAIN, NO CHANGES TO THE MAPS OTHER THAN THE TRANSPORTATION MAP, BUT THEY'LL BE UPDATED WITH THE NEW PLANNING HORIZON OF 2025.
>> I AM CONCERNED WE HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT LAYERS, AND THE WORK FORCE HOUSING JUST DIDN'T SEEM LIKE IT WAS WORKING. I GUESS BECAUSE OF THE FLEXIBILITY THE DEVELOPER BUILDER HAD. AN AVERAGE PERSON CAN GO OUT AND BY A HOUSE AND NOT HAVE RESTRICTIONS. WE DID LOOK AT MAKING IT ALL UNDER ONE UMBRELLA
AND NOT HAVE SEPARATE UNITS? >> UM, WHEN YOU SAY SEPARATE UNITS ARE YOU SAYING, ARE YOU BREAKING DOWN THE PERCENTAGES OF DEVELOPMENT OR SAYING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MISSING MIDDLE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DIFFERENT LEVELS.
>> SURE. >> SO WORK FORCE HOUSING IS A REAL TIFFLY NEW DISTRICT CREATED. I WAS DRUG INTO IT. THE KNEW THEY DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE IT TOO RESTRICTIVE AT THE TIME, SO THEY SAID DON'T PUT TOO MANY, YOU KNOW, RESTRICTIONS SUCH AS LONG DEED RESTRICTIONS, SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY INITIALLY. IT WAS JUST TO GET SOMETHING OFF THE GROUND. SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE WITH DENSITY BONUSES. WE ALSO HAD BONUSES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THEY WEREN'T WORKING VERY WELL. AFFORDABLE MEANING POSSIBLE DOWN INTO THE 60 RANGE OF AMI. SAMAR LAKES WAS THE ONLY ONE I KNOW OF THAT REALLY USED IT, SO IT WASN'T A REALLY GOOD INCENTIVE. SO NOW HOPEFULLY HOPEFULLY ACHIEVABLE AND WILL BE USED.
[05:10:06]
>> HOPEFULLY WE ARE GOING TO PROTECT SOME MORE WETLANDINGS THROUGH INCENTIVES BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO IMPACT THE WETLANDS, YOU CAN BUY INTO THE MITIGATION BANK. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT'S WORKING AS WELL EITHER, SO WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS INCENTIVES? ANYTHING THAT'S PROPOSED?
>> THROUGH CHAIR, SO ONE OF THE COMPONENTS WE'VE DONE TO TRY AND OFFER DENSITY INCREASES IS HAVING WETLAND PRESERVATION AS.
A BONUS. SO WHATEVER YOU PRESERVE, YOU GET A 100% OR WHATEVER BONUS ADDED TO YOUR BASE DENSITY, AND THE CONSERVATION OF THE WETLAND AREA HAS TO BE ESSENTIALLY ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY. SO THERE WILL BE SOME LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT OF HOW IT'S CONSERVED, WHO'S CONSERVING IT, WHAT WILL HAPPEN LATER IN THE FUTURE. IT WOULD BE IN CONSERVATION FOR THE REST OF
TIME. >> I CAN'T SAY ENOUGH ABOUT THAT. THERE HAS TO BE A WAY TO FUND THE LAMP PROGRAM. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE THERE. THERE ARE MORE WAYS YOU CAN PRESERVE SO
MUCH WAS THROUGH THE WET LAMP. >> WHY IS, THAT'S NOT PASSED, BUT IT IS, HAS BEEN PRESENTED, AND NOBODY HAS CANNED IT, SO
WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. >> AND IMPACT FEES, WE'LL GO BACK REAL QUICK. INCENTIVE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AS FAR AS PARKS WITHIN THEMSELVES WILL GET CREDITS IN LIEU OF IMPACT FEE.
>> THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TO PROVIDE WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S A PRO-RATE, I DON'T KNOW COUNT, BUT BASED ON HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE RECREATION INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT. IN ADDITION, EVERY HOUSE IN THERE ALSO AS IMPACT FEES. SO YOU HAVE NOT ONLY RECREATION BUILT IN THERE TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS, ALSO EVERYBODY PAYS IMPACT FEES FOR THE PUBLIC USE OF PARKS AND REC SUCH AS BIG AREAS WHERE THEY'D HAVE PARKS.
>> JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE NOTHING IS TAKEN AWAY FROM THE
PARKS SYSTEM. >> NO, NOTHING IS BEING REMOVED.
>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WHATEVER, NUMBER ONE WEALTH BUILDER IN THE UNITED STATES IS HOMEOWNERSHIP. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU GET CRITICIZED A LOT FOR PROMOTING THAT, BUT THAT'S JUST A FACT. AND HOWEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT AND DO IT, I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, SORT OF REALLY MORE STREAMLINED, I GUESS. MORE CLARITY FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BE ABLE TO PUSH THIS BECAUSE WE ARE JUST SIMPLY PRICING THE YOUNG OUT OF THIS COUNTY. AND WE NEED THEM. WE NEED THEM TO TAKE OUR JOBS ONE DAY UP HERE. AND I JUST, AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S, LIKE EVERYBODY SAYS, IT'S A REAL MIXED BAG WHEN YOU READ THIS. IT DOESN'T LIKE FLOW LIKE OKAY, THIS IS STEP ONE, STEP TWO, STEP THREE. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS. AND WE MENTIONED THE COMMERCIAL STUFF. THE 40% IN A.1.2.3 I THINK IF MY NOTES WERE RIGHT. THERE WERE SOME OTHER THINGS, BUT A LOT OF IT WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED. I DON'T WANT TO IS IT UP HERE AND BEAT A DEAD
[05:15:05]
HORSE. WE TALKED ABOUT DEVELOPMENT ON 206 AND A1A SOUTH. I UNDERSTAND DOWN TOWARDS THE CRESCENT BEACH AREA THERE'S REALLY NO PLACE TO DO COMMERCIAL DOWN THERE ANYWAY. BUT AS WE GET BACK UP, WE'VE GOT PUBLIX, A WINN DIXIE. IT'S JUST VERY VAGUE. IT JUST SAYS A1A SOUTH. I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT OF THAT PART. ALSO THE EXPANSION OF A QUARTER MILE.I WAS LOOKINGFOR THAT. I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM IF YOU HAVE A DEVELOPER WANTING TO EXPAND, AND WE STILL HAVE SO MUCH IN THE COUNTY WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE EXPANSION OF, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT RUSS KING, WHAT'S HAPPENED OUT THERE. IT'S TAKEN DECADES TO GET THAT THROUGH. DECADES. WHEN I WAS ON THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE 90S WE STARTED PLANNING IT. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE EXPANDING FOR DEVELOPMENT. AND MIKE, YOU MENTIONED THE TEN ACRE PUD. WILL YOU GO OVER THAT AGAIN BECAUSE I'VE GOT A NOTE HERE. THE 40 ACRES AND THE 10 ACRES. EXPLAIN
THE DIFFERENCE. >> SURE, SO RIGHT NOW 10 ACRES, IF YOU'RE 10 ACRES AND OVER IN MIXED USE, RESIDENTIAL USE, AND YOU DON'T HAVE THE USES YOU WANT TO GET.
>> RIGHT. >> YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ALLOWED BE I THE ZONING DISTRICT, YOU HAVE TO GO TO PUD. YOU CAN'T GO TO ONE OF THE STANDARD ZONING DISTRICTS LIKE COMMERCIAL GENERAL OR RS2 FOR RESIDENTIAL. YOU HAVE TO GO
TO PUD. >> THAT'S IF YOU'RE CHANGING
ZONING? >> YEAH, IF YOU'RE CHANGING
ZONING. >> SO THE FOUR ACRES SAID YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MIXED DEVELOPMENT AT 40 ACRES.
>> AND MIXED USE, RIGHT? >> SO WHAT'S A MIXED DEVELOPMENT ACCORDING TO THE COMP?
>> YEAH, IT'S A COMBINATION. >> BECAUSE MY DEFINITION AND
YOURS MAY BE DIFFERENT. >> AND JACOB CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT'S NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL OR JUST INDUSTRY, THE IDEA IS YOU HAVE A MIX IN THERE. AND WHAT WE HAD HAD, AND I THINK WE ARE CHANGING, WAS THE THE, INITIALLY THAT WAS THE IDEA, AND THEN SOME FLEXIBILITY WAS GIVEN AND THE COMP PLAN CHANGED WHERE PEOPLE WERE ALLOWED SOME SINGLE USE.
>> SO THAT'S IN A MIXED USE DISTRICT, NOT SO MUCH A
RESIDENTIAL. >> NO, THAT'S RIGHT.
>> OKAY, OKAY THAT. CLEARS IT UP. I COULDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IF IT'S LIKE RES B. 40 ACRES DOESN'T GIVE YOU ENOUGH SPACE TO MAKE A COMMERCIAL PROJECT WORK UNLESS IT'S ON MAYBE A
MAJOR HIGHWAY. >> RIGHT, RES B COULD BE SOLELY RESIDENTIAL OR MIXED USE IF YOU WANTED TO TO DO COMMERCIAL USES, THOUGH, YOU NEED THAT PUD TO ENCAPSULATE THAT.
>> AND I DIDN'T REALLY SEE ANYTHING MORE ON INDUSTRIAL LAND, I MEAN, I KNOW THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY HAS A BUNCH, BUT UNLESS I MISSED IT I DON'T REALLY SEE ANYTHING ON IT.
>> SO THE COUNTY DIDN'T, AT THIS POINT THE COMMISSION HASN'T GIVEN ANY DIRECTION OR ADMINISTRATIVELY CHANGING ANY OF THE LAB USES LAND USES AS THEY ARE. THE MAP IS STAYING THE SAME. BUT THE COMMISSIONER DIRECTION TO US TO PUT ADDITIONAL POLICY. WE HAVE ENCOURAGING POLICIES IN THERE ABOUT INDUSTRY AND WORKING WITH THE INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE THE IDA. RIGHT NOW, SO WE HAVE NEW LANGUAGE
[05:20:02]
THAT ENCOURAGES MANUFACTURING AND INCENTIVIZING, SO IF APPROVED WE'D BE ENCOURAGED TO INVESTIGATE THAT. RIGHT NOW I KNOW OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS A STUDY BEING ACCOMPLISHED RIGHT NOW TO IDENTIFY PARCELS. LIKE THIS IS SPECIFIC. SO THERE'S A CONSULTANT LOOKING AT PARCELS TO IDENTIFY WHERE WE CAN ENCOURAGE THESE, YOU KNOW, INDUSTRY USES AND OTHER USES TOO, NOT JUST INDUSTRY, BUT NONRESIDENTIAL USES TO HELP THE ECONOMY. APPRECIATE HER DOING THAT, AND IT WILL HELP AND GO WITH LONG WITH THE POLICIES.>> BECAUSE ALL WE HAVE ON MANUFACTURING IS JUST THE I-16, 95 CORRIDOR, INMAN ROAD, WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. THEY'RE SMALL MANUFACTURING. AND I MEAN AT SOME POINT THEY'LL PROBABLY WANT TO EXPAND. MAYBE NOT ON THAT LOCATION, BUT THOSE ARE
GOOD PAYING JOBS. >> THEY ARE.
>> THEY HAVE GREAT BENEFITS. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SEE ENCOURAGED. GOOD QUALITY MANUFACTURING. THERE'S NO ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS THAT I SEE OUT OF IT. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I MEAN MOST OF IT, THEY'RE ASSEMBLING STUFF. THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY MANUFACTURING THE PRODUCT. WE'VE GOT A BIG COUNTY, SO, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S JUST, I JUST KEEP LOOKING IF, YOU KNOW, JOBS. I WANT TO SEE JOBS AND HOMEOWNERSHIP FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE, WORK HERE, AND CAN RAISE THEIR FAMILY HERE AND QUIT GOING TO JACKSONVILLE.
>> ALL RIGHT. YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK?
>> NO, SORRY. >> I DIDN'T PUT HIM UP TO THAT EITHER. MIKE AND I WERE TALKING THE FIRST BREAK, AND IT'S SOMETHING I HAD IN THE BACK OF MY MIND OF FINDING PLACES FOR MANUFACTURING. WE DON'T HAVE IT. WE NEED THE JOBS, AND ACROSS THE STREET FROM GRUMMAN IS AN IDEAL LOCATION BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF THINGS MADE FOR THEM AND SHIPPED IN. IT WOULD BE A LOT EASIER IF IT WAS MADE ACROSS THE STREET. NOT NECESSARILY JUST THEM, BUT A NUMBER OF COMPANIES THAT HAVE THINGS GOING THAT COULD BE MANUFACTURED HERE. THAT WOULD HELP OUT WITH PROVIDING JOBS FOR PEOPLE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO JACKSONVILLE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE IS ON THIS. I KNOW THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL LOOK AT IT, BUT I'D ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFINITELY LOOK AT MANUFACTURING AND HAVING SPECIFIC AREAS FOR MANUFACTURING.
>> WE'LL PASS THAT ALONG. >> AND THE COUNTY HAS THE IDA, YOU KNOW? THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO GO DO IT WITH. THE COUNTY HAS A WHOLE BOND SET UP FOR MANUFACTURING, BUT THERE WAS NO PLACE TO EVER PUT THEM.
>> AND PART OF THAT STUDY THAT SARAH IS DOING IS A LOT OF THE COUNTY AT THE PRESENT AT AND IT'S PART OF THE PACKAGE OF GETTING THEM IN HERE. IT'S UNIQUE AND SITE SPECIFIC, NOT JUST A GENERAL THING SO THEY CAN HAVE A LIST OF PROPERTIES AND START DOING THE INCENTIVES TO GET PEOPLE HERE. DEFINITELY GOOD FEEDBACK, WE'LL PASS THAT ALONG.
>> MS. SPIEGEL? >> I JUST WANT TO SAY YOU ALL DID A GREAT JOB. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I KNOW THAT WAS A HUGE LIFT. THERE'S A FINISH LINE IN SIGHT. YOU CAN MAKE IT THROUGH THE NEXT MONTH, I'M JUST GIVING YOU SOME ENCOURAGEMENT, AND THANKS FOR LISTENING TO US RATTLE ON. DID YOU HAVE SOME
THINGS YOU WANTED TO SAY? >> I'VE BEEN WAITING MY TURN.
>> HE'S NEXT. HE'S IN THE QUEU.
>> OKAY, YOU'RE NEXT. >> YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
>> AND I'M GLAD GRUMMAN WAS JUST MENTIONED. HAVING SERVED ON THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY, YOU CAN'T HELP BUT GAIN A SPECIAL APPRECIATION FOR THEM AND WHAT IT DOES AND THE FACT THAT
[05:25:09]
THEY'RE THE TOP DEFENSE AEROSPACE CONTRACTOR IN THE WORLD AND JUST BUILT, OR THEY BUILT THE B-2S THAT JUST PERFORMED FOR US VERY NICELY. FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT GRUMMAN HAS A WHOLE SLEW OF SUPPLIERS THAT SUPPLY THEIR OPERATIONS HERE. THEY'RE MOSTLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST, AND A PERFECT STRATEGY THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT AT THE AIRPORT, AND I ASSUME WITH THE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS TO HAVE SPECIFIC STRATEGIES TO WORK WITH NORTHROP BECAUSE THEY'D LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THE SUPPLIERS BE NEXT DOOR OR NEARBY RATHER THAN UP IN THE NORTHEAST. THEY'RE VERY DEPENDENT ON THEM FOR THEIR MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY. BUT MY COMMENTS, AND I'LL TRY TO BE EFFICIENT. BUT BIG PICTURE I THINK THE PLAN SEEMS, THE WAY IT'S HANDLING GROWTH SEEMS VERY APPROPRIATE FOR OUR SITUATION AND MAINTAINING THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES FOR THE PERIOD GOING FORWARD AND EMPHASIZING IN FILL ON PROPERTIES THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE A HIGHER DENSITY THAT ARE MARGINAL USE NOW OR OTHER SITUATIONS IS SORT OF RIGHT ON.1 AND IT HAS THE BENEFIT COMPONENT OF PRESERVING AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND RURAL AREAS, AND I SURE HOPE THAT CAN GO FORWARD AND BE PART OF OUR COUNTY'S FUTURE. AND I SPEAK NOT ONLY JUST GENERALLY, BUT AS SOMEONE THAT BICYCLES ABOUT ONCE A WEEK THROUGH THE COUNTRY OF OUR COUNTY AND LOVES TO SEE THE PRODUCTIVE LAND AND RURAL AREAS. SO ANYWAY, GOING THROUGH THE PLAN UNDER LAND USE, THESE ARE MY NOTES. I THINK THE TREATMENT OF THE TOWN CENTER IS NOT CORRECT. VALANA TOWN CENTER HAS ACHIEVED A LOT OF ITS DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION.IT'S REALLY TO THE POINT THAT PRIVATE MARKET FORCES CAN I THINK BE DEPENDED ON TO AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE I THINK PROBABLY AGREE THAT VILANO TOWN CENTER IS PROBABLY BECOMING TOO INTENSE. THE ROAD SYSTEM IS STRAINED, AND ESPECIALLY ON WEEKEND, AND IT'S BECOMING ACTUALLY INCONVENIENT FOR NEIGHBORS OR RESIDENTS TO, WE PLAN OUR LIFE TO NOT GO TO PUBLIX ON WEEKENDS BECAUSE OF THE CONGESTION. SO I THINK CELEBRATING THE SUCCESS OF VILANO TOWN CENTER AND WORKING TOWARD PRESERVING THE FEW HISTORIC ELEMENTS THAT REMAIN THERE. ONE HAS A WRECKING BALL HANGING OVER IT RIGHT NOW.
PROBABLY THE MOST DISTINCTIVE HISTORIC BUILDING IN THAT DISTRICT, IS MORE APPROPRIATE. AND I'M NOT SURE WHETHER ACTUALLY TEN YEARS, OR THE LAST COMP PLAN HAD A LOT OF ATTENTION AND APPROPRIATELY SO ON VILANO TOWN CENTER, AND THE COUNTY MADE A SIZABLE DONATION, BUT NOW I THINK IT SHOULD BE VIEWED PROBABLY MORE AS A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ON ITS WAY AND NEEDS TO
[05:30:03]
BE GUIDED RATHER THAN INCENTIVIZED ESPECIALLY. THEN SORT OF FLIP SIDE, I THINK THE PLAN THAT'S BEING LOOKED AT RIGHT NOW, THE 2050, THE NEW ATTENTION I THINK SHOULD GO TO HASTINGS. MY VIEW IS THAT HASTINGS IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR GREATING A SUB-COMMUNITY SURROUNDED BY A LOT OF WONDERFUL AGRICULTURAL RURAL AND LAND COMMUNITIES, BUT HASTINGS ITSELF HAS A LOT OF UNDERUTILIZED LAND RIGHT IN WHAT WAS THE FORMER CITY BOUNDARIES OF HASTINGS. SOME OF THESE SIGHTS ARE, UM, SIZABLE, THAT COULD BE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING. AFFORDABLE WORK FORCE HOUSING AND MARKET RATE HOUSING, AND SOME OF THE SITES ARE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF HASTINGS MAIN STREET THAT IS ON ITS WAY BACK WITH THE COUNTY INVESTMENT IN THE NEW COMMUNITY CENTER AND RETAIL BUILDINGS OR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, MOST OF THEM HISTORIC, BEING REHABILITATED BY A PRIVATE INVESTOR. I BELIEVE HASTINGS COULD ACTUALLY ABSORB SOME OF THE POPULATION HOUSING DEMAND AND COULD BE A WONDERFUL FREE STANDING COMMUNITY AS PART OF OUR COUNTY. SO I WOULD URGE THAT BE, BECOME LOOKED AT, NOT JUST AS AWE MAIN STREET PROGRAM, WHICH IS NOW ORGANIZED ALONG MAIN STREET, BUT AS A TRUE REBUILDING OF A COMMUNITY AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S THERE BECAUSE SOME OF THE VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED SITES HAVE STREET SYSTEMS SERVING THEM, UTILITIES, ALL THAT. AT THIS POINT SOME OF THESE ARE SMALL. I'LL PROBABLY FOLLOW UP WITH STAFF AND JUST GO THROUGH SOME OF THE LIST SO I'M NOT GOING TO PICK AWAY, BUT I DO SEE ALSO UNDER LAND USE HAVING JUST SERVED A NUMBER OF YEARS IN THE CRB THAT THE CRB, A.1.5.15, CRB SHOULD STILL BE THE ENTITY THAT HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC REVIEWING AND ACTING UPON DESIGNATIONS OF CULTURAL RESOURCES I SAW THERE WAS A COMPONENT OF HAVING THOSE DESIGNATIONS BECOME A STAFF ACTION, AND I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD HAPPEN. I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF CRB ATTENTION AND A PUBLIC MEETING TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. A FEW OTHER SMALL THINGS THAT I'LL SHARE WITH STAFF. TRANSPORTATION. HAVING ALSO JUST SERVED ON THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, I DO HAVE SOME THINGS TO SHARE. THE NAMES IN THE COMP PLAN ARE INCORRECT, AND I'LL SHARE THE CORRECT ONES. BUT IT'S NOW OFFICIALLY, THE GOVERNOR SIGNED IT, I UNDERSTAND, IT'S ST.AUGUSTINE AIRPORT. BUT OBJECTIVE B.1.10, I WOULD ADD ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE THE ATTRACTION OF SCHEDULED COMMERCIAL AIRLINE SERVICE INTO ST. AUGUSTINE AIRPORT, PROVIDING A CONVENIENCE FOR LOCAL TRAVELERS. IT WAS MY GREATEST FRUSTRATION IN SERVING ON THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY BOARD THAT WE HAD A PROPOSAL FROM AN AIRLINE THAT'S DOING VERY WELL FLYING ON THE EAST COAST AND
[05:35:02]
WEST COAST COME TO THE AIRPORT AND PROPOSE NINE FLIGHTS A WEEK TO THREE DIFFERENT CITIES AND HAVE THE VOTE TO APPROVE BE TURNED DOWN 4 TO 1 WITH A BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, MOSTLY PRIVATE PLANE OWNERS MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE HANGER RENTS FOR THEIR AIRPLANES RATHER THAN COMMERCIAL AIR SERVICE. ONE COMMENT WAS, AND THERE WERE SOME NODS, HAVING FLIGHTS INTO ST.AUGUSTINE WILL JUST BRING MORE TOURISTS, AND MY RESPONSE AT THAT POINT IS WHAT'S BETTER THAN A TOURIST ARRIVING IN TOWN WITHOUT A CAR? SO ANYWAY, DIRECT FLIGHTS COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY.
THE BUSINESS OF COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORT IS EVOLVING. THERE WILL BE A LOT OF NEW FLIGHT TECHNOLOGIES COMING ONLINE IN THE PERIOD THAT THIS COMP PLAN COVERS. AND FEEDERS INTO ATLANTA AIRPORT, THE HUBS, WOULD BE A REAL NICE CONVENIENCE FOR OUR CITIZENS TO NOT HAVE TO BEAT THEIR WAY UP TO NEAR THE GEORGIA LINE TO GET ON AN AIRPLANE TO GO ANYWHERE. AND IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. HOUSING, OH, COASTAL MANAGEMENT. I WAS STRUCK BY THE PROVISION E9.6 WHERE NEW PROJECTS BEING BUILT, IF THEY, LET'S SEE, THE 10% PROJECT IMPACT ON EVACUATION ROUTES KEY DEVELOPMENTS REQUIRING A MITIGATION COMPONENT. MY VIEW IS THAT THIS MEASURE NEEDS TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER FOR COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREAS AND AREAS WHERE CONSTRAINED EVACUATION ROUTES SUCH AS OUR BARRIER ISLANDS, VILANO NORTH BEACH, IT SHOULD BE REDUCED IN MY VIEW TO A 5% OR LESS. AND THEN I WONDER WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE MITIGATION TO CONSTRAINING EVACUATION, 10% OF EVACUATION CAPACITY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE. I MEAN, WHAT WOULD A MITIGATION BE? THAT'S NOT SPELLED OUT. SO I'M NOT SURE IF OTHERS HAVE MORE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THAT, BUT I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. 10%, AGAIN, I THINK IS WAY TOO HIGH A BAR. LET'S SEE.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION. YOU'RE GOING TO THINK I HAVE ONE THING ON MY MIND AS I SAY TO MY COLLEAGUES, BUT I THINK THAT WE'VE COME TO THE POINT OF, THERE ARE STATEMENTS THAT RELATE TO AGAIN THE AIRPORT. I THINK THE BEST INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION INITIATIVE THAT COULD HAPPEN GOING FORWARD IS FOR THE COUNTY TO ENGAGE WITH THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND EXPLORE THE FEASIBILITY OF BRINGING THE AIRPORT UNDER THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT. ALMOST ALL AIRPORTS IN FLORIDA BIG AND SMALL OPERATE UNDER AN UMBRELLA OF THE CITY OR COUNTY GOVERNMENT. IT WORKS VERY WELL FOR THEM. THERE'S STILL A, IN SOME CASES THEY CALL IT AN AIRPORT AUTHORITY. IT'S AN APPOINTED BOARD THAT DOES A LOT OF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS AND GUIDANCE FOR THE OPERATION OF THE AIRPORT. BUT MANY AIRPORTS BENEFIT FROM HAVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE
[05:40:02]
ADMINISTRATIVE INFRASTRUCTURE OF A COUNTY OR A CITY THAT THEY CAN RELY ON IN OPERATION AND ADMINISTRATION. OUR AIRPORT IS REALLY CONSTRAINED WITH THOSE RESOURCES, AND YOU CAN, IF YOU SERVE OF A BOARD, YOU CAN SEE IT EVERY DAY. WE'VE BEEN ESPECIALLY CONSTRAINED IN THE PAST COUPLE YEARS WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS. SO I REALLY THINK THAT SHOULD BE EXPLORED, AND I THINK NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO DO IT. I HAVE A LOT OF SMALLER STUFF, BUT THOSE ARE THE ONES I BRING FORWARD RIGHTNOW. >> OKAY. MR. GREEN IS NEXT.
>> YES, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TRANSMITTAL OF THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> I SECOND! >> COULD YOU REPEAT THAT MOTION?
>> YES, I WILL IF YOU NEED ME TO.
>> PLEASE, YEAH, I'M SERIOUS. >> OH, OKAY. A RECOMMENDATION TO TRANSMIT ST. JOHNS COUNTY 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> OKAY, WAS THAT STRAIGHTFORWARD? OKAY. MR.
LABANOWSKI. >> QUICK QUESTION TO STAFF, HAS THE SCHOOL BOARD HAD INPUT ON THIS?
>> WE NEED A SECOND. >> JUDY SECONDED.
>> YOU'RE OKAY. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, MS. SPIEGEL AS THE SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE MIGHT KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN COORDINATION THROUGH THEM.
>> YOU'VE BEEN TALKING TOO MUCH, I'M NOT GIVING YOU THE MIC. BUT YES, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AND A LOT GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES, SO THEY'RE
VERY MUCH IN THE LOOP. >> OKAY. THANKS.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE VOTE?
>> JUST VOTE. >> THERE'S NO ONE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, SO LET'S VOTE. IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU
FOR MAKING THAT MOTION. >> SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO
[Staff Reports]
CALL IT. >> NO, I'M SORRY. NEXT WE HAVE
ANY STAFF REPORTS? >> BRIEFLY, THE NEXT PZA MEETING IS JULY 17TH DUE TO INDEPENDENCE DAY HOLIDAY. SO JULY 17TH.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JACOB.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.