[Call meeting to order]
[00:00:06]
>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, WE ARE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. 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.
>> DOCTOR, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT ?
>> ALL RIGHT, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW, THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE JURISDICTION, AND BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING. THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIME ON EACH MEETING AND FOR LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRPERSON, WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKER SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND THEN STATE THEIR ADDRESS. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY. THE TESTIMONY, IF IT IS NOT SWORN, MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF THERE IS ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORDING OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED, ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING, SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, WRITTEN STATEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE CLERK TO NB THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD. IT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR COUNTY REVIEW, AND REVIEW OF ANYTHING RELATED -- AN APPEAL RELATED TO THEM. STATE WHETHER THEY HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSON, REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM, OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE AGENCY. THE COMMUNICATION , IF IT HAS OCCURRED, THE AGENT SHOULD IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED AND THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION.
CIVILIAN CLAUSE -- CIVILITY CLAUSE, WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES, WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS WISHING
[1. MINMOD 2025-05 Richard Property. Request for a Minor Modification to the Sawgrass PUD (Ordinance 1973-08, as amended) to allow for a Rear Yard setback of zero (0) feet in lieu of the required 5 feet and a Side Yard setback of zero (0) feet in lieu of the required 5 feet to allow for a covered patio and to allow for an eight (8) foot tall privacy wall in lieu of a the six (6) foot maximum height, specifically located at 1536 Harbour Club Drive.]
TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY ? WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER ONE, WILL BE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD, AND IS THERE ANY EX PARTE ? MR. OLSON , THIS IS NOT -->> NOT POPPING UP ON MY THING, THE MICROPHONE? HOLD ON, ONE SECOND.
WE HAVE ONE LITTLE TECHNICALITY. SURE , YES. NO PROBLEM. IF YOU
WOULD NOT MIND >> THIS IS THE BREEZEWAY SEPARATING THE TWO PROPERTIES , AND THE POOL , ON THE RIGHT. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TREES ABOVE THE POOL , WHICH IS THE MAIN CAUSE AND NEED . AND THIS IS ONE POINT WHERE THEY WOULD BE CONNECTING CLOSE TO THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE, WHERE IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE WALL AND THE GATE AND THE STRUCTURE ON THE LEFT. OVERHEAD VIEW .
THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT DRAINAGE. THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY SIGNIFICANT DRAINAGE , BECAUSE THIS IS A SCREEN
[00:05:05]
ENCLOSURE. THERE IS NO HARDCOVER, SHOULD DRAIN WATER PENETRATE THE SCREEN AND CONTINUE DOWN. ANY QUESTIONS OR -- THERE ARE SOME PHOTOS TO SHARE, ALSO. THERE ARE PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE SCREEN CLOSURES , WITHTHE SAME LINES. >> I AM KATHY RICHARD, 1536 HARBOR CLUB DRIVE. I AM HAVING TO DEAL WITH THESE TREES . I WILL SHOW THEM. OKAY. THERE ARE THREE , VERY CLOSE TO MY WALL. I HAVE HAD TWO TREE PROFESSIONALS LOOK AT THEM AND THEY BOTH SAID THEY CANNOT GET A CRANE BACK THERE, AND THEY CANNOT DO A LOT FOR ME, ONE OF THEM WENT TO SEE IF THE NEIGHBORS BEHIND ME WOULD ALLOW A CRANE , THEY ARE SIGNIFICANTLY OVER MY HOUSE, I MEAN, MY YARD. I DON'T SEE HOW THEY CAN EVEN BE REACHED VERY WELL. THE TREES ARE SO CLOSE . SO, MY ISSUE IS, THESE LEAVES ARE CAUSING ME A LOT OF TRULY PAIN. I HAVE TO SCOOP THE POOL EVERY DAY FOR A GOOD EIGHT MONTHS OF THE YEAR, THESE TREES SHED ALL THAT MESS. I HAVE SUFFERED WITH A BACKACHE AS A RESULT . AND A LOT OF MEDICATION. THIS WOULD MAKE MY LIFE A LOT EASIER. I WANT TO SHOW YOU JUST FOR A KIND OF ARGUMENT. THIS IS THE STREET. YOU COME IN RIGHT HERE, WE GO THROUGH A CUL-DE-SAC. I JUST WANT TO SAY, OF THE 20 HOUSES ON THE STREET , ON THIS SIDE OF THE STREET , THERE ARE THIS MANY, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE SCREENS. ON MY PLOT , YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE TWO AND ANOTHER ONE DOWN HERE. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANY COMPLAINT ABOUT THESE FROM THE NEIGHBORS. I HAVE BEEN HERE, A WHILE. THESE ARE THE TWO , THIS IS MY HOUSE, THIS , THESE ARE THE TWO THAT ARE RIGHT NEAR HER. I WANT TO ALSO SHOW THE PART OF HER YARD THAT THIS WILL IMPACT IS VERY MUCH THE REAR.
THIS IS THE AREA THAT SHE USES. SHE HAS A FENCE , AND SHE DOES NOT USE MUCH TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THIS IS THE WALL IN QUESTION. I WANT TO SAY THE YARD IS NOT A MANICURED THING THAT SHE USES A LOT. I JUST FAIL TO SEE HOW THIS COULD BE A PROBLEM. ALSO , HIS ASSISTANT HAD SUBMITTED A VIDEO OF HOW MUCH WATER COMES THROUGH THE SCREEN AND YOU CAN SEE THAT , THE AMOUNT OF DIFFERENCE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE MAJORITY COMES THROUGH THE SCREEN VERY HEAVILY.
SO , I THINK THAT IS ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
>> WE DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. >> HI. I THOUGHT YOU MUST BE THE DAUGHTER? POSITIONING OF THE SCREEN. WHERE WILL IT BE JOINING THE CONCRETE BLOCK, STUCCO-COVERED WALL, AT THE TOP? OR THE LEDGE ?
>> CONNECTED RIGHT ONTO THE SOUTH.
>> IS THERE ANY WAY IT CAN BE ATTACHED BELOW THAT LET AND
[00:10:01]
ANYTHING THAT COULD STAY ON HER PROPERTY ? WE CANNOT BE HAVING WATER GO ON TO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. OKAY?>> I SUPPOSE WE COULD TALK TO THE ENGINEER AND SEE IF WE COULD GET A CONNECTION FOR CONNECTING TO THE INSIDE OF THE WALL.
>> THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. >> I WANT TO ADD, I HAVE NOT MEASURED IT, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE WALL IS 10 TO 12 INCHES WIDE, IT IS NOT ANCHORED IN THE CENTER, IT IS NOT AS THOUGH IT
WOULD BE GOING DIRECTLY DOWN. >> I DID NOT SEE ANY VIDEO ABOUT POROSITY . I LOOKED TO SEE HOW MUCH WOULD OCCUR, I WAS NOT ABLE TO FIND ANYTHING RELATED TO THE APPLICATION, SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT. BUT , ANYWAY, MY QUESTION JUST IS, THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY WATER. IT WAS JUST BELOW THAT .
THAT WAS MY MAIN CONCERN . THANK YOU.
>> I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND HOW MESSY TREES ARE, MY HOUSE IS SURROUNDED BY THEM , I DO HAVE A SCREEN, AND IT DOES CATCH THEIR LEAVES AND BRANCHES AND SO FORTH, I UNDERSTAND THAT, I USUALLY VOTE FOR ITEMS LIKE THIS , UNLESS THE NEIGHBOR , OR NEIGHBORS, RIGHT NEXT-DOOR OBJECT . THERE IS AN OBJECTION TO THIS, HOW IS THAT SCREEN GOING TO BE ATTACHED TO NOT BE ON THE NEIGHBOR'S ROOF? EVEN IF YOU BUILD THAT WALL, UP TO EIGHT FEET , RIGHT THERE . HOW IS THE SCREEN GOING TO COVER THAT AREA FOR EXAMPLE ? THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE COVERED FOR EXAMPLE?
>> THE OWNER OF THE COMPANY IS VERY BUSY AND HE HAS AN ASSISTANT WHO PREPARED ALL OF THIS AND THAT IS WHY WE DO NOT KNOW WHY THE VIDEO DID NOT MAKE IT IN.
>> I DID NOT SEE IT. >> THEY WERE PLANNING TO PUT A BEAD IN HERE -- BEAM IN HERE, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A
CONNECTION TO THE ROOF. >> I BELIEVE IT IS A 10-INCH SPACE. AND IT WOULD BE FROM THE HOUSE .
>> I WANT TO ADD ALL OF THIS ROOF RIGHT HERE IS DRAINING INTO
MS. RICHARD'S PROPERTY. >> I CAN'T BELIEVE A SUBSERVIENT HOUSE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DRAIN INTO A DOMINANT HOUSE. I HAVE NEVER HEARD THOSE TERMS BEFORE I READ THIS REPORT.
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND I MAY ASK COUNTY STAFF AND OTHER
MEMBERS OF HERE. >> I AM PRETTY SURE IT DRAINS,
IN MY DIRECTION. >> I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY
DRAIN OFF OF THAT. >> I PROPOSE THERE IS A LITTLE GIVE AND TAKE. SOME DRAINAGE WE ARE RECEIVING .
>> THE BEAM THAT YOU WERE GOING TO PUT IN , IS NOT GOING TO
>> WAS THAT IN THE APPLICATION? >> WE HAVE PICTURES , WHICH I AM NOT FINDING . YOU HAVE A PICTURE THAT WAS SUBMITTED, THE BEAM.
>> THAT WOULD BE , THE BEAM WOULD BE PART OF THE
ENGINEERING. >> IT WAS A REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS A SHARED WALL , WHICH IMPLIES DUAL OWNERSHIP .
THE WALL IS TOTALLY ON MY PROPERTY. AND SO IF WE ATTACH THE BEAM , IT WOULD BE IN THIS LOCATION. AND IT WOULD BE VERY MUCH NEAR THE GATE, AS YOU CAN SEE THAT WOULD BE WHERE THE BEAM WOULD GO . EVEN THOUGH THE WALL ON YOUR PROPERTY IS UNDER THE
[00:15:04]
EVE OF YOUR NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE?>> THE ORANGE , ON THE RIGHT. >> MAYBE TWO FEET ?
>> 16, 18 INCHES, THAT IS ACTUALLY OVER PART OF THE WALL.
>> SO HER HOUSE ENCROACHES INTO YOUR PROPERTY?
>> I'M SORRY? >> THE WALL IS ENTIRELY ON YOUR PROPERTY , IT LOOKS LIKE AN ENCROACHMENT. BUT THEN, I DO NOT KNOW THE TERMINOLOGY OF THE DOMINANT AND SUBSERVIENT HOUSE .
I HAVE NEVER HEARD THAT BEFORE AND I HOPE I DO NOT HEAR IT AGAIN, IT IS A DISTURBING CONCEPT TO ME.
>> MY FORMER HUSBAND WAS A CONTRACTOR. YOU LOOK AT HOW MUCH WATER , WHEN YOU BUILD, SOMETIMES YOU SEE IT AND YOU DO A LOT OF DRAINAGE. WE DO NOT HAVE THOSE ISSUES . IT IS JUST NOT A FACTOR. SO. SOMETHING CAME TO MIND. BUT NOW I FORGOT.
>> CAN I ASK SOME OF OUR PEOPLE SITTING HERE ON THE BOARD? I WOULD LIKE TO ASK GREG , WHO IS A BUILDER. GREG, HAVE YOU EVER BUILT HOUSES WHERE YOU WOULD CLASSIFY ONE AS DOMINANT AND ONE
AS SUBSERVIENT? >> I WILL SPEAK FOR LAX , MORE THAN A DEVELOPER, I THINK THIS IS THE WAY A LAWYER CRAFTED THE TERMINOLOGY . IN OTHER WORDS, FIRST DESCRIBING THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE AS DOMINANT , AND THEN IN PARENTHESES, OR, HE PUT IN QUOTATION MARKS, THE DOMINANT HOUSE. HE COULD HAVE CALLED IT THE ELEPHANT HOUSE AND THE OTHER ONE THE MOUSE HOUSE , IT WOULD HAVE THE SAME EFFECT. WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS WHAT THE COVENANTS SAYS. I HAVE BUILT THESE HOMES, NOT A LOT OF HOMES THAT I HAVE NOT BUILT , THEY RAN OUT OF FAVOR. THEY ARE CALLED ZERO LOT HOMES, A PORTION OF THE COVENANTS IS HERE, BUT I SUSPECT WE ARE MISSING A PORTION, WE HAVE A PORTION THAT TALKS ABOUT THE EASEMENT , I SUSPECT THERE IS A PORTION TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT I THINK IT IS SPECIFICALLY ALLOWING THAT ENCROACHMENT AND IT PROBABLY SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES FOR THE DRAINAGE FROM ONE PROPERTY TO GO TO THE OTHER. NOW, I AM SURMISING , I DON'T HAVE THEM HERE. BUT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FAIRLY COMMON BACK IN THE DAY. AND IT PROBABLY ADDRESSES WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ATTACH TO THE WALL. HAVE YOU
HAD AN HOA APPROVAL ? >> I HAVE.
>> PRESUMABLY, THE HOA DOES NOT WANT YOU TO SUE FOR GRANTING APPROVAL THAT IS NOT IN THE COVENANTS. EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY ABOUT THIS WHOLE ISSUE, I REALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM VOTING YES FOR THIS, I THINK IT IS A HARDSHIP FOR HER, BUT I WOULD SAY, BUYER BEWARE . IF THE COVENANTS -- CONVENANCE
DOES NOT PROVIDE THE EASEMENT -- >> CAN I PUT SOMETHING ON THE RECORD ? YOU UNDERSTAND THAT TODAY'S HEARING IS ONLY ABOUT THE COUNTY ROLES AND ZONING RULES AND WE CANNOT GIVE YOU ANY LEGAL ADVICE ON WHAT RIGHTS YOUR NEIGHBOR MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE, CIVILLY . THAT IS NOT IN THE SCOPE OF THIS HEARING. I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PUT THAT BEAM IN ORDER TO CONNECT TO THE JOINT WALL, BUT THIS BOARD CANNOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION. IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A PROBLEM DOWN THE ROAD. WE CANNOT GIVE HER PERMISSION.
>> WE CAN GIVE HER A VARIANCE. >> IT IS WITH THE COUNTY AND THE
ZONING LAWS. >> WE HAVE DISCUSSED ACCESS BEFORE, BEING ALONE, I DO PUT A LOCK ON MY GAIT. AND I HAVE NO
[00:20:07]
ISSUE , SHE HAS THE AT&T LINE THAT COMES DOWN RIGHT THERE .THERE IS NO PROBLEM . WHEN I KNOW THEY ARE COMING, I JUST LEAVE THE DATE OPEN. ON ONE OCCASION, I HAD THEM GO THROUGH THE HOUSE, AND OPEN THE GATE , THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE, AS FAR AS HER GETTING ACCESS TO THE AREA, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.
>> WHEN YOU HAVE THESE ZERO LOT LINES , THERE IS USUALLY A LOT OF LANGUAGE IN THE AGREEMENTS THAT ALLOW FOR THAT KIND OF MAINTENANCE. IT WOULD SURPRISE ME IF YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THIS. I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU ARE.
>> IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE. >> I AGREE.
>> THERE IS NO WAY FOR THAT HOUSE DID NOT DRAIN INTO HER PROPERTY, WHICH IS NOT ALLOWED , IT IS IN THE COVENANTS , GIVEN THE NUMBER OF HOMES THAT HAVE THE SCREENS ATTACHED ALREADY AND HOA APPROVAL, I WOULD SAY THERE IS DEFINITELY A PROVISION , WE ARE NOT TELLING YOU THAT . OUR JOB IS TO TELL YOU IF SHE MEETS
THE CRITERIA OF THE HEARINGS. >> I DO NOT WANT TO PROLONG THIS. BUT I ASKED ROBERT OLSON, WHO IS AN ARCHITECT, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS, IN GENERAL? AND I LIKED GREG'S ANSWER. I WILL PUT YOU ON THE SPOT , IF THAT IS OKAY.
>> I HAVE QUESTIONS , OF A NATURE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN
ASKED SO I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD. >> FAIR ENOUGH. THAT IS IT FOR
NOW. >> I WANT TO ADD, THE HOA APPROVAL HAS REACHED THE TIME LIMIT, THEY HAD NO PROBLEM WITH IT THE FIRST TIME. I DON'T THINK THAT IS SIGNIFICANT, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE THE APPROVAL, WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A YEAR.
>> LET ME ADD, DO YOU BUILD THIS ENCLOSURE? I WOULD TRY TO GET THOSE OVERHANGING RIMS TRIMMED UP, WE NEED A TREE SERVICE THAT CAN GET UP WITH A CHAINSAW, TIE OFF THE LIMBS, AND GET THEM DOWN SAFELY, IF YOU HAVE SEEN MY SCREEN ENCLOSURE , I HAVE SOME OVERHANG , THEY HAVE A GROWN BACK. THERE ARE A LOT OF LEAVES . YOU WILL BE OUT THERE WITH A BLOWER, BLOWING THE LEAVES OUT.
>> IT DOESN'T GIVE THEM A LOT OF TROUBLE. WHAT I NEED IS A
CLIMBER. >> THAT IS MY SUGGESTION .
>> YOU NEVER SEE CLIMBERS, JUST CLAIMS.
>> CLAIMS ARE EASIER. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THEM?
>> WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE SCREEN ENCLOSURE ?
>> I BELIEVE, THIS WALL IS , SO . I THINK , WE WERE GOING UP , TO MEET THE HOUSE ON THIS SIDE, WHERE HER DAUGHTER IS, 7.5 TO 11
FEET . >> I DID NOT SEE THEM THERE. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER ONE? YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT FOR A MINUTE.
>> I'M SORRY, I DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT STATEMENT.
>> YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT. >>> I AM JOHN MCCARTHY, I LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR, ON THE DOMINANT LOT , IN THAT DEFINITION, IT IS IN THE COVENANTS , AND IT HAS ALLOWABLE DAMAGE , THAT IS APPLICABLE. SO, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME. I DUG UP THE GRASS IN MY BACKYARD, I DID NOT LIKE TAKING MY
[00:25:05]
LAWNMOWER ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE BACKYARD. THE HYDRANGEAS DO NOT LOOK SO GOOD RIGHT NOW AND THE BLUEBERRY BUSHES , THAT IS THE OFFICE. I AM THE SECOND OWNER, I HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE 2001, THAT IS THE ONLY REASON I CAN THINK OF, I AM NOT SURE WHEN THE WELL WAS BUILT . I DID SOME RESEARCH. THE POOL WAS PUT IN SUBSEQUENT TO THE HOUSE BEING BUILT. I DON'T KNOW IF THE WALL WAS BUILT , BUT I AM GUESSING THE OWNERS WOULD NOT HAVE PUT LINES BEHIND THE WALL. ALSO, WHAT I HAVE UNDERSTOOD OVER ALL THESE YEARS, THE EVE IS A PARKING LOT . THAT ALLOWS DRAINAGE. I HAVE SENT THE COPIES OF THE SURVEYS, THEY VARY OVER TIME BECAUSE OF CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING, NOTHING CAN BE ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE , MY BIGGEST ISSUE, LOOKING AT DIAGRAMS THOUGH, EVERYTHING IS FLAT. I AM A NATIVE FLORIDIAN WHO GREW UP IN SOUTH FLORIDA. WE HAVE DOWNPOURS AND SCREENS DO NOT KEEP OUT THE DOWNPOURS. MY BIGGEST ISSUE IS WATER RUNNING UNDER MY ROOF , IS THIS GOING TO BE RIGHT THERE, AND ADDITIONAL WATER , AT MY FOUNDATION . I DO NOT THINK THAT THE COMPANY IS GOING TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE COMING FROM THE ROOF AND INTO MY FOUNDATION. I HAVE WATER RUNOFF FROM THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR. BY INCREASING THE WATER RUNOFF , I AM CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL INTERIOR DAMAGE.AND AGAIN, THERE IS NO SLOPE . INCREASED WATER IS IMPACTING ME I UNDERSTAND THE OAK TREES, BUT WITH THE OAK TREES STILL THERE, YOU WILL HAVE TO GET IT OUT OF THE POOL OR OFF THE SCREEN. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE ON MY PROPERTY.
>> INC. YOU VERY MUCH, WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO RESPOND TO ANY
OF THAT ? >> YES, THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY CONNECTION TO THE NEIGHBOR'S ROOF , IT WOULD ALL BE UNDER THE ROOF, THERE SHOULD BE NO IMPACT . WE COULD PUT A DAUGHTER TO COLLECT THE WATER COMING OFF OF THE ROOF, THAT WOULD HELP KEEP THE WATER AWAY FROM BOTH PROPERTIES.
>> I THINK YOU JUST ANSWERED MY QUESTION, I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST, I HESITATE TO USE THIS WORD. LET'S CALL IT PLANK , OFF THE WALL, ATTACH THE SCREEN TO THE TOP OF THE PLANK AND RUN THE GUTTER ON TOP OF THE WALL AND MAYBE HAVE A LITTLE FOUR-INCH GAP WHERE THE DOWNSPOUT CAN COME BACK IN, IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH THAT I AM GOING TO MAKE THIS A CONDITION.
>> OKAY. YOU HAVE TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE TO SPEAK.
>> SHE SAID SHE COULD RUN A PIPE TO DIVERT THE WATER.
>> THAT IS WHERE IT IS FALLING NOW, I AM FINE WIH IT.
>> THE GATE GOES TO THE FRONT, I AM WILLING TO HAVE A DOWNSPOUT WITH A PIPE THAT RUNS IT OFF , SO THAT DOES NOT IMPACT HER
SLAB. >> AS LONG AS IT IS GOING TO BE
IN YOUR YARD THAT IS MY OPINION. >>
>> I'M SORRY , THE PUBLIC PORTION IS DONE.
[00:30:03]
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINMOD 2025-05 RICHARD PROPERTY, WITH THE CONDITION, WHICH IS YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE WHERE THE SCREEN ENCLOSURE WOULD SHED WATER ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY AND THAT GUTTER WILL REDIRECT THE WATER BACK INTO THE APPLICANT'S YARD.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.
>> ANY DISCUSSION? >> I HAD SOMETHING . I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY , AGAIN GIVEN MY OBSERVATIONS OVER MANY YEARS, I HAVE NOT SEEN WATER RUNNING OFF SCREEN ENCLOSURES. DRAIN WATER COMES RIGHT THROUGH AND GREG CAME UP WITH A SOLUTION, I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST A GUTTER. THAT SHOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEMS . SO, I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR IT, SINCE I SECONDED IT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
[2. COMM 2025-26 JAMC Warehouse/Shell. Request for Site Plan Approval to allow for a 26,600 square foot Office/Warehouse shell building with paved parking, stormwater retention, utilities and landscaping, located on property within that portion of lands rezoned by Ordinance 1987-01 designated Industrial Warehouse (IW), specifically located on Parcel A & B Agricultural Center Drive.]
ITEM NUMBER TWO , IS THERE ANY EX PARTE ? MR. LABANOWSKI ? MS.SPIEGEL ? >> I ALSO VISITED THE SITE.
>> ANYONE ELSE? WOULD THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, I AM THE PROJECT ENGINEER, WILLIAM TULLY
FOR THE JAMC WAREHOUSE. >> CAN YOU SPEAK UP ?
>> YES, THIS IS LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 208, IT CONSISTS OF TWO LOTS . AND MY CLIENT IS PROPOSING A 26,600 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE WAREHOUSE BUILDING , WITH A PAVED PARKING LOT, STORM DRAINAGE, RETENTION POND, LANDSCAPING, WE MEET ALL OF THE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS AND THERE IS A SITE PLAN, THERE IS A LOT OF GREEN AREA , I THINK 75% , WE ARE AT 71%, AND WE WERE QUITE A BIT THROUGH THE COUNTY TO GET THE DRIVEWAY SITUATED, TO WHERE IT MET CODE. AND THIS KIND OF SHOWS YOU THE AMOUNT OF GREENERY , FOR THE PROJECT. I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT
HAVE . >> ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE
TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? >> WE HAVE SEEN THIS. NOT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT , DOWN THE STREET, IT
MOTION? >> MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO , COMM 2025-26 , JAMC WAREHOUSE , IN THE STAFF REPORT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND APPROVAL, ANY DISCUSSIONS ?
>> LONG TIME, NO SEE . AND IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU .
>> HANG ON . >> THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK
[3. ZVAR 2025-08 Pollard Residence. Request for a Zoning Variance to allow for a proposed swimming pool to encroach three (3) feet past the platted Building Restriction Line in Residential, Single-family (RS-2) zoning; located specifically at 2453 S. Ponte Vedra Blvd.]
YOU, MR. WILLIAM TULLY, ITEM NUMBER THREE , IS THERE ANY EXPARTE ? MR. LABANOWSKI ? >> YES , I VISITED THE SITE .
>> I WALKED THE SITE YESTERDAY. >> ANYONE ELSE ?
>> MY NAME IS BREE, HE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION , HE IS THE
[00:35:11]
CONTRACTOR, I WILL SPEAK ON BEHALF OF IT, WE ARE REQUESTING A SLIGHT VARIANCE.>> IF YOU WANT TO SEE THIS , WE ARE REQUESTING A SLIGHT VARIANCE , IN ORDER TO INSTALL A POOL IN THE BACKYARD. THE HOUSE WAS BUILT BY AN ARCHITECT, AND THEY ARE STORING IT . THIS IS THE ORIGINAL WOULD DECK . AND WE ARE PROPOSING A POOL TO BE LOCATED IN THE SAME POSITION OF THE DECK. FOR SAFETY REASONS AND SECURITY REASONS , WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE THE DOORS, TRYING TO HAVE A GOOD FOOTPRINT A CRUNCHING ON THE PROPERTY LINE , YOU CAN SEE , HERE IS PROPOSING THE POOL BUILDING, IT IS JUST ON THAT SOUTHSIDE. AND WE CAN HAVE THE HOMEOWNER TO BE
ABLE TO ACCESS THE POOL. >> IT IS WITHIN THE OLD
FOOTPRINT ? >> IT IS SLIGHTLY, SLIGHTLY OPEN. COULD SEE THE OLD FOOTPRINT, I THINK IT IS , LIKE, I THINK I HAVE IT HERE. WE ARE PAST THE PORCH, I HAVE THE VERY MAX POINT RIGHT THERE , SO IT IS PRETTY SLIGHT AND WITH THE PROPERTY, WE ARE NOT ENCROACHING.
>> CAN YOU CUT IT BACK, 2 FEET 4 INCHES.
>> SO THAT LITTLE EDGE OF THE PORCH, IT IS A FAMILY OF FOUR.
HE WANTS IT TO BE A FUNCTIONAL POOL. AND THE TYPICAL POOLS , THEY ARE 15 BY 30 FEET , THIS IS GOING TO BE A SMALL POOL , AND WE ARE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE USAGE, INSTEAD OF THIS BEING AN
AESTHETIC. >> WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE
QUESTIONS. MR. OLSON ? >> IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT , WHAT IS COMING ALONG HERE, IT REALLY IS. COULD YOU LOCATE, ON THE MAP, COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE? I WANTED TO MAKE
SURE IT WASN'T COMING NEAR THAT. >> ACTUALLY THE COASTAL
CONSTRUCTION, THE HOUSE ITSELF . >> HAVE YOU GOTTEN A PERMIT FROM
THE FLORIDA DET? YOU HAVE? >> I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH DAVID MULTIPLE TIMES, HE HAS HAD THE DRAWINGS FOR MONTH. HE HAS
APPROVED EVERYTHING. >> WELL, WE WILL WANT THAT IN
WRITING . >> OKAY, IT IS RIGHT UP AGAINST A LINE . OKAY ? SO. THAT IS MY ONLY QUESTION.
>> DR. RICHARD HILENBECK? >> YOU ARE NOT IMPACTING ANY VEGETATION? COULD YOU GO BACK IN THAT FIRST SET OF DRAWINGS? GO BACK SEVERAL PAGES , I GET THESE ITEMS ELECTRONICALLY, CAN YOU GO BACK SEVERAL PAGES , AT ONE POINT IT SAID THERE WAS AN ENCROACHMENT, OF FIVE FEET , ONE INCH PAST THE COASTAL
[00:40:08]
CONSTRUCTION. >> THAT IS COMING ACROSS.
>> SO, THE APPLICATION , NOT ONLY THROUGH THE BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE , BUT NOW THE CCC L , IS FIVE FEET, ONE INCH,
AND PASS THAT ? >> I KNOW THAT WHEN I DID THE MEASUREMENTS , IT WAS FIVE FEET PAST.
>> WHAT IS GOING TO BE THERE , ENCROACHING INTO THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE. I VOTED FOR A LOT OF VARIANCES . ONE THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE.
>> THE HOUSE ITSELF ENCROACHES INTO THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION
IS IT FOR NOW, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU .
>> YES, I LOOKED AT THE WEBSITE, I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THAT AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTIES ARE PUSHED FORWARD, EVEN FURTHER FROM WHAT THE EDGES WERE GOING TO BE.
>> I WILL SAY, WE ARE VERY COMMITTED TO THE RESTORATION OF THE DUNES THEMSELVES , AND MAKING SURE THAT OUR FLORIDA COASTLINES STAY INTACT AND STAY USABLE , WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE NOT GETTING INTO THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT.
>> WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT.
>> THERE IS STRUCTURE IN PLACE AND
YEARS ? >> WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE POOL, I AM ZOOMING THAT IS THE EDGE OF THE WATER, YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A LEFT, IS THERE GOING TO BE MORE DISTURBANCE ON THE EAST SIDE LIKE A PULLED BACK ?
>> IF THEY SCREEN IT, IT WOULD BASICALLY NEED A VARIANCE.
>> THIS IS OBVIOUSLY , JUST , YOU KNOW, A PERSPECTIVE RENDERING. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE OVERALL FEELING, ALL THE WAY TO THE EDGE OF THE POOL. AND WHAT THEY HAVE ON THE PROPERTY.
>> FLIPPED ALL THE WAY OVER TO YOUR FIRST PAGE, I THINK IT IS THE FIRST PAGE, THAT LOT REALLY , BY LEGAL DESCRIPTION, GOES WAY OUT INTO THE OCEAN. BY STATE LAW, THE LINE IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PRIMARY DUNE, AND THAT DRL IS ESTABLISHED BY THE PLAT , IS THAT CORRECT ? YEAH. OKAY, ALL RIGHT. THE HARDSHIP IN THIS CASE , YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ENOUGH ROOM TO FIT A DECENT -SIZED POOL, WITH THE SETBACK THAT YOU HAVE? THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU WANT THE POOL FOR AESTHETIC REASONS, COULD YOU, AND WHY CAN'T YOU, MOVE THE POOL DOWN FURTHER SOUTH? TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE HOUSE ? SO THAT YOU WILL HAVE MORE ROOM.
>> SO, THERE IS AN EASEMENT RIGHT THERE , RIGHT ALONG THE SIDE , FOR UTILITIES, ACCESS, AND POTENTIALLY FOR FUTURE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC ACCESS. AND WE ARE TRYING TO STAY AS FAR AWAY FROM THAT SIDE, SO THAT WE DO NOT EVENTUALLY HAVE ANY CONFLICTS, WITH THAT UTILITIES LINE . ON THE PROPERTY.
>> OKAY. BUT THERE IS ROOM TO PUT THE POOL, IS THAT BEHIND THE
[00:45:03]
GARAGE? >> NO, IT IS BEHIND -- THE
GARAGE IS ON -- >> THE NORTH SIDE?
>> THE NORTH SIDE, AND SO, THAT AREA THERE, IT IS ACTUALLY QUITE LOW, IN TERMS OF, THE, OF THE LAYOUT, LET ME SEE IF I HAVE ANYTING FURTHER IN THAT AREA, AND I DON'T, BUT IT IS QUITE LOW, THERE WOULD BE, THERE IS, THERE IS ROOM, HOWEVER, JUST I THINK, IN REGARDS, TO THE WAY IT FITS AT THE SITE, IT IS QUITE A BIT HIGHER THAN THE REST OF THE HOUSE AND WE WOULD HAVE TO DO QUITE A BIT OF EXCAVATION TO GET THAT POOL AND IT WOULD PROBABLY CREATE MORE DAMAGE TO THE DUNES , BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO EXCAVATE FURTHER DOWN, TO GET UP TO THAT EXISTING DUNE. DOES
THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE ? >> YOU SAID PUTTING THE POOL THERE WOULD CREATE MORE DAMAGE TO THE DUNES? EARLIER, WE SAID
THAT WE CREATE NO DAMAGE . >> BECAUSE THE POOL , IT IS BASICALLY GOING IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE DECK , THE SAME ELEVATION . SO, WE ARE NOT REALLY HAVING TO INFRINGE INTO ANY EXCAVATION. WHEN WE EXCAVATED IT , THERE WAS SORT OF, YOU KNOW? THERE WAS ROOM LEFT UNDERNEATH THE BACK. IF WE CHOSE TO INSTALL IN THAT SOUTHEAST LOCATION, IT IS QUITE A BIT LOWER, THE FINISHED DOOR LINE, IT IS 16.6 FEET , AND THE HOUSE DIRECTLY OUT INTO IT. TO BE ABLE TO GET THE POOL PUT IN CORRECTLY WITHOUT ANY WATER RUNOFF TOWARD THE HOUSE ITSELF, WE WOULD HAVE TO SINK IT EVEN LOWER. THE DUNE RISES HERE, SO WE ARE TRYING TO GET THAT DUNE , AND HOLD IT BACK, AND JUST
RETAIN IT MORE. >> THAT WOULD BE SAFETY CONCERNS , IS THERE AN EGRESS FURTHER TO THE SOUTH COMING OUT OF BOTH? MORE IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO THE SWIMMING POOL ? TOWARDS THE SOUTH, THERE IS AN ELEVATED , OUTDOOR BALCONY THAT WOULD PROVIDE A MEANS OF PREVENTING CHILDREN FROM JUMPING OFF THE BALCONY AND INTO THE POOL, THAT IS SOMETHING I HAVE SEEN,
GROWING UP. >> I THINK I MAY HAVE DONE IT.
>> I WOULD DISCUSS MOVING THE POOL TO THE SOUTH.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING, YOU SAID SOMETHING WAS FIVE FEET, AND THREE FEET PAST THE RESTRICTION LINE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE VOTING
ON. >> DO YOU NEED FIVE FEET ?
>> THE ORIGINAL WOODEN DECK , WOULD NOT PASS THE BASIC
CONSTRUCTION LINE, YEAH. >> THE REQUEST IS ACCURATE.
THREE FEET PAST THE PLATTED BUILDING LINE ? I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THERE WAS NO ERROR. >> IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER THREE, OH, I AM SORRY.
>> HOW MUCH EXCAVATION IS GOING TO BE DONE? WILL THIS BE CLOSE
TO THE LEVEL OF THE DECK ? >> IT WILL BE FLUSH , WITH THE
LEVEL OF THE DECK. >> YOU ARE NOT DIGGING DOWN THAT
FAR THEN? >> IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ? WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER THREE?
>> APPROVE VARIANCE 2025-08, POLLARD RESIDENCE, THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT, PROVIDED.
>> I SECOND. >> ANY QUESTIONS?
[4. ZVAR 2025-09 Hyman Family Beach House. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section 6.01.03.E.4 of the Land Development Code to allow for a reduced Front Yard setback of twelve (12) feet in lieu of the required 15 feet for a Corner Through Lot located in Residential, Single Family (RS-3) zoning to accommodate construction of a swimming pool, located at 5099 Medoras Avenue]
>> ALL RIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES. THANKS VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, ANY EX PARTE ? MS. SPIEGEL ?
[00:50:04]
>> YES, I DID A SITE VISIT . >> AND THERE ARE EMAILS .
>> I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ITEM YESTERDAY, WITH MR. WHITEHOUSE , I HAVE TO ASK MR. WHITEHOUSE A QUESTION THAT COULD HAVE A CONFLICT. THE NAME ON THIS IS THE HYMAN FAMILY. IS
THAT CHARLES D HYMAN? THANK YOU. >> I DID A SITE VISIT AND YESTERDAY I TALKED TO MR. WHITEHOUSE, BRIEFLY.
>> MR. GREENE ? >> I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MR.
WHITEHOUSE. >> OKAY, MR. WHITEHOUSE?
>> HELLO, AGAIN. MADAM CHAIR, FOR THE RECORD, 104 IN ST.
JOHN'S , I AM EXCITED TO BE HERE, THIS IS ON THE VARIANCE , 2025- 09, A REQUEST FOR A ZONING VARIANCE , TO SECTION 6.0 1.03 POINT D -- CAPITAL E , OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCED FRONT YARD SETBACK, LOCATED IN THE BEACH AREA, AS YOU CAN SEE . AND ALONG, JUST TO THE EAST OF K-1 - A . YOU CAN SEE IT AS WELL, FROM GOOGLE MAPS, YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THE AREAS, THERE IS THE NUMBER OF STREETS ON THE MAP, THEY HAVE BEEN VACATED, EVEN THOUGH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN OTHER LOTS WITH FRONTAGES, THIS ONE IS KIND OF IN THIS AREA. YOU CAN SEE AND HEAR FROM THE OVERHEAD , AS WELL, IN THE AERIAL IMAGERY, YOU CAN SEE THE ONES THAT WERE VACATED. AND THIS IS A RARE INSTANCE OF HOW THIS HAS DEVELOPED IN THE AREA, RESIDENTIAL C ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND ALSO, RS -3, FOR THE ZONING AND AGAIN, ANOTHER AERIAL VIEW , WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE MINOR RELAXATION, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS LOT, AT 5099 DORIS , YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT OF IT ALONG THE LOT, THIS IS WHEN IT WAS CLEARED, AND THE RIGHT OF WAY IS UP HERE AND THERE IS A LARGE VIEW WITH TRIANGLES ON BOTH SIDES, THIS IS CONSIDERED TO BE A CORNER THROUGH LOT AND THERE ARE THREE FRONT YARDS.
HERE, YOU CAN SEE, WHEN THE SITE PLANNING WENT IN, IT CREATED A LONG, NARROW LOT , AND YOU CAN SEE HERE, THAT THE SETBACKS , THEY EXCEED THEM , ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE , THE 15 FOOT , THE SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE, SORRY, ON THE EAST SIDE, THE 25 FOOT , THE FRONT YARD, THEY EXCEED THAT, BY ABOUT SIX OR EIGHT FEET, TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, WHICH IS DOWN HERE, 15 FEET, THEY ARE ASKING FOR 12 FEET SO THEY CAN MOVE THE POOL JUST A LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THE HOUSE. AND YOU CAN SEE, AGAIN, THIS IS A CLIP OF THE SURVEY, YOU CAN SEE THE LARGE AREA OF THE RIGHT OF WAY , ON THIS CERTIFIED SURVEY, ALL OF THIS, AGAIN, IS EXTRA AREA THAT SHOWS MITIGATION IN THIS PROCEDURAL REQUEST . WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS MINOR VARIANCE, THAT TALKS ABOUT THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS ON CORNER THROUGH LOTS OF, THEY HAVE OWNED THIS SINCE
[00:55:02]
1971, THEY, FOR OVER 50 YEARS, THE OLD STRUCTURE DETERIORATED FROM COASTAL WHERE AS WELL AS HURRICANE DAMAGE OVER 50-PLUS YEARS, THEY HAVE REBUILT A WALL. WITH A NEW HOUSE ON THIS IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOT, THEY EXPECT TO HAVE A POOL IN THE FRONT, A MODEST POOL, 10-FOOT WIDE , BY 16, IT IS APPROXIMATELY THREE FEET OF LENGTH THAT GOES OUT INTO THIS LONG LOT , THE REQUIREMENTS, FOR THE VARIANCE, UNDER THE CODE, THIS ONE MEETS THOSE, THE STAFF REPORT, THE UNUSUAL WANTED, IT DOES NOT AFFECT THAT, AND A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE AREA, AND IT WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, THE REQUEST IS BASED ON THE IRREGULAR LOCATION OF THE LOT, REQUIRING THREE FRONT YARDS , AND IT IS EXTREMELY MINIMAL , TO ALLOW THIS INFRINGEMENT FOR THE 10-FOOT -WIDE POOL. THE THREE FRONT YARDS, THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE REGULATIONS THAT WE SAW AS WE LAID OUT IN THE CODE, IT DOESN'T CAUSE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP , AND IN SOME, IN FACT, IT IS THE IRREGULAR SHAPE OF THE LOT, THE CAN TRAIN THE -- CONSTRAINED SPACE. IT WAS PUSHED A FEW FEET UNDER THE OVERHANG OF THE HOUSE. THAT REALLY DID NOT WORK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, AND TO GET ALL OF THE OTHER REGULATIONS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY'S ET CETERA AND THEN FINALLY, THIS IS AN UNUSUAL, IRREGULAR SHAPE, AS SHOWN , THERE ARE TWO FRONT YARDS, WHICH EXCEED THE REQUIRED FRONT SETBACKS. COMPARABLE TO CODE, AND THEN SOME HAVE REPRESENTED THE PICTURES TO SHOW A LACK OF NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE AREA, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THIS, BECAUSE THEY CAN PUT A FENCE UP ON THE SIDE. AND , THEREFORE, WE ASK YOU TO HAVE REASONABLE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS, THE STAFF DID SUBMIT THIS AND THERE ARE NO OPEN COMMENTS, THERE IS NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT, RAN ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT HERE, THEY SAID THEY HAVE KNOWN THIS FAMILY FOR A LONG TIME. IN FACT, THEY ARE A TREASURE TO THE COMMUNITY , YOU WILL NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO SEE IT, IN CONCLUSION, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE THIS LETTER OF SUPPORT, THE STAFF HAS PROVIDED YOU AN ADJUSTED MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND WE ARE HERE TOANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ?
>> IT IS AN INTERESTING NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD INVESTMENTS HAPPENING IN VARIOUS POINTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE CAN SEE THAT LIKELY CONTINUING. MY ONLY QUESTION IS, THERE IS NOT ANY DETAIL ABOUT HOW THAT POOL WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE -- THE QUESTION I HAVE, IN MY MIND, WILL THAT HARM THE VISIBILITY OF THE INTERSECTION AT ALTAVISTA AND PALMETTO ? WHAT TYPE OF WALL WILL ENCLOSE THAT , POSSIBLY NOT DIMINISHING THE VISIBILITY OF THAT INTERSECTION. THROUGH THE CHAIR , THESE ARE SOME DEPICTIONS OF HOW IT WILL SET UP. THERE ARE CODES , THERE ARE CODES AND REGULATIONS REQUIRING WHERE THE FENCES CAN BE. OBVIOUSLY THEY WILL MEET ALL THOSE REGULATIONS, BUT FROM THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, DEFENSE IS INTENDED TO BE AROUND THE AREA. ANY SITE ISSUES ALONG THE ROAD, AND AGAIN, WE TALKED TO TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING. THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY
CANNOT GO TO THE CORNER. >> THANK YOU, THAT WAS MY ONLY
[01:00:04]
QUESTION. >> JAMES, YOU SAID THIS IS AN IRREGULARLY-SHAPED LOT. IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS A RECTANGLE. A LOT OF THE OTHER LOTS , THE NEIGHBORS ALL AROUND THERE, OR RECTANGULAR LOTS AS WELL , BECAUSE IT IS A 55-FOOT -WIDE LOT, IT IS IRREGULAR? AS YOU SEE IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE NONCONFORMING LOT, IT DOES NOT MEET THE REGULATIONS OF THIS AREA , UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL, YOU ARE RIGHT, THERE ARE OTHER RECTANGULAR LOTS THAT BACK UP TO IT, IN BETWEEN ALTAVISTA, THIS IS THEIR FRONT YARD, THIS ONE CAN HAVE EIGHT-FOOT ON THE SIDE, WE HAVE A THIRD FRONT YARD, THEY ARE FAR EXCEEDING EIGHT-FOOT, NOW THEY ARE AT 12. REALLY, THE ONLY CONSIDERATION, BOARD MEMBER OLSON ASKED ABOUT THE SITE CONSIDERATIONS AND THEY ARE TAKING THOSE INTO ACCOUNT. IT IS AN ELONGATED LOT AND THE FRONT, BECAUSE THE FRONT YARD PART OF OUR CODE COMES IN, THEY SORT OF CONFLICT, THAT IS WHY THERE IS
AN ISSUE. >> OKAY, YOU MENTIONED THAT A NORMAL -SIZED HOUSE WOULD NOT FIT ON THIS LOT. WHAT IS A
NORMAL-SIZED LOT ? >> WHAT I MEANT WAS A NORMAL , SORT OF SQUARE -LOOKING HOUSE. IT HAS TO BE DESIGNED IN A WAY WHERE IT WAS VERY LONG AND SKINNY. SOME PLACES UP ALONG A 18, GOING BACK, AND ALL LOT OF THEM COME IN AND THEY HAVE TO MOVE IT CLOSER TO STAY OUT OF THAT, THEY HAVE HAD TO DO THAT, MAKING IT LONGER, THEY COULD NOT REALLY PUT A POLL -- POOL ON THE EAST OR WEST SIDE, THEY ARE ONLY ASKING FOR THE SETBACK. REALLY RARE, BECAUSE THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF THREE-FOOT FRONT YARDS IN THIS AREA , IN THE COUNTY, REALLY. IT IS AN INTERESTING
DILEMMA. >> WHY DON'T YOU MAKE A MOTION,
AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT? >> IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR ?
>> I BELIEVE THERE IS A HARDSHIP , HAVING THREE FRONT YARDS, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO IMPROVE ZVAR 2025-09 , THE TREND --
HYMAN FAMILY BEACH HOUSE. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.
>> OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION ? WE WILL VOTE. ALL RIGHT, THAT
[5. MAJMOD 2025-03 St. Augustine Industrial Park. Request for a Major Modification to the St. Augustine Industrial Park PUD (Ord. 1994-10, as amended) amending the phasing and expiration schedule to account for a proposed 200,000 square foot expansion to an existing warehouse/distribution facility. A re-vised Master Development Plan (MDP) Text and Map is provided to reflect the proposed changes. The subject site is specifically located at 3660 Deerpark Boulevard.]
MOTION PASSES , 7- 0. >> THANK YOU.
>> ITEM NUMBER FIVE, IS THERE ANY EX PARTE ? MR. LABANOWSKI ?
>> I DID VISIT THE SITE. >> I DID VISIT THE SITE
YESTERDAY. >> I HAVE MANY, MANY TIMES .
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS. SUITE 600, DAYTONA BEACH, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, I AM WITH THEM TODAY, AS THE CLIENT CONTACT, DAVID ARCHIBALD , THE ATTORNEY IS ALSO HERE AND OUR CIVIL ENGINEER , IS ALSO HERE, EVAN WALSNOVICH. I WANT TO THANK EVAN AND THE REST OF THE STAFF FOR THE ASSISTANCE, WE ARE HERE FOR A MODIFICATION TO UPDATE THE PROJECT SCHEDULE FOR THE ST. AUGUSTINE INDUSTRIAL PARK. JUST TO ORIENT YOU ALL, THE SITE IS LOCATED WEST OF I-95 AND NORTH OF 207, YOU CAN SEE ALONG THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY , THAT IS THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY , THIS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 1997 AND IT IS A LARGE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, OVER 1.8 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL SPACE, 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USE, WE ARE JUST FOCUSING ON ONE LOT , WITHIN THIS LARGE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE
[01:05:03]
SPECIFIC LOT, IT IS ABOUT 32 ACRES OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE NO ENVIRONMENTALLY-SENSITIVE AREAS, NO AREAS WITH WETLANDS OR OTHER ISSUES . AND JUST TO ORIENTATE YOU TO WHAT IS AROUND THE SIDE, WE HAVE INDUSTRIAL, MIXED-USE TO THE SOUTH, NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS, ACROSS 95 , YOU CAN SEE SOME PINPOINTS THERE, COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE USES, AS WELL, THIS SLIDE GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO THE VARIOUS MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS THE COMMUNITY OVER TIME. THE LAST TIME THIS WAS MODIFIED WAS IN 2007. AGAIN, THIS REQUEST IS LIMITED TO JUST KIND OF BREATHING LIFE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, FOR THIS PROJECT, THERE IS NO CHANGE TO ANY PERMITTED USES, NO EXPANSION OF ANY PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT, THE STAFF REPORT HAS A REALLY NICE SLIDE, OR TABLE, THAT SHOWS THE SITE DEVELOPMENT. THE LOT COMMITTED UP TO 539,510 SQUARE FEET, ONLY 321,000 SQUARE FEET HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED SO FAR ON THE LOT. AND, WITH THE BUILDING PROPOSED BY THE CLIENT , UNDER THE PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE, JUST UNDER 20,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THIS NEXT SLIDE KIND OF SHOWS THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THE RIGHT SIDE, AND THE PROPOSED BUILDING, WHICH IS CURRENTLY A PARKING AREA , YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT, 90 DEGREES , TO YOUR LEFT, OUTLINED IN RED. THAT IS THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE SITE TO ALLOW BUILDING EXPANSION, ALL WITHIN THE PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT CRITERION -- CRITERIA. NO VARIANCES, ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES, BREATHING LIFE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE. WHICH BRINGS ME TO THIS NEXT SLIDE, THE TABLE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE IS THE CURRENT SCHEDULE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUD , SO, THE LANGUAGE ADDED , AND UNDERLINED, AT THE RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE, WE PUT THAT INTO THE TEXT , THAT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THIS MODIFIED PUD, AND THEN HAVE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED WITHIN EIGHT YEARS OF THE MODIFICATION TO THE PUD. WE DO NOT THINK IT IS GOING TO TAKE THAT MUCH TIME TO, YOU KNOW, BUILD THE EXPANSION. THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION, THESE ARE GETTING APPROVED , APPROVAL PROCESS, AND THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES, A COUPLE OF THINGS FROM THE STAFF REPORT, NO WAIVERS OR MODIFICATIONS BEING PROPOSED. STAFF MENTIONED THAT STAFF HAS HISTORICALLY ALLOWED FOR CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF PUD'S . WE DO NOT HAVE A CURRENT SCHEDULE, WITH A REQUIRED INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR THE PUD IN PLACE, WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT IS GOING ON. THAT IS IT, SHORT AND SWEET, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S CONSIDERATION FOR THIS REQUEST.>> MR. GREEN? >> I TRAVELED DOWN THAT TO THE LUMBER SHOP. QUICK QUESTION, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE
BUILDING ? >> IT IS ABOUT 30 FEET HIGH.
>> IS IT A LOADING DOCK HEIGHT ? >> YES.
>> WE RAN ACROSS THIS, WITH THE COUNTY, THEY DECIDE WHERE THE HEIGHT OF THE LOWEST PART OF THE LOT IS , TO THE TOP OF YOUR BUILDING. IF YOU ARE THINKING OF MOVING THE FLOOR HEIGHT UP 30 FEET, JUST BEWARE. IT MAY BE IN A VARIANCE FOR THAT.
>> IS EVERYBODY TAKING NOTES? >> I WANT TO SEE THIS BUILDING GET BILLED. I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF US , I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE IN YOUR SHOES IN THAT SITUATION.
[01:10:04]
>> THE EXISTING BUILDING IS, WHAT?
>> I HAVE IT UP ON THIS SLIDE. >> I KNEW IT WAS BIG. AND YOU ARE ADDING TO IT , THAT IS FANTASTIC. I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION AND MAKE SURE, YOU MAY BE BACK IN HERE.
>> THAT IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO AVOID.
>> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS , THE CURRENT BUILDING IS VACANT ,
CORRECT ? >> THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE RENEWING THAT LEASE . TECHNICALLY , THEY STILL HAVE
THE RIGHT TO UTILIZE THE SITE. >> THERE ARE EVEN PLANS FOR THE
NEW ADDITION? >> YES, THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY, SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD , THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE, SO THAT
WE ARE READY TO GO. >> YOU KNOW THE NUMBER OF
EMPLOYEES IT WOULD HAVE? >> WE ARE GOING TO HAVE UP TO 244, 45 PARKING SPACES. THIS COULD ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONALLY AT LEAST 100 MORE EMPLOYEES THEN WERE THERE BEFORE.
>> OKAY, GOT IT. >> MR. GREEN ?
>> REFRIGERATED SPACE ? IT IS ALL RIGHT , IF YOU CAN'T. I AM JUST CURIOUS. DO NOT WORRY ABOUT IT. I DID NOT ASK THAT QUESTION.
>> YES . THIS IS A BUSY PARK . THERE ARE A LOT OF VERY LARGE TRUCKS ENTERING AND LEAVING THE SITE AND I HEARD YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE PARKING FOR 200 PLUS ON YOUR SITE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS A COMMENT OR IF YOU CAN RESPOND TO THE QUESTION. IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A TRAFFIC PROBLEM, LEAVING THE SITE , LEAVING THE PARK , AND COMING ONTO 207 WHEN I WAS THERE YESTERDAY MORNING, THERE WAS A SHERIFF, A SHERIFF THERE, DIRECTING , HALTING THE TRAFFIC ON 207, SO THAT A STRING OF TRUCKS WOULD BE ALLOWED. IT LOOKED LIKE HE WAS STATIONED THERE FOR A LONG TIME, ARE THERE PLANS OR EFFORTS TO GET A SIGNAL? I KNOW IT IS VERY CLOSE TO THE SIGNAL FOR THE INTERSTATE. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? IT IS GOING TO CREATE A PROBLEM IF THERE IS MORE OCCUPANCY IN THE INDUSTRIAL
PARK. >> A LOT OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE THAT CHANGES ARE ALREADY IN THE WORKS. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS ARE KIND OF A CATALYST FOR THE THINGS THAT ARE COMING. THE ANSWER IS YES , TO YOUR QUESTION, THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS
COMING TO THE AREA . >> IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO GET THEM THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. THE
>> A REASON TO HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE , TO GET STARTED, WITH CONSTRUCTION TO ALLOW THOSE THINGS TO MATERIALIZE, SO THAT ANY CONCERNS ARE NOT EXACERBATED BEFORE THE SOLUTIONS ARE IN PLACE.
>> ONE QUICK , AFTER MR. ALSTON'S QUESTION, ABOUT THE DEPUTY BEING THERE , THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE TRAFFIC BACKED
>> THANK YOU . >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE , TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE? SEEN
NONE, WOULD YOU LIKE A MOTION ? >> I RECOMMEND A MOTION TO APPROVE MAJOR MODIFICATION 2025- 03, ST. AUGUSTINE INDUSTRIAL
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, MR. LABANOWSKI ? SEEING NONE. ALL
[Items 6 & 7]
[01:15:05]
RIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES , 7-0. ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, ISTHERE ANY EX PARTE ? >> MR. ALSTON ?
>> I VISITED THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA YESTERDAY .
>> I VISITED THE SITE AS WELL. >> OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO REPEAT
>> OKAY, MS. EVANS? >> CHRISTINA EVANS , THIS IS A REZONING AND VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR A PROPERTY AND SO, THE TOTAL SITE ISABOUT FOUR ACRES, DEVELOPED IN 1986 .
RECENTLY OCCUPIED BY THE HYUNDAI DEALERSHIP . AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN VARIOUS DESIGNATIONS, ONE OF THE MOST INTENSE CATEGORIES PRESENT IN THIS AREA , THE PROPERTY IS ZONED IN ONE, THEY ARE HERE TODAY ASKING TO REMOVE THE ZONING THAT YOU SEE ALONG U.S.-1 IN THIS AREA. THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS , FROM THE PREVIOUS REZONING, EVEN THOUGH IT IS A SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR USE, IT DOES NOT PERMIT HEAVY DUTY EQUIPMENT ON THE NORTHERN ONE ACRE , PERMITTING VEHICLES AND TRUCKS , AND THE RENTAL OF AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLES, TRAILERS, AND TRUCKS, WHICH IS IN A VERY SIMILAR INTENSITY. OTHER EXAMPLES , ZONING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA ALONG U.S. 1, U.S. 1 IS DEVELOPED AS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, WITH COMMERCIAL USES. A MAJOR ROADWAY FOR CENTRAL UTILITIES. ON THE WEST SIDE, YOU HAVE AUTO DEALERSHIPS , THIS ONE WAS PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED FOR TRAILER SALES AND SERVICE , LOTS OF OUTDOOR SERVICES THAT YOU NETTED RENTALS WOULD HAVE. THE CIRCLE K GAS STATION , AND THEN, THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS . SO, THIS IS THE SOUTHERN SECTION OF THE PROPERTY. THE BUILDING WILL REMAIN. THEY WILL MOVE THIS BUILDING A LITTLE FARTHER NORTH BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THEY ARE REALLY NOT DOING ANYTHING TO THE PROPERTY. THIS REZONING REQUEST WOULD PERMIT ALL THE USES PERMITTED IN THIS COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. THE PROPOSED UNITED RENTALS WILL GENERATE LESS TRAFFIC, YOU WILL NOT HAVE CUSTOMERS LIKE A DEALERSHIP THAT WOULD OPERATE TODAY. IT IS JUST GOING TO BE THE EMPLOYEES. THIS IS A VERY LARGE PROPERTY ON U.S. 1, UNDERUTILIZED RIGHT NOW, SO IT WILL IMPROVE THE AREA. DOUBTFUL THEY WILL USE THE SITE INSTEAD OF DEVELOPING A SITE THAT IS RIGHT NOW DEVELOPED AND
WILL REMAIN UNUSED. >> THE ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMERCIAL AND THE NEXT APPLICATION, WE WILL OFFER SUPERIOR BUFFERING TO THE EAST . THAT EXISTS TODAY. SO, THE SECOND APPLICATION IS FOR THE ZONING VARIANCE TO MODIFY THE BUFFER STANDARDS, ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL . THE CODE BACKGROUND HAS LESS SETBACKS THAN BUFFERING, THEN WHAT THE CURRENT OBESITY REQUIRES, A 20-FOOT BUFFER, THE SITE HAS BEEN DEVELOPED WITH A 10-FOOT BUFFER, BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE PARKING SPACES. INSTEAD OF RECONSTRUCTING THE PROPERTY, THEY ARE NOT DOING MUCH TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT WOULD REPLACE THE EXISTING EIGHT-FOOT FENCE .
INCLUDING LANDSCAPING , THAT IS GOING TO MEET THE BUFFER STANDARDS, LOCATED ON THE INTERNAL SIDE OF THE FENCE RIGHT NOW, ALL OF THE LANDSCAPING IS ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE. THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS ABOUT THE 10-FOOT -WIDE NATURAL BUFFER
[01:20:08]
FROM THE '80S REZONING. AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT NOW IN THIS GRAPH, THERE IS OFFENSE THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. ALL THE VEGETATION IS LOCATED ON THE RESIDENCE -- RESIDENTS ' PARCEL , YOU CAN SEE VEGETATION THAT ALREADY SCREENS THE HOMES, YOU CAN BARELY SEE IT, SO WE ARE GOING TO ADD ADDITIONAL TREES, ON THE INTERNAL SIDE, THEY WILL BE SPACED EVERY 20 FEET TO MEET BUFFER STANDARDS. OVER 20, SORRY, 12 FEET, ONCE PLANTED , THE BUFFERED STANDARD REQUIRES AT LEAST 10 FEET WHEN THEY ARE PLANTED . AND THE SCREENING ONLY REQUIRES THE 6 FOOT FENCE, WE ONLY HAVE 10 FEET BUT WE ARE DOING MORE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS. AND THAT IS GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE, A LOT OF IT, MOST OF IT, IS NOT DEVELOPED. SO, THIS PROPERTY, WHEN IT WAS AN AUTO DEALERSHIP, NOW , IT IS GOING TO BE LESS INTENSE USAGE, IT WILL HAVE EIGHT-FOOT FENCE, TALLER TREES, AND IT WILL BE CLUSTERED IN AREAS NORTHEAST, WITH SCREENING A LITTLE BIT LIGHTER. SO , THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. D■O OU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?>> WE HAVE A FEW. MS. SPIEGEL ? >> NICE JOB. THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. THIS IS GOING TO BE A LESS-INTENSE USE, BUT YOU ARE TAKING AWAY CONDITIONS THAT MAKES IT MORE INTENSE, OPENING UP THE REZONING TO ALL THAT COULD BE COMMERCIALLY INTENSIVE,
APART FROM YOUR PLAN. >> YES, THE CORRIDOR, A LOT OF IT BACKS UP TO RESIDENTIAL, JUST LIKE THIS PROPERTY DOES, AND A LOT OF THEM WERE ALSO DEVELOPED AT THE SAME TIME. THEY HAVE VERY LIMITED, IF ANY, SETBACKS. AND A LOT OF THOSE ZONED PROPERTIES HAVE ABOUT A 10-FOOT GRASS AREA UPFRONT, AND A LOT OF THEM HAVE TRAINS -- TREES TO THE NORTH, VERY NARROW, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE
ANY TREES. >> SUNBELT ZONING, I NEED TO CHECK ON THAT. AND I DIDN'T LOOK RIGHT, THERE IS A LOT OF COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE CORD OUR , I LIVE RIGHT THERE, MY CONCERN IS. I DON'T, I DON'T SEE HOW RENTING HEAVY EQUIPMENT IS LESS INTENSE THAN A CAR DEALERSHIP. MAYBE LESS BUSY. THE CONCERN TO ME , THERE IS ANOTHER HOUSE BEING BUILT AND THERE IS A LOT NEXT DOOR, MORE HOUSES COULD POTENTIALLY COME, THAT COULD BE 70 OR 80,000 RIGHT THERE, MY CONCERN IS THE INCREASE IN INTENSITY, BY TAKING AWAY THE CONDITIONS FOR THE FUTURE, MOVING FORWARD. AND THEY HAVE THAT BUFFER SCREENING, BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE NOW, BECAUSE OF THAT, WHICH THEY DID NOT HAVE EARLIER. AND SO, MY BIGGEST PROBLEM REALLY IS WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER. I HAVE A QUESTION IF I COULD. SHE DID A NICE JOB OF TALKING ABOUT THE TREES. I LOVE THAT. I LOVE THAT. BUT, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 20-FOOT BUFFER AND A 10-FOOT BUFFER, AS FAR AS THE PLANTING ? IT IS NOT THICKER . THERE ARE NO PLANTINGS, RIGHT? IT IS JUST A
WIDER SWATH ? >> FOR THE RECORD, JACOB SMITH, BASED ON THE PRESENTATION, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE PROPOSING MORE LARGER PLANTING, BUT IT LITERALLY IS THE SPACE . YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A 10-FOOT AREA TO PLANT VEGETATION VERSUS 20 FOOT.
THE PLANTS PROVIDE A PORTION OF THE BUFFER, THE FENCE PROVIDES A PORTION OF THE BUFFER BUT ALSO THE DISTANCE PROVIDES A PORTION OF THE BUFFER. IT IS 10 FEET LESS . UNLESS YOU REMOVE THE
VEGETATION REQUIREMENT. >> THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES.
[01:25:01]
>> THAT IS GOOD TO KNOW. SO, YOU ARE MUFFLING THE SOUND A LITTLE BIT, THAT IS A GOOD VISUAL, AS WELL. HOW, SO, A GENERAL CONCERN, IS NARROWING THE BUFFER AND PLANTING THE TREES, THAT MIGHT BE INADEQUATE, AN INADEQUATE PLACE FOR THOSE TREES TO THRIVE. I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. I DO NOT KNOW THAT I NECESSARILY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REZONING AND REMOVING OF THE CONDITIONS. BECAUSE I REALLY THINK IT IS A
CORE ARE OUR -- BUSY CORRIDOR. >> WE ARE NOT MINIMIZING IT, THAT IS WHAT EXISTS. IT COULD GO BACK TO BEING AN AUTO DEALERSHIP WITH CUSTOMERS AND HIGH TURNOVER, AND CUSTOMER PARKING, RIGHT BY THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES. AND THEY COULD LEAVE IT AT 10 FEET NOW, IT DOES NOT HAVE ANY OF THE PLANTINGS.
>> I AM JUST SAYING. I AM JUST SAYING.
>> THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR DOES HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF COMMERCIAL,
GENERALLY. >> IT IS NOT DEVELOPED. ANYWAY, THAT IS MY ONLY CONCERN. I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP, THANK
>> WITH THE BUFFER, AS WELL, WHAT THE RESIDENT IS DOING ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT, THE LANDSCAPING WILL BE IN FRONT OF THAT FENCE , THE HOMEOWNERS ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE 8
-FOOT-TALL FENCE. >> THEY HAVE A LOT OF VEGETARIAN -- VEGETATION THAT WILL REMAIN.
>> THE OTHER QUESTION AND, HOW MUCH VEGETATION IS COMING OUT, WHEN YOU REMOVE THE FENCE, HOW MUCH VEGETATION IS COMING OUT ? WILL YOU BE REPLACING IT ALL OR LEAVING SOME OF IT?
>> ONLY WHAT HAS GROWN OVER THE FENCE WILL BE REMOVED.
>> OKAY. THAT WAS THE MAJOR CONCERN. I HAVE BEEN BY THERE SEVERAL TIMES , THERE HAVE BEEN TRACTOR-TRAILERS THAT HAVE BEEN HUNG UP, BLOCKING, BECAUSE OF THE ENTRANCE THAT IS TOO STEEP FOR THE TRACTOR-TRAILERS TO GET IN THERE, WILL THERE BE IMPROVEMENTS DONE ON THAT DRIVEWAY?
>> THEY HAVE DISCUSSED LOWERING THE SLOPES , THEY HAVE DISCUSSED THAT WITH D.O.T., BUT THEY ARE AWARE OF THAT, BUT ALSO, IT IS JUST GOING TO BE THE EMPLOYEES DELIVERING THE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, SO IT IS NOT GOING TO BE CARS GETTING DELIVERED ALL THE TIME, OUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
>> MR. OLSON? >> I HAVE ALSO SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE USE. IT SEEMS LIKE HEAVY EQUIPMENT RENTAL IS NOT AN IMPULSE THING. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD , YOU KNOW, BE LIKE A CAR DEALERSHIP, YOU DON'T GO BY THE SITE AND SAY, OH , I WENT TO RENT A BOBCAT TODAY. IS THIS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE NOT AN IMPULSE PURPOSE BUT MAYBE IN A MORE INDUSTRIAL AREA , THIS IS PRIME RETAIL FRONTAGE OR COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE ALONG U.S. ONE, ON THE SOUTH ENTRANCE , TO THE CENTER OF ST.
AUGUSTINE. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE THINKING IS . THAT IS HOW I HAVE LOOKED AT THIS. THERE ARE BETTER AND MORE COMPATIBLE USES
FOR THIS SITE. >> THIS IS THE PROPOSED TENANT NOW. NO ONE ELSE HAS, YOU KNOW, COME FORWARD WITH THESE CONDITIONS, IT WILL NOT BE CUSTOMERS COMING TO UNITED RENTALS TO PURCHASE HEAVY EQUIPMENT, IT WILL BE THE EMPLOYEES LOADING IT UP AND DELIVERING IT, WHEREVER IT IS
NEEDED. >> OKAY, YEAH, RIGHT. THEY DON'T EVEN COME THERE TO GET THE EQUIPMENT. IT IS NOT THE KIND OF THING THAT YOU WENT AT HOME DEPOT. IT IS THE BIG STUFF,
RIGHT? >> YES. WELL, OKAY. YOU ANSWERED
MY QUESTION. >> A LOT OF THEM HAVE OUTDOOR STORAGE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, BOTH THE STORAGE, SERVICE, AND REPAIR, ALL THE SAME USES , IN THE SAME AREA, WITH THE SAME
[01:30:03]
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, TO JACOB , WHAT IS THE PRINCIPAL REQUIREMENT, IN TERMS OF THE FENCE?
>> THAT IS A SOLID, SOLID FENCE. >> THEY COULD BE WOOD, OR VINYL?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> WHAT KIND OF FENCE , IS
PROPOSED? >> 6-FOOT WOOD FENCE.
>> SO? ISN'T THERE AN INCONGRUITY , BETWEEN US ALLOWING SOMETHING THAT IS NOISIER THAN THE CURRENT USES ALLOWED, AND REDUCE THE BUFFER? I HESITATE TO ASK THAT QUESTION, I FEEL LIKE A M -- I AM BAKING THE APPLICANT. I AM SAYING, PLANTING ANY SORT OF SIZE TREES , THE TREES ARE NOT GOING TO DO VERY WELL, WE ONLY HAVE FIVE FEET. AND, OF COURSE, TREES DO NOT NECESSARILY BLOCK SOUND. SOUND IS WHAT I WOULD BE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT, TALKING ABOUT THE ABILITY TO HAVE HEAVY EQUIPMENT, THERE IS A LOT OF NOISE. AND, YOU KNOW, SO , I JUST WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU, THAT, I AM NOT REALLY ASKING YOU FOR AN ANSWER BUT I AM SAYING, THIS SEEMS DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT. I DO NOT SEE WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS, LET ME ASK THAT QUESTION. WHAT
IS THE HARDSHIP? >> THE HARDSHIP IS, THAT IS HOW IT HAS ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED. THEY ARE NOT , YOU KNOW, CHANGING A LOT OF THE PROPERTY, IF THEY WERE TO, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY RECONSTRUCT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING THE WHOLE SITE INTO COMPLIANCE. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BRING THE WHOLE SITE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER CURRENT STANDARDS. AND UNITED RENTALS WILL ONLY OPERATE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY DURING WORKING HOURS , WHEN PEOPLE ARE AT THE OFFICE , KIDS ARE AT SCHOOL, IT WILL NOT BE AT NIGHT WHEN PEOPLE ARE SLEEPING. BUT IF YOU HAD AN AUTO DEALERSHIP, YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING IN ON THE WEEKENDS, ALL THE TIME, DURING THE DAY, ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS. THOSE ARE BUSIER, WHEN PEOPLE ARE BUYING CARS . WHEN THE RESIDENTS
ARE HOME . >> THAT MAY BE, YEAH, BUT LET ME ASK, YOU ARE SAYING THE HARDSHIP IS THE COST OF THE ASPHALT, TO
GET TO THE 20 FEET? >> NO , BUT THEY ARE NOT DOING A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION ON THE PROPERTY, IT HAS EXISTED , SINCE '86, WHEN IT WAS OPERATING AS A VERY BUSY AUTO DEALERSHIP, WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE TO APPEAR IN OPPOSITION. I HAVE NOT HEARD COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT BEING TOO NOISY . BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT THIS PARTICULAR USE WILL BE ANY NOISIER THAN THE THINGS PERMITTED NOW, UNDER THE CODE OF SERVICE . THE SERVICE GARAGE, A BODYSHOP, THOSE ARE ALL USES THAT WOULD BE HAVING THE SAME KIND OF IMPACT. ACTUALLY, MORE OF AN IMPACT . EMPLOYEES ARE NOT GOING TO BE ON THE SITE ALL DAY. THEY ARE GOING TO BE DELIVERING
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR , THERE IS NO CONDITION ON TIME OF USE. THE APPLICANT MADE SOME STATEMENTS THAT THE CURRENT APPLICANT IS INTENDING TO NOT USE IT ON THE WEEKEND, BUT THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE ZONING, JUST SO YOU KNOW.
>> CAN YOU GIVE US EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT? THAT
COULD BE ANYTHING. >> I THINK THEY CAN GO AND TRIM THEIR TREES , LIKE, A CONSTRUCTION DOZER, THAT WOULD MOVE OUT ASPHALT . WE DO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM UNITED
RENTALS . >> EXACTLY WHAT YOU WOULD SEE AT
[01:35:05]
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY ONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON ITEM SEVEN? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION , THIS IS REZONING 2024-23 , A MOTION TO DENY, BASED ON THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT, ALTHOUGH THIS REZONING IS IN KEEPING WITH THE LAND USE THAT EXISTS , THE COMPATIBILITY ISSUE IS NOT MET , PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE VARIANCE BEING REQUESTED. WE ARE PROPOSING MORE -INTENSE USES , IT WILL BE QUITE NOISY. AND IT IS NOT OUR JOB TO LOOK AT WHAT USED TO BE THERE, IT IS OUR JOB TO LOOK AT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL BEFORE US AND I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS MADE ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR BUFFERING NOISE FROM THIS MORE-INTENSE USE. SO
THAT IS MY MOTION. >> OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY, MR. LABANOWSKI AND MS. SPIEGEL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK
? >> MY CONCERN IS, GOING FORWARD, ONCE WE CHANGE THIS, WE WILL ALLOW EVERY KIND OF COMMERCIAL USE , AND WE WILL HAVE AN INADEQUATE BUFFER. ACCORDING TO OUR CURRENT STANDARDS. IT WAS JUST SAID , THAT IS WHAT IT WAS.
I AGREE, I DO NOT SEE THE HARDSHIP WITH THE 20-FOOT BUFFER. THAT IS WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES AND THERE IS A REASON.
THERE ARE HOUSES THERE. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE DENIAL.
>> I COULD SUPPORT THIS WITH A 20-FOOT BUFFER, IF YOU WANT TO GO TO 20 , FROM 10. I THINK IT WOULD PASS, I CANNOT SPEAK FOR MY OTHER MEMBERS APPEAR, BUT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL, RIGHT BEHIND IT, THAT REALLY CUTS THE SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU. >> YES . I DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE THE PROPERTY GET CLEANED UP. I DO NOT LIKE TO SEE EMPTY COMMERCIAL ALONG ANY OF OUR CORRIDORS. YOU ARE ASKING FOR A ZONING CHANGE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT WHATSOEVER, IF YOU ARE GOING TO ASK FOR THE ZONING CHANGE, BRING IT UP, WHAT DOES THE ZONING REQUIRE? I REALLY DO NOT SEE THE HARDSHIP BUT I DON'T BLAME YOU FOR ASKING FOR IT I WOULD , TOO. BUT I DO NOT SEE THE HARDSHIP. DO YOU WANT TO PUNT THE FOOTBALL
AND COME BACK? >> BOTH OF THESE APPLICATIONS ARE GOING TO GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR APPROVAL, THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH OF THESE. I WILL SAY, IF WE DO THE 20-FOOT BUFFER, WE WILL HAVE A SHORTER FENCE, SHORTER TREES, I DON'T SEE THAT 10 FEET MAKING A HUGE DIFFERENCE, IN TERMS OF NOISE. AND EVEN THOUGH HE USED TO BE AN AUTO DEALERSHIP, IT COULD BE USED FOR THAT AGAIN WITH WHAT IS EXISTING NOW, I DON'T THINK THE 10 FEET WILL
MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH NOISE. >> LIKE I SAID, I DON'T HAVE A
PROBLEM WITH THE ZONING CHANGE. >> MR. MATOVINA ?
>> THE APPLICANT MAKES A VERY GOOD POINT. IN ZONING, YOU HAVE A STEP DOWN IN DENSITY , YOU GO FROM THE HIGHEST, TO MORE MEDIUM , TO LOWER, TYPICALLY. IN THIS CASE, QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK THE OWNER SHOULD COME WITH SOME ENHANCED BUFFER , WHETHER THAT IS A BLOCK WALL, WHICH WOULD BE EXPENSIVE , OR PERHAPS IT WOULD BE MORE OF A NICE HINGE LINE OF BUTCHERS -- BUSHES. MY CONCERN IS SOUND, THE VISUAL WILL BE MOSTLY TAKEN CARE OF. BUT MY BIGGEST CONCERN WOULD BE SOUND . SOME SORT OF HEDGE ROLE OF
[01:40:02]
EVERGREEN TREES WOULD BE VERY EFFECTIVE IN REDUCING THE SOUND.I AM NOT SURE I WOULD VOTE FOR THIS, THOUGH IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAND USE, I AM NOT SURE I WOULD VOTE WITH THIS WITHOUT PROTECTIONS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ON THAT OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE.
>> WE DO HAVE A LINE OF SHRUBS, I BELIEVE 3 FEET , I BELIEVE IT SAYS. WE ARE PROPOSING A CANOPY OF TREES , AGAIN , WE ARE IMPROVING WHAT IS THERE NOW , HAVING A HIGHER FENCE, AND THE HIGHER TREES AND PLANTING, WE COULD ADD SOME MORE SHRUBS OR LOWER PLANTS , THEN THAT 10 FEET. I DON'T SEE THAT 10 EXTRA FEET , IF WE JUST DO THE 20, YOU HAVE THAT 10 EXTRA FEET, BUT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE MORE OF THOSE SHRUBS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TO MUFFLE SOUND. I THINK WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, WE DO HAVE THE SHRUBS, IS SUPERIOR TO THE 20 FEET , EVEN THOUGH IT
IS WITHIN 10 FEET . >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ? WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL ON THE TABLE. YOU CAN VOTE YES , YOU CAN VOTE TO DENY. ON THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL IS APPROVED. MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, MR. MATOVINA, PLEASE?
>> MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE 2025-11, U.S. 1 UNITED RENTALS, BASED ON FINDINGS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE. THAT MOTION FOR DENIAL IS
APPROVED. >> FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, FROM THIS BODY , AND IT WILL GO TO THE BCC, IF THEY DECIDE TO MOVE ON.
>> SOMEONE DID NOT VOTE. WE ARE MISSING THE SEVENTH. OH, YOU DO?
>> THANK YOU, MS. EVANS. ONTO THE STAFF REPORTS.
>> NO STAFF REPORTS,
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.