[Call to Order]
[00:00:06]
>> CHAIRMAN: GOOD AFTERNOON AND HAPPY NEW YEAR. I'D LIKE TO CALL THE ORDER THE JANUARY 6, 2020, MEETING OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD. IF WE COULD HAVE THE READING OF THE
PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT PLEASE. >> THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE BOARD'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AND THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE SO BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CARD WHICH IS FOUND IN THE FOYER. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD ONLY AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN.
SPEAKER CARDS MAY BE TURNED INTO STAFF. THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIME DURING THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM AND FOR A LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND THEN STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY. IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OR TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT A THE HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE. WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 3REED DURING THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS, WILL BE RETAINED BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD. THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARDS, AGENCIES OR COMMITTEES OR THE COUNTY IN ANY REVIEW OF APPEAL RELATING TO THE ITEM. BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER THEY HAD ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE BOARD. IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE BOARD MEMBER SHOULD BEEN 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. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS OTHER THAT THE AGENDA ITEMS ON THE SCHEDULE TODAY? NOT SEEING ANY, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM
[Item 1]
WHICH IS THE PONTE VEDRA CLUB AND CHILLER YARD TO ALLOW FOR A TEN FOOT BRICK WALL IN LIEU OFTHE FOUR FOOT HEIGHT MAXIMUM. >> BEFORE YOU BEGIN, IF YOU COULD DECLARE ANY EX-PARTE
COMMUNICATIONS AND SITE VISITS. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAD A SITE
VISIT. NO COMMUNICATION. >> BOARD MEMBER: I VISITED THE SITE AND HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO
ANYONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I VISITED THE SITE AND HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO
ANYONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND HAVE NOT
SPOKEN TO ANYONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND HAVE NOT
SPOKEN TO ANYONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYBODY.
>> SPEAKER: KIM DEL RANCE SENIOR PLANNER WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THIS IS FOR A PONTE VEDRA ZONING VARIANCE. 2019-09 FOR THE PONTE VEDRA INN AND CLUB CHILLER YARD WALL. THE REQUEST IS FOR A ZONING VARIANCE TO SECTION 8 AND 1. AND AS STATED BEFORE, IT IS A FOUR FOOT WALL BUT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IT TO BE 10 FEET. THIS IS ALONG -- AT 302 PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD BUT THIS IS ACTUAL LE I ALONG THE MIRANDA ROAD SECOND FRONTAGE. THE LOCATION IS NORTH OF SOLANO ROAD. IT'S TECHNICALLY ALONG PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD BUT IT SITS BACK. THE ZONING, A TINY PART IS R4 THE REST IS R2 BUT THIS IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE. THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW THE PERIMETER WALL TO EXCEED THE FOUR FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT. THE EQUIPMENT INSIDE THE CHILLER YARD IS NOT WITHIN THE SETBACK SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY VARIANCES. HOWEVER, DUE TO ITS EXTREME HEIGHT, THEY FELT THE WALL BEING FOUR FOOT TALL WOULD NOT HIDE ENOUGH OF THE CHILLER WALL. THERE ARE SOME EXISTING LANDSCAPES AND TREES. THEY'RE GOING TO ENHANCE THAT.
AND THE WALL WILL BE FINISHED IN STANDARD WHITE BRICK THEY USE FOR OTHER THINGS AND HAVE VINES
[00:05:03]
ON IT. THIS IS THE MIRANDA ROAD SIDE OF THE SITE. YOU CAN SEE THE WALL THERE. I HAVE IT IN RED. THAT'S THE PART THAT WILL BE HIGH. AND THE BLUE IS THE ROADWAY. SO, YOU CAN SEE HOW FAR BACK IT IS. AND THESE ARE THE TREES THAT WILL BE IN FRONT OF IT. THE APPLICANTS HAVE SLIDES I'M SURE OF MORE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. I'VE GONE OVER THE FIRST THREE THINGS. THE EXISTING LOCATION OF THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT LIMITS WHERE THEY CAN EXPAND. AND THERE'S SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND PIPES TO WHERE THEY HAD TO BRING THIS WALL OUT AS FAR AS THEY DID. THEY DID HAVE IT OUT FURTHER AND THEY BROUGHT IT BACK. THIS IS A CORNER LOT SO THERE'S TWO FRONTAGES. SO THEY DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE ELSE TO PUT THIS BECAUSE IF THEY PUT IT IN THE REAR IT'S GOING TO BE FACING THE LAGOON WHICH IS FACING RESIDENTIAL HOMES. SO, THEY'RE REALLY KIND OF LIMITED BECAUSE IT IS AN EXISTING LOT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CHILLER YARD IS UP THERE WHERE THE FENCE IS GOING TO BE. I DID GET A FEW PHONE CALLS JUST ASKING ABOUT WHAT THIS WAS. ONE PERSON ASKED WHAT THE ZONING WAS AND I TOLD THEM R4. AFTER THE PHONE CALL I REALIZED THE REST OF IT WAS R2 BUT IT IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE. I DID GET ONE EMAIL IN OPPOSITION. AT THE ARC READING IN NOVEMBER, THE ARC APPROVED ALL OF THIS UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. BASED ON THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING THEY REQUESTED.STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST MEETS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAY MEET THE NECESSARY CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE PONTE VEDRA DISTRICT ZONING REGULATIONS. IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTEMPORARY TO PUBLIC -- CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. IT IS NOT PARALLEL TO THE ROAD SO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE DRIVING PAST A BIG BOX EXPERIENCE. IT COMES OUT AND THEN RECEDES. THERE'S AN EXISTING UTILITIES. STAFF HAS PROVIDED FIVE CONDITIONS AND FOUR FINDINGS TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO APPROVE. AND FOUR FINDINGS TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO DENY. THAT'S I HAVE. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION AND I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
>> THEY CAN INSTALL THE CHILLER YARD WHERE IT'S AT BUT IT WILL ONLY BE A FOUR FOOT SCREENING
FENCE RIGHT? >> SPEAKER: THAT'S CORRECT. >> BOARD MEMBER: IT DOES NOT
AFFECT THE CHILLER YARD? >> SPEAKER: CORRECT. >> BOARD MEMBER: WHAT DID YOU
SAY THE FINISH OF THE BRICK COLOR? >> SPEAKER: IT'S GOING TO BE PAINTED BUT HE THEN VINES CLIMBING OVER IT. THEN LAYERS OF LANDSCAPING. AND THEY'LL
HAV SLIDES. >> CHAIRMAN: SO IT WILL BLEND IN WITH THE BUILDING. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE APP PEL I CAN'T'S PRESENTATION.
>> SPEAKER: GOOD AFTERNOON. MIKE KOPPENHAFER 9104 CYPRUS GREEN DRIVE JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. I DON'T HAVE A HUGE FORMAL PRESENTATION BUT YOU ALL HAVE BEEN TO THE SITE. SO, OBVIOUSLY THE PONTE VEDRA INN AND CLUB HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. TRULY IT WAS THE HEART OF PONTE VEDRA FOR THE LONGEST TIME. TO BEGIN THAT TOWN IN FACT. BUT IT IS A MEMBERSHIP CLUB. IT IS A RESORT. IT'S GOT DESIRES TO SORT OF HIDE ALL THE BACK OF HOUSE E EQUIPMENT. WE'VE DONE THE ARCHITECTURE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS THERE. THE OVERALL GOAL IS TO SORT OF HIDE ALL THAT BACK-UP HOUSE STUFF. I THINK IT'S BEEN DONE IN A PRETTY SUCCESSFUL WAY. THIS IS JUST ANOTHER STEP IN THAT DIRECTION. ALL OF THE UTILITIES ARE COMING IN FROM THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT BUILDING THERE. IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND PLEASE. THAT'S FINE. SO, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE -- JUST TO EXPLAIN IT BETTER -- WE HAVE THE TWO COOLING TOWERS HERE THEN THE CHILLER STRUCTURE RIGHT HERE. THE CHILLER STRUCTURE IS ABOUT 10 FEET TALL. THAT WAS THE DESIRE TO RAISE THIS FENCE ALONG THESE THREE SIDES TO THAT 10 FOOT HEIGHT. THIS IS THE EXISTING SERVICE AREA HERE. THAT HAS AN 8 FOOT HIGH WHITE PAINTED BRICK SCREEN WALL. THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT POST THE OVERLAY. SO, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NON-CONFORMING. BUT IT MEETS ALL THE CURRENT SETBACKS. THE SETBACK AS KIM MENTIONED IS ABOUT 30 FEET HERE AND IT'S JUST A HAIR UNDER 10 FEET RIGHT THERE. BUT I AM GOING TO SHOW YOU SOME SLIDES HERE WHICH WILL HELP DEPICT THE VIEW. AS YOU ALL HAVE SEEN, THIS IS THE VIEW
[00:10:19]
FROM ACROSS MIRANDA TO THE PROPOSED SCREEN WALL AREA HERE. YOU CAN SEE THE ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS THERE. AGAIN, THE INN HAS SEVERAL LAYERS. A HEDGE ROAD AGAINST THE STREET. A SIDEWALK. THEY HAVE THE PATIO TREES HERE. THEY HAVE A ROW OF SABLE AND WASHINGTONIAN PALMS THEN ANOTHER HEDGE ROW. WE INTEND TO KEEP THAT. WE'LL JUST ADD ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THAT AND THE NEW WALL WHICH IS AT A BIT OF AN ANGLE. THERE'S AN EXISTING SHOT AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE -- THERE'S SOME PEEK-A-BOO VIEWS IN THERE. THE DESIRE IS SO THAT THE COUNTY RESIDENTS, THE LOCAL RESIDENTS, THE MEMBERS AND THE RESORT GUESTS DON'T SEE ANY ACTIVITIES THAT MIGHT GO ON INSIDE THERE LIKE THE TYPICAL ANNUAL SERVICING OR MONTHLY SERVICING OF THAT EQUIPMENT. SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE TEN FOOT HIGH WALL. WE KNOW WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE THAN THE FOUR FEET. BUT IT'S ONLY A LOGICAL TO DO THAT. WE'LL PAINT THE WALL WHITE. IT WILL BLEND IN SEAMLESSLY. WE'LL ALLOW IVY TO GROW UP IT, ADD THE LANDSCAPING AND YOU WON'T SEE IT. THE OVERALL GOAL IS TO HIDE IT MUCH LIKE THIS CHILLER OR SET OF CHILLERS AND COOLING TOWERS.THIS IS AT THE NORTH PLANT HERE. IT'S RIGHT BEHIND HERE. AND SO THAT IS OUR INTENTION. IS TO GO AHEAD AND HIDE ALL OF THAT. YOU CAN'T SEE A COOLING TOWER, YOU CAN'T SEE A CHILLER, AND YOU'VE GOT THE IVY ON THE WALL SO YOU FRANKLY DON'T EVEN SEE THE WALL. IT BASICALLY JUST GOES AWAY.
THAT'S YET ALONE ANOTHER ONE FROM THE BOULEVARD. SO, I'M GOING TO ABBREVIATE THE PRESENTATION HERE, BUT I THINK IT IS A LOGICAL SOLUTION. I'M FREE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
>> CHAIRMAN: ANY QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. NOT
SEEING ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO A MOTION >> BOARD MEMBER: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PVZVAR 2019-09 PONTE VEDRA INN AND CLUB CHILLER YARD ZONING VARIANCE TO THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATION SECTIONS 8N1 OF THE ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR A 10 FOOT BRICK WALL IN LIEU OF THE 4 FOOT HEIGHT MAXIMUM AT 302 PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD SPECIFICALLY LOCATED ALONG MIRANDA ROAD SECOND FRONT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED ON PAGE 7. THERE ARE FIVE CONDITIONS AND THERE ARE ALSO
FIVE FINDINGS LISTED ON PAGE 7. THAT'S MY MOTION. >> BOARD MEMBER: SECOND.
>> CHAIRMAN: AND WE WILL VOTE. THAT IS UNANIMOUS YES. THAT IS APPROVED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2 WHICH IS GATE C-STORE
[Items 2 & 3]
AND CAR WASH SIGNS TO EXCEED THE ALLOWANCES FOR WALL SIGNAGE. IF I COULD START WITH JOHN. IF YOU WOULD LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE MADE A SITE VISIT AND SPOKEN TO ANYONE.>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE MADE A VISIT AND HAVEN'T SPOKEN WITH ANYBODY.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I'VE NOT SPOKEN ANYBODY AND I'VE OBSERVED THE PROPERTY.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I MADE A SITE VISIT AND DID NOT SPEAK TO ANYONE.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I DID A DRIVE-BY BUT HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYONE.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF THE PROPERTY AND HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYONE.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO ANYONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M FAMILIAR
WITH THE PROPERTY AND HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO ANYBODY. >> SPEAKER: KIM DEL RANCE AGAIN.
THIS IS FOR A PONTE VEDRA ZONING VARIANCE. IT'S ACTUALLY THREE VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR THE GATE CONVENIENCE STORE. THAT'S WHAT THE C IS FOR. AND CAR WASH. THE THREE SECTIONS, EVEN THOUGH THIS LOCATED WITHIN THE PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING VARIANCES TO ARE IN THE PONTE VEDRA CODE THAT EVERYONE IN PONTE VEDRA IS SUBJECT TO. THE FIRST IS SECTION 10C2A WHICH EXCEEDS THE SIZE ALLOWANCES FOR WALL
[00:15:05]
SIGNAGE. THE SECOND TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL GROUND SIGN. AND THE THIRD IS TO ALLOW FOR THOSE SIGNS, THOSE GROUND SIGNS TO BE LOCATED IN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THE LOCATION IS THIS -- IT'S JUST NORTH OF THE SHOPS AT PONTE VEDRA SHOPPING CENTER. IT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF A1A WHICH IS NORTH OF SA LANA ROAD. IT IS ZONED R3 COMMERCIAL. INDIVIDUALLY THE RELIEF IS FOR FOUR WALL SIGNS TO EACH EXCEED THE LIMIT OF 24 SQUARE FEET. THE LARGEST OF WHICH WILL BE THE GATE SIGN ON THE CONVENIENCE STORE. WHICH THEY'RE REQUESTING 81.8 SQUARE FEET. THE FRESH KITCHEN SIGN WHICH IS ONE OF THE TENANTS IS TO BE 64.4 SQUARE FEET. AND THE OTHER TENANT IS TO BE FROZEN YOGURT AT 46 SQUARE FEET. THE CAR WASH SIGN IS REQUESTED TO BE 78 SQUARE FEET.THE OTHER -- ANOTHER PART OF THAT SECTION OF CODE IS THAT THE SIGNS ALL HAVE TO BE FACING THE FRONTAGE. THEY'RE REQUESTING RELIEF TO ALLOW SOME OF THEIR CANOPY SIGNS ON THE GAS CANOPIES TO BE FACING NORTH OR SOUTH. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION OVER WHICH ONE THEY WERE REQUESTING SO I'LL LET THEM CLEAR THAT UP. BUT EVEN SO IT WON'T BE FACING A FRONT ABELL. IT WILL BE FACING NORTH OR SOUTH OR BOTH. THE OTHER RELIEF TOSS ALLOW TWO 32 SQUARE FOOT GROUND SIGNS INSTEAD OF WHERE THEY WOULD NORMALLY BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ONE 60 SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN. AND THESE TWO SIGNS INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM AT THE ENTRY THEY WANT THEM MORE OR LESS CERTAINLY LOCATED IN FRONT OF EACH BUSINESS IN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHICH WOULD REQUIRE SOME CLEARING. THIS IS THE BIG SIGN ON THE GATE CONVENIENCE STORE. THEN YOU CAN SEE THE FRESH MARKET ON THE LEFT. AND THE CANOPIES FOR THE FUEL PUMPS, THEY DID AGREE WITH THE ARC TO LOWER THE CANOPIES TO 15 FEET INSTEAD OF THE ORIGINAL 17 TO TRY TO KEEP THIS IN BETTER SCALE. BY THE WAY, THOSE GATE SIGNS ON THE CANOPY ARE WITHIN THE 24 SQUARE FEET. I BELIEVE THEY'RE 19.6 OR 19.8. THE CAR WASH SIGN WILL BE LOCATED -- IT IS A ONE STORY BUILDING BUT WILL BE AT THE TOP PART OF THE FETCHA. -- FETCHA. THESE ARE THE TWO GROUND SIGNS. THESE I'VE KIND OF EDITED THE VERSIONS TO SHOW YOU WHAT THE ARC APPROVED. SO, ONE WILL BE RED AND WHITE AND THE OTHER ONE WILL HAVE SOME BLUE/GREEN ON IT. THEY'RE LOCATED CENTRALLY IN FRONT OF EACH OF THE SITES DOWN AT THE BOTTOM WHERE THE RED CIRCLES ARE. AND I JUST HIGHLIGHTED THE BUILDINGS TO SHOW YOU THE DISTANCE BACK FROM A1A. THE APPLICANT STATES THE VARIANCES WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA. THE APPLICANT STATES THE REQUESTED LARGE SIZES, CANOPY LOCATION CHANGES ARE NECESSARY IN ORDER FOR THE SIGNS TO BE LEGIBLE AND RECOGNIZABLE AS THEY ARE SETBACK MORE THAN 200 FEET FROM SCENIC A1A NORTH. AGAIN, THERE'S THE VACANT SITE. THE SITE FACES A1A. IT HAS OVER 600 FEET OF FRONTAGE. ALL OF THE COASTAL CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS FROM DUVAL TO FLAGLER COUNTY ALL HAVE THE 4 SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGN LIMITATION. EXCEPT FOR SOME PREEXISTING, NON-CONFORMING SIGNS AND THOSE THAT ARE IN PUDS LIKE THE SHOPPING CENTER, THE PUBLIX DOWN THE ROAD, WHICH IS IN A DIFFERENT OVERLAY DISTRICT, THAT'S IN PALM VALLEY. AND SOME SIGN VARIANCES FOR DOWN AT PONTE VEDRA POINT WHERE YOU HAVE THE TIRE KINGDOM, ANY TIME FITNESS AND PET SUPERMARKET. THOSE THREE BUSINESSES ALL RECEIVED VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE SIZE LIMIT BECAUSE THEY'RE SET BACK 400 FEET FROM THE ROAD. HOWEVER THEY'RE LIKE 62 AND 64 SQUARE FEET. NONE ARE LARGER THAN 65 SQUARE FEET. AS FAR AS THE LIMIT PREVENTING THEM FROM BEING IN THE LANDSCAPE BUFF ERR, THAT IS UNIQUE TO THE PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY. NONE OF THE OTHER OVERLAY DISTRICTS HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT. IT WAS PUT IN LESS THAN TEN YEARS AGO. I DON'T KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHAT THAT WAS PUT IN FOR. BUT THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO PUT THE SIGNS BY THE ENTRANCE. AND SINCE THERE ARE TWO BUSINESSES, WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT EXPLAIN WHY THEY NEED THAT. BUT THE A. R. C. WAS OKAY WITH THAT. STAFF RECEIVED A FEW PHONE INJURIES
[00:20:02]
ABOUT THE SIGNS WHEN THEY WENT UP BUT THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION OR OPINION GIVEN TO ME ON THE PHONE CALLS. THERE IS ONE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE THAT CAME IN -- SORRY, THAT WAS THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION. SO, THERE'S NO WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. DECEMBER 18TH IS WHEN THE A. R. C. HEARD THIS APPLICATION. WHILE EVERYTHING WAS APPROVED SOME OF THE REQUESTS WERE ONLY 2-1 APPROVAL. AND I HAVE THE MINUTES HERE AS TO WHICH ONES THOSE WERE. THE GROUND SIGNS WERE APPROVED 3-0. THE CAR WASH WALL SIGN WAS APPROVED 2-1. THERE WERE THREE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT SPOKE AT THE MEETING, HOWEVER, AND I DO HAVE THEIR SPEAKER CARDS HERE. TWO WERE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE BEHIND THE PROPERTY AND WANTED TO KNOW -- THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE SOUND AND DIFFERENT THINGS. THE OTHER IS THE NEIGHBOR -- THE OWNER OF THE SHOPPING CENTER TO THE SOUTH. HE IS HERE TODAY. AND HE SPOKE -- WELL ACTUALLY HIS REPRESENTATIVE SPOKE AT THE MEETING AND HAD QUITE A FEW ISSUES WITH IT. SO, THEY HAVE SOME DIFFICULTIES WITH WHY THEY NEEDED VARIANCES.STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST MEETS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BU NOT MEET THE NECESSARILY CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST. IT DOES NOT APPEAR CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTERESTS. THE WALL -- SORRY THAT'S THE WRONG SENTENCE THERE. BUT THE APPLICANT HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A HARDSHIP WITH THE PARCEL. STAFF HAS PROVIDED FIVE CONDITIONS AND FOUR FINDINGS TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO APPROVE AND FOUR FINDINGS TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO DENY. AND THIS APPLICANT I BELIEVE DOES HAVE A FORMAL PRESENTATION. THEY REQUESTED TO HAVE A POWER POINT SENT OVER. AND I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR
QUESTIONS. >> JUST A SECOND. THIS IS ONE OF TWO APPLICATIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT KIM TO PROCEED WITH THE PRESENTATION OF THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE AS WELL AND THEN HAVE THE BOARD DISCUSS BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER? OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THIS
PARTICULAR REQUEST AND THEN THE NECESSARY CRITERIA FOR THIS ONE. >> CHAIRMAN: THEY'RE ALL PRETTY
MUCH TIED TOGETHER AREN'T THEY? >> SPEAKER: WELL THE ZONING VARIANCES ARE ALL IN SECTION 10 TO THE SIGNS. SO, THESE ARE STRICTLY SIGNAGE QUESTIONS. THE NON-ZONING VARIANCES ARE ALL CONNECTED TO CONSTRUCTION. THE BUILDINGS, THE FLAT CANOPIES. SO, IN A SENSE, THEY COULD BE HEARD SEPARATELY. THEY DO INTERTWINE, ABSOLUTELY. SO IT COULD GO EITHER WAY.
>> CHAIRMAN: DO YOU ALL HAVE A PREFERENCE TO TAKE ONE AT A TIME NOT TO CONFUSE IT?
>> BOARD MEMBER: IT'S UP TO YOU. >> BOARD MEMBER: IF I MAY? THE APPLICANT JUST INFORMED THEM
THEIR PRESENTATION THEY PUT TOGETHER DOES COMBINE THE TWO. >> CHAIRMAN: WE'LL COMBINE THEM
THEN. WE CAN BREAK IT DOWN LATER IF WE NEED TO. >> SPEAKER: ALL RIGHT THEN WE'LL GO ON AND I WILL GO RIGHT INTO THE NEXT PART. THIS IS -- WHAT HAPPENED HERE? OKAY.
>> CHAIRMAN: ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD AT LEAST ON THIS FIRST -- BENCH WE
START THE SECOND? >> BOARD MEMBER: I DO. I'VE EXPRESSED THIS BEFORE AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE. ON PAGE 8 YOU TALK ABOUT RECOMMENDED ACTION. RIGHT IN THE BEGINNING IT SAYS... STAFF HAS DIFFICULTY FINDING ANY HARDSHIP. AND I'M LOOKING TO THE ATTORNEY. I'M USED TO EITHER YOU DO OR YOU DON'T. BUT "HAVING DIFFICULTY" DOESN'T REALLY GIVE ME PROFESSIONAL INPUT. YOU GUYS ARE THE PROFESSIONALS.
>> SPEAKER: THAT'S MY COMMENT. SO, WHEN I SAY I HAVE DIFFICULTY, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT TO THIS APPLICATION. NOTHING THAT I CAME ACROSS, I COULD NOT FIND A HARDSHIP. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT I KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT THE PARCEL. LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A BIG
PROJECT. I COULD NOT IDENTIFY ONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: SO THAT IS A DEFINITIVE STATEMENT ON YOUR PART. YOU CANNOT FIND A HARDSHIP?
>> SPEAKER: THEY HAVEN'T PUT ONE IN THE APPLICATION THAT I COULD FIND.
>> BOARD MEMBER: SINCE HARDSHIP IS ALSO A LEGAL TERMINOLOGY OR LEGAL RULING, ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT
SUBJECTIVE, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON IT? >> MY STATEMENTS ARE USUALLY I
[00:25:05]
CAN'T DECIDE FOR THE BOARD. I CAN GUIDE YOU OF WHAT TRADITIONALLY HAS BEEN CONSTITUTED A HARDSHIP BUT THIS BOARD IS THE ULTIMATE FINDER OF FACT. AS YOUR ATTORNEY, IT'S NOT MY ROLE TO KIND OF SAY HERE'S A HARDSHIP, YOU KNOW, BOARD PLEASE FIND THIS. IT'S ONLY HERE'S THE CRITERIA THAT WOULD CONSTITUTE A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE LIMITATIONS OF SUCH TO THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF FINDING THAT PARTICULAR HARDSHIP ON ANY FUTURE CASES.BUT ULTIMATELY THIS BOARD IS THE FINDER OF FACT AND THE FINDER OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A HARDSHIP AND ANY NECESSARY CONDITIONS THAT WOULD RISE TO THE LEVEL OF MEETING THE CRITERIA FOR A
ZONING VARIANCE. >> BOARD MEMBER: LET ME REPHRASE IT. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE
STAFF REPORT THAT DEFINES A HARDSHIP? >> CITY ATTORNEY: YES
THERE'S -- >> BOARD MEMBER: FOR THE SIZE OF THE SIGN
>> CITY ATTORNEY: FOR THE SIZE OF THE SIGN? UM, NOTHING THAT WOULD KIND OF HINGES TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S A SPECIAL CONDITION THAT IMPAIRS THE PROPERTY SUCH THAT, YOU KNOW, THE LIMITATION OF THE 60 FOOT GROUND SIGN OR THE 24 FOOT WALL SIGN WOULD CONSTITUTE A HARDSHIP IN DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY. AND SO THE ISSUE IS OKAY WHAT ABOUT THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS IMPAIRING ITS DEVELOPMENT AND TAKING THE CODE RESTRICTIONS OF THE 24 FOOT WALL SIGN AND THE 60 FOOT GROUND SIGN AND APPLYING IT TO WHATEVER IMPAIRMENT OF THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED.
THOSE KIND OF STEPS HAVEN'T BEEN TAKEN OR THERE'S AT LEAST AT THIS POINT THERE'S NO COMPETENT EVIDENCE TO IDENTIFY IMPAIRMENT AND HOW THAT RELATES TO THE RULE.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK THAT WAS A WONDERFUL ANSWER. BECAUSE THAT TO ME GIVES US PROFESSIONAL GUIDANCE AS TO AT LEAST ME PERSONALLY FOR THE SIZE OF THE SIGN. THE PLACEMENT AND STUFF LIKE THAT IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE. BUT I'M JUST USED TO PROFESSIONAL STAFFS DOING WHAT YOU JUST DID. AND I THINK IT'S EXCELLENT AND I'M NOT CRITICIZING YOU FOR NOT DOING IT BECAUSE IT'S REALLY KIND OF HIS ROLE, BUT I JUST -- SIZE OF SIGNS LETTERING IS AN EXTREMELY SUBJECTIVE ISSUE. EVER SINCE I'VE MOVED HERE, 18 YEARS AGO, SIGNS ALWAYS SEEM TO JUMP OUT.
I REMEMBER THE WINN-DIXIE HAD SOME ISSUES YEARS AND YEARS AGO. IT STILL SEEMS TO BE AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT PART OF THE PONTE VEDRA DISTRICT. AND SO IT, TO ME, SOMEBODY COMING IN AS WELL-KNOWN AS GATE AND ASKING FOR THOSE AND THEN SEEING THE DOCUMENTATION IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT'S TROUBLING TO ME. AND I WANTED SOME CLARITY OF IT. AND AT LEAST IN MY OPINION YOU'VE GIVEN ME CLARITY. AT LEAST IT RELATES TO THE SIZE OF THE SIGN NOT THE PLACEMENT AND THE LANDSCAPING BUFFER AND STUFF LIKE THAT BUT AS TO THE SIZE OF THE LETTERING. IT WAS VERY
HELPFUL. THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: JOHN, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT?
>> BOARD MEMBER: TWO QUESTIONS. ONE, IT APPEARS THE SHOPS OF PONTE VEDRA ACTUALLY HAVE TWO
GROUND SIGNS. AM I CORRECT ON THAT? >> SPEAKER: YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT. AND I THINK THEY PREDATE THE OVERLAY DISTRICT. I'M NOT SURE WHEN THIS PART OF THE CODE OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS CAME INTO BEING. BUT I DON'T HAVE A
VARIANCE ON RECORD FOR THEM FOR THAT. IF THEY DID. >> BOARD MEMBER: IT IS A SIRNGLE
PARCEL. >> SPEAKER: RIGHT. >> BOARD MEMBER: OTHER QUESTION.
THE EXISTING GATE GAS STATION AND THE SIGNS APPEAR TO BE VERY LARGE ESPECIALLY ON THE CANOPY.
WAS THERE A VARIANCE FOR THAT? >> SPEAKER: THAT DOES PREDATE THE OVERLAY. AND ONCE YOU HAVE A SIGN, AS LONG AS YOU KEEP REFACING IT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BRING IT BACK DOWN TO SIZE UNLESS YOU REPLACE IT WITH A COMPLETELY NEW SIGN. SO THAT PROBABLY IS A NON-CONFORMING SIGN. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF SIGNS THAT PREDATE THE OVERLAYS IN THIS DISTRICT. SO THAT'S WHAT MY CAUTION WAS ON THAT ONE BY COMPARING IT TO OTHER SITES IS THAT A LOT OF THEM PREDATE
THE OVERLAYS. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY THANK YOU. >> CITY ATTORNEY: WE HAVE A
[00:30:01]
REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THE ZONING VARIANCE COMPONENT NOW WHILE IT'S FRESH ON EVERYONE'S MIND IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIR, I THINK THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO THEIR PRESENTATION NOW. OR IS THAT NOT CORRECT? NO? OKAY. I THINK SHE'D JUST LIKE TO RESPONSE.>> CHAIRMAN: THAT'S FINE. >> SPEAKER: MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, ELLEN AVERY SMITH, ROGERS TOWERS, 100 WET STONE PLACE. WE ARE GOING TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER MS. DEL RANCE DOES THE SECOND PART OF THE PRESENTATION TO DO OUR PRESENTATION BUT WE DID NOT WANT MR. POWELL'S QUESTION TO GO UNANSWERED BY OUR TEAM BEFORE YOU MOVED ON FROM THE ISSUE OF HARDSHIP. IT IS OUR OPINION -- AND WE'LL GET INTO THE SITE PLANNING AND ALL -- BECAUSE THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PROJECT THE BUILDINGS ARE SET BACK FARTHER FROM THE ROAD. THEY'VE GOT GAS CANOPIES IN FRONT OF THEM AND A MYRIAD OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT COMBINED MAKE UP THE HARDSHIP THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. ALSO, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF GATES BUSINESS, EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW WHAT THE PRICE OF GAS IS WHEN THEY'RE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. SO, YOU ALSO HAVE TO HAVE SIGNAGE FOR GASOLINE PRICES. SO, WE'LL GET INTO THAT DURING OUR PRESENTATION. WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE AWARE THAT WE DO FEEL LIKE THERE IS A HARDSHIP BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY AND ALSO SAWGRASS VILLAGE, THE VEER AND RA AND OTHER BIG PROJECTS IN PONTE VEDRA HAVE UNIFIED SIGN PLANS THAT ALLOW FOR LARGER SIGNS. JUST BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PRESENTING A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN DOES NOT TAKE AWAY THE FACT THERE ARE LARGER SIGNS THAT HAVE
BEEN APPROVED POST OVERLAY DISTRICT IN PONTE VEDRA. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PHASE OF THE AGENDA?
>> SPEAKER: OKAY. MOVING ON TO THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE. THESE REQUESTS ARE FOR RELIEF FROM THE OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS. THE FIRST IS TO ALLOW FOR FLAT ROOFS. THE FLAT ROOFS THEY WANT ON THE GAS CANOPIES. BUT ALSO ON SEGMENTS OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE. IT DOES HAVE A SHED ROOF BUT YOU CAN'T SEE THE SLOPE FROM THE FRONT. BUT THE TWO PIECES ON THE SIDE ARE FLAT ROOF. THEY ALSO REQUEST RELIEF FOR THE CAR WASH TO EXCEED THE 120 FOOT MAXIMUM. THEY'RE ASKING FOR 145 FEET. AND TO ALLOW FOR THERE TO BE NO LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE PARKING LOT. AND THERE'S A REQUIREMENT IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT TO ENHANCE LANDSCAPING.
THE REASON THE BUILDING NEEDS TO HAVE RELIEF IS THE PART OF THE CODE THAT LIMITS IT TO 120 FEET IS FOR BUILDINGS THAT ARE PARALLEL OR WITHIN 45 DEGREES. SO THEY DO HAVE A CAR WASH UP IN NOCATEE WHICH IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE OVERLAY REGULATIONS BUT THAT BUILDING IS NOT PARALLEL TO THE ROAD. SO, IF THEY WERE TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR HERE, THEY MAY OR MAY NOT NEED THIS RELIEF.
THE REQUIREMENT OF THE MINIMUM OF THREE FOOT LANDSCAPE STRIP IS BETWEEN ANY BUILDING AND PARKING LOT. THEY'RE REQUESTING IT AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. HERE'S THE FLAT ROOF PARTS OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE ON THE SIDE VIEW. AND THEN THE CANOPIES WHICH I STATED BEFORE THEY'VE LOWERED FROM 17 TO 15 FEET. AND THERE'S THE LENGTH OF THE CAR WASH BUILDING. AND THE CONVENIENCE STORE IS PRETTY LONG BUT IT DOESN'T EXCEED 120 FEET. STAFF SUGGESTED WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXAMPLES OF ANYBODY GETTING A VARIANCE TO ELIMINATE LANDSCAPING COMPLETELY. THE ONLY EXCEPTION THAT I COULD FIND THAT I KNOW OF IS VALLEY SMOKE RESTAURANT IN THE FRONT OF THEIR BUILDING. BECAUSE IT SITS BACK I THINK 150 FEET FROM THE ROAD. THEY PUT IN PLANTERS ALONG THE FRONT OF THEIR BUILDING BECAUSE THE OVERHANG WAS GOING TO BE TOO SHADY SO THEY WANTED SOMETHING THAT WAS UP HIGH TO BE, YOU KNOW, LIKE GROUND COVER. BUT I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER VARIANCES AWAY FROM THIS. THE REQUEST FOR THE FLAT ROOF ON THE FUEL CANOPIES IS TO LOWER THE PROFILE IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE SERENES STORE VISIBILITY. AND THE CAR WASH BUILDING. THIS IS A SHORTER VERSION OF WHAT THEY USUALLY BUILD. THEY SAID THEY COULDN'T SHORTEN IT LESS THAN THIS. AND THEY STATE THE LANDSCAPE STRIP IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TENDS TO DRAW CIGARETTE BUTTS AND LITTER AND THAT'S WHERE THEY STORE THE EXTRA THINGS FOR SALE.
I DID RECEIVE SOME INQUIRIES ABOUT THIS AGAIN. AND THERE IS NO WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE. AT
[00:35:01]
THE DECEMBER 18TH A. R. C. MEETING, THIS WAS HEARD AND THE AESTHETICS OF THE BUILDING WERE APPROVED 3-0. AND THAT'S BOTH OF THE -- THAT'S FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE. THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING WAS APPROVED 2-1. THERE WERE THREE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO SPOKE INCLUDING THE REPRESENTATIVE, THE OWNERS OF EH SHOPS AT PONTE VEDRA. WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH. AND SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS WERE THAT THE SHOPPING CENTER -- ALL OF THEIR SIGNS MEET THE 24 SQUARE FOOT ALLIANCE. THAT MOSTLY APPLIES TO THE ZONING VARIANCE PORTION.BUT THEY DID ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF THE CANOPIES PUSHING THE BUILDINGS BACK BUT THE CANOPIES NOT BEING AS FAR BACK AS THE BUILDINGS. THEY HAVE SOME SORT OF PRIVATE AGREEMENT THE COUNTY IS NO THE INVOLVED WITH. SO, THERE MAY BE THINGS THAT DON'T AFFECT US THAT MAYBE HAVE TO DO WITH THAT. AS FAR AS THE POND LOCATION. THE POND IS THERE. THE A. R. C.
DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LOCATION OF THINGS. HOWEVER THEY DID PREFER THAT THE CAR WASH BUILDING BE ANGLED, IF POSSIBLE, LIKE NOCATEE. BUT IT WAS APPROVED BY THE ARC APPLICATION. CONTINGENT ON APPROVALS FROM YOU. AND THAT'S FOR BOTH SETS. THEY WERE
CONTINGENT ON YOUR APPROVALS. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> CHAIRMAN: DO YOU HAVE A
COMMENT? >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE A. R. C.
I HAVE BEEN AT A FEW OF THEIR MEETINGS. THEY'RE FIVE-MEMBER COMMITTEE IS THAT CORRECT? AND THEY ONLY HAD THREE PEOPLE PRESENT. IN ORDER TO APPROVE, SHOULDN'T THEY HAVE HAD ALL
THREE HAVE TO VOTE IN FAVOR? >> SPEAKER: WELL THEY ONLY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO VOTE BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THREE VOTES FOR THE DECISION TO COUNT. I'M SURE PAOLO CAN STEP IN
>> CITY ATTORNEY: RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST A MAJORITY OF A QUORUM PRESENT. UNLIKE THIS BOARD.
THIS BOARD HAS A EXPLICIT REQUIREMENT THAT YOU NEED AT LEAST FOUR MEMBERS TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF ANY MOTION. SO, IN ALL OTHER BOARDS IT'S MAJORITY OF QUORUM PRESENT.
>> BOARD MEMBER: BUT THEY DO HAVE FIVE MEMBERS I UNDERSTAND. SO THEY HAD TWO ABSENT. IT WASN'T A ROBUST APPROVAL AS IF YOU HAD FIVE PEOPLE THERE AND THREE PEOPLE VOTED -- AND ONLY
TWO PEOPLE VOTED. >> SPEAKER: CORRECT. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
>> BOARD MEMBER: COULD I CLARIFY SOMETHING? THE DRAWING THAT THE SHOWED THE -- AND IT'S SHOWING UP AGAIN ON PAGE 5 OF THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNER IS A POTENTIAL MITIGATION. IS THAT
YOUR DRAWING? >> SPEAKER: YES. >> BOARD MEMBER: IT WAS NOT
GATES? >> SPEAKER: CORRECT. THAT WAS MINE. I WANTED TO SEE WHAT IT
WOULD LOOK LIKE. IF IT MADE A DIFFERENCE. >> BOARD MEMBER: AND YOU THINK
THAT WOULD BE -- IN YOUR OPINION -- ADEQUATE MITIGATION? >> SPEAKER: I PUT IT OUT THERE AS A POSSIBILITY. I DIDN'T -- I HAD THAT AT THE A. R. C. MEETING AS WELL. AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY DIDN'T FEEL NECESSARY OR THINK WAS IMPORTANT. THERE IS SOME TREE ISLANDS THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE THAT THOSE ARE REALLY ENHANCED. SO IT WAS FELT THAT THAT MADE UP FOR IT. SO, I JUST PUT IN THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STRAIGHT VIEW YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SEE THEM. SO A PLANTER IN THE MIDDLE MIGHT BE NICE. AND IF IT'S UP TALLER MAYBE IT WON'T GET CIGARETTE BUTTS. WHO KNOWS.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. IN THIS PACKAGE, I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHERE THERE IS A REFERENCE TO SOME SORT OF A MASTER PLAN. AND I LOOKED AT THE COUNTY WEBSITE TO SEE IF THIS WAS OWNED BY THE SAME PEOPLE. AND THE PONTE VEDRA SHOPS SEEMS TO BE OWNED BY SOMEONE DIFFERENT. WAS THERE A MASTER PLAN BACK IN 1995? IF SO, DOES THAT HAVE ANY
BEARING ON WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY? >> SPEAKER: THERE IS NOT A MASTER PLAN THAT WE HAVE FROM THEM. BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE IS A MASTER PLAN OF THAT ENTIRE PARCEL. AND WHEN THE SHOPS OF PONTE VEDRA WAS SOLD OUT OF IT, THEY HAD OTHER AGREEMENTS THAT ARE INTERTWINED AND THAT'S WHERE THE NEIGHBOR WHO IS HERE CAN EXPLAIN MORE OF HOW THAT WORKS. BUT APPARENTLY THERE WAS A MASTER PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE PARCEL. WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECORD OF IT. AND IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE DECISIONS HERE.
[00:40:07]
>> BOARD MEMBER: BUT DOES GATE OWN THE REMAINDER OF THIS PARCEL?
>> SPEAKER: AS FAR AS I KNOW. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING AGAIN FOR THE APPLICANT.
>> BOARD MEMBER: SO THEY DO OWN THE PROPERTY BEHIND IT? >> SPEAKER: IT'S SHOWING ON
COUNTY RECORDS SO FAR THAT WAY. >> BOARD MEMBER: BECAUSE I PERSONALLY FIND THAT EXTREMELY INTERESTING. BECAUSE IF THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO A LARGER PARCEL AND IT'S BROUGHT IN MASTER PLANS AND NO MASTER PLANS, I FIND THAT EXTREMELY INTERETING THAT THEY OWN THE REMAINDER OF THE PARCEL
BUT ARE NOT COMMITTING ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE ENTRY OF IT. >> BOARD MEMBER: WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, THAT DRIVEWAY BY THE TALBOTTS SHOPS OF PONTE VEDRA, ISN'T PART OF IT.
THE OTHER PARCEL IS NOT OWNED BY GATE. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT IT MUST HAVE -- A GOOD QUESTION. DOES IT BELONG -- THE ENTRY TO THE SHOPS IS BEING ALTERED TO BECOME
THE MAIN ENTRY TO THIS MUCH LARGER PARCEL? >> SPEAKER: I THINK THE APPLICANT IS MUCH BETTER SUITED TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE I ONLY KNOW WHAT I GAVE YOU.
>> BOARD MEMBER: IT'S DRESSED AS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. >> BOARD MEMBER: I UNDERSTAND.
BUT IT'S THE MAIN ENTRY TO THE GAS STATION IS THAT ENTRY. >> BOARD MEMBER: YES. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWING, IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE'S A POTENTIAL ROAD EXTENSION GOING BACK IN A
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. IT'S ALL THERE.. >> CITY ATTORNEY: I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHATEVER MASTER PLAN IS, ISN'T PART OF A COUNTY APPROVED DOCUMENT. IF A MASTER PLAN EXISTS, IT'S COMPLETELY PRIVATE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL.
IT'S NOT PART OF A PUD. IT'S JUST PURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PARTY OWNERS THAT HAS NO BEARING ON THE COUNTY EXERCISE OF ITS
REGULATIONS. >> CHAIRMAN: I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE HAD APPLICANT COME FORWARD AND SPEAK. THAT MIGHT CLEAR UP MANY OF OUR QUESTIONS WE'RE KIND OF LOOKING FOR.
>> SPEAKER: THERE IS ONE THING I FORGOT TO MENTION AND THAT IS THE FINDINGS FOR THE FINAL ORDER FOR THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE. I DID HAVE THE ZONING VARIANCE TRANSFERRABLE BUT THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE NOT. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THEY BOATS BE ALLOWED TO BE TRANSFERRABLE WHICH MAKES SENSE. THEY'RE TIED TOGETHER. SO, I DID HAVE A CORRECTED COPY TO HAVE THEM MATCH.
>> BOARD MEMBER: COULD I JUST ASK A QUESTION? TECHNICALLY ON ALL OTHER VARIANCES THAT WE APPROVE THEY AREN'T TRANSFERRABLE FOR THE ZONING VARIANCE. SO, IF SOMEONE DOES SOMETHING ON THEIR PROPERTY AND WE APPROVE IT, WE SAY THIS ISN'T TRANSFERRABLE. SO, DO WE EVEN
HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT KIND OF CHANGE? >> CITY ATTORNEY: YES YOU CAN.
IT'S YOUR CONDITIONS. STAFF PROVIDES THEM AS A RECOMMENDATION. THE DEFAULT IS THAT ZONING VARIANCES ARE NOT TRANSFERRABLE. HOWEVER, IF IT HAS TO DO WITH CONSTRUCTION, SOMEONE IS ACTUALLY BUILDING SOMETHING, THE BETTER COURSE OF ACTION IS TO MAKE IT TRANSFERRABLE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THE PROPERTY CHANGES HANDS WE DON'T SUDDENLY HAVE A VIOLATION UPON THE RECORDATION OF A DEED. BUT IT DEPENDS UPON THE SPECIFIC REQUEST. BUT IT'S WITHIN THIS BOARD'S PURVIEW TO MAKE IT TRANSFERRABLE OR NOT TRANSFERRABLE.
>> SPEAKER: AND IT ONLY APPLIES TO THESE APPLICATIONS APPROVED BY THE A. R. C. SO, IF YOU WOULD APPROVE THE LARGER SIGNS, THEY COULDN'T PUT DIFFERENT SIGNS IN THERE WITHOUT GOING
BACK TO THE A. R. C. SO. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. IF THE APPLICANT WOULD COME FORWARD
PLEASE. >> SPEAKER: GOOD AFTERNOON. TONY ROBBINS. 13901 SUTTON PARK DRIVE SOUTH, JACKSONVILLE, 3224. REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNERS. PV COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES INCORPORATED ALONG WITH OUR TEAM ARE THE OWNERS FROM GATE PETROLEUM BEHIND ME.
OUR CIVIL ENGINEER MR. BRAD DAVIS ALSO WITH PROSSER. OUR LEGAL COUNSEL. I APPRECIATE
[00:45:03]
YOUR TIME AND ALL THE WORK MS. DEL RANCE HAS PUT FORWARD. AS THE AXIOM GOES THE BEST WAY TO TACKLE AN EMAIL IS ONE BITE AT A TIME. I'LL TAKE MY TIME TO GO THROUGH THE VARIOUS APPLICATION FOR RELIEF. THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS ASK FOR. WHICH IS THAT RELATED BUILDINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE SHOULD COME TOGETHER SIMILAR STYLES AND BE COMPATIBLE AND UNIFORM IN TERMS OF SIZE, TERMS OF USE AND IN TERMS OF LIGHTING. ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS TO HAVE A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN FOR THIS SITE MUCH LIKE APPROVED FOR THE PUDS FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. BUT THAT WE'RE PUTTING THE CARDS ON THE TABLE ABOUT WHAT SIGNS WILL BE ON THE PROPERTY, HOW THEY RELATE TO ONE ANOTHER, HOW THEIR ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES ARE COMPLIMENTARY, HOW THEIR SIZES WILL BE LIMITED, AND WHERE THE LOCATIONS ARE. WITHOUT CALLING IT A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT SEEKING OF RELIEF IS SEEKING TO HAVE. THE FOUR AREAS OF RELIEF ALLUDED TO IN MS. DEL RANCE'S STAFF REPORT ARE THERE. WE'LL TAKE ONE AT A TIME. THE FIRST IS FOR THE ADDITIONAL GROUND SIGN. THE SECOND IS TO HAVE TWO GROUND SIGNS WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THEN TO HAVE LARGER WALL SIGNS THAN EXPRESSLY LISTED INSIDE THE REGULATIONS. AND TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL SIGN ON THE SECOND CANOPY SPECIFICALLY ONE THAT DOESN'T FACE AWAY FROM THE STREET. ALL OF THOSE REQUIRE RELIEF FROM THE PLAIN READING OF THE REGULATIONS. STARTING WITH THE FIRST ONE WITH THE ADDITIONAL GROUND SIGN. EACH BUSINESS OR EACH SITE IS ALLOWED TO HAVE ONE SIGN. BEFORE WE GO ON, I WANT TO TAKE ONE STEP BACK. WHEN THEIR PAOLO WAS QUESTIONED EARLIER DEALING WITH THE HARDSHIP CAME TO MIND THE REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM THIS SECTION OF THESE FOUR PORTIONS OF SECTION 10, NONE OF THEM SEEK AND WILL RESULT IN THE IMPAIRMENT OF LIGHT OR AIR TO ANY OF OUR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. NOBODY OF THEM ARE SEEKING TO CREATE AND CAUSE ADDITIONAL FIRE HAZARD OR OTHER DANGERS TO OUR ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR TO THE SITE. THEY DO NOT DEMONISH -- THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF DIMINISHMENT OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES THAT COULD THREATEN THE PONTE VEDRA DISTRICT. THE RELIEF REQUESTED, NONE WOULD CAUSE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC CONGESTION. NONE OF THEM CREATE A NUISANCE AND NONE CREATE A NEED FOR THE COUNTY TO SPEND MORE IN THIS AREA OF PONTE VEDRA. WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED IS A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN OF THE SIGNS THAT COMPLIMENT EACH OTHER. THE FIRST AND FOREMOST IS HAVING TWO GROUND SIGNS. IF THE SITE WAS TO BE SPLIT, ONE FOR THE CAR WASH AND ONE FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE, THIS WOULD NOT BE A MATTER OF CONTENTION. EACH WOULD BE ALLOWED ONE WALL SIGN BECAUSE CODE ALLOWS FOR THAT. WHAT THAT WE HAVE HERE IS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LIKE THIS AS ALLUDED TO IN THE STAFF REPORT, THEY'RE ALLOWED UP TO ONE SIGN OF 60 SQUARE FEET. AS OPPOSED TO THAT LARGER 60 SQUARE FOOT SIGN WITH HAVING CAR WASH AND GAS ON TO IT, THE APPLICANTS PROPOSING THE TWO SMALLER SIGNS. AND MAKE UGH SURE THEY ARE SEPARATE BY NO LESS THAN HALF A CITY BLOCK BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM AND HAVING THOSE SUPPORT THOSE GROUND SIGNS WE AGREE THE COLOR SCHEME PRESENTED AT THE PONTE VEDRA A.R.C. LAST MONTH AND THAT IS REFLECTED IN HER STAFF REPORT AND ON THE SCREEN TODAY. WHICH IS LESS RED, NO RED ON THE SIDE PANEL, AND LESS RED AROUND THE GATE INSIGNIA. AND THE CAR WASH. THE PRESENTATION HAD A NEWER UPDATED VERSION WHICH I DO APPRECIATE HER TALENTS IN CLEANING THAT UP.BUT WHAT'S REFLECTED WOULD NOT HAVE THE GRAY BACKGROUND BUT A WHITE BACKGROUND AND THE GATE SXR AS WORDS WOULD BE IN COLOR ALONG WITH THE LINE AROUND IT AND THE BUBBLES. BUT ESSENTIALLY THE FACT THAT THE TWO BUSINESSES THAT ARE THERE INSTEAD OF SPLITTING THE PARCEL AND DOING TWO SEPARATE PARCELS AS PART OF THE OVERALL PLAN, THEY HAVE TWO GROUND SIGNS. THE FACT THEY'RE INSIDE THE BUFFER, THEY HAVE BEEN PLACED BACK AS FAR FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AS POSSIBLE. AS FAR FROM A1A AS ANY FURTHER WEST, THEY WOULD BE INTRUDING INTO THE TRAVEL LANES AND AFFECTING VEHICULAR CIRCULATION. I NOTE ON HERE IN COLOR IN ORANGE INSIDE THIS BUFFER, THIS IS FOR REFERENCE TODAY WHERE THE STORM WATER POND IS. THERE'S NOT A LARGE CLEARING OF TREES OR THICK FOREST OF VEGETATION. WHICH IS WHERE THE POND IS NOW. AND ALSO A CONCRETE SIDEWALK THAT RUNS THROUGH THERE. THAT OUR LANDSCAPING PLAN HAS TO INCREASE AND ADD TO THE BEAUTIFICATION OF THAT SECTION TO CREATE A NICE BUFFER. PLENTY OF LUSH LANDSCAPING WILL BE ADDED AND THAT WILL HELP SCREEN ANY LIGHT FIXTURES AROUND THE SIGNS. THE
[00:50:03]
PLACEMENT OF THE BUFFER IS SIMILAR -- WHERE THE SIGNS ARE, AGAIN, NOT ALL THE WAY UP AGAINST A1A AND NOT CENTERED INSIDE THE BUFFER. THEY'RE AS FAR BACK AS POSSIBLE. THEY ARE IN KEEPING WITH OTHER SIGNS LOCATED UP AND DOWN A1A. THAT FULFILLS OF PART OF SECTION 8 AS WELL. PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. WHERE THE REDUCTION OF VISUAL DISTRACTION ALLOWS FOR THE CLUSTERING OF COMPLIMENTARY USES THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR. WE FEEL THE RELIEF IS JUSTIFIED IN THAT IT HELPS FURTHER SOME OF THE OTHER REGULATIONS INSIDE THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATIONS. AS WE GET TO THE THIRD REQUEST ON THE LARGER THAN ALLOWED WALL SIZE. IN AFFECT FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE AT THE TOP PICTURE AND FOR THE CAR WASH ON THE BOTTOM. AT THE REQUEST THE SIGNAGE IS SIMILAR TO THE NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT YOU WOULD FIND ON A SIMILAR SIZED BUILDING. OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH AND SHOPS, EACH OF THOSE STORES HAS A SIGN THAT WOULD BE FOR THAT BUSINESS. UP TO 24 SQUARE FEET. IF THE SITE WAS TO BE REDONE WITH TWO 120 FEET LONG BUILDINGS, SIX STORES AND EACH WERE TO HAVE 24 SQUARE FEET, CONTINUING THE PATTERN THAT EXISTS TODAY, THAT WOULD NEARLY BE 300 SQUARE FEET WORTH OF SIGNS. AS OPPOSED TO THAT, THE SINGLE USE OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE AND THE CAR WASH NECESSITY A LITTLE BIT OF RELIEF ON THE SIZE OF THE SIGNS FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE. THE A.R.C. RECOGNIZED THAT THE GATE OVER THE DOOR, GATE IN WHITE, IS NOT JUST AN APPLIQUE BUT PART OF THE ARCHITECTURE. WHILE IT MAY BE MORE THAN 24 SQUARE FEET THAM APPROVED THE SIZE AS PRESENTED.AS IT RELATES TO THE TWO WALL SIGNS ON THE OPPOSING SIGNS OF THAT GATE SIGN, THEY HAVE SOME OPTIONS FOR US. ONE THAT THE SIZE COULD REMAIN BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE MOSTLY BLACK AND WHITE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF COLOR OR THE COLOR COULD REMAIN AS LONG AS THEY WENT DOWN TO 24 SQUARE FEET. I WOULD CONTEND THERE IS A THIRD OPTION THEY COULD NOT PUT THEM UP AT ALL IF THT'S THE CASE. BUT WE APPRECIATED THE A.R.C.'S ROBUST DISCUSSIONS. IT WAS A VERY LONG MEETING THEY TOOK GREAT TIME AND CARE TO GO THROUGH AND APRIVATED AT OPTIONS WHERE THE SIGNS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND THEY HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE WALL SIGN FOR THE CAR WASH AS LONG AS IT MATCHES WHAT I SHOWED N THE PREVIOUS SLIDE AS I IT RELATES TO THE COLOR SCHEME. AS IT RELATES TO THE ZONING VARIANCE. PV PVZVAR, THE A.R.C. SUPPORTING THE GATE SIGN. THEY ALLOWED THE PLACEMENT OF THE SIGNS THAT DO NOT FACE A1A. WE SPLIT THE CANOPY -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOP PICTURE -- THE TWO DIFFERENT CAN CANOPIES. IN ORDER TO HAVE GATE LISTED ON BOTH, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THAT'S PART ARE OF THE REASON WE'RE THERE. TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL WALL SIGN. IT IS THE OPTION APPROVED BY THE A.R.C. ONE OF THOSE COULD NOT BE FACING A1A. IT CAN BE THE NORTH OR THE SOUTH ONE WHICH EVER ONE.
THE ONE WE PRESENTED TODAY IS THE SOUTH ONE. THE SITE ON THE LEFT THAT WOULD HAVE THE GATE ON THAT SIDE THERE IF BUT THE ORDER WAS THEY COULD DO VICE VERSA. AND DECIDE TO HAVE IT FACING A1A ON THE SOUTH AND THE NORTH SIDE ON THE OTHER CANOPY AS WELL. BUT ZONING VARIANCE NONETHELESS IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ALLOW ONE OF THOSE. AND DELL RAINS WAS ACCURATE WHICH CITING WHEN YOU ADD THE TWO SIGNS TOGETHER THEY'RE LESS THAN THE 24 SQUARE FEET. THEY'RE 19.6 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL. THESE REQUESTS ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THEY HAVE A COHESIVENESS, ATTRACTIVE ALTERNATIVE TO A CONVENTIONAL CONVENIENCE STORE AND CAR WASH LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE REGION. THESE REQUESTS HERE AND GRANTING THE RELIEF IT'S NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO OUR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND THE CRITERIA LISTED IN THE RELIEF FROM SECTION 10 DOESN'T IMPAIR THE LIGHT OR AIR AROUND IT, CREATE ANY FIRE HAZARDS, DIMINISH THE PROPERTY VALUES, INCREASE TRAFFIC, NOR FORM ANY SORT OF NUISANCE OR REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL COUNTY EXPENDITURES. TAKES TO US THE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE THREE REQUESTS THERE. THESE THREE REQUESTS BEING SOUGHT DEAL WITH THE PORTIONS OF THE STORE NOT THE ENTIRE STORE, NOT EVERY PART OF THE STRUCTURE, TO HAVE A FLAT ROOF. ALSO TO ALLOW THE CAR WASH BUILDING TO BE SLIGHTLY LONGER THAN THE 120 FEET ALLOWED BY CODE. LASTLY, TO NOT REQUIREMENT THAT LANDSCAPING IN BETWEEN THE BUILDING FRONT ANKH AND THE PARKING LOT. AS YOU KNOW, YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS THOSE FIVE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR THIS BODY TO GRANT RELIEF NECESSARY TO FIND ANY APPROVAL OF A NON-ZONING VARIANCE. THERE
[00:55:04]
ARE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN CARRYING OUT THAT LETTER OF THE LAW. IT'S NOT BASED ON A WAY FOR THE APPLICANT TO LOWER THE COST OF DEVELOPING THE SITE. THIRDLY, THE CRITERIA DEAL WOULD NOT CREATE ANY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN CONGESTION ON THE SURROUNDING PUBLIC STREETS, A DANGER OF FIRE OR OTHER HAZARDS. FORTHLY, SUCH RELIEF WILL INCREASE THE PROPERTY VALUE OF THE SITE AND NOT NICE -- VICE VERSA. AND LASTLY IT IS IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT OF PONTE VEDRA LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. FIRSTLY OF THE THREE, DEAL WITH THE FLAT ROOFS.YOU SEE THE TOP PORTION OF THE CENTRAL PART OF THE STORE IN THE MIDDLE PICTURE YOU CAN SEE FROM A SIDE ELEVATION OR THE BOTTOM PICTURE TO WHERE PITCHED ROOFS ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE AAPPEARANCES ARE BEING PROVIDED AND WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID CREATING AN OBSTACLE TO VIEWING THE ARCHITECTURE FROM A1A. THE CONVENIENCE STORE HAS A PITCHED ROOF THAT SCREENS THE FLAT PORTION BEHIND IT. AND THE SMALL FLAT PORTIONS ON EACH SIDE OF THE SIGN -- OF THE STORE, AVOID THE MONOTONY OF THE BUILDING AND ARE IMPEDED FROM THE TWO CANOPIES IN FRONT OF THEM. BY KEEPING THE HEIGHT AND ICK THISNESS TO A MINIMUM, NOT HAVING A PITCHED ROOF ON THE CANOPIES, THE OWNER CAN ENSURE THE ARCHITECTURAL CONSISTENCY IS MAINTAINED ALONG THE BUILDINGS AND IS AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. THIS WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SORT OF COST OR REDUCING THE DEVELOPMENT PRICE OF THE FACILITY OF THIS SITE FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN CREATING TWO CANOPIES INSTEAD OF ONE IS AN ADDITIONAL COST THAT WASN'T BORN OUT OF THIS. BUT IT ADDS TO THE NOTIONS OF THE ADDED ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES THEY'RE INTRODUCING INTO THIS UNDER THE CANOPY SUPPORTS AND MAXIMIZING THAT OVERALL VISUAL AFFECT. THAT THE CANOPIES ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE A GREATER COST THAN ONE LARGE PLAIN CANOPY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE. WOULD NOT PROVIDE ANY SORT OF INCREASE IN TRAFFIC CONGESTION. THE PASSER-BY TRAFFIC IS NOT AN ATTRACTANT TO PONTE VEDRA BECAUSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE NEW TRAFFIC THAT NORMALLY WOULDN'T BE ALONG A1A. IF ANYTHING, IT MAY LESSEN SOME OF THE CONGESTION AND DETER SOME FOLKS ON THEIR WAY HOME OR AWAY FROM THE OFFICE TO STOP IN FOR SOMETHING AT THE CONVENIENCE STORE OR FOR A CAR WASH. BUT IT DOES NOT CREATE NEW TRAFFIC THAT WASN'T GOING TO BE THERE BEFORE. IT DOES NOT CREATE A NEW POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC OR CONGESTION IN THE AREA. LASTLY, THE ARCHITECTURE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THAT IN THE VICINITY. THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER EH OF THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING US, THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE SITE AND WE FEEL WOULD STIMULATE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA RAISING THE VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY. THE STAFF DID NOT RAISE OBJECTIONS TO THE FLAT ROOF CANOPIES AND STATED THEY PREFER THEM. AND WE HAVE AGREED TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 15 FEET TO THE UNDER STORY FOR THE PV ARC. THAT IS THE EXISTING ONE BETWEEN EXECUTIVE WAY AND CORONA AS AN ALTERNATIVE. YOU COMPARE THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM THAT MR. KOPPENHAFER WITH OUR TEAM MENTIONED THAT THAT DOES NOT PREDATE THE CODE. THAT THE BOARD DID APPROVE THE STYLE THAT IS OUT THERE TODAY. HE CAN ADDRESS THAT FURTHER. BUT IT WASN'T THE FACT THAT IT PREDATED THE 111-74. THE SECOND REQUEST DEALING WITH THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING. THE ADDITIONAL LENGTH HELPS CREATE AN AREA WHERE WE CAN KEEP THE CLEANING COMPONENTS, MACHINERY, AND STORAGE SPACES WITHIN ENCLOSED AREAS INSTEAD OF HAVING THE EQUIPMENT OUT. THE REQUEST IN LENGTH ALLOWS MAJORITY OF THOSE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES TO BE ENCLOSED WITH ONLY THE BACK HUMS AND THE PAY GATE BEING OUTDOORS. THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING WILL NOT BE NOTICEABLE DUE TO THE SIDING OF IT AT THE REAR OF THE PARCEL. THE FACADE OF THE CAR WASH IS SEGMENTED WITH THREE DIMENSIONAL BUILDING FEATURES, MATERIAL CHANGES AND HARD SKWAIP FEATURES. THAT BREAKS UP THE CONTINUOUS MASS INTO SMALLER ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS AND ADDING -- MAKING THAT ADDED LENGTH ALMOST INDISTINGUISHABLE. STAFF FOUND THAT ADDITIONAL BUILDING LENGTH COULD BE MITT GATEDED BY ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. WE AGREED TO ENHANCE THE LANDSCAPING EAST OF THE VACUUM HOSES BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND A1A. THAT WAY WE COULD REDUCE THE VISIBILITY OF THE EQUIPMENT AND THE EXTENDED BUILDING LENGTH. POINT OUT THAT THE BUILDING AT MERCHANT'S PLAZA IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH IS NEARLY TWICE AS LONG. NOT 25
[01:00:05]
FEET. NEARLY TWICE AS LONG AS THE BUILDING PROPOSED WITH THE CAR WASH. ON THE NORTH SIDE, I'M SORRY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SHOPS OF PONTE VEDRA, THERE'S MORE THAN 320 FEET LONG.TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF SCALE. IF LOOKING AT MY ILLUSTRATION THERE THE BLUE BOX IS MY CAR WASH IS SET BACK MUCH FARTHER. IT'S MUCH SHORTER. IT IS BARELY LONGER THAN THE 120 FEET THEY ARE ALLOWED AND HAS THE BENEFIT OF ENCANS LATING AND BEAUTIFYING AND MAKING SURE MUCH OF THE EQUIPMENT IS NOT OUT THERE. BUT THE CAR WASH IN BLUE IS SETB BAK FURTHER THAN THE BUILDINGS THAT HAVE LONG STOOD ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS. FINALLY, THE THIRD REQUEST DEALS WITH LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE PARKING LOT. THE PROTOTYPE STORES THAT THEY'VE HAD CONSTRUCTED MANY, MANY TIMES IN THE PAST. THEY HAVE A LONG ENOUGH TRACK RECORD IN HISTORY TO SEE NO MATTER WHAT PART OF TOWN OR THE REGION THEY MAY BE LOCATED IN, THIS AREA TENDS TO COLLECT CIGARETTE BUTTS, TRASH D EXITING THE STORE. THE LANDSCAPE BED THAT WOULD BE LOCATED HERE WOULD BE AT DANGER OF BEING ANOTHER ONE OF THESE LESS THAN DESIROUS ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS TO THE FRONT OF THE STORE. AND THIS SIZE OF STORE HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE CONDUCIVE AS RETAIL SPACE FOR THINGS LIKE SEASONAL SALES DURING FIREWOOD, OR BOTTLED WATER DURING EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. NOT ONLY DO TO THE DIFFICULTY OF LIGHT GETTING INTO THERE AND FEEDING IT BUT THE ALTERNATIVE AGAIN HAVING BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD BEFORE THEY OFFERED AND IT ACCEPTED BY THE PVZARC. THAT LANDSCAPE SOFTENS THE ELEVATION AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE ADDED IT TO IN THE FRONT IT DOES ADD THE B- ENHANCED LANDSCAPING TO THE SIDES. IT WILL BE IRRIGATED BETTER AND NOT BE TRAM.ED ON. JUST IN CLOSING AS WE WAIT FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL AS FROM THIS BOARD, M MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, JUST TO REMIND YOU THE INTENT OF THE CODE WAS NOT TO RESTRAIN DIVERSITY OR ARCHITECTURE BUT TO REDUCE HOW INCOMPATIBLE AND TO ASSURE WE HAVE A PLEASING - ENVIRONMENT IN PONTE VEDRA. THESE REQUESTS AS ALLUDE TO EARLIER THROUGH VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION, THROUGH A LOT OF NEGOTIATION WITH THE PVARC, WERE NOT FOUND TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC AND WE AGREE ON MANY OF THE DISCUSSIONS THERE.
SINCERELY APPRECIATE THE TIME. MYSELF AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE TEAM STAND READY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS NOW OR WISH TO WAIT FOR THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> CHAIRMAN: THERE WILL PROBABLY BE QUESTIONS NOW. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'D LIKE ON -- ON YOUR ELEVATION THAT YOU SHOWED WHERE THE CANOPY'S GOING BACK WAS A FULL ELEVATION BACK TO THE -- RIGHT THERE. THE TOP ELEVATION. ARE THOSE CANOPIES AT THE NEW ELEVATION OR THE OLD?
>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. TO BE COMPLETELY ACCURATE, THAT IS STILL SHOWING I BELIEVE THE 17 FOOT ELEVATION BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STATE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED FROM THE GROUND -- ESTABLISHED GRADE TO THE UNDER STORY WOULD BE 15 FEET MAXIMUM.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THE REASON I ASK THE QUESTIO, IT'S VERY INTERESTING HOW THE CANOPIES FRAME GATE PERFECTLY AT THAT PARTICULAR HEIGHT. I WAS WONDERING HOW THEY WOULD -- IF THEY WERE SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING. IN OTHER WORDS THE CANOPIES ARE SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN THE GATE SIGN? RIGHT NOW THEY ALMOST PERFECTLY FRAME IT.
>> SPEAKER: I FOLLOW YOU. YES. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. I AM GOING TO JUST MAKE A OVERALL STATEMENT IN CASE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT MY EARLIER QUESTIONS. SIDES OF SIGNS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, YOUR LAST STATEMENT I THINK IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT ON TARGET. YOU DON'T WANT REGULATIONS TO INHIBIT CREATIVE ARCHITECTURE. FROM MY ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND AND YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN GETTING PRO PROJECTS TITLED IN THE TAMPA BAY AREA, THIS IS ONE DARN GOOD LOOKING GAS STATION. AND I UNDERSTAND -- THE THING ABOUT THE SIGNS. IF YOU HAD MADE THAT CAR WASH SIGN ANY SMALLER, I MEAN, YOU MIGHT AS WELL JUST MADE IT A POSTAGE STAMP BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T SEE IT. I MEAN, IT'S SO SMALL NOW. AND I KEPT ON GOING BACK TO MAKE SURE THAT I WAS GETTING THE SIZE CORRECTLY. AND IT IS ONE OF THE
[01:05:04]
LARGER -- I MEAN, WHAT IS IT 62 SQUARE FEET ON THE CAR WASH? YOU CAN'T MAKE IT ANY SMALLER AND HAVE IT READ. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY INPUT FROM AN EXPERT FROM A SIGN COMPANY SAYING TALKING ABOUT VISIBILITY. I JUST HAD TO DO A SIGN VARIANCE SEVERAL MONTHS AGO IN TAMPA AND WE TURNED TO OUR SIGN COMPANY AND GOT AN EXPERT IN THE SIGN INDUSTRY TO SAY THIS IS WHAT IS LEGIBLE GOING AT CERTAIN SPEEDS IN THIS AREA I THINK IT'S 45 MINUTE MILES AN HOUR. SO, YOU NEED CERTAIN SIZES TO BE ABLE TO BE READ. YOU DO HAVE SETBACKS. WHEN YOU PUT THIS UNIVERSAL 26 SQUARE FEET ON THERE, IT JUST MAKES ME WINCE BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A HARD AND FAST SQUARE FOOTAGE AND, IN PARTICULAR, CASES WHEN THE GATE SIGN WHICH IS THE BIGGEST IS GOING TO BE ABSOLUTELY MINIMIZED BECAUSE OF THE CANOPIES. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THEM VERY MUCH. THE SIZE OF THE SIGN. I INTEREST FIND IT INTERESTING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CALLED ITAN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AS OPPOSED TO A WALL SIGN. >> SPEAKER: IT'S PART OF THE ARCHITECTURE. AND NOT AN APPLIQUE THAT THEY RECOGNIZED. YES.
>> BOARD MEMBER: BECAUSE I FOUND THAT INTERESTING. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU -- MAYBE LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC FIRST BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A COMPLICATED THING. SO MANY OF THE VARIOUS ELEMENTS MAY NOT CAUSE THE QUESTIONS THAT OTHER ELEMENTS DO BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT OVERALL
STATEMENT. >> CHAIRMAN: CONTINUE WITH STATEMENTS BEFORE WE HEARD FROM
THE PUBLIC. JOHN YOU HAD A COMMENT? >> BOARD MEMBER: WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE EXISTING GATE STATION TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROJECT?
>> SPEAKER: TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH THAT
STORE. >> BOARD MEMBER: THIS IS A LOT MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN THAT ONE
[LAUGHTER] >> SPEAKER: I HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT WITH THAT. I ASKED THE QUESTION AND WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS. COULDN'T GIVE YOU AN HONEST ANSWER TODAY.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THE SIZE OF THIS CAR WASH, IS IT COMPARABLE TO THE ONE AT NOCATEE?
>> SPEAKER: IT IS. BUT IF YOU WERE TO COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES YOU WOULD FIND DEVICES AND SECTIONS AND MACHINERY THAT IS VISIBLE FROM THE ROAD. AND KNOWING THE PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY AND TRYING TO BE AS COMPATIBLE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AS POSSIBLE, THIS IS ONE THEY'VE ENCLOSED.
IT'S NOT THEIR PROTOTYPE. LEADING TO ADDITIONAL COSTS. THEY'RE NOT USING THEIR STANDARD STORE. THEY'RE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND NOT JUST IN THE APPEARANCE OF THE ARC TECH TOUR BUT IN THE DESIGN TO ENCAPSULATE A LOT OF EQUIPMENT. EVERYTHING BUT REALLY THE VACUUM HOSES.
>> BOARD MEMBER: AND THE HOSES ARE INDIVIDUAL CAR VACUUM HOSES. AND IS THE EQUIPMENT COMPARABLE
TO WHAT IS AT THE EXISTING ONE TO THE NORTH? >> SPEAKER: I BELIEVE IT'S MORE COMPLICATED. IT IS THE SAME? OKAY. FOR THE RECORD, IT IS THE SAME AS THE ONE TO THE NORTH.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER: YOU ARE WELL COME. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTIONS.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THE ONE TO THE NORTH IS SMALL. >> SPEAKER: THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.
BECAUSE I WAS THINKING I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT. THE EXPRESS WASH IS ONE OF A NEWER VENTURE FROM GATE PETROLEUM. SO, IT IS DIFFERENT. APOLOGIZE FOR MISUNDERSTANDING.
>> BOARD MEMBER: IT'S MUCH BIGGER RIGHT? >> SPEAKER: LONGER, YES. IT'S NOT ON A1A. IT IS NESTLED FURTHER BACK. IT IS AT SOME WHAT OF AN ANGLE IT'S NOT A AS IF THERE IS A MO MAN'S LAND BETWEEN A1A AND THE BUILDING. BETWEEN THE LANDSCAPING AND THE BUFFER, THE PARKING DECK AND ISLANDS AND TREES THERE, BETWEEN THEM AND THE BUILDING, IT'S NOT AS IF YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT THAT LIKE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PICTURE RIGHT THERE. I'M SORRY NOT THERE BUT THAT PICTURE THERE. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF INTERFERENCE BETWEEN A1A AND THE BUILDING ITSELF. THAT'S MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER CAR WASH UP THE STREET. THAT'S
MUCH CLOSER TO A1A. >> BOARD MEMBER: I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE TWO GROUND SIGNS. THEY ARE WITHIN THE 32 SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION ARE THEY NOT?
>> SPEAKER: THEY'RE BOTH PROPOSED AT 32 SQUARE PETE. THAT'S -- SQUARE FEET. HOWEVER, THE VARIANCES BECAUSE ONE COMMERCIAL SITE IS ALLOWED ONE GROUND SIGN. WE'RE ASKING TO HAVE TWO AND TO HAVE THEM LOCATED IN THE BUFFER. BUT AGAIN THE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WE DON'T LIKE TO PLAY GAMES. WE LIKE TO BE UP FRONT AND HAVE A UNIFIED PLAN. ALTERNATIVELY
[01:10:05]
THEY MAY BE FORCED TO SUB-DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES.>> BOARD MEMBER: BUT YOU COULD HAVE ONE GROUND SIGN WHICH ADVERTISES BOTH?
>> SPEAKER: CORRECT WHICH WOULD BE MUCH AND OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE AREA. WE'RE TRYING TO CLUSTER SIMILAR USES AND AVOID DISTRACTION. THROWING A 60 FOOT SQUARE FOOT SIGN IS QUITE
DISTRACTING IN MY OPINION. >> BOARD MEMBER: AND YOU DO HAVE TWO. A CAR WASH AND COMMUNITY
STORE. >> SPEAKER: THAT'S TRUE. BUT THE READING OF THE LAW --
>> BOARD MEMBER: I UNDERSTAND. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAD THE SAME QUESTION. WHAT YOU PROPOSED TO DO WITH THE EXISTING GATE STATION. SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER IS THERE ANYONE ON YOUR TEAM THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT? THE REASON I ASK IS I TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS OF THAT AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT EXISTING SIGN IS BUT IT'S HUGE AND IT'S IN THE SAME AREA. SO, I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT ONE GO AWAY AND AND BE REPLACED WITH THESE SMALLER, NEWER SIGNS. I KNOW THAT DOESN'T REALLY -- IS NOT PART OF THIS VARIANCE BUT IT DOES HAVE
BEARING ON IT IN MY MIND. >> SPEAKER: I'M DREW FRICK, PRESIDENT OF GATE LANDS. I DO OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AT GATE. NOT SPECIFICALLY THE STORES SO MUCH BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT PARCEL WHENEVER THIS ONE IS DONE WE'LL COME UP WITH OUR PLANFOR WHAT WE'LL DO. BUT I DON'T SEE US PUTTING CERTAINLY NOT ANOTHER EXPANDED CAR WASH AND I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE IT AS A COMPETING CONVENIENCE STORE. IT'S JUST TOO CLOSE. SO, I DON'T KNOW UNTIL WE GET THIS APPROVE AND WE GET THIS UNDER CONSTRUCTION IT WILL OBVIOUSLY STAY OPEN DURING THAT TIME BUT THEN WE'LL LOOK AT THE SURPLUS PLANS, WHAT'S IS ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY. BUT IT'S CLOSE TO THIS STORE. THIS IS GOING TO BE A MUCH BETTER, IMPROVED OFFERING THAN THE AND THE ONE WE'LL BE PUTTING OUR RESOURCES BEHIND. WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL WE MOVE ON TO THIS SITE THEN LOOK
AT WHAT WE HAVE THERE AND WHAT WE CAN DO WITH IT. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. MEGAN?
>> BOARD MEMBER: I'M DISAPPOINTED IN THE PRESENTATION. BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF MODIFICATIONS WHICH YOU HAVE MADE IS VERY MINIMAL. A1A IS A COASTAL SCENIC HIGHWAY.
JUST BECAUSE THIS BUILDING LOOKS BETTER THAN PRIOR BUILDINGS DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT ISN'T AT AN OPTIMAL DESIGN LEVEL. I THINK IF YOU WERE MINDFUL OF THE DESIRE TO HAVE A SCENIC COASTAL HIGHWAY AND THE NOTION THAT THE NEWER DESIGN CRITERIA THAT WERE PUT IN THE CODE WERE TO ELIMINATE THE LARGE SIGNS THAT ARE REQUIRED ON AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY. THIS IS NOT AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY. PEOPLE WHO TRAVEL ALONG THE ROAD TRAVEL USUALLY DAILY OR WEEKLY.
THEY'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS, ESPECIALLY GAS STATIONS WHICH ARE VERY IDENTIFIABLE WITH THE CANOPIES. SO, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO ME TO BE A NEED TO HAVE THESE VERY LARGE SIGNS. YOU CAN IDENTIFY THE GAS STATION WHEN YOU SEE THE CANOPY, WHEN YOU DRIVE BY ONCE, YOU SAY THERE'S A GATE GAS STATION AND YOU DON'T FORGET IT. AND I ALSO OBJECT TO THE NOTION THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE LANDSCAPING BECAUSE SOMEONE MIGHT THROW A CIGARETTE BUTT.
IT SEEMS TO BE A VERY WEAK EXCUSE. MANY OTHER BUSINESSES MAINTAIN THEIR LANDSCAPING TO KEEP THE LUSH LOOK OF THE COASTAL CORRIDOR. THEY HIRE LANDSCAPING COMPANIES THAT COME IN, CLEAN THE BEDS. IT'S NOT A BIG HARDSHIP. SO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU ARE ARGUING THAT YOU NEED MORE SIGNS, THAT THE CAR WASH BUILDING, WHICH IS LARGE. YOU WANT TO PUT A BIG SIGN IN THE MIDDLE. IF YOU REALLY WANTED A CAR WASH THAT WAS LONGER, YOU COULD MITIGATE THE LOOK OF THAT LONG CAR WASH BY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING ERECTING PLANTERS WHICH WOULD BASICALLY MAKE IT LOOK LIKE TWO SEPARATE BUILDINGS LIKE THE PRIOR APPLICATION FOR THE INN AND CLUB WHERE THEY WERE TRYING TO HIDE ANYTHING WITH ADDITIONAL LAYERS OF LANDSCAPING. NOT JUST ONE SHRUB BUT MULTIPLE LAYERS AND TREES. SO THEY HAD THREE LAYERS TO TRY TO MAKE SOMETHING LOOK LOVELY IN THE COMMUNITY. AND I THINK THE GATE CORPORATION, BEING A PREMIER CORPORATION, SHOULD BE A LEADER IN THIS AREA AND SHOULD SHOW OTHER CORPORATIONS THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO HAVE GOOD ARCHITECTURE THAT CONFORMS WITH THE NEEDS AND GOALS OF THE
[01:15:04]
BUSINESS THAT PEOPLE CAN IDENTIFY WHAT'S THERE AND ALSO IS RESPECTFUL OF THE COMMUNITYIN WHICH YOU ARE LOCATED. >> SPEAKER: I'M SORRY YOU FEEL THAT WAY. WE'VE OBVIOUSLY PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS. AND I WOULD PUT THIS UP AGAINST ANY OF OUR COMPETITION. WE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE ARCHITECTURE. WE WENT THROUGH IT WITH THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD AND MADE COB SESSIONS THERE. WE'RE NOT SEEKING IN ADDITION BUT ONE VARIANCE FROM THE LANDSCAPING CODE. WE ACTUALLY AGREED TO ENHANCE IT IN OTHER AREAS. SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A WELL LANDSCAPED DEVELOPMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT WAYS TO IMPROVE IT. I THINK FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT THIS IS ONE OF FEW STORES THAT WE'VE DONE THAT ARE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE NEWER COMMUNITIES. AND I DO BELIEVE IT FITS IN WELL WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA DIFFERENT FROM A LOT OF THE OLDER USES ALONG A1A. SO, I STAND BY WHAT OUR ARCHITECTS HAVE DONE AND SPECIFIC ATTRACTIVE FEATURES WEAVE APUT INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE DO AND WE CONTINUE TO RAISE THE BAR AND WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR WAYS TO RAISE THE BAR. BECAUSE WE ARE A COMPANY IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE'LL STAY IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE THE COMMUNITY. AS FAR AS THE SIGNAGE? I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN LIKE OTHER AREAS ALONG A1A. IT RESULTS IN A NUMBER OF VARIANCES BECAUSE OF THE WAY, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEING DONE BUT IT IS A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN AND WE'RE MAKING TRADEOFFS FOR VISIBILITY YES BUT IT'S ALSO DIRECTING TRAFFIC AND TRYING TO GET PEOPLE INTO THE RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT TO GO TO THE CAR WASH INSTEAD OF COMING DOWN TO THE MAIN ACCESS IF YOU HAD JUST ONE SIGN. SO, THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS TO BREAK UP THAT SIGN. AND INSTEAD OF ONE BIG 60 FOOT SIGN YOU COME UP WITH SMALLER 32 FOOT SIGNS. AS FAR AS THE WALL SIGNS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING USES THIS IS A MULTI-USE FACILITY. WE DO HAVE MULTIPLE USES INSIDE THE CONVENIENCE STORE. WE'RE ASKING CONVENIENT GOODS TO THE COMMUNITY BUT ALSO PROVIDING CONVENIENT SERVICES TO THAT COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SIGNING ON THE WALLS. I THINK WE'RE DOING IT IN A WAY THAT ACTUALLY MEETS THE ARCHITECTURAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE BUILDING TO THAT POINT.
WHILE I CAN'T HELP THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS AT THE REVIEW, IT WAS APPROVED BY THE MEMBERS THAT WERE THERE AND IN A ROBUST BACK AND FORTH WHERE THEY HAD COMPROMISES ON NOT JUST THE SIZE OF THE SIGNS BUT THE COLOR OF THE SIGNS, THINGS THAT GO TO ARCHITECTURE. AND PLENTY OF THEM AGREED THIS IS A GOOD LOOKING ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING. BUT WITH THAT SAID WE'RE HERE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS. IF THERE'S SPECIFIC THINGS YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT US ADDRESSING I'M FOR IT.
BUT I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB AND TRY TO DO A GOOD JOB FITTING IN WITH THE COMMUNITY.
BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'D HAVE TO RESPECTFULLY AGREE WITH TIM AM I THINK YOU HAVE DONE A NICE JOB. I WISH THESE COULD ALL BE MEDICAL BUILDINGS WITH LOTS OF PLANTED BUSHES BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GAS STATION. THAT'S WHAT WE ALL LIVE WITH. IT IS WHAT IT IS. SO WHAT YOU'VE DONE FOR SOMETHING THAT'S A FILLING STATION, I THINK YOU HAVE DONE A
GOOD JOB. AND I LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN: ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? >> SPEAKER: AND I'LL BE
AVAILABLE FOR ANY MORE QUE QUESTIONS. >> CHAIRMAN: I'LL OPEN IT UP TO
PUBLIC COMMENT. >> WE HAVE NEIL CARROLL. >> CHAIRMAN: IF YOU COULD STATE
YOUR NAME AND I ADDRESS. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: NEIL CARROLL. 338 A1A NORTH IN PONTE VEDRA.
THE BUILDING I REPRESENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THERE'S A COUPLE OF STATEMENTS MADE -- I'M NOT VERY GOOD AT THIS SO EXCUSE ME. BUT THERE WAS A COUPLE OF STATEMENTS MADE ABOUT THIS NOT BRINGING ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TO A1A. A1A WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS OVERBURDEN NOW. I WOULD AGREE IT'S NOT GOING TO BRING ANYMORE TRAFFIC TO A1A. IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BRING ANYMORE TRAFFIC TO A1A WHY DO WE NEED ALL THESE BIG SIGNS? THERE'S NO HARDSHIP PROVEN TO CREATE THESE GIANT SIGNS. WE'VE OWNED THE SHOPPING CENTER NEXT DOOR FOR 19 ODD YEARS. BEEN GOING TO A.R.C.
MEETINGS FOR 19 ODD YEARS. BEEN HEARING WHITE FACES, BLACK RETURNS, 24 SQUARE FEET FOR 18, 19 YEARS. IN THE BEGINNING I THOUGHT THAT WAS SORT OF AN INTRUSION ON YOUR RIGHTS AS A LANDOWNER, AS A PROPERTY OWNER. OVER TIME I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW PLEASANT IT IS TO SEE ONE MNOTONE WHITE SIGN. WE GO TO OTHER CENTERS THAT ARE BLUE, PINK, YELLOW, GREEN. IT LOOKS
[01:20:06]
LIKE A COLORING BOOK. I THINK THE A.R.C. IS DOING A GREAT JOB. I'M SORRY THERE WASN'T MORE PEOPLE THERE. I DON'T THINK THIS PROJECT WAS PROPERLY POSTED, ADVERTISED, WHATEVER. I THINK THE COMMUNITY SHOULD HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS. THE BULK OF THE COMMUNITY IS NOT EVEN AWARE OF THIS GOING ON RIGHT NOW. THERE'S ONE OTHER STATEMENT HERE THAT A -- EXCUSE ME. THE REQUESTS ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST. THE REQUEST IS CONTRARY TO OUR INTEREST. WE HAVE AGREEMENT WITH GATE PVC COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THAT NO BUILDINGS ARE TO BE BUILT IN FRONT OF A CERTAIN LINE. I DON'T HAVE THAT HERE AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT PART OF THE ZONING VARIANCE HEARING. BUT ALL THE BUILDINGS, MOST OF THE BUILDINGS ARE IN FRONT -- NOT ALL THE BUILDINGS. A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS ARE IN FRONT OF THAT LINE. OBVIOUSLY, THAT HAS TO BE SETTLED. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS PART OF THE MASTER COMMUNITY BEHIND THERE FOR 18 MONTHS, MAYBE LONGER.WE'VE BEEN DENIED ALL THAT INFORMATION. I THINK IN CLOSING, BEING A PROPERTY MANAGER0 YEARS, EVERY TENANT WE'VE EVER HAD WANTS A BIGGER SIGN. EVERY TELLANT WANTS MORE SIGNS. AND WE'VE TRIED TO COMPLY. I THINK THE BEAUTY OF THE ONE COLOR SORT OF SUITS ALL. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE PEOPLE WITH SIGNS OUT ON THE STREET. YOU KNOW, COME IN GAS IS $2 TODAY. THE COASTAL CORRIDOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S A PLEASANT DRIVE. IT'S NOT BEACH BOULEVARD. I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE IN PONTE VEDRA WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE BEACH BOULEVARD. IT IS A MIXTURE OF REFRAINED COMMERCIAL USE. RESTRAINED. AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THANK
YOU. I'M BEEPING. THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: TRACY RAMPLY. 28C TROUT STREET, PONTE VEDRA, FLORIDA. I AM IN RESIDENTIAL.
AND I'VE ALREADY HAD, YOU KNOW, WITH THE GAS STATION THEY HAVE NOW, I'VE RECEIVED MY 300 FEET FROM THE THING. I'VE -- I HAD TO HAVE A FENCE PUT UP TO KEEP THE TRANSIENTS OUT. IT'S RIGHT BEHIND GATE. THEY COME OVER. THEY CAMP OUT. THEY THROW THEIR BEER CANS ON GATES PROPERTY BUT IT'S RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE. AND THEN TO PUT THE BIGGER GAS STATIONS WITH ALL THE LIGHTS AND, YOU KNOW, THE SOUND COMING IN, I HAVE ISSUES -- I JUST HAVE ISSUES WITH -- WHEN YOU GO OUTSIDE YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE A BIG LIGHT UP WHEN IT'S DARK. YOU WANT TO SEE THE MOON AND WHATEVER. AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ALL THE LIGHTING AND THE RETENTION POND. MY HOUSE IS DEAD END ON SEA TROUT. BUT IT'S UP TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND GATE. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRANSIENTS. THE ONES THAT THROWS THE CIGARETTE BUTTS OUT AREN'T ALWAYS THE ONES THAT GET IN THE CAR. THEY GO BEHIND THE BUILDING AND COME TO MY AREA. I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS COULD BE HELPED BUT I DO HAVE A MAJOR CONCERN WITH IT. THE LIGHTING AND, YOU KNOW, JUST THE TRAFFIC NOISE. BECAUSE WE ARE A RESIDENTIAL RIGHT THERE. AND I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT AROUND THE RETENTION POND. YOU KNOW. THOSE ARE SOME CONCERNS. ARE THEY GOING TO PUT A FENCE OR, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR PLAN. BUT, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO KEEP MY HOME A HOME.
I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE I AM GOING OUT AND I CAN HEAR THE RACE TRACK. THAT'S ALL I HAVE
TO SAY. >> CHAIRMAN: ARE YOU BEHIND THE CURRENT GATE STATION?
>> SPEAKER: I AM >> CHAIRMAN: THIS NEW STORE WON'T AFFECT YOU BUT YOU ARE
UNHAPPY WITH THE CURRENT AFFECT FROM THE STORE. >> SPEAKER: WELL I GOT THE THING THAT SAYS I AM -- IT SAYS THAT YOU ARE -- YOU RECEIVED THIS BECAUSE YOU OWN PROPERTY WITHIN
[01:25:08]
300 FEET RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. >> BOARD MEMBER: THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE LARGE PARCEL BEHIND THE BAIT STATION THAT WAS -- GATE STATION THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER. THE GAS STATION IS FRONTING A1A AND THERE IS A VERY LARGE EMPTY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BEHIND THE GAS STATION BEFORE IT GETS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH THEN TRIGGERS THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY PERIMETER TRIGGERS THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT THAT THEN PICKED UP YOUR HOUSE. SO IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE YOU ARE ABUTTING THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT THAT'S IN FRONT MUCH US TONIGHT BUT YOU ARE NOT. YOU ARE HUNDREDS OF FEET AWAY FROM IT. BECAUSE IT JUST SO HAPPENS YOU ARE WITHIN THAT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT OF THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY THEY OWN BUT NOT THE PERIMETER OF THE GAS STATION. THERE IT IS. THAT'S A GOOD THING. THE GAS STATION IS
ON THE FRONT PART OF THE PROPERTY. >> SPEAKER: AND I'M RIGHT THERE
WHERE THE -- RIGHT AT THE DEAD END. RIGHT THERE. >> BOARD MEMBER: RIGHT. SO, YOU ARE -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE -- MAYBE SOMEBODY FROM STAFF CAN GIVE US THE WIDTH OF THAT PROPERTY BUT I WOULD SUSPECT IT'S WELL OVER 100 FEET, MAYBE MORE. 150 FEET?
>> CHAIRMAN: WE'LL DEFINITELY ASK THE APPLICANT BACK UP FOR REBUTTAL AND I'M SURE THEY WILL
ADDRESS THAT SHORTLY. THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: AND JUST THE TRANSIENTS ON THEIR PROPERTY. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THEY -- WHEN THEY BREAK MY FENCE DOWN I HAD TO PUT A WOOD FENCE UP BECAUSE THEY CROSS OVER INTO MY YARD AND COME OUT. I DON'T WANT TO INCREASE THAT. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M SINGLE. I LIVE BY MYSELF. AND YOU DON'T EVER KNOW WHEN THE TRANSIENT MIGHT DECIDE THEY WANT TO COME IN MY HOME. SO, I HAVE A CONCERN. AND IT'S BEEN -- IT'S BAD. YOU CAN LOOK BEHIND MY FENCE AND SEE WHERE THEY CAMP OUT. YOU KNOW, BEER CANS, ALL THE STUFF THEY BRING IN. AND IT'S A PROBLEM. AND THEN I JUST DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH ALL THE LIGHTS. WE ALREADY HAVE A LITTLE BIT BUT IT'S GOOD. SO THAT'S MY CONCERN.
>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? NOT SEEING ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, I WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO
COME BACK UP FOR REBUTTAL? >> SPEAKER: THAT'S A GOOD MAP AND GOOD VERIFICATION OF THE PROSSER NUMBER. THANK YOU. THEY WERE SAYING AT LEAST 500 FEET AWAY FROM HER HOME. AND ALSO BRAD WAS SAYING THERE IS THE LARGE BLOCK OF WOODS BEHIND THE EXISTING GATE STATION IS WHERE THE TRANSIENTS TEND TO HANG OUT. SO, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL HELP ELIMINATE THAT. JUST A COUPLE OF NOTES FOR THE BOARD IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. FIRST, A LOT OF THE SPEAKER, BOTH SPEAKERS' COMMENTS ARE RELATED TO THE LAND USE AND ZONING OF THE PROPERTY WHICH IS NO THE AT ISSUE TODAY. A GAS STATION WITH A CAR WASH IS A PERMITTED USE AS A MATTER OF RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY. SO THE USE IS KIND OF -- IS ACTUALLY NOT LEGALLY GERMANE. WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THE SIGNAGE AND THE BUILDING VARIANCES AND NON-ZONING VARIANCES THAT ARE BEFORE YOU TODAY. IF I COULD PULL OUR POWER POINT BACK UP PLEASE. THERE WERE SOME MENTION OF TRAFFIC. AGAIN, I DON'T LIVE IN PONTE VEDRA. I LIVE ON AN ASTAGE YEAH ISLAND. WHEN I GO TO PONTE VEDRA I LIKE TO SEE THE SIGNS SO I KNOW WHERE I'M GOING BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW LIKE PONTE VEDRA LIKE YOU FOLKS DO. SO, I APPRECIATE HAVING THE SIGNS TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE I AM GOING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO LOOK AT MY PHONE AT THE SAME TIME I AM DRIVING. WITH RESPECT TO, THERE WAS A MENTION OF A SITE PLAN. WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE MASTER PLAN IS. WE'VE NOT BEEN PROVIDED A COPY. SO, WE'RE CURIOUS ABOUT THAT IF ANYBODY HAS A COPY OF THAT. ALSO, THE GENTLEMAN, MR. CARROLL, MENTIONED A PRIVATE AGREEMENT. THERE IS A PRIVATE AGREEMENT BUT THAT'S NOT, AGAIN, THE PURVIEW OF THIS BOARD. FOR THE RECORD, THE PRIVATE AGREEMENT IS NOT BEING VIOLATED BY GAS STATION CANOPY WHICH IS NOT A BUILDING. WITH RESPECT TO THE COASTAL CORRIDOR. AGAIN, AS MR. ROBBINS MENTIONED TO YOU, THIS IS REALLY IN THE AFFECT OF A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN WHICH IS THE SAME THING THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE VERANDA, SAWGRASS VILLAGE, AND A
[01:30:01]
LOT OF THE OTHER MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. A LOT THE SMALLER SIGNS ARE FOR OFFICES AND SHOPPING CENTERS. BUT A LOT OF THE NEWER COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES DO HAVE UNIFIED SIGN PLANS THROUGH PUDS. INSTEAD OF REZONING THE PROPERTY THING UNDER A DIFFERENT NAME.SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE SOUND AND THE LIGHTING. THIS STATION WILL BE MORE THAN 500 FEET FROM -- I THINK IT'S RANDLEY -- I APOLOGIZE IF I GOT HER NAME WRONG. SHE DID RECEIVE THE NOTICE WHICH IS GOOD. BECAUSE THE PROPER NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. I'M GOING TO LOOK AT MR. ROBBINS AND MR. KOPPENHAFER TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE
YOU WANT TO ADD. >> SPEAKER: MIKE KOPPENHAFER. MANY YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS A YOUNG MAN I HAD THE PLEASURE OF KNOWING JACK POPE AND I SPENT TEN YEARS ON THE A.R.C. WITH HIM. NINE AS CHAIRMAN. AND THE DIFFICULTY WITH THE OVERLAY. AS IT WAS DEVELOPED, IT WAS DEVELOPED FOR MULTI-TEN ATTEMPTED BUILDINGS. IT WAS NOT DESIGNED AROUND A WINN-DIXIE AND PUBLIX. EACH WHICH DID NOT GET APPROVED AT THE A.R.C. BUT WENT BEFORE THIS BOARD OR THE COMMISSION TO GET APPROVAL ON. SO IT'S A GRAY AREA THAT I TALKED ABOUT NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE YOU HAVE A SINGLE TENANT OR YOU HAVE A LARGE SCALE TENANT LIKE AN ANCHOR TENANT WHERE, YOU KNOW, 24 SQUARE FEET ISN'T GOING TO WORK. AS MR. POWELL HAS MENTIONED, TO DO A 24 SQUARE FOOT SIGN ON THAT CAR WASH WOULD BE THE SIZE OF A STAMP. IT WOULD BE A BIT OF A MESS. AND THE IDEA IS THAT THESE BUILDINGS HAVE HAD DOZENS AND DOZENS OF HOURS OF COMPROMISING AND TALKING ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW -- MCKINLEY THAT HAPPENED BEFORE WE CAME HERE TO REDUCE THINGS TO MINIMIZE THE REQUESTS HERE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO ASK AS MUCH, IT WOULD BE MORE IN HARMONIZING WITH THE AREA. BUT THE DIFFICULTY IS THE SIGNS. THIS GATE IS AN UPSCALE CONVENIENCE STORE. SO, RATHER THAN DO TWO STRIP SHOPPING CENTERS THAT COULD BE 120 FEET LONG AND NEVER GO BEFORE THIS BOARD, EACH WITH A 24 SQUARE FOOT SIGN IN EACH OF THOSE 6 TENANT BAYS, TWO OF THREE OF THEM BEING A CONVENIENCE STORE, THAT'S WHAT YOU COULD END UP WITH HERE. AND THEY'RE SAYING IT IS -- AND IT IS A LOT CHEAPER. NAIR THEY'RE SAYING WE WANT TO DO THIS RIGHT. THEY'VE GOT A VESTED INTEREST IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY'VE GOT LOTS OF ASSETS AND SOME OF THEIR EXECUTIVES RESIDE HERE AND IT'S SOMETHING TO MAKE THIS A MORE IMPROVED AREA. SO THAT GIVES YOU BACKGROUND ON THE SIGNAGE ITSELF. IF YOU'VE GOT ANY
QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE ABOUT IT. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M LOOKING AT THE MATERIAL SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. AND THERE IS A SENTENCE HERE THAT SAYS... "THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF THE EXISTING SHOPS OF PONTE VEDRA MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT; AS MUCH THE SIGN SITE WILL SHARE THE EXISTING PRIMARY ACCESS WITH THAT SHOPPING CENTER AND IS NOT SEEKING ADDITIONAL FULL ACCESS POINTS" BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. SO, YOUR TEAM CITED THE REFERENCE TO THE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT IT WAS GERMANE FOR ME TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT. AND I DO WANT TO MAKE A POINT, LIKE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD I HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA, AND I HAVE WORKED WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES IN OTHER STATES WHEN CORPORATIONS WHO HAD A CORPORATE -- I'M GOING TO USE THE TERM "COOKIE CUTTER" MODEL FOR WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO IN TERMS OF THEIR NEW CORPORATE LOOK AND INTRODUCE THAT INTO COMMUNITIES, NOT ALL COMMUNITIES EMBRACE IT. BECAUSE EACH COMMUNITY IS UNIQUE. EACH COMMUNITY HAS DIFFERENT STANDARDS AND DIFFERENT NEEDS. SO, I HAVE FOUND IN THE PAST THAT THE HIGHER-END COMMUNITIES TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THESE NEW APPROACHES FOR ARCHITECTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS AND THEY SAY THIS IS GREAT BUT WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE GIGANTIC SIGNS. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE COLOR AND THE KITSCHY BUBBLES FOR THE CAR WASH. WE CAN BE MORE ELEGANT, MORE SOPHISTICATED AND A MODEL OF EVEN BETTER ARCHITECTURE.
[01:35:03]
AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD CHALLENGE GATE TO DO. IT MAY BE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR YOU. MAYBE YOU DON'T HAVE THE INTEREST. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO GATE AND TO THECOMMUNITY. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER: I'M BRAD DAVIS WITH PROSSER. THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MY WRITING ON THAT APPLICATION. IT'S 13901 SUTTON PARK BOULEVARD SOUTH, SUITE 200, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, 32224. I AM A PRINCIPAL AT PROS ERR AND DO ALL OF GATE'S WORK. WHEN I SAID MASTER SITE PLAN IT WAS PROBABLY RELATED TO THE MASTER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE DO HAVE HERE. I THINK SOMEONE OTHER THAN BOARD MEMBERS MAY HAVE SPOKE ABOUT THE COMMON ENTRY THAT WE DO HAVE. SO WE DO HAVE COMMON ENTRY AND COMMON UTILITIES AND THAT'S WHAT I CALL A MASTER PLAN. NOT AS IT RELATES TO WHAT A PLANNER WOULD CALL A MASTER PLAN WHICH COULD RELATE TO ENTITLEMENTS AND OTHER SITE PLAN RELATIONSHIPS. SO, I APOLOGIZE IF THAT CAUSED ANY CONFUSION TODAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU.
>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. >> BOARD MEMBER: JUST A QUICK FOLLOW UP ON THAT TO TALK ABOUT THAT MASTER PLAN IS CONTAINED IN THE DECLARATION OF EASEMENT AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT BINDS THE GATE PROPERTY THAT INCLUDING THE VACANT LAND BEHIND AND THE SHOPPING CENTER THAT THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE IN PUBLIC COMMENT HAS. THAT'S WHAT THE PLAN IS RELATED TO. AND THAT DECLARATION ALSO CONTAINS A BUILDING RESTRICTION. SO, WHICH IS PART OF THE REASON WHY GATE HAD TO PUT ITS PHYSICAL BUILDINGS BACK FARTHER AGAIN JUSTIFYING THE HARDSHIP WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER FOR HAVING TO PUSH THE BUILDINGS BACK OFF A1A. GOING TO A POINT YOU MADE.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, THE CASE LAW FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES ALLOW THAT CORPORATIONS CAN HAVE SIGNS WITH THEIR LOGOS AND THEIR COLORS BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF THEIR CORPORATE IDENTITIES WHETHER THOSE ARE TRADEMARKED AND THINGS. SO IT'S NOT AS EASY AS SAYING ALL SIGNS CAN BE WHITE WITH BLACK LETTERS BECAUSE THAT'S IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW. JUST FYI.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THANK YOU. BUT I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE SIDES OF THE SIGNS. I HAVE TO ADD TO THAT ABOUT THE LOGO. THE SAME SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT MADE US REDO OUR SIGN CODE STATES THAT COMMUNITIES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE AESTHETIC CONTROL OVER THE SIGNS AND IN THE CODE THAT IS WHERE THE COLOR ALLOWANCES COME FROM. SO, WHILE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE THEIR LOGO, THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS IT HAS TO BE A CERTAIN SIZE. SO, COMMUNITIES ARE ALLOWED TO REQUIRE THE SIGNS BE SMALLER. SO THAT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW. JUST WANTED TO
CLARIFY THAT. >> SPEAKER: I GUESS I'LL CLOSE AND TRY TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS BECAUSE I AM THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMPANY HERE. WE'VE TRIED TO DO WHAT YOU ARE ASKING US TO DO. REALIZE 19 YEARS AGO WE PUT TOGETHER COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS IN A MASTER INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT SHARES ACCESS. IT SHARES STORM WATER PONDS. SO, YOU DON'T HAVE MULTIPLE CURB CUTS ALONG A1A. THAT'S PART OF OUR VISION NOWING OUT NOW. INSTEAD OF PARTICLEIZING IT -- PARCELIZING IT AND COME WITH INDIVIDUAL PARCELS WHERE YOU COULD HAVE 60 FOOT SIGNS ON EACH PARCEL WE'RE DOING A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN IN THE FORM OF VARIANCES. I DON'T KNOW THAT I AM EVER GOING TO CONVINCE YOU OF OUR ARCHITECTURE BUT WE ARE TRYING TO BE AHEAD OF IT. IN THE WAY WE PLANNED OUT THIS SITE AS WELL. SO, WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THOSE DEMANDS AND AGAIN IT IS CERTAINLY ABOUT OUR IDENTITY, ABOUT GETTING PEOPLE TO AND FROM OUR SITES AND ABOUT BUILDING WHAT WE THINK IS A QUALITY ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT A WELL AS LANDSCAPING. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS BUT I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF -- A BIG TIMELINE HOW WE WORKED ON THIS PIECE OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS. WE BUILT THE SHOPPING CENTER THAT'S THERE TODAY AND SOLD IT TO THE GENTLEMAN THAT CAME UP HERE AND SPOKE. SO WE PLANNED ON THIS PROPERTY FOR A LONG TIME. THANK YOU.
>> CH >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M GOING TO ASK IF WE COULD TAKE THE INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS THAT WERE L LISTED, THE VARIANCES AND TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME. BECAUSE I HAVE A FEELING THAT SEVERAL, MAYBE I'M BEING NAIVE, SEVERAL OF THEM MAY NOT CAUSE THE CONCERN OR QUESTIONS THAT SOME OF THE OTHER ONES ARE. IF WE JUST START TAKING THEM -- LIST THEM OUT AND FIND OUT IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM --
[01:40:05]
>> CHAIRMAN: WHAT I WOULD PREFER TO DO RATHER THAN GO BACK THROUGH ALL THAT AGAIN IS IF SOMEONE HAS A PARTICULAR ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THEY DISAGREE WITH VERSUS TRYING TO GOAT BACK
THROUGH ALL OF THEM OF THEM. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. END RESULT THE SAME. YEAH.
>> BOARD MEMBER: I'M IN GENERAL AGREEMENT WITH ALMOST ALL OF THE VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED. THE TWO SMALLER SIGNS BEING THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER, THE SIGNS ON THE CANOPY, THE ELIMINATION OF THE LANDSCAPING IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING, THE LONGER CAR WASH. I JUST WISH THE SIGNS ON THE
BUILDING WOULD BE SMALLER. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT IS THE RESTRICTION ON THE BUILDING SIGNS THEMSELVES? ARE THEY ASKING FOR HOW MANY
MORE SQUARE FEET THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED? >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SPECIFICALLY, AS IT CAME OUT OF THE A.R.C. LAST MONTH, THE TWO ON THE SIDE, THE YOBI YOGURT AND THE FRESH KITCHEN, THOSE TWO SIGNS IN PARTICULAR, THEY COULD BE THE COLORS PRESENTED BUT LIMITED TO 24 SQUARE FEET. AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE HAD ASKED FOR IN THE APPLI APPLICATION. THAT'S ONE OPTION. OR THE SIZES WE HAD PRESENTED
THERE WHICH I AM TURNING -- >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE PRESENTING THE 24?
>> SPEAKER: NO THE IMAGERY IS THE ONES THAT I AM ABOUT TO GIVE YOU NOW. 65 FOR THE FRESH KITCHEN AND 46 FOR THE YOBI. T THEY SAID THEY MUST GO DOWN TO THE 24. OTHERWISE THE SIZE COULD REMAIN THE SAME BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW THE CODE WITH MOSTLY BLACK AND WHITE WITH UP TO 50 PERCENT OF THE COLORS. A LOT OF GREAT DISCUSSION WITH IT. BUT THAT'S THE RELATION THERE. AND THE SIZE OF THE SIGN ON THE CAR WASH IS 78 SQUARE FEET. WHICH IS TWO PERCENT OF THAT ENTIRE WALL FACADE. WHEN YOU ADD THE OTHER THREE, EVEN THE GATE SIGN, THAT'S LESS THAN TEN PERCENT, IT'S EIGHT PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE FACADE. WHILE THE NUMBER MAY NOT SOUND VERY BIG WHEN LOOKING AT THE MASS OF THE STRUCTURE THEY'RE ARE, APOLOGIZE, IT MAY BE MR. PAOLO WHO RECOGNIZED IF IT WAS TO GO ANY SMALLER IT WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE TO EVEN HAVE. THE GATE OVER THE DOOR IS 82. 65 FOR FRESH KITCHEN AND 46 UNLESS THE COLOR SCHEME AGREED TO AT THE COMMITTEE IS ABIDED BY THEN THEY COULD BE UP TO 24 SQUARE FEET WITH THE ADDITIONAL COLORS. THOSE ARE TRADEMARK ONES. ONE OF THE OPTIONS MAYBE THEY DON'T EVEN DO THOSE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE COLORS CAN BE CHANGED BECAUSE THEY ARE TRADE MARKED
SIGNS. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT THE CAR WASH SIGN ON THE BUILDING ITSELF
IS ALSO NON-COMPLIANT? >> SPEAKER: YES, SIR. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT YOU HAVE A
MONUMENT SIGN OUT FRONT INDICATING THE CAR WASH. >> SPEAKER: WE DO. A 32 FOOT
GROUND SIZE. YES, SIR. >> BOARD MEMBER: ONE THICK ABOUT THE SIGNS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IF THE GATE SIGN THAT IS PROPOSED IS OVER 80 FEET AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 24 FEET, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY GOING TO MAKE ANY COMPROMISE? ARE THEY GOING TO SAY IT'S THAT SIZE OR THAT THEY
CAN'T MAKE IT ANY SMALLER? I HAVE GREAT DIFFICULTY WITH THAT. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU. AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE HAVE THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS TO HEAR THESE TYPE OF CONCERNS. ITS WANT OUR WAY OR THE HIGHWAY. IT WAS ACCEPTED AT THE A.R.C. THAT PARTICULAR SIGN IN PROPORTION TO THE BUILDING THEY ACCEPTED. BUT IF IT'S THE WILL OF THE PSARC THAT IT BE LESS WE WANT TO HEAR THE CONCERN. BUT I DON'T THINK 24 IS ANYWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
82 IS THE GATE. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY SO -- JOHN, YOU HAD SAID SOMETHING
ABOUT ONLY ONE THAT GAVE YOU CONCERN WAS THE GATE SIGN? >> BOARD MEMBER: IT WAS ACTUALLY
[01:45:02]
JUST THE TOTAL SWEAR FOOTAGE OF ALL THE SIGNS. IT JUST SEEMED AWFUL LARGE. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO ANY OF THEM IN PARTICULAR BUT I AGREE THE CARR WASH SIGN PROBABLY CAN'T GET MUCH SMALLER.>> SPEAKER: TO MR. PATTON'S CONCERN PERHAPS. YOU HEAR THE NUMBERS IT'S MUCH BIGGER THAN 24. AS I SAID WHEN YOU ADD UP THE FACADES THEY'RE ON, WHENEVER COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE, THE REGION, ONE THING THE ATLANTA DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATIONS TEND TO DO IS HAVE A PERSIANAGE OF THE WALL THAT CAN BE COVERED BY SIGNS. WHILE IT'S NOT PONTE VEDRA AND PONTE VEDRA IS ITS OWN UNIQUE SELF, A COMMON RULE OF THUMB THROUGHOUT OTHER COMMUNITIES IS UPWARD OF 15 PERCENT TO HAVE WALL SIGN COVERAGE. AS IT RELATES TO THE CAR WASH, 2%. WHEN YOU ADD UP THE THREE SEPARATE SIGNS ON THE CONVENIENCE STORE IT'S LESS THAN 10%. 8% TO BE PRECISE.
>> BOARD MEMBER: MAYBE YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER BUT THE NEW GATES STATION BUILT IN JAX BEACH
HOW BIG IS THAT SIGN? THE BRAND-NEW ONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE A
PICTURE OF IT. >> SPEAKER: HE SAID IT IS THE SAME. IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE JAX BEACH LOCATION THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME AS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED BEFORE YOU TODAY.
>> BOARD MEMBER: DO YOU HAVE A RENDERING OF WHERE THE CANOPIES OF THE GAS PUMPS ARE IN
RELATIONSHIP TO THE YOBI SIGN AND THE FRESH MARKET SIGN? >> SPEAKER: I'D BE HAPPY TO BRING THAT UP A AFTER M MR. KOPPENHAFER SHARES HIS INSIGHT.
>> SPEAKER: THIS IS THE NOCATEE STORE. IT'S SIZE PROPOR PROPORTIONATELY -- I'M AN ARCH ARCHITECT. IT'S SIZED TO THAT IMAGE. EARLIER SLIDE YOU HAD ON THERE SHOWS IT BETTER BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU THE OVERALL STRUCTURE. BUT IT'S PART OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT. IT'S HUNG FROM THE STRUCTURE ABOVE FROM A COUPLE OF TENSION RODS.
IT'S GOT A CHANNEL ACROSS THE BOTTOM TO GIVE IT THAT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. AND THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE IMAGES. THE COMMENTS CAME UP HOW DOES THIS LOOK IN COMPARED TO THE NOCATEE STORE. AND I THINK THE NOCATEE STORE IS A RATHER HANDSOME STORE. AND IT'S FRANKLY THE EXACT SAME STORE GOING IN. THERE'S NO RED CANOPIES. THERE'S NO RED LETTERING. THERE'S NO RED AWNINGS. IT'S THAT NATURE BLEND COLOR SCHEME.
>> BOARD MEMBER: DON'T MOVE THAT DRAWING THAT YOU'VE GOT ON THE FILM. THAT SHOWS MY POINT.
WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE GATE SIGN. YOU CAN'T SEE IT MOST OF THE TIME.
I MEAN, THIS IS -- >> BOARD MEMBER: THEN THEN IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE YOU
COULD TAKE IT AWAY AND THAT WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM. >> BOARD MEMBER: PLEASE LET ME FINISH MY POINT. I REALLY WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE PONTE VEDRA REGULATIONS AND TRY NOT TO COMPROMISE THEM. BUT YOU GET INTO THESE SHADES OF GRAY AND I'VE DONE IT NUMEROUS TIMES OVER THE YEARS, I DEFY ANYBODY TO TELL ME THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON WILL BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE. BECAUSE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE YOU WON'T SEE IT MOST OF THE TIME. SO, YOU ARE ARGUING OVER A TECHNICALITY. IT IS A PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEM.
THAT'S WHY I SAY, IT'S A PERSONAL PREFERENCE BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE THIS CODE AND THAT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT OR I DON'T WANT TO INTERFERE -- TO COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THE CODE. AT THE SAME TIME, YOU GET INTO A SITUATION YOU ARE ARGUING SOMETHING THAT IS DESIGN MINUTIA. YOU WON'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE HARDLY AT ALL. THE TWO GROUND SIGNS IN FRONT OF IT, I THINK THEY HAVE AN EXTREMELY GOOD POINT. THEY COULD LEGALLY GET AROUND IT AND BUILD THE SAME EXACT SIGN. THE ONLY SIGN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THAT SEEMS TO BE DRAWING THE ATTENTION IS THE GATE SIGN. THE GATE LETTERS. BECAUSE THEY'RE THE BIGGEST ONES. AT THE SAME TIME, THAT PHOTO KIND OF SHOWS MY POINT. YOU CAN'T SEE THEM MOST OF THE TIME. ALL DUE RESPECT TO YOU, MEGAN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S FINE, SAYING THEN TAKE IT AWAY AM.
THAT TO ME IS NOT A COMPROMISE. IT'S SIMPLY A STATEMENT OF, WELL, THEN DON'T DO IT AT ALL.
THESE COMMERCIAL ENTITIES NEED TO HAVE SOME FORM OF IDENTITY. SO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
[01:50:05]
COMPROMISE IS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME TYPE OF REDUCTION POSSIBLY ON THE GATE SIGN SINCE THAT SEEMS TO BE DRAWING THE MOST ATTENTION BUT THE OTHER ONES I THINK ARE VERY MUCH IN SCALE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCALE, LOOK AT THE DRAWING THAT THEY GAVE WHERE YOU PUT ALL OF THE SIGNS ON THE FACADE WITHOUT THE CANOPIES INTERFERING WITH THE VISUAL THING, WHICH TO ME IS EXTREMELY RELEVANT. BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T SEE MOST OF THE SIGNS ANYHOW BECAUSE OF THE CANOPIES BLOCKING THEM, THEN WE'RE ARGUING OVER SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY NOT THAT GERMANE BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM AS YOU GET CLOSE TO THE BUILDINGS THAT THE PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE THEIR CORPORATE IDENTITY THERE. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. IF YOU WANT QUALITY CORPORATE PEOPLE IN YOUR COMMUNITY, YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST NEGOTIATE WITH THEM AND COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF COMPROMISE. I USED TO DO WALMARTS ALL THE TIME AND WE HAD CONSTANT ISSUES WITH BOTH THEIR SIGN AND THE WAY THAT THEIR ENTRIES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. LIKE THIS BUSINESS ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THE BUILDING FACADE AND THE PARKING LOT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A THIN STRIP OF LANDSCAPING.TRUST ME, WALMART USED TO HAVE TROUBLE WITH GUM ON THE PAVEMENT ALL THE TIME AND THEY WERE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO DO IT. THEY ALSO HAD TO HAVE NO RISE CURB ACCESS. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE ANY TYPE OF RISE IN FRONT OF A BUILDING ANYMORE. WHY? BECAUSE OF THE TRIP AND FALL LAWSUITS.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ALL FLUSH NOW. AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THESE CORPORATE ENTITIES DO THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF DESIGN STUDIES TO SHOW WHAT WORKS BEST. AND IF THEY'RE GATHERING TRASH NEAR THE FRONT OF AN ENTRY AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THE LANDSCAPING AND THEY'VE ENHANCED IT, THEY'VE MITIGATED IT BY DOING LARGER ISLANDS, I THINK THAT'S AN ADEQUATE SUBSTITUTE AND LET'S JUST GO WITH THEIR MITIGATION OF
THE LANDSCAPE ISLANDS. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAD TWO MORE QUESTIONS IF I CAN. FIRST, MAYBE YOU KNOW AND MAYBE YOU DON'T KNOW. THE SETBACK OF THE NOCATEE'S MAJOR BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THIS BUILDING, FROM THE ROAD. THEN THE SECOND IS: I THINK YOU SAID THE CANOPY WAS REDUCED BY TWO FEET. DO YOU HAVE A RENDERING SHOWING HOW THAT AFFECTS THE SIGNAGE ON THE
GATE BUILDING ITSELF WITH THE YOBI AND THE FRESH MARKET? >> SPEAKER: TO THAT POINT, BEFORE WE LOSE MR. POW UHL'S POINT EARLIER AND IT GOES YOUR SECOND QUESTION. AT PVR, MIKE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GATE AGREED TO REDUCE THE CANOPY HEIGHT TO THE BOTTOM FROM 17 FEET TO 15 FEET WHICH MAKES IT MORE IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE GATE SIGN ON THE BUILDING STAY 5 FEET TALL. BECAUSE THE CANOPY IS NOW GOING TO PARTIALLY BLOCK THAT SIGN. THEN I'LL LET MIKE ANSWER
THE QUESTIONS. >> SPEAKER: TWO VERY GOOD POINTS, SIR. ONE IS THIS IMAGE HERE, THE SETBACK FROM 210 THERE IS LESS THAN THE SETBACK ON THE STORE WE'RE PROPOSING HERE. SO, THERE'S EVEN MORE GREEN SPACE BETWEEN THAT. TWO IS THAT CANOPY, I BELIEVE IS AT 17 FEET.
SO THAT WOULD DROP DOWN ANOTHER 2 FEET MAKING AT LEAST THIS ANGLE OF THIS IMAGE OBSCURE SCHEME OF THE GATE SIGN ABOVE THE FRONT DOOR ITSELF. BUT, AGAIN, SOMEONE HAD MADE MENTION OF THE ELEVATION DRAWING. YOU WILL NEVER SEE THAT ELEVATION DRAWING EVER. BECAUSE THAT IS DRAWN IN TWO DIMENSIONS AND WE'RE SEEING KNIT THE THIRD DIMENSION. IT'S JUST THE ONLY WAY SOMEONE CAN DRAW SO THAT SOMEONE CAN BUILD IT. SO, THIS IS THE REAL LIFE VIEW HERE. YOU WOULD BE LOOKING THROUGH A CANOPY TO THE STORE SIGN ITSELF. DOES THAT ADDRESS YOUR
QUESTIONS, SIR? >> BOARD MEMBER: YEAH. MY POINT WAS I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE YOBI SIGN AND THE FRESH MARKET SIGN WAS REALLY GOING TO BE VISUAL ANYWAY BECAUSE OF THE LOWERING
OF THE CANOPY. >> SPEAKER: IT WILL BE TOUGHER TO SEE THEM CERTAINLY. BUT, AGAIN, THAT DEPENDS ON -- HERE I'M STANDING FROM THE CAR. I'M NOT IN AN SUV WHERE I AM A
COUPLE OF FEET HIGHER. OR A SMALLER CAR. >> BOARD MEMBER: RIGHT.
>> BOARD MEMBER: THE EARLIER SLIDE WHICH SHOWED THE TWO RETAIL FLANKING AND GAVE YOU OPTION A AND OPTION B. EITHER REDUCE TO 25 FEET IF IT WAS GOING TO STAY COLOR OR THE SAME
SIZE IF IT WAS BLACK AND WHITE. IS THAT ARCHITECTURE'S REVIEW? >> SPEAKER: WE'RE ADHERING TO WHAT THE COMMITTEE APPROVED. WHICH WAS THE SIZE IS FINE IF YOU GO MOSTLY BLACK AND WHITE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF COLOR. OR IF YOU INSIST BECAUSE FOR ANY OTHER REASON BESIDES THE FACT IT
[01:55:03]
IS A TRADEMARK AND HAS TO BE THAT COLOR, THEY MUST COME DOWN TO 24 SQUARE FEET. IN MY MIND THERE'S PROBABLY A THIRD. BECAUSE IF THE COLOR HAS TO CHANGE OR THEY CAN'T LIVE WITH24 THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PUT UP ANY SIGN. >> BOARD MEMBER: SO YOU ARE
PROBABLY GOING TO GO WITH THE SMALLER SIGNAGE? >> SPEAKER: WE'RE VERY HAPPY
WITH THE COMPROMISE WE REACHED WITH THE A.R.C., YES, SIR. >> BOARD MEMBER: IS THAT THE
COMPROMISE? >> SPEAKER: YES, SIR. THE ORIGINAL SIGNS PRODUCED WITH ARE THE NUMBERS I QUOTED A MOMENT AGO. THOSE LARGER SIGNS. AGAIN WITH THE DISTRICT REGULATIONS OF BLACK OR WHITE, I'D HAVE TO GO BACK TO MY NOTES TO BE SPECIFIC BUT I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE LEFT SIDE OF THE FRESH KITCHEN I BELIEVE NEARLY ALL OF IT IS BLACK AND WHITE. I KNOW A LETTER AND MAYBE A PIECE OF THE FRUIT IN THE YO OR THE BE, AS I SAID THOSE ARE TRADEMARK SIGNS SO THAT WON'T FLY SO THEY MOST LIKELY WILL NOT BE APPROVED AND PUT UP THERE. IF WE LOOK AT THE IMAGERY OF LOOKING AT THE EX EXI EXISTING STORE UP THE ROAD A BIT. I MADE THE STATEMENT WHEN WE WERE AT THE A.R.C. ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE COLOR SCHEME THEY'RE USING, IT'S NOT SOME OBNOXIOUS GLARING LAS VEGAS STRIP TYPE OF DOMINANCE THAT INTRUDES THE TRANQUILITY OF THE RIDE DOWN THE SCENIC HIGHWAY. THEY BLEND VERY WELL INTO THIS ARCHITECTURE OF THE SURROUNDING BUILDING AND TO WHERE THEY'RE ALMOST NOT NOTICEABLE. AS I WAS MAKING THE PRESENTATION EARLIER, THIS PHOTOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING ONE. YOU KIND OF SEE IT OFF TO THE SIDE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH ON THAT PARTICULAR ONE. ON THE OTHER ONE, I MEAN, THAT'S ONE WITH FULL COLOR THERE. EVEN THAT -- IF YOU LOOK ABOVE RENDERING, A SOFT STONE COLOR OF THE TWO SIDES OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE, THOSE COLORS ARE NOT VERY DOMINANT. I WOULD ARGUE AND I STILL DO IF YOU MAKE THEM BLACK AND WHITE THEY'RE EVEN MORE EVIDENT AND DOMINANT. THIS IN MY OPINION CONCEALS THEM SOMEWHAT TO THOSE WALKING INTO THE STORE AND NOT THOSE FROM A1A AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. TO MAKE THEM MORE DOMINANT IN BLACK AND WHITE WOULD DRAW MORE ATTENTION TO THEM IN MY OPINION. BUT WE'RE HAPPY WITH THE COMPROMISE OF EITHER EVE LEAVING THEM THE SAME SIZE WITH BLACK AND WHITE OR REDUCING THEIR SIZE
TO 24 IF THEY HAVE COLORS PRESENTED. >> BOARD MEMBER: JOHN, DO YOU
HAVE A QUESTION? >> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL WITHDRAW MY OBJECTION TO THE SIGN. I
WOULD PROBABLY APPROVE IT AS IS. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. WERE THERE ANY OTHER DETAILS OF THIS THAT ANYBODY HAD ANY PROBLEM WITH? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> BOARD MEMBER: MAYBE I'M BELABORING THE POINT, BUT SO I UNDERSTAND. THE TWO SIGNS ON THE BUILDING, THE YOBE AND THE OTHER SIGN IN COLOR ARE WITHIN THE 24 FEET.
>> BOARD MEMBER: IF THEY REMAIN THE COLOR YES THEY WILL REDUCE THOSE SIGNAGES.
>> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ITEM 2. MOTION TO APPROVE PVZVAR 2019-10 GATE C-STORE AND CAR WASH SUBJECT TO THE FIVE CONDITIONS AND FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT AS
PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> BOARD MEMBER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: TAKE A VOTE. THAT
WOULD BE UNANIMOUS YES. THAT SECOND MOTION-- >> CITY ATTORNEY: I BELIEVE MS.
MCKINLEY DESCENTED FROM THE VOTE. >> CHAIRMAN: I MEAN, BECAUSE AS A -- MORE THAN NEEDED. MAJORITY. IT MEANT IT DID PASS BECAUSE IT DID MEET THE VOTE
COUNT. WE WILL TAKE A MOTION THEN ON THE THIRD ITEM. >> CITY ATTORNEY: WHOEVER MAKES THAT MOTION IT WOULD BE AS AMENDED WITH THE ZONING VARIANCE BEING -- NON-ZONING VARIANCE
BEING TRANSFERRABLE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL MAKE A MOTION APPROVE NZVRB2019-16 GATE C-STORE CAR WASH NON-ZONING VARIANCE TO PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS
[02:00:04]
SECTION 8Q5A AND 8Q5E SECTION 1 TO ALLOW FOR FLAT ROOFS. AND SECTION 8X5A FOR THE CASH WASH TO EXCEED THE 120 FEET MAXIMUM BUILDING LENGTH BY 25 FEET AND SECTION 8Q5B TO ALLOW NO LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE PARKING LOT SPECIFICALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHERN UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF 330 A1A NORTH SUBJECT TO THE SIX CONDITIONS AND ADDING THE FACT THAT IT IS TRANSFERRABLE AS AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION. AND ALSO ACCORDING TO THE SEVEN FINDINGS OF FACT BOTH LISTED ON THOSE LISTED ON PAGES 6 AND 7 OF THE STAFF REPORT.>> BOARD MEMBER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: TAKE A VOTE. AS I MEANT TO SAY LAST TIME, THAT IS A MAJORITY APPROVAL, NOT A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. THAT IS PASSED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND TIME. ANY OTHER STAFF REPORT OR ITEMS TO REPORT TODAY?
[Staff Report]
>> NO SIR. THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY UPDATES ON ANY OF THE PAST ITEMS WE'VE BEEN
WORKING WITH AS FAR AS BULKHEADS. >> WE'RE STILL WORKING ON ALL
THOSE ITEMS WE TALKED ABOUT. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. >> CITY ATTORNEY: USUALLY AROUND THIS TIME WE DO THE ELECTIONS OF CHAIR, VICE CHAIR. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SET UP AN AGENDA ITEM IF WE DO HAVE A FEBRUARY MEETING FOR ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR THIS
BOARD. >> CHAIRMAN: SO MOTION FOR THE COUNTY TO PUT THAT IN A FUTURE
MEETING TO HAVE DONE IT WOULD BE GREAT. >> YES, SIR, WE WILL.
>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. IF NOT ANY OTHER BUSINESS, THEN A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> BOARD MEMBER: MOTION TO ADJOURN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.