[Call to Order] [00:00:07] >> THE CHAIR: IT IS NOW 3:00 AND I WILL DECLARE THE MEETING OF THE ST. JOHN'S COUNTY PONTE VEDRA ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD OPEN. WE WILL FIRST PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THE CHAIR: NEXT WE WILL HAVE THE READING OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT. >> THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW PICK OF THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITIES TO COMMENT ON TOPICS THAT MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER A COMMENT AT THE DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING PICK TO ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MAY DO SO BY FILLING OUT A SIGN-IN SHEET AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER PARTICULAR PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK FOR A TIME DURING THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM AND FOR THE LENGTH OF TIME DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE 3 MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENTED SAVIOR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER A SWORN TESTIMONY IF THEY DO NOT AFFECT THE TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY DETERMINING THE WEIGHT AND TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS THAT MAY NEED TO ENSURE A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS ARE MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES A TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE HEARINGS SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE CLERK FOR THE INCLUSION OF THE RECORD TO PICK ON THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR EVERY BOARD AGENCY COMMITTEE OR COUNTY IN REVIEW OF THE APPEALS OF THE RELATED ITEM. MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER THEY HAVE HAD ANY COMMUNICATION OF THE APPLICANT OR ANY PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE OF THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE AGENCY. IF SUCH COMMUNICATIONS HAS OCCURRED THE MEMBER SHOULD IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED AND THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION. WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER WHEN WE DISAGREE, WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES AND WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS. >> THE CHAIR: I'M GOING TO MOVE THE MINUTES FOR BOARD [1. PVZVAR 2026-04 110 Overlook Drive. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section III.B.1 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations (PVZDR) to allow for a side setback of 1 foot 8 inches in lieu of the required ten (10) feet in R-1-B zoning to accommodate the placement of exterior second floor stairs, specifically located at 110 Overlook Drive.] APPROVAL TO THE END OF THE MEETING, WE WILL START WITH AN AGENDA NUMBER 1 TVS EVA ARE 2026 -- 04110 OVERLOOK DRIVE. IF THE APPLICANT WILL COME UP, WE WILL TALK ABOUT COMMUNICATION STARTING WITH MARK. >> I CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING. >> I'M NOT HAD ANY COMMUNICATION ABOUT THIS NOR VISITED THE SITE. >> I'VE HAD NO COMMUNICATION, I HAVE VISITED THE SITE. >> I'VE HAD NO COMMUNICATION, I DO DRIVE BY THE SITE. >> THIS WILL TAKE A MINUTE, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR OVER 31 YEARS, ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT FOR FIVE YEARS, VICE PRESIDENT FOR 22 YEARS I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE 110 OVERLOOK HOUSE. THE FAMILY THAT BUILT IT IN 1998 WERE VERY GOOD FRIENDS AND THEY LIVED THERE FOR 17 YEARS. OUR FAMILIES WERE CLOSE, I BET OF THE HOUSE HUNDREDS OF TIMES DURING THE TIME THEY'VE LIVED THERE AND SEVERAL TIMES SINCE. I HAVE VISITED THE SITE AGAIN IN DETAIL ON AUGUST 1ST TO LOOK AT THE FRONT BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE. COMMUNICATION -- IN MAY AND JUNE I SAW SOMETHING GOING ON, BUT JUNE 25TH I WENT ON VACATION AND WHEN I GOT HOME LATE ON JULY 3RD, JULY 4TH WEEKEND I HAD SEVERAL HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASK ABOUT THE STAIRS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A THE RBL OR A OR AIRBNB BEING RUN OUT OF 110 OVERLOOK DRIVE I SENSE NOT POSSIBLE IT'S NOT PERMITTED TO PICK I LOOK AT THE STAIRS AND WONDERED HOW THEY GOT A PERMIT FOR A TYPICAL I CANNOT FIND RECORD OF THE PERMIT, AND VERIFIED THE PERMIT HAD NOT BEEN ISSUED FOR THE STAIRS OR FOR THE ADDED DOOR. WE AGREED A COMPLAINT SHOULD BE [00:05:05] STARTED HE SAID HE WOULD DO THAT IT DID, ANOTHER ONE WAS INITIATED A WEEK LATER AND THEY WERE COMBINED. THE WEEKEND OF JULY 11TH AND 12TH LANDSCAPING WAS ADDED AROUND THE GARAGE TO THE STAIRS, THE PATH, SOME OF THE PLANTINGS WERE ON THE PROPERTY OF 112 OVERLOOK DRIVE. I ASKED THE OWNER IF THEY HAD APPROVED IT AND THEY HAD NOT. DURING THE SUMMER AND FALL I HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE PROCESS. THIS CONTINUED ON TO 2026. ABOUT THE SECOND WEEK OF JULY 2006, CALLED JACOB ABOUT THE CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY AND HOW THIS WOULD AFFECT THE VARIANCE, HE SAID IT WOULD NOT. ONCE THE LETTER WENT OUT TO SEVERAL OF THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CALLED AND SENT ME TEXTS ABOUT THE PROCESS AND LETTER. IT CAME UP ABOUT AN AIRBNB. I SENT OUT A TEXT TO ALTER HOMEOWNER MEMBERS I HAD A PHONE NUMBER FOUR WITH A COPY OF PAGE 45 PROHIBITED USES DATED JU JULY 25TH. ON JULY 26TH I MET WITH THE HOMEOWNERS OF 112 TO DISCUSS THE VARIOUS -- THEY ASKED ME TO REVIEW THEIR EMAIL FOR ACCURACY, I DID. SPEAK OUT NOW MINE FEELS INSUFFICIENT I DID TRY PAST THE SITE DID NOT HAVE COMMUNICATION WITH ANYONE. IF YOU WILL GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AT THE BEGINNING PLEASE. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? GOOD AFTERNOON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME MY NAME IS PHILIP SYKES AND I REPRESENT 110 OVERLOOK DRIVE. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO PROCEED TO. >> THE CHAIR: YES, SIR. >> IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT ON MY BEHALF, AS YOU CAN HEAR WE ARE NEW TO THE COUNTRY AND WE ERECTED SOME STAIRS WITH THE THOUGHT OF SETTING UP AN AIRBNB. WE SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND OUT THAT THE PONTE VEDRA IS NOT OPEN-MINDED OR SUBJECT TO ALLOWING AIRBNB. SUBSEQUENTLY MY WIFE AND I, WE RUN OUR OWN BUSINESSES FROM HOME AND WE USE IT AS AN OFFICE SPACE, WITH THE STAIRS THERE WE HAVE LOOKED AT INCORPORATING THEM NOW AS FIRE ESCAPE STAIRS. HAVING SAID THAT, I BELIEVE SOMETHING WAS POINTED OUT IN AN EMAIL TO THE COUNCIL, THAT A FIRE HAS NEVER BROKEN OUT IN THAT NECK OF THE WOODS. I'VE DONE SOME RESEARCH AND THERE'S QUITE A LOT OF RESULTS IN AN AROUND PONTE VEDRA ESPECIALLY WITH THE POSTCODE WHERE FIRES HAVE BROKEN OUT AND CAUSED CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE. THERE IS NO ACCESS IF YOU'RE UP THERE IF THE FIRE WERE TO BREAK UP DOWNSTAIRS. IF I WOULD BE ALLOWED TO SHARE THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION IF I MAY? YOU CAN OBVIOUSLY CLEARLY SEE, YOU GOT 111 LOOKING STRAIGHT ONTO US. OUR NEIGHBORS 114, MR. PATTON LIVES AT WHAT NUMBER ARE YOU, 112? 114. HE WOULD GET THE OTHER NEIGHBORS AROUND THERE. WE HAVE TAKEN GREAT CARE IN ORDER TO PUT UP SOME VEGETATION WHICH I BELIEVE HAS BECOME AN EYESORE WHEN SOMEONE LOOKS ONTO THE VEGETATION I BELIEVE THERE WAS A NOTE POINTED OUT ITS UNSIGHTLY. HOPEFULLY FROM THAT VIEWED THEIR LOOKING STRAIGHT FROM 111 OVERLOOK DRIVE OVER THE ISLAND YOU WILL SEE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE ANY FORM OF STAIRS. THE HAS GROWN AND WE HAVE TAKEN CARE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THE HEDGING IS APPROPRIATE. IF YOU GO FURTHER, THIS IS STANDING IN THE DRIVEWAY AT 112 I TOOK THIS PICTURE RECENTLY YOU WILL SEE AS YOU ENTER THE DRIVEWAY ABSOLUTELY BUT AS YOU CAN SEE THE VEGETATION WILL CONTINUE TO GROW. WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PALM TREE OR ANY OF THE VEGETATION FACING YOU. THIS IS WHEN YOU DRIVE IT OF DRIVEWAY, THAT'S MORE OF A DIRECT VIEW, ABSOLUTELY AND THEN THIS IS THE VIEW FROM THE TOP OF THE STAIRS FACING DOWN OUT OF THE EYELID LOOKING AT 111. YOU WILL SEE FROM THE NEXT SLIDE THAT IS THE DIRECT NEIGHBOR. THERE IS NO VIEW ON TO THE PRIVACY OF ANY LEVEL NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY. THERE IS NO NOISE COMING FROM THIS AREA WHICH IS POINTED OUT, NOISE AND DISTURBANCES, FROM [00:10:06] THAT PERSPECTIVE I SEE THERE IS YOUR VIEW DIRECTLY FROM THE TOP THEY ARE. THEN AGAIN I BELIEVE THIS MIGHT BE A VIDEO, IF IT IS -- THERE'S A VIDEO POINTING OUT THE NEIGHBORS AND THE VEGETATION IS VERY GREEN, VERY LUSH AND YOU WOULD BE HARD PUSHED IN MY OPINION TO REALLY NOTICE OR REALIZE THERE ARE ANY STAIRWELLS OFFENDING ANYONE'S EYESIGHT OR THE LIGHT OF SITE ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU WALK OUT OF 111 WHICH IS POINTED OUT THAT IT'S AN EYESORE AND IT HAS BEEN EXPOSED ON A DAILY BASIS. THE SECOND ONE, THIS ANOTHER VIDEO HERE I BELIEVE STANDING IN OUR NEIGHBORS WHO WE DID NOTIFY ABOUT THE STAIRS AT THE TIME, ANDREA DID NOT CONCERN HERSELF WITH IT. SHE SAID SHE HARDLY EVEN NOTICED IT. THAT IS THE VIEW WHEN YOU PAN FROM THE FRONT DOOR AND PAN ACROSS THE VEGETATION OF THE DIRECTION OF THE CUL-DE-SAC. THAT IS THE PRESENTATION THAT I PUT TOGETHER. I'VE OBVIOUSLY DONE SOME RESEARCH WHEN IT COMES TO FIRES BREAKING OUT. ON ONE OF THE CORRESPONDENCE EMAILS THAT WAS SENT BY MR. BOWLING WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IF YOU READ THAT IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL. SOME OF IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL. I BELIEVE HE WAS SUPPORTING AND HELPING SOMEONE AND PUTTING AN EMAIL TOGETHER. YEAH, I HOPE WE CAN COME TO SOME FORM OF AGREEMENT OF THE STAIRS ARE NOT APPROPRIATELY FOUND TO BE IN ORDER, THEN WE'D LIKE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. >> THE CHAIR: THANK YOU, SIR. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, START WITH PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THIS ITEM IF YOU WILL COME UP TO THE PODIUM HERE AND YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> MY NAME IS JOHN CELLUCCI, I LIVE AT 101, I'M A NEIGHBOR OF THE PROPERTY. I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 39 YEARS AND IN THE PAST WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF RENOVATIONS MADE AND EVERY TIME WE'VE USED LICENSED ARCHITECTS, LICENSED CONTRACTORS FOR BOTH OUR SAFETY AND FOR THE LOOK AND PRESERVATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO. I UNDERSTAND YOU CAN BUILD A STAIRWAY IN THE BACK AND NOT ON THE SIDES AND THE FRONT. I WOULD LIKE TO PROTEST FOR ME AND MY WIFE HERE AS WELL, WE THINK WE SHOULD DENY THIS BECAUSE ITS UNSIGHTLY AND IT'S NOT KEEPING WITH PERMITTED SAFETY. THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. >> THE CHAIR: DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? >> MY NAME IS BELK INGRAM I LIVE AT 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS FOR ALL THE WORK YOU DO OVER THE YEARS I KNOW IT'S HARD WORK, AND I'VE ALWAYS FELT ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS YOU DO IS PROTECT THE SETBACKS OF THE HOUSES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. I'M HERE JUST TO VOICE MY OPINION, I'M OPPOSED TO THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SETBACK AND ASKED THE BOARD TO DENY IT. THANK YOU. >> DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? HEARING NONE COME I'M GOING TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND OPEN UP TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTIONS TO THE PRESENTER OR ANYONE ELSE. MR. GREEN? >> THANKS FOR COMING, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, HOW LONG AGO DID YOU PURCHASE THE RESIDENCE? >> COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? >> HOW LONG AGO DID YOU PURCHASE THE RESIDENCE? >> WE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED THE RESIDENCE IN OCTOBER 2017. >> AT WHEN YOU PUT UP THE STAIRS DID YOU USE A CONTRACTOR FOR THAT? >> WE RECOMMENDED A CONTRACTOR THAT IS CORRECT. >> DID THE CONTRACTOR AND YOU DISCUSS A PERMIT FOR THE STAIRS? >> NOT AT THAT STAGE, NO. SPEAK OF THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T BRING UP THE STAIRS NEEDED A PERMIT? >> NO. WE HAD THE STAIRS DRAWN UP BY A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECT BUT IT WAS NOT MENTIONED TO US THAT WE WERE REQUIRED A PERMIT AT THAT STAGE. >> ANY ACCESS TO THE UPSTAIRS [00:15:03] FROM THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE OR IS THE ONLY WAY TO ACCESS TO THE OUTSIDE? >> THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN ACCESSED FROM INSIDE THE PROPERTY, ABSOLUTELY. YOU WILL NOTICE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS IF YOU MAY RECALL, IT'S A DOUBLE STORY PROPERTY. I THINK IT'S A BONUS FROM ROOM ABOVE THE GARAGE, IF I WERE TO BREAK OUT DOWN THE STAIRS, HE WOULD ACCESS THE ROOM ABOVE THE GARAGE TO ESCAPE AND IF YOU WERE HEAVEN FORBID AGAIN IN THAT ACTUAL ROOM UP THERE IN A FIRE BROKE OUT DOWN STAIRS THAT WOULD BE YOUR ONLY SOURCE OF EXITING THE PROPERTY ON ANY LEVEL. >> OKAY, THE INTENT OF THE STAIRS OUTSIDE WAS FOR AIRBNB USAGE. >> WE DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT RESTRICTIONS ON THAT LEVEL I KNOW EVERY COUNTRY IS VERY DIFFERENT AND WE DIDN'T -- WE SHOULD HAVE BUT WE DID CONTEMPLATE OR EVEN THOUGHT IT. THE MOMENT WE FOUND OUT THAT AIRBNB WAS NOT POSSIBLE IN THAT NECK OF THE WOODS WE SQUASHED THAT IMMEDIATELY. >> THE STAIRS WERE IMPORTED FOR THAT PURPOSE. SPEAK OF THE STAIRS WILL NOT BE USED ON A DAILY BASIS ON ANY LEVEL. I THINK UP AND UP AND DOWN THOSE STAIRS ONES SINCE THEY HAVE BEEN ERECTED TO. >> THAT'S IT FOR NOW. >> MY QUESTION IS IF YOU'RE SO CONCERNED ABOUT A CAN OF FIRE ESCAPE, WHY DO YOU BUILD IT W WOOD? >> IT WAS IN SITU IF YOU LOOK TO OUR LEFT OF THE PROPERTY THERE'S WOODEN FENCES, OTHERS WOODEN PARTITIONS AROUND COME OF THOSE PROPERTIES BUILT OUT OF WOOD. IF THERE'S A FIRE DOWNSTAIRS AT LEAST YOU CAN STILL -- IT HASN'T AFFECTED THOSE STAIRS YET. THEN YOU CAN ESCAPE FROM THERE. >> IF THERE'S A FIRE IN THE FIRST FLOOR, IT CATCHE THOSE STAIRS YOU CAN'T GET DOWN THEM ANYWAY THAT'S MY QUESTION, THE SECOND ONE IS DID YOU EVEN THINK THAT MAYBE IF YOU NEEDED TO HAVE A FIRE ESCAPE, YOUR WORDS, YOU COULD HAVE PUT A METAL LADDER AGAINST THE HOUSE COMING DOWN. I HAVE A FRIEND OF MINE THAT DID THAT, DIDN'T ENCROACH UPON THE VARIANCE THAT WAS REQUIRED INSTEAD THE STAIRWAY WAS BUILT AND NOW YOUR LESS THAN 2 FEET AWAY. >> AS YOU WILL RECALL FROM THE EARLY CONVERSATION WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO PUT AN AIRBNB THERE WE WERE GOING TO GIVE PRIVATE ACCESS TO THAT SPECIFIC ROOM. IT WAS OBVIOUSLY AN OVERSIGHT, SUBSEQUENTLY WITH REGARD TO WHERE THE STAIRS ARE NOW IS KEEPING THEM IN SITU SO THEY CAN BE ACCESSED AS A FIRE ESCAPE. >> I UNDERSTAND, IT WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE ACCESSED FOR AIRBNB AT THAT POINT IT WASN'T A FIRE ESCAPE. >> NOT AT ALL. IT HAD A TWO-PRONGED APPROACH. IT WOULD HAVE DOUBLED UP AS A FIRE ESCAPE STAIRS, HOWEVER ORIGINALLY IT WAS THE ACCESS FOR THE AIRBNB, THAT IS CORRECT. >> YOU HAVE ADVERTISED THE HOUSE FOR RENT? >> I BEG YOUR PARDON? >> YOU HAVE ADVERTISED THE HOUSE >> NO WE HAVE NOT, WE HAVE ADVERTISED THE HOUSE, THE HOUSE WAS RENTED FOR A LONG TIME WE WERE VERY BLESSED. WE MOVED OVER FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM, OBVIOUSLY GOT RESIDENTIAL STATUS NOW. THE HOUSE I DID NOTICE ON ONE OF THE WEBSITES SEEMS TO BE UP THERE, THE GENTLEMAN HAS SUPPORTED US BUT IS DEFTLY NOT FOR RENT. NOT AT ALL, WE ARE LIVING THERE. MY SON IS GOING TO SCHOOL IN THE LOCAL AREA, MY WIFE AND I AS WE MENTIONED RUN HER OWN BUSINESS. >> I'VE JUST SEEN ONLINE THAT IT'S FOR RENT. >> I SAW THAT THE OTHER DAY ON THE PILLOW, IT TAKEN DOWN. >> THANKS FOR COMING AND I WANT TO SUMMARIZE TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING. WHEN YOU CAME IN TO PURCHASE THE HOUSE YOU WERE UNAWARE OF THE AIRBNB NOT BEING ALLOWED IN THAT AREA AND YOU DID NOT KNOW A PERMIT WAS REQUIRED TO. SO YOU BUILT IT. ARE YOU COMING BEFORE THE BOARD AS A HARDSHIP OF BEING SINCE THAT THEY ARE ALREADY CONSTRUCTED IT WOULD BE TOO MUCH TO TAKE THEM DOWN? I GUESS AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU FEEL YOUR HARDSHIP IS IN ORDER TO GET THIS VARIANCE. >> WE ARE VERY MUCH IN THE HANDS OF WHATEVER THE DECISION COMES TO. WE HAVE COME HERE -- I DON'T LIKE THE WORD "HARDSHIP," BUT THE STAIRS ARE ERECTED TO. IT'S OBVIOUSLY COST A [00:20:03] SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT THAT THEY HAVE TO COME DOWN, SO BE IT THEY HAVE TO COME DOWN. BUT WE HAD NO INKLING -- WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I COME FROM A FAMILY FROM A VERY CLEAR OPEN COMMUNICATION TYPE OF PERSON WHICH WE HAVEN'T SEEMED TO MANAGED TO CONNECT. IF IT HAD BEEN POINTED OUT WE WOULD NEVER HAVE GONE AHEAD WE DON'T JUST DO THINGS AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION AFTERWARDS, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT BUT WE HAD NO INKLING WHATSOEVER THAT WOULD BE A NO-NO. BLESSING WE WANT TO DO IS ARRIVE A NEW COUNTRY AND UPSET ANYONE, IF ANYTHING WE WANT TO TRY TO BUILD A STRONG COMMUNITY AND SUPPORT ONE ANOTHER. THAT IS WHERE I STAND ON THAT. >> I CAN APPRECIATE THAT, THANK YOU. >> JUST SOME QUICK QUESTIONS, DID YOU CONSULT WITH A FIRE MARSHAL TO SEE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE? >> NOT AT THAT STAGE. >> BECAUSE YOU HAD TO MODIFY THE EXTERIOR OF YOUR STRUCTURE IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, YOU NEED A SIGN-OFF FROM AN ENGINEER. BESIDES THE ARCHITECT, DID YOU WORK WITH AN ENGINEER TO GET THAT APPROVAL PROCESS? >> THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. I KNOW MY WIFE WAS SPEAKING TO THE ENGINEER AND THE GENTLEMAN WHO PUT THE STRUCTURE WHO PUT THE PLANS TOGETHER. >> SEE DID GET A SIGNATURE FROM AN ENGINEER SIGN-OFF. SPEAK I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S AN ENGINEER BUT HE'S DEFINITELY AN ARCHITECT, THAT I DO KNOW. >> AS FAR AS -- I LOOKED AT YOUR PROPERTY USING THE CILLO TOOL AND I SAW THAT THERE IS A -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- PERGOLA IN THE BACKYARD? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> DID YOU LOOK INTO REPLACING THE PERGOLA WITH A DECK? LIKE A WOODEN DECK THAT WOULD GO OVER YOUR OUTDOOR SETTING AND HAVE IN YOUR BACKYARD OUT OF VIEW, SOME STAIRS LEADING UP TO THE DECK. >> THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AS WELL, ABSOLUTELY. AND SOMETHING MY WIFE AND I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE CAN AFFORD TO IS GETTING PERMISSION TO PUT A DECK THERE, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE. SPEAK I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PERMISSIONS ARE. >> IT WOULD HAVE TO GET PERMISSION NOW WE REALIZE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY UNLESS YOU ARE JUST DOING NORMAL DECORATING TO NEED A PERMIT TO RENOVATE OR DO ANYTHING IF YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE THINGS AROUND. IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE CAN AFFORD TO THE PLAN WOULD BE TO PUT A PERGOLA OR MAKE SURE IT'S A STRONG ENOUGH STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO PUT A DECK UP THERE IN THE FUTURE AS OUR NEIGHBORS AT 112 HAVE DONE. >> THE OTHER THING AS FAR AS OUR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, WE DON'T HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO JUST THROW THEM OUT WILLY-NILLY. MY QUICK TAKE WAS IF THERE WAS SOME SORT OF FIRE -- I KNOW IT ASKED ALREADY -- WHY DID YOU USE WOOD FOR THE STAIRS? I WAS THINKING IF A FIREFIGHTER HAS TO GET INTO YOUR BACKYAD TO ACCESS WHERE THE FIRE MIGHT BE INSIDE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, THEY MIGHT HAVE AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TIME GETTING THEIR GEAR AROUND THE STAIRS, GIVEN THE 20 INCHES THAT YOU HAVE GOT BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR PROPERTY LINE. >> TURTLE ACCESSES AND OUR PROPERTY TO THE RIGHT OF THE PROPERTY WE HAVE LARGE ACCESS AROUND THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. THERE IS FROM MEMORY A REASONABLE WIDTH TO THE PATHWAY AND ACCESS AROUND THERE. I DIDN'T TAKE A PICTURE OF IT BUT AT LEAST -- >> RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE ROOM IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> VERY MUCH SO. >> WHAT IS YOUR NEIGHBOR GOING TO DO IN A YEAR OR TWO? >> ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE WHERE THEY ARE AT, COULD THEY -- I'M PRETTY SURE THEY COULD PUT A FENCE OR SOME DIFFERENT KIND OF STRUCTURE THEY ARE, LANDSCAPING. MY POINT IS 20 INCHES BETWEEN YOUR STAIRS AND YOUR PROPERTY LINE, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD BE TOO KEEN ON TRYING TO GET THROUGH THERE, THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THESE SETBACKS. >> AT THE MOMENT THERE IS A SPACE APPROXIMATELY FROM ME TO THIS WOODEN DESK OVER HERE AND THAT IS THE VEGETATION. THERE'S A LOT OF VEGETATION AS YOU SAW FROM THE ONE PICTURE I [00:25:01] SHARED FROM THE TOP OF THE STAIRS A HUGE AMOUNT OF VEGETATION WHICH BORDERS BETWEEN US AND OUR NEIGHBORS AT 112. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK THANK YOU. >> I THINK WE'VE ESTABLISHED -- >> I HEARD YOU SAY GOOD AFTERNOON, I JUST NEED YOU TO -- >> WE'VE ESTABLISHED YOU DID NOT GET A PERMIT AND DID NOT TRY TO GET A PERMIT. ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS -- IF YOU'D ASK ANYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY REQUIRE A PERMIT THEY WOULD SAY THEY BASICALLY REQUIRE A PERMIT FOR EVERYTHING. ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS SAID THEY MENTIONED THAT AT ONE TIME. YOU SAY YOU HAVE AN ARCHITECT, WHO WAS THE ARCHITECT ON THE STAIRS? SPEAK OF THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME IS AUGIE I CAN FURNISH YOU WITH THE RESULTS FROM THE BACK OF THE MEETING. >> AND YOU DO NOT HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LOOK AT THE STAIRS? >> AS I POINTED OUT TO MR. NICKERSON, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WAS DONE. I HAVE A FEELING IT WAS BUT I DON'T WANT TO SAY YES IT WAS DEFINITELY DONE. >> WAS THE CONTRACTOR LICENSE AND INSURED? >> THAT AGAIN I DON'T KNOW. BEING NAIVE AND NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LAWS WHICH WE SHOULD HAVE GOT UP TO SPEED WITHIN HINDSIGHT, THAT I DON'T KNOW. >> YOU DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE CONTRACTOR? >> HE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO US AND I'M SURE WE SHOULD HAVE AN EMAIL ADDRESS OR AT LEAST A TELEPHONE NUMBER THAT SPECIFIC CONTRACTOR. >> YOU PAID THEM, RIGHT? YOU PAID THE CONTRACTOR? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OF THE STAIRS WERE TO BE USED AS FIRE STAIRS, WHY ARE THEY AS BIG AS THEY ARE -- THE STAIRS ARE ALMOST 9 FEET OR 9 FEET 4 INCHES WIDE TO. IF THEY WERE ONLY TO BE FIRE STAIRS, CODE REQUIRES THEM TO BE AT LEAST 36 INCHES WIDE AND WITH 27-INCH INSIDE CLEAR WHICH WOULD'VE MADE THE STAIRS OF THE TOTAL WIDTH OF 7 FEET VERSUS 9 FEET CAMP IS ALSO AN EXEMPTION FOR EXTERIOR FIRE STAIRS, THERE IS A WAY YOU CAN GET A DOWNED 2 FEET TO. IT IS ALLOWED TO HAVE FIRE STAIRS IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, RESIDENTIAL CASE BEING MADE OUT OF WOOD AT LEAST BEING MADE OF -- WHY DID YOU PICK PUTTING THESE STAIRS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE? >> FOR ACCESS TO THAT SPECIFIC ROOM IF YOU RECALL ORIGINALLY THE THOUGHT WAS AIRBNB AND HENCE WHY -- MY WIFE AND I WERE BOTH PRETTY TAKEN ABACK BY THE SIZE OF THEM INITIALLY SO MUCH SO THAT SHE WENT ACROSS TO ENTRY AND MADE AN APOLOGY TO HER AND HER WORDS WERE I'VE HARDLY EVEN NOTICE. THAT DOESN'T RESOLVE THE SITUATION OR ISSUE THE STAIRS ARE IN MY OPINION, SHOOT MYSELF IN THE FOOT, THEY ARE BIG ABSOLUTELY BECAUSE ORIGINALLY THEY WERE GOING TO BE FOR PEOPLE TO WALK UP AND NO DOUBT TAKE A BACK UP WITH THEM. >> TO USE THE STAIRS FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, SOMEONE HAS TO GO ONTO THE PROPERTY OF 112 OVERLOOK DRIVE, -- >> ONE MORE TIME. >> TO GET AROUND THE STAIRS PEOPLE HAVE TO WALK ON THE PROPERTY OF 112, YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY? >> NO. >> OYEZ. >> YOU COULD BE RIGHT ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW. >> YOU'RE ASKING FOR REDUCING THE SIDE SETBACK 21 FEET 8 INCHES, SOMEBODY GOING AROUND THE PROPERTY AROUND THE STAIRS THEY WILL HAVE TO GO ONTO 112'S PROPERTY THERE'S ALMOST NO WAY YOU CAN WALK IN A 1 FOOT 4-INCH PATH. IF YOUR GUESTS, FRIENDS, FAMILY ARE CONTINUALLY HAVING TO WALK ONTO 112 OVERLOOK DRIVE'S PROPERTY ARE YOU WILLING THEM TO GIVE A HOLD HARMLESS PROTECTING THEM AGAINST THE LIABILITY OF YOUR PEOPLE USING THE PROPERTY? >> THE ANSWER TO THAT IS YES, SECONDLY WE WANT TO BE HAVING GUESTS COMING AROUND THAT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ON ANY LEVEL, WERE NOT GOING TO BE USING IT GOING FORWARD AS ACCOMMODATION PURPOSES OR PRIVATE ACCESS FOR ANYBODY. >> BUT YOU DEVELOPED A PATH AROUND IT. >> THERE WAS ALREADY A HEDGE THERE, WE HAVE A PATH IN FRONT OF OUR GARAGE AND IT WAS ALREADY ACCESS GOING AROUND THERE AN ANYWAY. WE JUST MOVED TO THE HEDGING OR GOT RID OF THE HEDGING AND PLANTED SOME NEW TREES. THE ACTUAL VEGETATION TO THE [00:30:03] LEFT OF OUR PROPERTY, THE VEGETATION THAT FALLS IN THE BORDER WAS ALREADY THERE, 98% OF THAT VEGETATION WAS ALREADY THERE. >> DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE STAIRS WHO PLANTED ADDITIONAL VEGETATION ONTO THE 112 PRO PROPERTY. >> WE GROW A LITTLE VEGETABLE GARDEN. SAY THAT AGAIN? SPEAK OUT WHEN YOU CRAVE THE PATH RUG IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AROUND THE STAIRS, YOU PLANTED PLANTS ON 112'S PROPERTY. >> AS YOU GO AROUND THE CORNER, THE TWO TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLANTED, THREE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLANTED THERE. IN LINE WITH THE BORDER. >> IN LINE WITH THE STAIRS AND THEY ARE 112'S PROPERTY. >> IN LINE WITH THE BORDER, THAT WAS THERE ALREADY. >> THERE ON 112'S PROPERTY. >> THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE. >> FOR OVER A YEAR YOU'VE KNOWN I'M ON THE ZONING BOARD AND I'M THE ONE THAT INITIATED THE COMPLAINT AND I FIND IT SURPRISING THAT YOU NEVER TALK TO ME ABOUT WHAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE TO MITIGATE THE PROBLEM EARLIER, WE NEVER HAD A DISCUSSION ON THAT. WE'VE JUST ADDRESSED THROUGH OTHER QUESTIONS YOU CANNOT HAVE AN AIRBNB ON THE PROPERTY AND YOU ARE IN FULL AGREEMENT THAT ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW THAT, CORRECT? YOU WILL NOT HAVE AN AIRBNB ON THE PROPERTY? >> 100% NOT. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT IF WE WOULD'VE KNOWN THAT HE WHEN SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS WERE ON THE BOARD OR INVOLVED WITH THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY COUNCIL, WE WOULD HAVE JUMPED AT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU AND FOUND OUT THE INS AND OUTS, WE NEVER DID THAT, WE DIDN'T KNOW YOU WERE UNTIL WE DID SOME FURTHER RESEARCH THAT YOU WERE ON THE BOARD. >> I HAVE A QUESTION IN RELATION TO ONE OF YOUR SUBMISSIONS. YOU HAVE AN ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANS, WAS THAT BASED ON A SURVEY? IN YOUR SUBMISSION? >> COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? >> THERE IS A SITE PLAN THAT LAYS OUT IN YOUR SUBMISSION THE VARIOUS APPLICATION, A SITE PLAN THAT LAYS OUT THE LOCATION OF THE STAIRS AND THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE ESPECIALLY IN RELATION TO THE FRONT SETBACK. IT WAS BASED ON A SURVEY OR WAS THAT JUST AN ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING? >> WITH REGARD TO THE SURVEY, -- >> I'VE GOT A COPY FROM A SURVEY FROM 1997 THAT INDICATES THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE HOUSE IS ACTUALLY ON THE BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE. IF THAT IS TRUE, YOU ARE ALSO -- A PORTION OF YOUR STAIRS IS INTO THE FRONT BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE. BASED ON YOUR DRAWING IT'S NOT. THAT'S THE DRAWING. >> YOUR FRIEND TO THE FRONT OF THE STAIRS IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY? >> MY RUDIMENTARY SURVEY IMPLIES YOU ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FRONT BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE AND MR. CHAIRMAN I WOULD SUGGEST IF WE APPROVE THIS VARIANCE WE ALSO MAKE NOTE OF THAT TO PREVENT A PROBLEM IN THE FUTURE. RICK BROWN AND HIS OPPOSITION LETTER POINTED OUT YOU'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY SINCE OCTOBER 2017, RENTED OUT FOR SIX OR SEVEN YEARS, MOVED BACK HERE -- YOU MOVED HERE PERSONALLY IN SEPTEMBER OF 2024? >> CORRECT. >> YOU SAID YOU ORIGINALLY STARTED THIS IS A FIRE STAIRS YOU ENDED UP WAITING ANOTHER YEAR BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY INSTALLED THE STAIRS. IS THAT'S BECAUSE IT WAS FIRE STAIRS OR IS THAT BECAUSE YOU WOULD THINK ABOUT DOING AIRBNB? SPEAK IT WAS A MATTER OF GETTING FINANCES TOGETHER AND PUT A GET TOGETHER WITH A VIEW TO SETTING UP AN AIRBNB, CORRECT. >> THE LAST POINT IS THE EXISTING WINDOWS IN THE BONUS ROOM WERE ACCEPTABLE FOR FIRE EXITING, THERE IS A MINIMUM AREA OF WINDOW, OPERABLE WINDOW OF 5.7 FEET. THE HOUSE WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED IN 1998 THAT AREA WAS USED AS A STORAGE AREA. IT WAS RENOVATED AT THE END OF 1999 OR EARLY 2000S TO HAVE THAT BE A BEDROOM/PLAY AREA. BOTH WINDOWS WERE ACCEPTABLE FOR FIRE EXITING. YOU COULD HAVE JUST GOTTEN THE FLEXIBLE STAIRS IN USE THROUGHOUT THE WINDOW. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> IS THERE ANY CODE REQUIREMENT [00:35:17] FOR FIRE EGRESS AND SETBACKS, IS THERE ANY RELIEF FOR THAT? >> FOR THE RECORD, JACOB SMITH. THERE IS NOT ANY PROVISION IN THE PONTEVEDRA CODE ADDRESSING FIRE SAFETY FEATURES REGARDING EXCEPTION TO SETBACK. >> THANK YOU, SIR. DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR QUESTION? >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ATTORNEY TAYLOR. IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT FOR RECUSAL FOR ANY OF US ON THE BOARD TO HAVE A VERY PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS? >> I THINK JOHN IS GETTING CLOSE TO RECUSAL IF HE WANTED TO PUT IN A REQUEST FOR RECUSAL I WOULD APPROVE IT. HE'S SO CLOSE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HE'S ALMOST THAT SHE IS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. EVEN IF YOU RECUSE HIMSELF HE IS ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS HE'S ABLE TO TALK, HE COUNTS FOR QUORUM. BUT IT STRIKES ME THAT MAYBE HE SHOULD RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THE ACTUAL VOTE. >> I HAD UNDERSTOOD IN THE PAST THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OR IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SOMEBODY, THE JUST BEING NEAR THEM DID NOT APPLY. >> BEING ONE NEIGHBOR, ONE DOWN POTENTIALLY YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S BETWEEN YOU COULD POTENTIALLY CREATE A PROBLEM. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING I HAVEN'T TOLD YOU TO RECUSE YOURSELF YET I'M ON THE FENCE ABOUT IT IF THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY FINANCIAL OTHER THAN CHANGE IN HOME VALUE AND I DON'T THINK THAT ACTUALLY WOULD REQUIRE A RECUSAL IN THIS SITUATION. HE DOESN'T HAVE TO. IF YOU WANTED TO TO BE SAFE HE COULD TO. BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE BOARD, IT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE VOTE-WISE BECAUSE YOU STILL NEED TO HAVE ENOUGH TO APPROVE THE VOTE. FROM THAT STANDPOINT IT'S UP TO YOU. I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE YOU RECUSE YOURSELF. IF YOU THINK YOU COULD BE OPEN-MINDED ON IT, UNLESS YOU THINK YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR OTHER NEIGHBOR IS CAUSING A PROBLEM. >> IT'S NOT. I THINK THE BOARD FULLY UNDERSTANDS MY POSITION ON ANY SORT OF RELIEF ON SIDE SETBACKS. WE FIND THREE MEETINGS ON IT SO FAR, I'M DEAD SET AGAINST ANY CHANGE IN A SIDE SETBACK AND THIS BASICALLY -- MR. CHAIRMAN IF YOU WANT ME TO RECUSE MYSELF I WILL. >> HE CAN CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDING IS JUST WHETHER OR NOT HIS VOTE COUNTS AND I'M NOT PRESUMING WHAT WAY JOHN WILL VOTE. YOU STILL NEED TO HAVE ENOUGH IN FAVOR ON THIS BOARD. >> I'M WITH YOU, I DON'T KNOW HIS VOTE SWINGS IT EITHER WAY, THERE'S ENOUGH VOTES WITH HIS I'D RATHER INCLUDE EVERYONE IF WE CAN. MR. SYKES I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WATCH THE LAST COUPLE OF VIDEOS WE HAD A SIMILAR SITUATION ON THE BOULEVARD, WE'VE HAD THIS DEBATE VERY RECENTLY. THE BOARD MEMBER FEELINGS ARE VERY STRONG ON SIDE TO SETBACKS. FOR MY PARTICULAR CASE I LOOK AT DRAINAGE AND I APPRECIATE THE SCREENING YOU ATTEMPTED TO DO. UNFORTUNATELY THAT WILL AT SOME POINT COMPROMISE THE DRAINAGE. THE SWALE BETWEEN THE HOUSES IS DESIGNED TO TAKE THE WATER AWAY. YOU CAN SEE IT IN YOUR PICTURES THE WATER THAT'S SITTING UP ON THE ROAD IS FROM POOR DRAINAGE IS NOT YOUR FAULT, THAT'S A ROAD CONDITION I'M SURE ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS THAT ON THEIR LIST. I THINK WE CAN HAVE INTERNAL BOARD DISCUSSION IF ANYBODY HAS ANY THOUGHTS COME I THINK WE CAN PUT IT TO. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION. I SO YOU PUSH THE BUTTON AND IT DOESN'T WANT TO. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY BASED [00:40:10] UPON THE FINDINGS OF FACT LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS THE DISCUSSIONS TAKING PLACE HERE TODAY. >> I'VE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND THE MOTION. >> MOTION AND SECOND. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE VOTE? SPEAK A HOLD ON THE BOAT FOR SECOND? >> IF THIS PLACE WHICHEVER WAY IT CAN PLAY OUT IF IT'S DENIED, WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR THE STAIRS, REMOVAL OF THE STAIRS? HAS THERE BEEN ANY TYPE OF CHANGE TO THE HOME WHERE THE STAIRS MEET THE HOUSE? WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR THE HOMEOWNER AT THIS POINT IN TIME IF THIS VOTE IS TO DENY? >> JACOB WOULD PROBABLY SPEAK BEST TO IT BUT IF THE I.D. THE APPLICANT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL THE FINDING TO THE FULL BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THAT, STAIRS WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. THE DOOR WOULD HAVE TO MEET CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS HE COULDN'T HAVE A DOOR OPEN TO NOWHERE. HOW DID I DO? >> EXCELLENT, THAT IS CORRECT. THERE IS AN OPEN CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE IF THIS BOARD WAS TO DENY THEM THE APPLICANT DID NOT PROCEED WITH ANY SORT OF APPEAL ULTIMATELY CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD GET IN CONTACT WITH HIM AND HE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE THE STAIRS AND DO ANY SORT OF SITE WORK TO BRING THE HOUSE BACK INTO COMPLIANCE. SPEAKER WAS THERE A TIME FRAME ON THAT, 30 DAYS, SIX MONTHS? WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME? >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. CODE ENFORCEMENT TYPICALLY IS WILLING TO BE REASONABLE WHEN THINGS ARE -- WHEN AN APPLICANT OR SOMEONE IS HAVING TO BRING INTO COMPLIANCE -- ETIQUETTE TYPICAL TIME FRAME WOULD START IN ABOUT 30 DAYS AND OF COURSE AS LONG AS THEY WERE MAKING ADEQUATE PROGRESS, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY ALONG WITH THAT, THAT WOULD BE TYPICAL. >> THANK YOU. >> PROCEED FORWARD TO THE VOTE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I WILL ABSTAIN. >> A VOTE OF YES IS A VOTE FOR DENIAL, IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVE FIVE VOTES TO DENY AND ONE ABSTENTION. MR. SYKES YOUR REQUEST IS DENIED FROM OUR BOARD, YOU OF COURSE HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THAT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND JACOB WOULD BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS BETTER. >> WITHIN 30 DAYS. >> THERE IS A STATUTORY TIME LIMIT ON HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO APPLY YOUR APPEAL. SPEAK ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING. [2. MAJMOD 2026-07 Our Lady Star of the Sea PUD. Request for a Major Modification to the Our Lady Star of the Sea PUD (Ordinance 2011-30, as amended) to allow for the redevelopment of the administrative building, school, faith formation building and other uses on the campus of the existing Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Church, specifically located at 545 A1A N.] WE WILL MOVE ONTO THE SECOND ITEM ON THE LIST. 2026 -- ZERO SEVEN, OUR LADY STAR OF THE SEA, ABOUT WITH M MR. PATTON. >> I DID CHAT WITH AMY SMITH I THINK IT WAS LAST THURSDAY ASKING IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS IN MY SUBMISSION, I DID TODAY DRIVE TO THE PROPERTY AND REFRESH MY MEMORY OF IT. BOTH BY WHAT TWO LITTLE STARS PRESCHOOL AND MY WIFE TAUGHT THERE. >> I DID SPEAK WITH AVERY SMITH FRIDAY OR SATURDAY I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE IT WAS. I DRIVE BY THE PROPERTY EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE. >> I'VE HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE APPLICANT, AND AGAIN LIKE MR. GREEN I DRIVE BY IT ALL THE TIME. >> NO CONTACT I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. >> I DID NOT VISIT THE SITE BECAUSE OUR KIDS HAVE BEEN GOING THERE FOREVER AND WE HAD OUR EAGLE SCOUT CEREMONY IN 2010 THERE. [00:45:01] I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD PLUG THEIR EFFORTS, THANK YOU. >> I SPOKE WITH AVERY SMITH, I HAVE VISITED THE SITE AND ATTENDED SERVICES AT THE CHURCH BEFORE, PLEASE COME ON UP. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS, I ALWAYS MAKE A PRACTICE TO CALL BOARD MEMBERS AND I PROMISE YOU THAT I DID LEAVE MESSAGES FOR THE PHONE NUMBERS THAT WERE ON THE ROSTER. I APOLOGIZE IF HE DID NOT GET MY MESSAGES AND I WILL TRY BETTER NEXT TIME. JUST BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THIS APPLICATION IS THE DIOCESE OF ST. AUGUSTINE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE HOUR LADY STAR CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE PRIVATE AE GROUP IS A CIVIL ENGINEER WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH OWNER GROUP AND PRIME IF YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS OR SPIRITUAL QUESTION STIRRING OUR PRESENTATION TODAY. WE ALL HAVE SPIRITUAL QUESTIONS PROBABLY MORE -- WE NEED TO ASK MORE THAN WE DO. JUST BY WAY OF LOCATION, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 545 NORTH 81 A ON THE EAST SIDE OF A ONE A. THE FUTURE LAND DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL SEE WHICH DOES ALLOW CHURCHES AND THE ZONING IS PUD. THAT'S THE EXISTING ZONING TODAY SO THIS APPLICATION IS TO MODIFY THE EXISTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. ESSENTIALLY THIS APPLICATION ALLOWS OUR LADY STAR OF THE SIEGE CATHOLIC CHURCH TO REDEVELOP THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, THE WORD SCHOOL SHOULD ACTUALLY BE "CHILD CARE CENTER" BECAUSE IT IS FOR YOUNGER CHILDREN, NOT A FULL SCHOOLS THAT IS AN ERROR ON MY PART AND I APOLOGIZE. AND THE FAITH FORMATION BUILDING AND USES ON THE EXISTING CAMPUS OF THE HOUR LADY STAR OF THE SEA CATHOLIC CHURCH. MR. STEPHEN WHO WROTE THE STAFF REPORT CORRECTLY NOTED WE DID INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE BEYOND THIS NEW BUILDING IN CASE THE SANCTUARY OR OTHER BUILDINGS WITHIN THE CAMPUS NEED TO BE ENLARGED OR REBUILT IN THE FUTURE SO THAT THE CHURCH WOULD NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER PUD MODIFICATION APPLICATION. THIS APPLICATION IS THE BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY ARE WITHIN ABOUT 52 OR 53% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE INCLUDING THE PARKING, MAXIMUM ALLOWED IN PONTE VEDRA IS 65%. THAT WAS WELL BELOW EVEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE SITE IS WELL BELOW THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS AND PONTE VEDRA, JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT. HERE ARE SOME RENDERINGS, THEY ARE BEAUTIFUL OF THE BUILDINGS, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND EDUCATION BUILDING. AGAIN FROM ANOTHER ANGLE, AGAIN FROM ANOTHER ANGLE. I BELIEVE THE PONTE VEDRA ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS APPROVED ALL OF THE VENDOR RINGS BECAUSE THE ARCHITECTURE IS SUBJECT TO THEIR PURVIEW. THEY HAVE APPROVED THE APPLICATION FOR ARCHITECTURE AND THAT IS SUBJECT TO A DOOR BOARD AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION APPROVING THIS MODIFICATION. IT'S MOVING A LITTLE SLOWLY. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO BUILDING SETBACKS, HEIGHT, OR BUFFERS, THE PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED BASED ON A SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS THAT WAS PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION AND NO ADDITIONAL WAIVERS TO THE PUD. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH PUD'S AND ST. JOHNS COUNTY IF YOU DON'T REQUIRE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS YOU HAVE TO ASK FOR THE WAIVER, WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANY NEW WAIVERS AND IN FACT WE REMOVED THE WAIVER ASKING TO GO OVER 65% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO BECAUSE WE DID NOT NEED IT. SO WE ARE DOWN ONE WAIVER WHICH IS GOOD TO. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PUD MODIFICATION APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND WE ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ARE THE PUBLIC MAY HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THAT MIGHT BE THE SHORTEST PRESENTATION I'VE EVER SEEN OUT OF YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> NOT 12 HOURS. [LAUGHTER] I'M GOOD OPENED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS DO WE HAVE ANYONE HERE TO COMMENT ON 2026 -- ZERO SEVEN. [00:50:02] SINGH ON I WANT TO OPEN UP TO BOARD QUESTIONS FOR THE PRESENTER, DO I HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? SEEING NOBODY ELSE, DOES THE PUD RESTRICTING OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE OR JUST THE IMPACT SQUARE FOOTAGE, SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE GROUND. WOULD TWO-STORY BE ALLOWED LATER? >> 35 FEET WOULD BE ALLOWED AS LONG AS THEY CAN BE WITHIN -- ONE OF THE SLIDES I SKIPPED OVER IT INCLUDES THE MASTER DEVELOPER AND PLAN. IS THE SAME BUILDING HEIGHTS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE EXISTING PUD TH THERE, THEY ARE NOT CHANGING. >> THIS IS A NONPUD QUESTION, WHAT IS THE TIMELINE OF CONSTRUCTION? 'S FIGURE I'M GOING TO INTRODUCE YOU TO VICTOR WHO IS GOING TO COME UP THAT SHE IS THE MAN A CHARGE OF CONSTRUCTION AND HE IS GOING TO GO VERY QUICKLY BECAUSE HE NEEDS TO BE OPEN FOR THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR. >> I'M A PARISHIONER -- I LIVE AT ONE OH SEVEN NORTH BEACH FLORIDA PEAK OF THE TIMELINE IS EXCRUCIATING BECAUSE WE WANT TO OPEN SCHOOL OR IN THIS CASE EARLY LEARNING CENTER NEXT AUGUST. OUR GOAL IS TO START THE PROCESS EXTREMELY FAST AFTER THE MEETING IF POSSIBLE AND BE COMPLETED BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR. SEPTEMBER. THAT'S OUR GOAL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> DO I HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE YOU MOVING BUT I DON'T HAVE A REQUEST FOR YOU. IT COULD BE ME COME I WANT YOU KNOW -- IT'S OUT OF MY SCREEN. >> I WILL TALK LOUDLY. THE EDUCATIONAL BUILDING, HOW LONG IS THAT GOING TO BE FROM THE DIMENSION? SPEAK I'M GOING TO ASK RICK WELLS TO COME UP AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION, HE'S THE ENGINEER. >> I'M RICK WELCH WITH PRIME ENGINEERING, I DON'T THE EXACT LENGTH OF IT, YOU MADE THE ASK ON THE FRONTAGE, THAT SPEAKS TO THE FRONTAGE ALONG A1A TO BREAK IT UP AS FAR AS I KNOW. THIS BUILDING JOGS BACK AND FORTH BUT IT EXCEEDS -- ONE SOLID WALL WITHOUT ANY UNDULATION I BELIEVE IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT 300 FEET I KNOW THE SANCTUARY IS RIGHT AT THE LIMIT JUST BELOW IT. >> WE'VE HAD A REQUIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF BUILDINGS, BUILDING CANNOT EXCEED IT -- 35? >> I'M GOING TO PULL UP THAT LANGUAGE SHORTLY. GENERALLY SPEAKING IT IS ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING PARALLEL TO THE ROADWAY. I WILL CLARIFY, THIS REMINDS ME WE DID ONE FOR CHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH EIGHT YEARS AGO, A TWO-STORY BUILDING. THANK YOU. >> ANY FURTHER I FEEL LIKE WE LEFT THE FATHER OUT. [LAUGHTER] SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE BOARD OF QUESTIONS AND ASK IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TWO. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE M.O. JAY 2026, FINDING OF FACT PROVIDED BY THE STAFF REPORT. >> MOTION, SECOND -- THERE YOU GO. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. MOTION CARRIES? [00:55:04] >> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR THE TIME. [3. LDCA 2026-04 PVZDR Amendment – Lot Coverage Allowance for Swimming Pools. The Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board (PVZAB) requested changes to the Ponte Vedra Zoning District (PVZDR) at their regularly scheduled meeting on April 6th, 2026, regarding an additional Lot Coverage allowance for properties 8,000 square feet or less in area, exclusively for the addition of residential swimming pools. The proposed lot coverage change would increase the pervious area on Lots 8,000 square feet or less from forty (40) percent to forty-four (44) percent, with the additional allowance only to be used for swimming pools. ] >> THANK YOU. WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM LDC 82026 -- ZERO FOUR AMENDMENT, LOT COVERAGE ALLOW HIM FOR SWIMMING POOLS, JACOB ARE YOU DOING THIS? >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. JACOB SMITH PRESENT A CONTENT ITEM NUMBER THREE, THIS IS AN ITEM WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY. IT IS A COMMITMENT TO THE CODE TO ADD ISR PROVISION FOR SOME OF THE SMALLER LOTS IN PONTE VEDRA, SPECIFICALLY IT IS TO PROVIDE 4% ADDITIONAL ISR FOR LOTS 8,000 SQUARE FEET OR LESS IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. I'M GOOD TO BRING THIS ONE RIGHT UP HERE. I HAD OUR GIS TEAM ANALYZE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND SO THE MAP UP AHEAD HERE, IT'S OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE STRETCHED OUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE DISTRICT IS. EACH LITTLE BLACK RECTANGLE INDICATES A LOT THAT IS 8,000 SQUARE FEET OR LESS WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICT. THERE ARE 177 OF THEM. LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS I HAD AN ISSUE WHERE WE ORIGINALLY HAD INTENDED TO USE THE MINIMUM ZONING LOT SIZE WHICH IS 7200 SQUARE FEET -- IT DIDN'T CAPTURE A LOT OF LOTS BECAUSE A LOT OF LOTS ARE JUST SLIGHTLY BIGGER THAN 7200 SQUARE FEET. WHEN I HAD GIS DO THIS ANALYSIS, THEY DID PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS FROM 7200, 7300, 7400 ALL THE WAY UP TO 8,000 AND IT IS A BIT OF A LINEAR -- THERE WAS ABOUT 100, 105 I BELIEVE AT 7200, A LINEAR RELATIONSHIP EVERY 100 SQUARE FEET AS WE ADD UP TO 8,000. I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP IT IS FAIRLY CONSISTENT AS WE GO. 8,000 DID SEEM TO BE A NUMBER THAT SATISFIED CAPTURING THE MAJORITY OF THESE VERY SMALL LOTS WHILE NOT JUST GRABBING EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING IN PONTE VEDRA. THAT BEING SAID THERE WAS ONE LAST LITTLE ANALYSIS I DID TO GIVE AN IDEA OF WHAT -- THE AMOUNT OF AREA THIS CREATES. WHEN WE TAKE 4% OF ALL 177 LOTS AT A MAXIMUM 8,000 SQUARE FEET YOU END UP WITH APPROXIMATELY 50 -- 56,000 SQUARE FEET OF SURFACE AREA. THAT IS ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT TO 1.2 ACRES OR THE DEVELOPMENTAL AREA ALLOCATED TO THE R1B LOTS ABOUT SIX HOMES WORTH OF DEVELOPMENT. I WANT TO THROW THOSE NUMBERS OUT THERE I WANT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE IT LEVEL OF RELATIONSHIP AND HOW MUCH AREA WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. 1.2 ACRES OF SPACE IF EVERY SINGLE 177 HOME USED EVERY BIT OF THE 4% ALLOTMENT TO THEIR POOLS. THAT BEING SAID I'M HAPPY TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD AND OTHERWISE WOULD ASK FOR A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THIS ITEM BE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> THANKS FOR THE PERSPECTIVE OF PUTTING IT IN SPATIAL. TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER'S IN AT ALL IF THEY FEEL LIKE HAVING THAT 1.2 ACRES DEVELOPED WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE DRAINAGE? THERE IS A DRAINAGE ISSUE BUT THERE ISN'T ANY DATA TO SUPPORT THAT THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO AT LEAST THE LAST TIME WE SPOKE TO THE ENGINEERS THAT THAT IS CAUSING IT. >> I HAVE WESLEY HERE, IF SHE WANTS TO SHARE ANY THOUGHTS. BASED ON A LOT OF THIS CONVERSATION THAT THE ENGINEERING TEAM CERTAINLY ACCEPTS THAT POOLS HOLD A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WATER, EVEN WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 1.2 ACRES OF EVERY EURO WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT DISCARDING ALL OF THAT WATER. IN FACT WE ARE PROBABLY DISCARDING A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF IT IN A TYPICAL RAINSTORM. IT'S MOSTLY BEEN CAPTURED TO. THAT'S ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT TO BRING UP FOR ANYBODY LISTENING TO THIS. THIS IS ONLY FOR THE WATER AREA [01:00:04] FOR THE POOL. NOT EVEN THE COPING OR HARDSCAPE POOL DECK ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT IS NOT BEING ALLOWED UNDER THIS PROVISION, IT IS JUST FOR THE WATER AREA. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SPEAK I WAS JUST GOING TO CLARIFY ITS FOR THE WATER AREA, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. ONE INTERESTING THING IS THIS IS GOING TO ELIMINATE A LOT OF OUR WORK, WE DO ONE OF THESE PER YEAR REVIEWING VARIANCES FOR THIS. I'M EXCITED THIS IS FINALLY HAPPENING, THANK YOU. >> THIS MAY BE A DUMB QUESTION BUT I THOUGHT I WOULD ASK FOR A LIABILITY STANDPOINT. DOES THIS OPEN US UP TO ANYTHING THAT WE DENIED IN THE PAST THAT MADE ONE OF THESE RESIDENTS FALLING IN TO THIS AT ALL? >> DENIED BEING ABLE TO COME BACK AND DO IT NOW BUT WHAT YOU DID IN THE PAST THAT DOESN'T CREATE ANY LIABILITY TODAY IF YOU SAID NO TO SOMETHING ELSE LATER, IT COULD GO TO BCC, NO PROBLEM AT ALL, NO LIABILITY. >> THANK YOU. >> I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE BECAUSE I PICK A LOT OF US ARE IN AGREEMENT. DOES THIS ESTABLISH THE 8,000 SQUARE-FOOT LOT IS EFFECTIVELY A NONCONFORMING LOT TO THE AREA. DOES THIS CREATE A HARDSHIP BY DEFAULT -- DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I DON'T THINK IT DOES BECAUSE WE ARE ARGUING WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE THE OTHER PROBLEM. JUST SO I'M CLEAR I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M NOT STATING THIS IS A HARDSHIP SPECIFIC TO THE LOT SIZE. >> YOU ARE TAKING THIS OUT OF THE HARDSHIP ANALYSIS. WILL ESSENTIALLY YOU ARE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE TO USE ON THE 8-FOOT LOT THAT DOESN'T CREATE ANY ASSUMPTIONS THAT THE 8,000 SQUARE-FOOT LOT ARE SOMEHOW DEFICIENT. THIS ONE SPECIFIC THING YOU DON'T REQUIRE A HARDSHIP ANYMORE IN ORDER TO GET THIS ALLOTMENT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. THE OTHER COMMENT I HAD GOTTEN WAS YOU GUYS ARE DOING THIS NOW, I HAVE TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT I HAVE TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT FOR SOMETHING -- I'M SORRY THAT YOUR POOL WASN'T CONFORMING AND I DON'T LIKE IT BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A REASON WE SHOULDN'T DO A THING. IF WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER FOR THE FUTURE WHY NOT DO IT NOW? DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER BOARD COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. PATTON? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON THE MODIFICATIONS IS BEING PRESENTED CONFERENCE A PLAN. >> SECOND. >> THE CHAIR: MOTION AND SECOND. SIX PEOPLE, THE MOTION CARRIES. [LAUGHTER] DO I NEED IS ANYTHING ELSE, WE [Minutes for Board Approval: 06/01/2026 ] ARE GOOD? THE MINUTES FOR BOARD APPROVAL, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 1ST 2026? SEEING NONE I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD MINUTES. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD MINUTES. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> MOTION SECONDED. MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD MINUTES. >> WE NEED A VOICE VOTE? [01:05:02] >> BOARD MINUTES ARE APPROVED. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR US? >> NO STAFF REPORTS, I JUST WANT TO LET THE BOARD TO KNOW WE DO HAVE TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR SEPTEMBER 14TH. >> THE CHAIR: THANK YOU, SIR. DID WE REMOVE ANY? I GUESS THE POOLS WON'T COME ALONG FOR ANOTHER 3-4 MONTHS, DO WE REMOVE ANY ITEMS FROM OUR AGENDA WITH THAT VOTE? >> I DO NOT BELIEVE SO. >> I'M ALWAYS TRY TO GET OUT OF WORK. >> THAT ITEM WILL TRAVEL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THEY WILL HAVE TWO HEARINGS IN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER WITH THE DATES UPCOMING FOR THAT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> DO WE HAVE ANY APPLICANTS? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY APPLICANTS FOR THE PONTE VEDRA ADJUSTMENT ABOARD. >> I HAVE TO ATTEND THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, RIGHT? >> YOU ARE STAYING. [LAUGHTER] >> I FORGOT THE ADDRESS -- >> IN OUR VERY UNOFFICIAL VOTE FOR A CASUAL I DON'T THINK WE PUT AN END DATE ON IT BUT DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT FOR US ON THE CASUAL DRESS? >> I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD AGREE ON A LOGO AND MONETIZE IT. [LAUGHTER] >> I THINK ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS ONE AND I'M SURE ANYTHING WE CAN MONETIZE ST. JOHNS COUNTY WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT OUR CONTRIBUTIONS. WE HAVE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE BOARD? >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING, JUST A MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> THE CHAIR: DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> THE CHAIR: VOICE * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.