[ Call meeting to order]
[00:00:05]
>> THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY BOARD WILL NOW
[Pledge of Allegiance]
COME TO ORDER. WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE AND JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLICAN FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY ANDJUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THANK YOU.
MS. BEAGLE WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT.
>> YES, SIR. SHOULD HAVE MADE MY CHAIR TALLER SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE ME OUT THERE.
THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CON OCCURRENCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW.
THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE AGENCY'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AND BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING. 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 IDENTIY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND THEN STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY.
IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT THE TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT AND TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MANNER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VER BADE M RECORD IS MADE.
THAT INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND THE EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE CLERK FOR INCLUSION INTO THE RECORD.
THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARD AGENCY COMMITTEE OR THE COUNTY IN REVIEW OF APPEAL RELATING TO THEM. AGENCY MEMBERS ARE REMINDED AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER THEY HAD COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE AGENCY. IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE AGENCY MEMBER SHOULD THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED AND THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION.
CIVILITY CLAUSE: WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE. WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES AND WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS.
[PZA Meeting Minutes for Agency Approval: 08/20/2026 and 09/17/2026]
>> THANK YOU MS. SPEGAL. WE HAVE TWO SETS OF MINUTES TO APPROVE OR MODIFY OR CORRECT. THE FIRST ONE IS AUGUST 20TH.
AND SO ANY -- MS. SPIEGEL. LET ME TURN YOUR MIC BACK ON,
SORRY. >> THIS IS A PRETTY SMALL CORRECTION, BUT ITEM NUMBER 3, THE MOTION SAYS, IT PASSES 60 AND THEN SAYS IN PARENTHESES MOTION PASSES 4.
2. I THINK THE MOTION PASSES 6-0 IS AN ERROR AND SHOULD BE STRICKEN. SO I MAKE A MOTION.
WOULD THAT CHANGE TO ACCEPT? >> ACCEPT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, WE'LL DO A VOICE VOTE.
NEXT WEAPON THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 17TH MEETING.
ANY CORRECTIONS OR COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ON THAT? ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANOTHER VOICE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> OPPOSED? THAT PASSES AS WELL. BEFORE WE GET TO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, I THINK MANY OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW THAT GREG MATAVEENA -- I WROTE SOMETHING DOWN -- WHO IS SITTING UP HERE, THIS IS HIS LAST MEETING. HE SERVED EIGHT YEARS.
THAT'S TWO FOUR-YEAR TERMS, THAT'S ALL THAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO SERVE, AND FOR MOST OF US THAT'S PLENTY.
BELIEVE ME. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK GREG FOR HIS MANY YEARS OF SERVICE TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY ON THE PZA, AND I KNOW THAT I WILL BE JOINED BY ALL THE PZA MEMBERS IN WISHING HIM WELL AND THAT WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE ON THIS BOARD OVER THE PAST EIGHT YEARS.
I SHOULDN'T HAVE WRITTEN THIS OUT BECAUSE NOW I'M LOOKING AN IT. WE DIDN'T ALWAYS AGREE, BUT I COULD UNDERSTAND HIS VIEWPOINTS AND I COULD . . . I COULD RESPECT HIS DECISIONS. BUT WE DID -- WE HAD A VERY GOOD BOARD. AS I SAID, WE DIDN'T ALWAYS
[00:05:02]
AGREE. I DIDN'T NECESSARILY ALWAYS AGREE WITH GREG, BUT UNDERSTOOD WHERE HE WAS COMING FROM AND I COULD RESPECT HIS VIEWPOINTS AND JUDGMENT AND HE ALWAYS GAVE SOUND REASONING FOR WHAT HE VOTED.SO IT'S BEEN, FOR ME, A GREAT EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE TO SERVE WITH GREG, AND HE WILL BE MISSED AND I'M SURE WE ALL WISH HIM WELL AND I THINK MRS. SPIEGEL HAS SOMETHING TO GIVE HIM ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE BOARD. GATHERING, WE WISH YOU LOTS OF LOTS. THANK YOU.
[Public Comments]
NOW FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA, OR THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, YOU ARE FREE TO DO SO, BUT IF YOU SPEAK TO AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, WHEN THAT ITEM COMES UP, YOU'LL NO LONGER BE ACCORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. SO IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW ON THAT ITEM, FINE. IF YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THAT ITEM COMES UP, I GUARANTEE YOU, YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON THAT ITEM. WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK UNOW ON AN ITEM. SO YOU UNDERSTAND IF IT'S ON THE AGENDA, YOU WON'T GET TO SPEAK LATER? CORRECT? ALL RIGHT.STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES TO TELL US WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND. THANK YOU.
>> HI, I'M VANESSA SIZEMORE. 426 BANK OFCKER DRIVE.
THE ITEM IS AGENDA NUMBER 10 AND 11.
IT IS THE REZONING FOR PROPERTY THAT WAS PURCHASED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO BY FREE COVE BAPTIST WHICH NOW ARE ASKING FOR ABOUT NINE AND A HALF ACRES TO BE SUBDIVIDED AND REZONED INTO COMMERCIAL GENERAL. AND THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THAT ACCORDING TO A MEETING THAT WE RECENTLY HAD, WE HAD A MAP WHERE IT HAS THE PROPERTY DIVIDED OUT INTO TWO PARCELS, EAST AND WEST, AND BOTH OF THOSE PARCELS ARE BETWEEN THE U-HAUL AND WARDS CREEK SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS WHERE I LIVE.
AND THE CONCERN IS THAT THAT PORTION OF 16A AS WELL AS ANYTHING FURTHER WEST IS ALL TWO-LANE, AND WE HAVE A HARD TIME TURNING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CURRENTLY BECAUSE OF ALL THE TRAFFIC. THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC FROM U-HAUL, THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC COMING DOWN -- UP AND DOWN 16A THAT'S ADDITIONAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE BEING BUILT AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED -- ACTUALLY NOT PROPOSED, BUT THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE NEW HIGHWAY THAT'S COMING IN THROUGH THAT AREA.
WITH ONLY BEING TWO LANES, WE HAVE A VERY SHORT TURN LANE INTO WARD'S CREEK, BUT I FEAR EVERY TIME I TURN INTO MY SUBDIVISION BECAUSE THE CARS ARE JUST BARRELLING UP AND DOWN THAT ROAD BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN USED TO IT BEING A COUNTY ROAD AND NOT MUCH TRAFFIC. WELL, NOW THAT WE HAVE THE U-HAUL THERE AND THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC, AND WITH THIS PROPOSAL FOR THE REZONING, THAT'S GOING TO CREATE EVEN MORE TRAFFIC AND THEN ADD IN THE ALREADY APPROVED AREA ON THE -- I BELIEVE IT'S THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF 16A AND 16 BY SILVER LEAF, WHICH IS WHERE THE HARRIS TEATER WAS GOING TO GO THAT WAS APPROVED. THAT ENTIRE CORNER HAS ALREADY BEEN REZONED AND PLANS TO BE BUILT.
WE CAN'T SUSTAIN THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.
SO MY CONCERN IS TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE NOT APPROVE THAT REZONING UNTIL WE GET ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S SUFFICIENT.
WE HAVE DUMP TRUCKS UP AND DOWN THAT ROAD ALL THE TIME THAT NEVER SLOW DOWN WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO TURN INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AS WELL AS COMING OUT.
IT IS A NIGHTMARE. I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE WHEN THAT SUBDIVISION -- OR WHEN THAT SHOPPING CENTRE IS BUILT OUT ACROSS THE STREET.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK FOR YOU TO NOT APPROVE THAT FOR COMMERCIAL
JUST YET. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
>> IS ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? >> MR. CHAIR BEFORE YOU CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, HOW ARE WE HANDLING AGENDA ITEM 1? THAT WAS A CONTINUANCE FROM THE LAST MEETING.
THERE'S AN ATTACHMENT THAT IS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED TO THIS BOARD. I DON'T KNOW IF THE BOARD FEELS
[00:10:05]
LIKE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES MORE PUBLIC COMMENT OR IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD, BUT I WOULD ADVISE YOU AT LEAST GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK DURING GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE TABLTTALK ON THE -- >> WELL, AFTER THE LAST MEETING AND AS WE WERE ADJOURNING, I ASK YOU AND JACOB WHAT I SHOULD DO ABOUT POTENTIAL PUBLIC COMMENT WHEN THIS CAME UP TODAY FOR -- IN ITS CONTINUANCE. YOU SAID IT WOULD BE UP TO ME WHETHER TO ALLOW PUBLIC COMMENT OR NOT GIVEN THERE'S NEW MATERIAL AND THERE ARE PEOPLE I RECOGNIZE THAT WERE HERE LAST TIME. I THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT AT THE TIME. SO AFTER BRAD WESTER SPEAKS, I'M IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT.
I THINK THAT'S ONLY FAIR. >> OKAY.
[1. MAJMOD 2025-12 FL St. Augustine Inman PUD. Request for a Major Modification to the Last Mile Distribution Facility PUD (Ord. 2020-43, as amended) to allow up to 250,000 square feet of light industrial/flex warehousing uses; rename the PUD to FL St. Augustine Inman; clarify permitted uses; restate building setbacks; reduce maximum building heights; add a right-of-way and increase access points; update phasing; and revise the Master Development Plan (MDP) Text and Map to reflect all proposed changes. The site is located at 3960 Inman Road. This item was heard at the 10/01/26 PZA meeting and continued to the 10/15/26 PZA meeting to allow for revisions to the list of permitted and prohibited uses and to incorporate buffering requirements. Attached, staff has provided the revised text, with the applicant’s changes since 10/01/26 highlighted for ease of review.]
>> OKAY. SO WE NEED EX PARTE ON ITEM 1 WHICH IS A MAJOR MODIFICATION, THE ENMAN ROAD PUD AND M
MR. WESTER IS GOING TO BE -- >> I'LL REMIND THE BOARD, THIS IS A CONTINUANCE OF THE LAST MEETING SO EVERYTHING THAT WAS PRESENTED AT THAT TIME LAST MEETING IS IN EVIDENCE ALREADY.
MR. WESTER DOES NOT NEED TO REPEAT ALL THOSE THINGS.
WE'RE POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT -- WE'RE AT THE SPOT NOW WHERE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT HIS NEWLY WILL THEN HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT E- AND THEN AFTERWARDS YOU'LL DELIBERATE AND VOTE.
BUT HE DOESN'T NEED TO PRESENT EVERYTHING ELSE, IT'S ALREADY IN
THE RECORD. >> I BET HE'S GOING TO.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE IS OR NOT, BUT I'M SURE HE HAS A LOT TO SAY. MRS. SPIEGAL.
>> YES, SIR, I HAD 29 PLUS EMAILS, OPPOSITION WERE ON ALL OF THEM. DID ANOTHER SITE VISIT AND I SPOKE WITH RON AND FRANK FROM THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE
NUMBER 113. >> MR. LEBONOWSKY.
>> I HAD EIGHT PLUS EMAILS, ALSO VISITED THE SITE AGAIN AND SINCE THE LAST MEETING HAD DISCUSSION WITH RONALD FAIRCLAW.
I WAS NOT ABLE TO BE AT THE LAST MEETING, SO I MISSED THE RATHER LENGTHY DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION AND COMMENTS, BUT I TRIED TO CATCH UP BY TALKING -- LOOKING AT THE VIDEO, THE VERY LENGTHY VIDEO AND I ALSO VISITED THE SITE ON TUESDAY OF THIS WEEK. AND I HAVE ALSO RECEIVED A NUMBER OF EMAILS, LOOKS LIKE MOSTLY ARE -- MOST ARE ALL ARE FROM RESIDENTS AND HOMEOWNERS IN THE TUSCANY VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
>> YES. I DID ANOTHER SITE VISIT, MET WITH CRAIG CUNNINGHAM AND ALSO HAVE QUITE AN EXTENSIVE LIST OF
>> YEAH, I HAVE A TEAMS CALL THIS MORNING TO GO OVER THE TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT WERE TAKEN WITH JACK FROM KIMLY HORN AND BRAD WAS ON AND THE OWNERS WERE ON.
SO I LEARNED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTIONS
I ALSO HAD A SERIES OF LETTERS -- OR EMAILS, EIGHT OR NINE OR SO, FROM RESIDENTS IN TUSCANY VILLAGE AND ELSEWHERE OUT THAT WAY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC PRIMARILY, SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. SO -- AND I HOPE BRAD, THE FLOOR WILL BE YOURS IN A SECOND AND YOU'RE GOING TO GO OVER THE TRAFFIC NUMBERS. THE FLOOR IS YOURS, SIR.
>> BRAD WESTER, 1 INDEPENDENT DRIVE, SUITE 1200 JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA. REPRESENTING THE MAJOR MODIFICATION. AT THE LAST -- BY THE WAY, THANK ON PZA. BIG SHOES TO FILL.
AND I MEAN THIS, YOU'RE AN ASSET TO THE COUNTY, YOU REALLY ARE AND YOUR EXPERTISE AND GUIDANCE AND YOU KNOW WE DIDN'T ALWAYS AGREE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DEBATE.
AND ODDLY ENOUGH, THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY, IS BECAUSE YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS, AND AS THE BOARD GENERALLY KNOWS I FOLLOW THROUGH IN EVERYTHING I COME HERE TO DO, INCLUDING OUTREACH. SO WITH THIS ONE, WE HAD A CONTINUATION ON REALLY TWO SPECIFIC ITEMS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS TODAY.
ONE WAS THE LIMITATION OF USES ON THE -- IN THE MAJOR MODIFICATION. AS YOU KNOW, THE MAJOR MOD HAD INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AND BUSINESS PART TYPE USES BUT THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS THAT THIS MIGHT BE ANOTHER AMAZON FACILITY OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT HAS MORE INTENSIVE USES.
[00:15:04]
SO WHAT WE'VE DONE, WE'VE ADDED 42 ITEMS TO THE LIST OF USES THAT WILL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THIS PUD.AND I WILL PRESENT THOSE. I HAVE A VERY SHORT PRESENTATION, ONLY REGARDING THE MATTERS THAT WE DISCUSSED PER THIS CONTINUANCE. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS THE TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF BOTH, YOU KNOW, THE OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE AND OUTLET MALL AND THEN ALSO INMAN ON STATE ROAD 16. I HAD THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND WE CAN DISCUSS THE FINDINGS FROM THEIR ADDITIONAL STUDY THEY DID IN THE FIELD, BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO RIGHT NOW IS JUST GO OVER -- YOU GUYS HAVE A COPY OF THIS, THIS WAS ALSO SENT TO THE COUNTY. BUT HIGHLIGHTED THERE ARE THE LIST OF ESSENTIALLY PROHIBITED USES IN THIS BUSINESS PARK, AND YOU SEE I THINK THEY ADEQUATELY ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE RESIDENTS AND WHAT COULD OR COULDN'T BE THERE.
AND I'LL RUN THROUGH THE LIST. RESTAURANTS, RETAIL SALES, BREW PUBS, PSYCHICS, ASTOLGSS, PALMISTS, FINANCIAL %-P CREMATORIUMS AND MORATORIUMS AND THE LIKE, CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS, CAR WASH, OIL CHANGE FACILITIES, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES, ADULT AMUSEMENT PARKS.
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND RENTAL FACILITIES, LARGE SCALE DISCOUNT CENTRES, SUPER CENTRES, BIG BOX RETAILERS, OUTDOOR PLANT, GARDEN CENTRES, VOCATIONAL TRADE SCHOOLS.
AGRICULTURAL STANDS, ARENAS AND RODEOS, KENNELS, STORAGE AND GARBAGE HAULERS, FLEE MARKETS, TRUCK STOPS, HOTELS, MOTELS, VEGETABLE FOOD PROCESSING, LUMBERYARDS, BIO MASS AND TRANSFER FACILITIES, NEWSPAPER PRINTING, OPERATIONAL DISTRIBUTION, VEHICLE RECYCLING FACILITIES, COMPOSTING YARD WASTE FACILITIES, OUTDOOR SEASONAL SALES, ANY USE EMITTING NOXIOUS ODORS. DATA CENTRES, THAT'S A HOT TOPIC RIGHT NOW. LIFESTYLE AUCTION FACILITIES, AIRPORT HELIPADS, ELECTRIC SUBSTATIONS, PRINTING, RACETRACKS, INCLUDING AUTO, DOG, CART, HORSE, PARAMUTUAL PERMIT HOLDERS AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL UES.
THAT'S 42 USES. EXTENSIVE LIST OF USES.
WE STATED ON THE RECORD WHAT THIS BUSINESS PARK WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE FLEX USES AND ABILITY TO SERVE THE LOCAL MARKET AND POTENTIALLY GROW NATIONAL RETAILERS, BUSINESS PARK USERS AS WELL. SO I THINK THESE 42 ITEMS ARE BASICALLY A -- REALLY WHAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS WERE AFTER TO BUCK THE NARRATIVE THAT THIS IS AMAZON PART 2, WHICH IT ISN'T.
IN SOME OF THE BIG BOX RETAILER COMPONENTS, SOME OF THE BIG HEAVY NOXIOUS OUTDOOR STUFF. THAT'S LISTED IN THE 42 USE.
THE OTHER THING WE SAID WE'D ADD ARE SIGNS TO BE PROVIDED ON THE PROPERTY PROHIBITING ANY BUSINESS-RELATED VEHICLE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC ON OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE AND TO ONLY USE ENMAN. THAT'S SPECIFIC TO THE LOGISTICS WOULD BE USING THIS BUSINESS PARK, ESSENTIALLY PROHIBITING THEM FROM USING OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE.
AND THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC.
THE OTHER THING WE'VE ADDED IS AN ENHANCED LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH ADDITIONAL TREES AND SHRUBS BEYOND THE MINIMUM STANDARD IN THE BUTTED. WHERE WE PROVIDED ALONG THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE BOUNDARY ALONG ENMAN ROAD.
REALLY IT'S ANYTHING THAT IS FLANKING THE RESIDENTIAL AREA ALONG THE ROAD WILL HAVE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING TO IT, TO PROVIDE MORE SCREENING AND PROTECTION AGAINST THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. SO THOSE ARE SOME ASPECTS THAT WE WERE CHARGED WITH. I DO WANT TO BRING JACK UP, WE HAD KIMBERLEY HORN WHO IS THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER GO OUT THERE AND THEY WENT THERE AND STUDIED THE INTERSECTIONS THAT WERE A DISCUSSION POINT LAST TIME. AND WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH MR. MATAVENO THIS MORNING AND I'D LIKE FOR MR. HALSBERG TO GO THROUGH THE FINDINGS ON THOSE INTERSECTION AREAS, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THE TURNING LANES, THE CUEING, THE TRAFFIC LIGHT SCENARIOS FOR THE TRAFFIC FLOW, AND THEN DISCUSS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE IF THIS PROJECT WB TO BE APPROVED FOR OUR PART REGARDING ACCESS MANAGEMENT.
JACK? EACH SLIDE HAS ITS OWN INTERSECTION. THE NEXT SLIDE HAS THE OTHER
HEY, GOOD AFTERNOON. JACK HOLSBERG.
I'M WITH KIMLY HORN REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
[00:20:01]
YEAH, AS BRAD MENTIONED, ALTHOUGH THIS PROJECT BEING NON-RESIDENTIAL IS EXCEPT FROM CONCURRENCY, IT HAS TO MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS AND THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE THIS WEEK, ACTUALLY. SO ON TUESDAY, WE WENT OUT TO KIMLY HORN WENT OUT IN THE A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOURS TO BOTH OF THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ON STATE ROAD 16.SO THE ONE YOU'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS STATE ROAD 16 AT OUTLET MALL BOULEVARD, AND THE GOAL OF OUR OBSERVATIONS WAS TO DETERMINE THE INTERSECTION'S ABILITY TO ACCOMMODATE THE IN-BOUND AND OUT-BOUND TRAFFIC CREATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. SO AT THIS INTERSECTION DURING BOTH PEAK PERIODS, ALTHOUGH THERE IS CUE -- THERE'S LONG CUES ON THE STATE ROAD 16 THROUGH TRAFFIC, ALL IN-BOUND AND OUT-BOUND MOVEMENTS CLEARED ON -- THEY CLEARED ON THE GREEN SIGNAL EVERY SINGLE SIGNAL CYCLE DURING BOTH PEAK HOURS.
AND THEN HERE IS STATE ROAD 16 AT INMAN ROAD.
THIS ONE THERE WERE SOME INSTANCES IN WHICH CUES DID NOT CLEAR. DURING THE A.M. PEAK HOUR, THE EASTBOUND LEFT TURN MOVEMENT, WHICH IS THE MOVEMENT FROM STATE ROAD 16 ON TO ENMAN ROAD, THAT EITHER CLEARED ON THE PROTECTED GREEN OR ON THE FLASHING YELLOW ARROW THAT COMES THE NEXT PHASE AFTER THE PROTECTED GREEN. SO REALLY NO VEHICLES WERE OBSERVED WAITING MUCH MORE THAN ONE CYCLE.
AND THEN ON THE SOUTHBOUND APPROACH, WHICH WOULD BE THE ENMAN ROAD APPROACH, THAT CUE CLEARED ON GREEN ALMOST EVERY TIME OUT OF APPROXIMATELY 200 OR SO VEHICLES MAKING THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT. SO THAT'S THE EXITING LEFT TURN, ONLY SIX WERE OBSERVED -- SIX VEHICLES OUT OF 200 OBSERVED NOT MAKING IT THROUGH THE LIGHT ON GREEN.
SO APPROXIMATELY 97% OF THE OUT-BOUND INMAN ROAD TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING IS WAITING LESS THAN ONE CYCLE.
AND OUR PROJECTS PEAK -- THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE MORNING IS THE MAJORITY IS IN-BOUND, SO THAT WOULD BE THE LEFT TURNS IN, WHICH WE SAW CLEARING EVERY CYCLE.
AND THEY COULD USE EITHER THIS LEFT TURN TO COME IN OR THE LEFT TURN AT OUTLET MALL BOULEVARD TO COME IN.
AND THERE'S A VERY -- BECAUSE THE MAJORITY IS INBOUND, THERE'S NOT GUILTY A LOT OF OUT-BOUND TRAFFIC.
THERE WOULDN'T BE ADDED TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING TO THE INMAN ROAD APPROACH. DURING THE P.M. PEAK HOUR, AS I MENTIONED OUTLET MALL THAT WAS DURING THE P.M. PEAK HOUR, THAT WAS WHEN WE OBSERVED KIND OF THE ONLY PROBLEM, I WOULD SAY, WITH EITHER OF THE INTERSECTIONS. THE EASTBOUND LEFT, THE MOVEMENT FROM STATE ROAD 16 TURNING LEFT ON TO INMAN ROAD, THAT CUE ONLY CLEARS ON GREEN ABOUT HALF OF THE TIME, ABOUT HALF OF THE CYCLES WE OBSERVED. BECAUSE DURING THE P.M. OUR PROJECT TRAFFIC IS MOSTLY OUT BOUND, WE WOULD BE ADDING VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC TO THAT MOVEMENT, ESPECIAL LY GIVEN THE FACT THAT THEY CAN TURN LEFT AT OUTLET MALL BOULEVARD AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE IT THROUGH IN A SINGLE CYCLE.
SOUTHBOUND IN THE P.M. ON INMAN ROAD, THAT APPROACH CLEARED ON GREEN EVERY CYCLE. THAT IS THE MAJOR MOVEMENT THERE, OUT BOWED FOR THE PROJECT.
ALL THIS WILL HAVE TO BE FINALIZED IN A REPORT WHEN WE GO TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL, IT WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY, IF THERE'S ANY ADJUSTMENTS THEY REQUIRE, SUCH AS TURN LANE LENGTHENING, SIGNAL TIMING MODIFICATIONS, ET CETERA, WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THOSE AT SITE PLAN.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
>> COULD YOU SAY HOW LONG YOU WERE OUT THERE? FROM WHAT TIME TO WHAT TIME? AND ON WHAT DAY IT IS?
>> YES, BASED ON THE LAST COUNT WE HAD OUT THERE, THE A.M. PEAK HOUR WAS 7:15 TO 8:15. SO WE WERE OUT THERE EVERY SINGLE SIGNAL CYCLE -- WE STAYED A COUPLE OF EXTRA CYCLES.
WE STAYED FROM AROUND 7:10 TO 8:20.
AND THE PEAK P.M. WAS 4 O'CLOCK TO 5 O'CLOCK.
WE LOOKED AT EVERY SINGLE CYCLE DURING THOSE PEAK HOURS.
ONE OF US STANDING AT EACH INTERSECTION.
>> THAT WAS ON A SINGLE DAY. >> ON TUESDAY OF THIS WEEK, YES.
>> OKAY. >> CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE PEAK HOUR A.M. AND P.M., WHAT ARE THEY TYPICALLY ENTAILING . . .
>> YEAH, FROM CODE STANDPOINT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO EVALUATE TRAFFIC FOR THE PEAK HOUR BETWEEN 7 O'CLOCK AND 9 O'CLOCK A.M. AND BETWEEN 4 O'CLOCK AND 6 O'CLOCK P.M.
>> SO THIS GRAPHIC THAT YOU'RE SHOWING, THIS PHOTO, THIS IS TAKEN BY A DRONE THAT Y'ALL HAVE?
>> THIS IS FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY'S I-MAP WEBSITE.
>> WHEN WAS THAT TAKEN? >> IT WAS IN 2026.
[00:25:03]
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE -- >> A SATURDAY AT 5 A.M.? THAT REALLY -- I'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION A LOT, I'VE NEVER SEEN IT LOOK LIKE THAT. BUT THAT'S JUST ME.
THAT'S MY -- >> YOU CAN SEE HERE RECENTLY -- RECENTLY THE LANES AT OUTLET MALL BOULEVARD WERE CHANGED SO THEY NOW HAVE THREE WESTBOUND THROUGH LANES, YOU CAN SEE IT ON THAT IMAGE. JUST GOING BACK TO LAST YEAR, THEY ONLY HAD -- THAT OUTSIDE LANE WAS A RIGHT TURN LANE, IT WAS LEFT THROUGH, THROUGH RIGHT, THAT IS A VERY RECENT IMPROVEMENT THEY JUST MADE AND YOU CAN SEE IT IN THIS PHOTO.
>> OKAY. SO IT SEEMED TO ME YOU WERE REPRESENTING THESE PHOTOS AS PART OF YOUR SURVEY YOU JUST DID OUT THERE, PART OF YOUR STUDY, BUT THAT'S NOT CORRECT.
>> BRAD WESTER, WE DID NOT -- THESE ARE PHOTOS TAKEN FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, THESE ARE SCREEN SHOTS FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER FROM 2026. I DON'T THINK WE MADE ANY INFERENCE THAT THESE WERE SHOTS SPECIFIC TO KIMLY HORN'S TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT OUT THERE. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE
RECORD. >> YOU DIDN'T MAKE AN INFERENCE THAT IT WASN'T. I JUST TOOK THAT IT WAS WHEN YOU WERE GOING OVER THE STUDY, IT SEEMED LIKE THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE
-- >> NO, THIS WASN'T TO SHOW THE STACKING OF THE CARS BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT HE POINT D OUT, THE IMPROVEMENTS OUT THERE, THE AMOUNT OF TURN LANES AND THE 2026 VERSION OF AN AERIAL FOR THE DESCRIPTION OF EACH INTERSECTION. REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY CARS ARE STACKED UP AT THE INTERSECTIONS, THIS IS LITERALLY THE COUNTY DATA THAT WE USED FOR THIS. WE DIDN'T DO DRONE SHOTS OR AERIALS. WE USED OUR LICENCED TRAFFIC ENGINEER TO ASSESS THE REAL WORLD SCENARIOS BASED ON THE TRAFFIC ACCOUNTS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY TO TESTIFY
ABOUT. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
>> SO WITH THAT, BRAD WESTER, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I'M
MR. OLSON? >> YES, I DIDN'T OF COURSE GET A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS LAST MEETING, SO I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. ONE IS A GENERAL ONE ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE PROJECT, THE 250,000 SQUARE FEET, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL SLASH FLEX WAREHOUSING USE.
I WENT TO THE MOST CURRENT FIGURE OF TOTAL FLEX INDUSTRIAL SPACE IN OUR COUNTY THAT'S AVAILABLE, THAT'S 2025 -- FROM 2025 SURVEY IS 680,000 SQUARE FEET TOTAL IN OUR COUNTY.
SO THIS PROJECT ADDS 250, AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON THE 6TH OF THIS MONTH WERE ADVANCING ANOTHER PROJECT WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES CALLED PLATFORM PROJECT THAT ADDS ANOTHER 247,000 SQUARE FEET.
BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS AS WE UNDERSTAND ARE SPEC.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS HOW CAN WE BE ADDING ALMOST HALF A MILLION SQUARE FEET OF THIS TYPE OF USE TO A MARKET THAT'S ONLY NOW AT 680? I JUST -- THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S -- THAT SORT OF IS OUT OF SCALE, AND THAT IT . . . WHILE WE'RE NOT -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT HERE TO QUESTION THE DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS OF PROJECTS, SIMPLY THE PHYSICAL, I GUESS.
BUT IT DRAWS INTO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PHASING.
THE PHASING IS TO START CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A YEAR AND COMPLETE THE PROJECT WITHIN TWO YEARS.
I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT CAN HAPPEN AT THIS SCALE, THIS ADDITION, GIVEN WHAT THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SPACE IS CURRENTLY IN OUR COUNTY. I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE FRAMED THAT REALLY PRECISELY OR NOT, BUT ARE THERE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT?
ABOUT WHAT -- >> WELL, WE ADDRESSED MOST OF THAT AT THE LAST HEARING. I CAN'T ATTEST TO THE COUNTY'S SQUARE FOOTAGE OF INDUSTRIAL SPACE, WHAT I CAN ATTEST TO IS WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR DEVIATIONS TO ASK FOR MORE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR THIS PROJECT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AT HAND.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE OTHER INDUSTRIAL PARK YOU MENTIONED.
BUT I DO KNOW AND I DID PUT ON THE RECORD THE COUNTY SPECIFICALLY IS LOBBYING FOR INDUSTRIAL SPACE, AND THAT IS BY
[00:30:01]
WAY OF THEM HAVING AN ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE CALLED SPEC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES FOR SPECULATIVE SPACE.SO I WOULD THINK IF THAT WASN'T IN THE BOOKS AS AN OPPORTUNITY, AS FAR AS DUE PROCESS, TO SEEK INCENTIVES TO RELOCATE HERE, THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT IS A DERIVATIVE OF AS WHAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO, MAYBE TOO MUCH INDUSTRIAL SPACE IN THE BOOKS. THIS ONE, IT WAS A VERY SPECIFIC PROJECT, WHICH WAS THE AMAZON PROJECT, WHICH I WAS THE AGENT
>> AND IT WAS 125,000 SQUARE FEET, JUST UNDER ONE BUILDING.
BUT PROPORTIONATELY A LOT MORE PARKING.
THIS HAS HALF THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAN THE AMAZON SITE DID. AND IT'S JUST DOUBLE THE AMOUNT.
SO WE WENT FROM 125 TO 250, BUT IT STILL IS UNDER THE FAR RATIOS FOR THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR WAIVERS FROM THAT.
MIXED USE IS THE OVERLYING LAND USE ON THIS.
MIXED USE IS REALLY SET UP FOR THIS ENTIRE NODE TO BE DEVELOPED FROM ANYTHING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO INDUSTRIAL.
AND SO AS I SPOKE AT MY LAST PRESENTATION TWO WEEKS AGO, IT'S BEEN AN INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR FOR DECADES AND I SHOWED THAT THROUGH THE PROGRESSION OF THE VARIOUS USES ALONG INMAN ROAD.
SO THIS SITE, WHAT IT DOES, ALBEIT -- DON'T THINK OF IT AS 250 SQUARE FEET OF ONE BUILDING UNDER ONE ROOF.
IT'S MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. A LOT OF THOSE BUILDINGS ARE GENERALLY THE SAME SIZE. RELATIVELY SPEAKING.
FAIRLY EASY TO BUILD AND CONSTRUCTION WHEN THEY'RE LIKE THAT. AND SO I THINK THIS DEVELOPMENT IS RIGHT SIZED IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT -- THE CAMPUS THAT -- THE FOOTPRINT THAT IT'S ON IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT AREA, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY ALLOWS FLEX SPACE AS I DESCRIBED FOR NOT ONLY FOR LOCAL FOR MOM AND POP TO LOCAL ENTREPRENEURS UP TO POTENTIAL NATIONAL BRANDS. BUT 250,000 SQUARE FEET IS SOMETHING THAT MY TEAM HAS BROUGHT TO THIS, KNOWING THAT THE DEMAND IS THERE. AND WE TESTIFIED TO THAT AT THE LAST HEARING. 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF THIS TYPE OF SPACE IS SOMETHING THAT IS IN DEMAND IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND WE'RE HERE TO SERVE THE RESIDENTIAL AND ESSENTIALLY THE ROOFTOPS IN THE COMMUNITY. SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA. BUT THIS ONE IS ESSENTIALLY -- WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING MORE THAN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD ALLOW US IN TERMS OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE TYPE OF SPACE THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS BUSINESS PARK.
>> SO -- WELL, JUST AS AN -- THE FIGURE THAT I CITED OF 680,000 IN THE COUNTY IS -- THE SOURCE IS COSTAR, I BELIEVE THE COUNTY
USES THEM. >> I MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT MORE. WE HAVE THE MASTER DEVELOPER HERE FROM REALITY LINK AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT MORE WITH YOU. AND JUST OUT OF RESPECT OF YOU NOT BEING HERE AND M MR. MCNAUGHTON SPOKE AT THE LAST HEARING, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND HAVE HIM RETESTIFY.
>> WELL, I HEARD -- I'M SORRY, I DON'T WANT TO ADD A LOT OF LENGTH TO THIS OTHER THAN I DID VIEW THE ENTIRE VIDEO.
SO I CAUGHT YOUR PRESENTATION. I GUESS, IF YOU PRESENTED IT AT
THE LAST ONE. >> YES, SIR, I DID.
>> BUT GIVEN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, IS IT STILL THE PUD MODIFICATION PHASING PLAN TO START CONSTRUCTION WITHIN ONE YEAR AND TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN TWO YEARS? IS THAT STILL THE BUILD OUT ALL 250 SPEC . . . SPACE, BUILD ALL THE BUILDINGS, BUILD IT ALL OUT WITHIN TWO YEARS? THAT'S WHAT I READ IN THE MATERIALS WE HAVE.
>> MICHAEL L MCNAUGHTON, ST. JOHNS COUNTY RESIDENT, 113 REGENTS PLACE. YES, SIR, THAT IS THE TIMING, HOWEVER, THE TRUE TIME OF THE PROJECT WILL BE BASED ON
>> I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE, HERE IS A COMPETING PROJECT THAT YOU'VE SEEN ON COSTAR, THIS IS PART OF THE 600,000 SQUARE FEET OF INVENTORY. THE BUILDING YOU SEE HERE, THIS BUILDING WHICH IS ONLY ONE OF THREE BUILDINGS IN AND OF ITSELF IS OVER 200,000 SQUARE FEET IN ONE BUILDING.
WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS SOMETHING VASTLY DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE AMAZON FILING, WHICH IS SIX BUILDINGS WHERE THE AVERAGE TENANTS ARE BETWEEN 2500 AND 25,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS WILL BE AN INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY SMALL BUSINESS HUB FOR LOCAL ENTREPRENEURS AND BUSINESS OWNERS. THIS IS NOT A DISTRIBUTION FACILITY. IT IS NOT 24/7.
THERE WON'T BE 75 TANDEM TRUCKS BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND 4 A.M.
[00:35:01]
THIS IS SOMETHING DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT.AND THE ABSORPTION RATE WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY ARE HIGH AND THE DEMAND IS VERY HIGH FOR SPACES OF THIS SIZE.
THE PROJECTS AND THE STATISTICS THAT YOU SEE ARE VASTLY DIFFERENT TYPE PROJECTS. 35-FOOT CLEAR, 60 LOADING BAYS, ET CETERA. THIS IS SOMETHING VASTLY DIFFERENT.
NOT IN THE SAME CATEGORY OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING AS PERVASIVE AND
AVAILABLE IN THE MARKET TODAY. >> WELL, I'M SEEING BASICALLY SPEC FLEX OF -- IN THAT CATEGORY.
OKAY. WELL, APPRECIATE YOU EXPLAINING
THAT. >> AND I'LL ADD -- THIS IS BRAD WESTER -- I WILL ADD SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, THE 42 ITEMS THAT WE LISTED IN THE PROHIBITION LIST ARE LIKELY INCLUDED ON THAT SPACE YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
SO THOSE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MAJOR DISTRIBUTION LOGISTIC CENTRES ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. THAT'S WHY THIS ONE IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. WE FRAMED THAT AT THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING, THIS IS A BUSINESS PARK MORE COMMENSURATE WITH THE AREA. IT FITS THE AREA.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYMORE OF A DENSITY OR INTENSITY OR FAR INCREASE OR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO INCREASE ON THIS PROPERTY WHATSOEVER TO GET MORE THAN OUR EXPERTS HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT COULD BE ABSORBED IN THIS COMMUNITY.
>> WELL, YOU'RE DOUBLING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT OF COURSE AS YOU SAY -- AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT -- THE AMAZON PROJECT WAS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. THAT WAS A SINGLE CREDIT TENANT GOING IN AND NOT A SPEC PROJECT. NOT A FLEX PROJECT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT, BUT IT HAS MORE INTENSIVE -- OVERNIGHT 24/7 WITH ALMOST 800 PARKING SPACES FOR DELIVERY VANS, AND 18-WHEELERS FROM 10 P.M. TO 4 A.M. EVERY SINGLE NIGHT.
24/7. SO IT HAD A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TRAFFIC, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY MORE INTENSE THAN THIS IN TERMS OF ITS DISTRIBUTION ON THE NETWORKS, AND SO WE ACTUALLY HAD TO DO A NOISE STUDY PREVIOUSLY FOR AMAZON, AND IT WAS ALL UNDER ONE ROOF. SO THAT 125 LOOKED A LOT BIGGER THAN FIVE OR SIX BUILDINGS THAT ARE MADE UP OF 250.
>> OKAY, THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS -- RELATES TO THE USES THAT DIDN'T GO OFF THE LIST, AND HOW THEY RELATE TO THE IMAGERY AND PLANS THAT WERE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, AND I JUST DRAW ATTENTION TO SOME OF THESE RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND BOAT STORAGE. I MEAN, THAT WOULDN'T -- SOME OF THESE OUTDOOR STORAGE, STORAGE YARDS FOR EQUIPMENT, MACHINERY, VEHICLE REPAIR AND STORAGE, AND THEN IT HAS AN OPEN-ENDED BOTTOM ONE, OTHER SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR FACILITIES AND USES.
SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT I JUST READ DON'T MATCH UP WITH THE IMAGERY OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT WERE EXPLAINING THE PROJECT OF THE LAST HEARING. THAT'S JUST AN OBSERVATION, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS RELEVANT.
>> WELL, TO YOUR -- BRINGING THOSE POINTS UP, THE SITE PLAN -- WE ARE BOUND TO THE SITE PLAN PRESENTED HERE BECAUS THIS IS A PUD. THE PUD WILL BE IMPLEMENTED PER THE SITE PLAN. ANY OF THOSE USES WILL NOT BE ALONG THE FRONTAGE. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO ANY TYPE OF VEHICLE MODIFICATION LIKE A TINT SHOP OR A VEHICLE REPAIR OR ANYTHING ELSE, RV RELATED, THAT'S TYPICALLY IN THE BACK WHERE THERE'S A LARGER APRON AREA IN THE PAVEMENT. THAT'S INDICATED ON THE SITE
PLAN. >> SO THEY'RE STILL ON THE LIST AND STILL MAY BE PART OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT.
>> IT COULD BE, YES. >> COULD BE.
>> THAT'S WHY IT'S SPEC DEVELOPMENT ALLOWS THIS TYPE OF BREADTH OF USE, BUT REELIMINATED 42 POTENTIAL USES BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST ONE AND WE HUDDLED UP WITH OUR TEAM TO GO OVER THE LIST AND PROVIDE IT TO YOU TODAY.
>> MY ONE LAST QUESTION IS TRYING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, IF IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEEDED TO INMAN ROAD AND PART OF THE INMAN ROAD FRONTAGE THAT THIS PROJECT HAS IS UNPAVED AND ROUGH, AND PART WE HEARD MAY BE NEEDING TO HAVE A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF SERVICE WITH SIDEWALKS AND ALL THAT. HOW -- WHEN WILL THOSE NEEDS BE MORE SPECIFICALLY KNOWN? WHAT ARE THE COSTS? WHO FUNDS THEM? WHO CREATES -- WHO BUILDS THEM?
>> THAT WOULD BE DEVELOPER FUNDED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
THAT'S A PRIVATELY OWNED -- WHEN YOU TAKE INMAN NORTH OF THAT INTERSECTION OF OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE, THAT'S PRIVATELY OWNED.
THE FRATERNAL POLICE HAS RIGHTS OF ACCESS ALONG THAT 60-FOOT EASEMENT RIGHT NOW. THE PREVIOUS OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY DEDICATED THAT 60 FOOT ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THEM TO
[00:40:04]
ACCESS THE PROPERTY. THAT WILL REMAIN.IN FACT, WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP THAT INMAN ROAD TO COUNTY STANDARDS. IT WILL BE BUILT AND DEVELOPED TO THE MODERN COUNTY STANDARDS WITH THE ROADWAY PAVING SECTION, DRAINAGE, UTILITIES, AND THE LIKE, AND SIDEWALK RUNNING THE ENTIRE DISTANCE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THIS PROPERTY AND SO THAT WILL BE IMPROVED BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE DONE BEFORE WE COULD EVEN GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ON ANY PHASE OH OF
THIS PROJECT. >> YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION --
>> AND THAT'S DEVELOPER FUNDED. >> THAT'S PART OF THE PROJECT THAT WILL START CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A YEAR.
>> YES, INFRASTRUCTURE IS USUALLY FIRST.
>> ALONG THAT SAME -- WE DISCUSSED AN ENHANCED BUFFER.
WE'RE DOING AN ENHANCED BUFFER THAT'S ADJACENT TO ALL THE RESIDENTIAL. AS YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, THAT'S THEIR BACKYARD, THEY HAVE A FENCE AND SOME GREEN SPACE. SO WE ARE PUTTING AN ENHANCED BUFFER ON OUR PROPERTY ALONG INMAN ROAD ALONG THE ENTIRE ADJACENCY OF ANY OF THE RESIDENTIAL.
>> IF ANY OF THESE FINAL USES ARE -- THAT ARE REMAINING THAT I READ, SOME OF WHICH SEEM INCOMPATIBLE TO BE BASICALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM QUALITY RESIDENTIAL, THOSE WILL BE IN
THE BACK OF THE SITE? >> CORRECT.
>> THE LAND PLAN -- YOUR FINAL LAND PLAN WILL KEEP THAT --
>> THAT'S CORRECT, YES, SIR. THAT'S INDICATIVE OF THE AI PRAWN AND THE AREAS THAT ARE BUILT, BASICALLY THE PAVEMENT SECTIONS THAT ARE MORE INDECORATIVE OF MORE SPACE FOR THE OUTDOOR USES. AGAIN, THIS WILL BE BUFFERED, HEAVILY SCREENED, AND AGAIN, IT IS IN MIXED USE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT FURTHERS THE PLAN FOR THIS ENTIRE NODE. YOU CAN TAKE IT FROM THE 22,000 ACRE PROTECTED SWAMP AREA ALL THE WAY TO 95.
THIS ENTIRE AREA IS MIXED USE. IN THIS ENTIRE CORRIDOR, IT'S BEEN INDUSTRIAL FOR DECADES. SO THERE WAS OPPOSITION WHEN THIS THING WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE APARTMENTS.
THERE WAS OPPOSITION WHEN IT WAS GOING TO BE AN RV PARK, OPPOSITION WHEN IT WAS AMAZON, NOW THERE'S OPPOSITION THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER DEVELOPER WILLING TO GO AND REDO THE AMAZON PUD FOR SPEC SPACE TO FURTHER THE NEED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL IN ST.
JOHNS COUNTY. PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO GO ON THE ROADS AND GO TO WORK IN ANOTHER COUNTY.
THE COUNTY CAN ABSORB THE TAX REVENUE FROM THIS AND PEOPLE HAVE A PLACE TO LITERALLY -- THERE'S EMPLOYMENT AND SERVICES BUILT INTO THIS INDUSTRIAL PARK. IT'S NEEDED OR THEY WOULDN'T BE
SORRY TO TAKE UP SO MUCH TIME, MR. CHAIR, BUT THOSE WERE
QUESTIONS THAT I HAD. >> THAT'S FINE.
YOU'RE A BOARD MEMBER, YOU CAN ASK WHATEVER YOU WANT.
>> RIGHT. I KNOW YOU'VE SPENT TIME WITH THIS. OKAY.
>> THAT'S FINE. YOU'RE WELCOME TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS YOU LIKE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? MR. LEBONOWSKI.
>> I STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.
IDENTIFY BEEN OUT THERE -- I'VE BEEN OUT THERE WHEN 16 IS BACKED UP ALMOST TO THE DOLLAR STORE. THIS IS ALMOST EVERY EVENING.
SO I REALLY HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT TRAFFIC.
I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK -- STATE ROAD 16 AT 95 IS 184%.
IF YOU LOOK AT 16 ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 4 MILE, IT'S 179%.
NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN ANOTHER 500 VEHICLES A DAY JUST FOR THE EMPLOYEES. THE NUMBER YOU GAVE AT THE LAST MEETING WAS 250. SO THAT'S 500 MORE VEHICLES.
THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE WORK VEHICLES GOING IN AND OUT ALL DAY LONG OR IN THE EVENING COMING BACK AND THEN THE WORKERS ARE GOING HOME. IN THAT LIST, I ONLY SEE ONE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY THAT'S EXCLUDED.
DOES THAT EXCLUDE ALL DISTRIBUTION CENTRES? THEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING MORE TRAFFIC --
EXCLUDED FROM THIS. >> FROM THAT LIST?
SO THERE COULD BE OTHER DISTRIBUTION CENTRES GOING IN
THERE? >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT. THERE'S NO DISTRIBUTION CENTRES PLANNED FOR THIS. THIS -- AS MR. MCNAUGHTON JUST TESTIFIED THIS IS A BUSINESS PARK TO SERVE NOT ONLY MOM-AND-POP SHOPS BUT ALSO ALL THE WAY UP TO POTENTIAL FLEX SPACE FOR SOME NATIONAL BRANDS THAT NEED LARGER SPACE, ANYWHERE FROM 2500 TO HOWEVER LARGE THEY MAY NEED IT.
THAT'S THE POINT OF FLEX SPACE. NOT ONLY FOR THE ABILITY TO MOVE WALLS AND HAVE INTERIOR SPACE WALLS FLEXIBLE, BUT DOCKS IN THE BACK OR PARKING SPACES OR A PAVEMENT AREA THAT IS APRONED FR THEIR SPECIFIC USE. THIS IS -- AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A CLASS A FACILITY. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE BIG GIANT TILT WALL THAT WAS DESCRIBED AT IGP OR ANYTHING ELSE. THIS IS VERY MUCH COMMENSURATE WITH THE AREA IN TERMS OF ITS HEIGHT, THE CAMPUS THAT WE'VE
[00:45:03]
LAID OUT ON THIS PROPERTY, THAT'S NOT ONE BIG MOTHER SHIP OF SQUARE FOOTAGE UNDER ONE ROOF LIKE THE PREVIOUS 125 WAS.THIS IS SPREAD OUT. IT'S GOT THE CORRECT CIRCULATION INSIDE, BUFFERING, TRAFFIC IS -- AND I WOULD LIKE YOU TO COME UP AND EXPLAIN THE PERCENTAGES YOU JUST DESCRIBED.
BUT THIS ONE OVERARCHINGLY AS WE TESTIFIED LAST WEEK, THIS HAS LESS AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS THAN THE AMAZON THAT WAS APPROVED.
LESS. IT HAS MORE P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS BY A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT'S MORE CONVENTIONAL TYPE OF USE.
IT'S NOT AN OVERNIGHT USE. WITH THAT SAID, THAT -- MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION SHOULD BE THAT YOU GUYS CONSIDER THAT, THAT THIS IS MORE IN LINE WITH THE CONVENTIONAL USE OPPOSED TO THE AMAZON SITE PREVIOUSLY. BUT I'D LIKE JACK TO COME UP AND DESCRIBE THE PERCENTAGES AND REALLY WHAT THEY MEAN IN TERMS
OF THE TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC. >> YES, YOU MENTIONED THE 180-SOMETHING PERCENT. THAT IS THE TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC. THE PERCENTAGE THAT THE COUNTY LISTS FOR EXISTING IS AND THE 120%.
I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING THE COUNTY ALSO LISTS THAT THIS ROAD IS GROWING AT 2% PER YEAR, WHEREAS IT WOULD TAKE 50% GROWTH TO GET FROM 120 TO 180. IT'S HARD TO SEE THE ROAD EVER
GETTING TO 180%. >> NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT ACCORDING TO THE COUNTY RECORDS IT'S AT 184% RIGHT NOW.
>> NO. >> THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE
COUNTY DOCUMENTS -- >> COMMITTED BUT NOT EXISTING.
>> EXACTLY. NOT CURRENTLY BEING USED BUT IT IS COMMITTED. SO WE HAVE TO LOOK OUT TO INCLUDE THE COMMITTED AS WELL, NOT JUST WHAT'S BEING USED RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOU HAVE OTHER FACILITIES THAT ARE GOING IN.
YOU HAVE APARTMENTS GOING IN. YOU'VE GOT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM INMAN, I HEARD THERE'S A WALMART GROCERY STORE GOING IN THERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE OR NOT. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST HEARSAY. BUT YOU KNOW, YOU START ADDING ALL THOSE IN AND IT GETS TO BE CONCERNING.
I KNOW THERE'S A BOAT DEALERSHIP THAT'S GOING IN RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. THAT'S NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC, BUT WHEN YOU START ADDING IN WHERE YOU HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING IN AND OUT AND YOU'VE GOT 16 BACKED UP.
IT TAKES FIVE OR SIX CYCLES TO GET THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION JUST TO GET TO 9 A. THAT'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
THAT'S WHY I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THE PICTURES -- I DON'T KNOW WHEN THOSE PICTURES WERE TAKEN. MAYBE IT WAS ON JANUARY 1ST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT I MEAN, I WAS SHOCKED WHEN I SAW THOSE PICTURES. BUT ANYWAY, GO AHEAD.
>> RIGHT. AGAIN, THOSE PICTURES WERE NOT MEANT TO REPRESENT OUR OBSERVATIONS.
I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I SAID, WE RECOGNIZE THERE ARE LONG CUES IN THE THROUGH LANES ON 16 EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND.
WE WERE SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT THE IN BOWED AND OUT BOUND MOVEMENTS, THE TURN LANES TO SUPPORT OUR PROJECT.
AS FAR AS THE ROAD BEING O OVERCAPACITY, I WOULD -- I THINK IT'S WORTH MENTIONING WITH THIS BEING A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE, IT'S EXEMPT FROM CONCURRENCY AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE REASON THAT THAT RULE WAS MADE INTO EFFECT IS TO PREVENT NON-RESIDENTIAL USES FROM NOT BEING APPROVED BECAUSE OF CONCURRENCY ISSUES. SO NON-RESIDENTIAL HAS TO CONFORM TO SITE ACCESS WHICH WE BELIEVE WE ARE CONFORMING TO SITE ACCESS WITH THE TURN LANES FUNCTIONING WELL.
BUT, YES, WE REALIZE THE CUES ON 16 ARE LONG.
I NEVER SAW IT BE FIVE CYCLES TO GET THROUGH.
MAYBE TWO CYCLES. BUT NOT FIVE.
>> I'VE BEEN IN THERE ENOUGH -- >> YEAH, MAYBE WHEN THERE'S AN
ISSUE ON 95, I COULD SEE THAT. >> BUT THIS IS JUST NORMAL TRAFFIC, WHICH IS REALLY A CONCERN WHEN IT BACKS UP THAT FAR. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND . . .
THE PROJECT, BUT I ALSO LOOK BACK -- AND THIS IS GOING BACK TO 2003 WHEN THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTRE WAS APPROVED AND NOW THEY'RE FILLING IT IN. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT SMALLER SCALE, BUT AGAIN, YOU'RE BUILDING A BUILDING, I CALL IT BUILD IT AND THEY'LL COME, BUT IT'S . . . YOU'RE GOING TO BE INCREASING THAT TRAFFIC. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE GOING IN THERE. LIKE I SAID, YOU ONLY HAVE THE ONE ITEM IN THERE FOR DISTRIBUTION THAT'S THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION CENTRE. NOT ALL DISTRIBUTION CENTRES.
SO YOU COULD OPEN UP A SECTION OF THAT ONE WAREHOUSE WITH MULTIPLE BAYS TO ONE DISTRIBUTION COMPANY AND THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE A LOT OF TRAFFIC AS WELL.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO IN THERE.
SO I -- >> I CAN ADD DISTRIBUTION CENTRE IF YOU LIKE. I MEANT TO ADD THAT LAST MILE, BECAUSE THERE'S SOCIAL MEDIA FLYING AROUND THIS IS AMAZON
PART 2, AND IT IS NOT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT IN THERE. THAT WILL ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE TRAFFIC AND MAKE ME FEEL BETTER ON 16.
>> WE CAN CLARIFY THAT. AND I WANT TO REITERATE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE WERE ASKED TO GO DO A TASK, WHICH WAS PUT IN SOME PROHIBITED USES AND WE GOT 42, 43 IN THERE NOW AND STUDY THE
[00:50:05]
TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTIONS AND WE DID THAT.AND WE'VE GOT EXPERT TESTIMONY HERE DESCRIBING THE CUEING, THE STACKING, AND HOW THE OVERALL SIGNALATION WORKS WITH OUR TRAFFIC. BOTH EMPLOYEES AND THE POTENTIAL AVERAGE DAILY FROM THE BUSINESS RELATED USE.
WE HAVE THEN SELF-PROFFERED THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND THE SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY TO PROHIBIT TRUCK-RELATED BUSINESS TRAFFIC GOING THROUGH OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE.
OKAY? SO CAN'T PROHIBIT ALL THE CARS, THERE MIGHT BE AN EMPLOYEE THAT LIVES IN TUSCANY VILLAGE THAT IS EMPLOYED AT THIS BUSINESS PARK. AND THAT'S A GREAT THING.
BUT BUSINESS RELATED TRAFFIC, TRUCK TRAFFIC, WE HAVE IT IN THERE THERE WILL BE SIGNAGE PROHIBITING THAT ON THE THROUGH FOR OUTLET CENTRE DRIVE. WE WILL WORK WITH THE COUNTY AS WELL ON THE INTERSECTION THERE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO IMPROVE INMAN ROAD HEADING NORTH. SO THAT ESSENTIALLY BECOMES A FOUR-WAY INTERSECTION, IF YOU WILL, REGARDING THE STOP SIGNS THAT ARE IN PLAY ON THAT -- IN THAT INTERSECTION AS WELL.
SO I ASKED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL BASED ON THE ADDITIONAL LEG WORK THAT WE DID AND THE ADDITIONAL REVISIONS TO THIS PUD THAT I THINK ADDRESS MANY OF THE
>> THE AMAZON CENTRE, WAS THAT PART OF THE COMMITTED -- MAYBE THIS IS MORE FOR TRAFFIC -- COMMITTED TRAFFIC.
THAT PART OF -- WAS THAT IN THE STUDY? I MEAN, YOU SAID A COMMITTED AMOUNT UP TO --
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. >> -- WAS THE AMAZON CENTRE PART
OF THAT? >> THEY DID GET ALL THEIR PERMITS. THEY GOT THEIR ENTITLEMENTS AND THE PERMITS. THEY WERE PRACTICALLY SHOVEL READY. THERE'S A PERMIT APPROVED FOR THIS SITE. WE HAVE TO MODIFY IT FOR OUR SPECIFIC PURPOSES BUT IT EXISTS TODAY.
BUT I DON'T KNOW. YAK, DO YOU KNOW? WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THAT HAS TO BE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY.
WHETHER THAT PORTION OF COMMITTED TRAFFIC IS ALREADY BUILT INTO THAT SYSTEM AND INHERENTLY WE'RE MODIFYING THAT.
I'M SORRY, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER.
>> THAT'S FINE. >> I DO KNOW IT WAS A LOT OF VAN TRAFFIC, A LOT OF PARKING AND A LOT OF SEMI-TRUCK TRAFFIC ON THAT DISTRIBUTION FACILITY FOR AMAZON.
>> RIGHT. THAT'S ALL, MR. CHAIR.
>> MR. MATAVENA, DID YOU WANT TO ASK A QUESTION?
>> NO, I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTIONS.
>> THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO MISS YOU SO MUCH.
>> I'VE GOT ONE MORE QUICK ONE, MR. CHAIR.
QUICKLY, HAVE YOU TALKED TO FOP ABOUT PAVING OVER THE DIRT ROAD
AT ALL? >> PAVING OVER THE DIRT -- IMPROVING IT TO A COUNTY STANDARD WHICH IS GOING TO BE A VERY NICE ROADWAY? WE HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO THAT, THE DEVELOPER SPONSORED DEVELOPMENT.
EXTENDING THAT ALL THE WAY UP. AS OPPOSED TO THE CONDITIONS THAT IT'S IN NOW. YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD THAT IT'S COMPLETELY RUTTED AND NEEDS A TON OF MAINTENANCE JUST FROM THE NATURAL WEATHERING AND THE RAIN EVENTS AND WHATNOT.
NOW INHERENTLY A LOT OF GUYS WHO USE THE FOP DRIVE TRUCKS.
BUT IT IS AN UNIMPROVED VERY RUTTED DIRT ROAD AND IT ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT SERVE FOR ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT AND IN FACT AS I STATED AND PROVIDED THE EXHIBITS AND DOCUMENTATION, THAT 60-FOOT RIGHT OF WAY OR EASEMENT WAS DEDICATED BY THE PREVIOUS INMAN OWNERS OF THIS LAND TO THE FOP SPECIFICALLY FOR ACCESS. WE WILL PROVIDE THAT ACCESS CUL-DE-SAC FOR EMERGENCY IRED - SERVICES TURN AROUND AT THE END OF OUR PROMPT, RIGHT AT THE FRONTAGE OF THE FOP FACILITY.
SO THE BEST WAY I CAN FRAME THAT IS THE FOP IS GOING TO HAVE A REALLY NICE DRIVEWAY ALL THE WAY FROM THE CURRENT INTERSECTION UP TO THE CURRENT FACILITY. AND I ALSO STATED AND IT'S DOCUMENTED, THAT THE AMAZON BUILDING WAS CLOSER TO THAT PROPERTY LINE THAN OUR BUILDINGS WILL BE.
WE ARE SEPARATED BY AT LEAST 100 FEET.
THEY WERE MUCH CLOSER BUT WE'RE STILL DOING A HIGH MASONRY WALL ALONG THERE. WE'RE GOING TO BE GREAT NEIGHBORS, LIKE I SAID. IT'S NOT INCONCEIVABLE THAT TENANTS WILL BE THERE TO HELP SERVE THE FOP POTENTIALLY.
>> BRAD, I'M CONVINCED THAT Y'ALL HAVE A REALLY GOOD SITE PLAN. I CAN EMBRACE THAT.
I THINK IT'S GOOD. YOU'VE GOT -- MADE A LOT OF CONCESSIONS. I MEAN, YOU LOWERED THE BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 50 TO 35. YOU'VE GOT 43 NOW PROHIBITED USES IN THERE. SO I . . . I THINK ALL THAT IS GOOD. MY MAIN CONCERN AGAIN, IS THE TRAFFIC ON STATE ROAD 16. SO YOU STATED A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO HAVE LESS TRAFFIC, GENERATE LESS
[00:55:03]
TRAFFIC THAN THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION CENTRE.AND YOU REPRESENTED BOTH. SO IF YOU --
>> AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC, YES, SIR.
>> HOW CAN YOU CONVINCE ME OF THAT? DO YOU HAVE THE FIGURES FROM THE COUNTY.
CAN YOU COME FORWARD AND TELL US AGAIN WHAT THAT WAS IN THE PACKET WE HAVE, THERE'S 1318 AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIPS.
AGAIN, I'LL GO BACK TO THE 184 AND 179 --
>> I SEE MR. DESUZA AND MY TRAFFIC ENGINEER MOBILIZING.
>> AND YOUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER IS WELCOME TO WEIGH IN, PLEASE.
>> I'D PREFER HIM TO WEIGH IN. >> I WANT TO GET TO THE FACTS HERE AND THE TRUTH OF THIS. AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW ALSO, MR. GREEN ASKED THIS, DID THE TOTAL COMMITTED DAILY TRAFFIC OF 184 AND 179 DEPENDING WHICH WAY YOU GO OUT OF INMAN, DID THAT INCLUDE THE AMAZON LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION CENTRE TRAFFIC?
>> I DO NOT HAVE -- JACK CAN CHEMLY HORN, I DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE SPREADSHEET TO SEE HOW THAT NUMBER IS DERIVED.
THAT WOULD BE A COUNTY QUESTION. >> OKAY, GOOD.
>> I CAN TALK ABOUT THE TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON.
THE PREVIOUS AMAZON STUDY DID THEIR OWN TRAFFIC STUDY.
THEY DIDN'T BASE IT ON ITE, BUT BASED IT ON THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AND THEIR EMPLOYEE SHIFT SCHEDULE.
AND THEY PREDICTED 1480 DAILY TRIPS.
THIS PROJECT -- LIKE IT SAID IN THE STAFF REPORT -- PREDICTS 1318 DAILY TRIPS. SO IT IS A REDUCTION IN DAILY
MR. DE SOUZA. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THOSE RESERVE TRIPS, THE AMAZON DISTRIBUTION CENTRE AND ITS ENTITLEMENT OCCURRED AFTER THE EXEMPTION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL FROM THE CONCURRENCONCURRENCY. NONE OF THE RESERVE TRIPS INCLUDE ANY OF THAT ASSOCIATED WITH THE AMAZON PROJECT.
AGAIN, WE GENERALLY CONSIDER, ONE, THOSE TRIPS ARE PROBABLY ALREADY ON THE ROAD BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING AND GOING TO YOUR HOUSE OR PLACE OF WORK AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO YOU'RE OUT AND ABOUT DRIVING ALREADY.
YES, IT IS A DISTRIBUTION CENTRE, SO THEY DID THEIR OWN STUDY TO SHOW WHAT THE TRIPS WERE, BUT THIS IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE SPREADSHEET. OUR SPREADSHEET DOES INCLUDE THE VESTED TRIPS BUT THOSE ARE ALL EITHER DRI RELATED OR SOME OF THE LONG-STANDING RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, GRAND OAKS, SILVER LEAF PROBABLY HAS SOME TRAFFIC OUT THERE AS WELL.
I DON'T HAVE THE FULL LIST PULLED UP.
HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.
AND THEN GOING BACK TO THE WHOLE NUMBER OF TRIPS FOR THIS COMPARED TO THE AMAZON FACILITY, AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE ROADWAY AND CONCURRENCY IS REALLY HOW WE SAY, WHAT DO WE WANT THE ROAD TO OPERATE AT IN ITS WORST CONDITION, RIGHT? THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA OF CONCURRENCY AND PLANNING FOR SPECIFIC LEVELS OF SERVICE, THAT'S WHERE WE CARE ABOUT THE PEAK HOUR TRIPS, NOT NECESSARILY THE DAILY TRIPS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
WE WANT TO HAVE THE WORST AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME, SO WE DON'T OVERBUILD ROADS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
WE DON'T WANT THE OPPOSITE, CONNOR JESSUP THE ROADS ALL THE TIME, BECAUSE IT MAKES EVERYTHING ELSE WORSE.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.
WELL . . . THAT MAKES ME FEEL BETTER ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.
DEFINITELY. >> AND I'M HAPPY YOU FEEL
I MAY WAIT UNTIL AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE IS ANY.
ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO I SEE MR. MCANARNEY IS HERE COMING FORWARD.
THREE MINUTES, SIR. >> I SHARE MR. LEBONOWSKI'S CONCERN FOR THE 184. IT'S COMMITTED TRAFFIC AND COMMITTED TRAFFIC MEANS JUST THAT.
I MEAN, 44% OF OUR ROADS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY EXCEED 100%.
WE'RE AT 150, 184, 250 ON 16. AND THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPROVED. AND THEREFORE, YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THOSE. TO HEAR MR. DA SOUSA'S EXPLANATION THAT THE AMAZON TRAFFIC BECAUSE IT CAME AFTER THE CONCURRENCY WAIVER WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 184, I CAN ONLY SAY, WOW, AND MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD AND MR. DA SOUSA CAN EXPLAIN AGAIN. BUT -- AND I DON'T HAVE THE STAFF REPORT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT IF IT'S 115 PAGES LONG, I THINK ON PAGE 113 WAS FINALLY SOME TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, WHICH, YES, DID SHOW THE TRAFFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN AMAZON AND THE 250,000.
[01:00:05]
WE DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT THAT TODAY. BUT IT IS THAT PEAK HOUR THAT IS THE 184%. IT'S THAT PEAK HOUR.WE DID HEAR MR. WESTER SAY THAT THE AMAZON PROJECT WAS INTENSE.
INTENSIVE TRAFFIC. SO WHEN YOU GO TO PAGE 113 OR WHATEVER PAGE THAT IS, VIRTUALLY, THE TRAFFIC IS THE SAME BETWEEN THIS PROPOSAL AND INTENSIVE TRAFFIC FROM AMAZON.
SO 250,000 SQUARE FEET APPROPRIATE? IS SOMETHING LESS? 125,000 SQUARE FEET APPROPRIATE? WHATEVER IS APPROVED THAT TRAFFIC IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 184%. THAT MAY NOT BE A DEAL BREAKER.
LAST MILE WAS APPROVED. BUT THERE IT IS.
AND I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE THAT THAT'S PROBABLY WHY 44% OF COUNTY ROADS ARE OVERCROWDED, IS BECAUSE OF ROUND AND ROUND EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS OFFERED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL CONCURRENCY. IT'S ALMOST AS IF, IF YOU'RE NOT RESIDENTIAL, YOU'RE NOT ADDING TRAFFIC.
AND I HAVE HEARD OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT SAY THAT ROOFTOPS ADD TRAFFIC. BUT PEOPLE DON'T MOVE HERE IN ORDER TO DRIVE TO WAREHOUSES. SO THIS IS ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.
THIS IS OUTSIDE THE COUNTY TRAFFIC.
THESE ARE MOVEMENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING REGION-WIDE.
SO I DO QUESTION THE REASONING AND THE LOGIC BEHIND NON-RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC. JUST PUT IT OUT THERE 184% IS THERE. IT'S THERE RIGHT NOW.
IT'S COMMITTED. AND WHEN THOSE BUILDINGS ARE BUILT, THAT ROAD BETTER BE THERE OR IT'S GOING TO BE 250%.
SO I'M CONCERNED FOR THE TRAFFIC.
>> THANK YOU. >> JUSTIN TAIL, 6752 GRAND VILLAGE DRIVE. I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT TO APPROVE IT. IF WE'RE CREATING PUDS IN ST.
JOHNS COUNTY, WHY ARE WE CONDITIONING THEM ON RE-STAR TREK TIFF USES INSTEAD OF PERMISSIVE USES.
I HAD THIS COME BEFORE THE BOARD THREE YEARS AGO BEFORE DATA CENTRES WERE BIG. DATA CENTRES PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ON THAT RESTRICTIVE LIST.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT DATA CENTRES. I'M NOT HERE TO ARGUE THAT.
THE ONLY TIME THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU TO ASK FOR PERMISSION TO DO SOMETHING IS IF IT'S ON THE RESTRICTED LIST.
DOESN'T THAT . . . DOESN'T THAT SEEM LIKE AN ISSUE? I MEAN, WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S A USE THAT BECOMES COMMON PLACE NEXT YEAR? JUST LIKE DATA CENTRES BUT THAT'S NOT ON THEIR RESTRICTED LIST? THEN THEY CAN JUST BECOME A DATA CENTRE.
MAYBE I DON'T UNDERSTAND PUDS THE RIGHT WAY.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY ARE RESTRICTIONS POINT OF VIEW INSTEAD OF A PERMISSION POINT OF VIEW.
THAT'S HOW MOST ARE DONE. USES BY RIGHT.
I UNDERSTAND PUDS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT AND THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO HAVE SPECIAL USES DEFINED BUT WHEN YOU CREATE THAT AND THEN THE WHOLE PREMISE IS WE CAN BASICALLY DO ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR THESE 42 THINGS THAT BRIEFS REALLY WELL, BUT YOU GOT TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE OTHER PERSPECTIVE AND IT'S HANDING THEM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING VERY POWERFUL THAT WILL -- IS A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT THAT RUNS WITH THE LAND FOREVER. JUST SOMETHING TO TAKE INTO
APPRECIATE THAT. >> I'M MARGE BROKER, 169 MONOCURLO COURT IN TUSCANY VILLAGE.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THIS. SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE BUILT THERE, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT ONE THING WHEN WE WERE TALKING TODAY, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE NO RETAIL AT ALL ALLOWED THERE. THAT WILL ADD MORE TRAFFIC IN AND OUT OF THERE, UP DOWN INMAN AND OUTLET.
CHUCK, YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT 16. I DON'T LEAVE MY HOUSE BETWEEN 3 AND 6. THANK GOD I'M RETIRED.
BECAUSE IT TAKES ME SO LONG TO GET BACK HEADING EAST, GETTING BACK ON TO INMAN ROAD, IT'S ATROCIOUS.
AND ALSO, WHO IS GOING TO UPDATE THE ROAD FROM OUTLET ON INMAN TO 16? HE'S GOING TO MAKE A BEAUTIFUL ROAD FROM OUTLET BACK. WHO IS GOING TO FIX THAT WITH ALL THE TRAFFIC, THE TRUCKS, CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES UP AND DOWN INMAN? AND THEN ALSO HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO TELL THE PEOPLE DON'T USE OUTLET.
TO GET FROM INMAN TO THE OUTLET BOULEVARD ON 16, YOU MIGHT GET THROUGH TWO LIGHTS. SO GO THROUGH OUTLET BOULEVARD,
[01:05:02]
COME UP, AND GET RID OF ALL THE 16.THEY'RE GOING TO USE OUTLET WHEN THEY LEAVE WORK.
IT JUST MAKES SENSE. EVERYBODY LIKES TO TAKE A SHORTCUT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE -- OH . . . . YES.
COME ON UP. >> YES, I'M RON FAIRCLOTH, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE DOWN ON INMAN ROAD. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, EVERY COMMISSIONER THAT TALKED ABOUT THIS HAS PAUSE IN REFERENCE TO THIS BUILDING. MY THING IS AS Y'ALL HAD SPOKE, THE TRAFFIC ON STATE ROAD 16 IS OVER WHAT WE NEED IT TO BE.
YOU HAVE SAID, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT YOU SET THROUGH MANY LIGHTS AND IT'S BEEN ABSOLUTELY CRAZY. AND WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER 4 OR 500 VEHICLES OUT THERE. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO LOOK AT. WE NEED TO START USING COMMON SENSE. YES, IT COULD GO OUT THERE, ABSOLUTELY. BUT IS THAT WHAT COMMON SENSE SAYS THAT WE NEED TO DO? IS TO JUST ADD MORE VEHICLES THERE? YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE NOT ONLY ON TUSCANY AND ALL THAT AREA, BUT YOU NEED TO LOOK AT CIRCLE DRIVE, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THAT AREA.
IF YOU LIVED IN THAT AREA, WOULD YOU WANT THIS ADDED TO THE TRAFFIC WHERE YOU LIVE? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT. BECAUSE I'M SURE THAT EVERY ONE OF YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS KIND OF TRAFFIC ADDED TO WHAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW ON STATE ROAD 16.
WAIT UNTIL THE STATE ROAD 16 SITUATION IS CLEARED UP BEFORE WE ADD MORE POOP INTO THAT BAG THAT, YOU KNOW, 10 POUNDS OF POOP IN A 5 POUND BAG, YO, YOU CAN ONLY SHOVE SO MUCH IN THERE AND THEN IT'S JUST GOING TO START CAUSING MORE AND MORE PROBLEMS. SO I'M ASKING YOU TO USE COMMON SENSE ON THIS. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
>> BRAD WESTER, DRIVER MCAFEE, AGENT FOR THE REQUEST.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF FOLKS THAT REACHED OUT TO THE COUNTY, THOSE THAT DID SEND CORRESPONDENCE, I REACHED BACK OUT TO THEM, INCLUDING THE LADY THAT JUST SPOKE WHO SAID SHE WASN'T AGAINST THIS PROJECT, BUT HAD SOME CONCERNS AND I THINK THAT'S THE OVERARCHING NARRATIVE. ANYTHING THAT'S BUILT THERE IS GOING TO GENERATE TRAFFIC, OKAY? MR. FAIRCLAW GOT UP AND SPOKE AND WE STATED UNDER TESTIMONY LAST ONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GREAT NEIGHBORS TO THE FOP. BUT THIS IS A USE THAT OPERATES A GUN RANGE 24/7 AND HE TESTIFIED AT THE LAST HEARING THAT THEY SOMETIMES HAVE NIGHT OPERATIONS AND SHOOTING EVENTS AT NIGHT. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS CHECK THE PRIDE REPORT AND UNDERSTAND THE NUISANCE IS ACTUALLY COMING FROM THE GUN RANGE, OKAY? WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE NIGHTTIME ACTIVITIES. WE'RE A BUSINESS PARK THAT PROVIDES EMPLOYMENT, PROVIDES SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND RIGHT NOW, THERE'S OVER 800 PARKING SPACES ON THAT AMAZON SITE THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME IN AND BUY THAT 125,000 SQUARE FOOT SITE AND FILL IT WITH THEIR OWN USE INCLUDING THE PARKING, THEY COULD DO THAT.
THAT'S THERE NOW, WE'RE CUTTING THAT IN HALF IN TERMS OF THE PARKING. THE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE IS MORE, BUT IT'S BROKEN UP INTO MULTIPLE BUILDINGS.
OKAY? THIS IS ABOUT EMPLOYMENT.
THIS IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY.
THIS IS ABOUT PROVIDING SERVICES SO FOLKS DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTY OR ON OTHER ROADWAYS TO BE SERVED BY A BUSINESS ENTITY OR HAVE AN EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY.
THIS IS MIXED USE LAND USE, THIS ENTIRE THING.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A COMPLEMENT TO GAIN NEW ENTITLEMENTS FOR THIS TYPE OF INDUSTRIAL USE.
WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING THAT THE SINGLE END USER, AMAZON FACILITY, IS NOW BEING CONVERTED BY AN ENTITY THAT HAS DONE EXTENSIVE DUE DILIGENCE AND PERFORMANCE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WOULD WORK IN THE MARKET. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THIS IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THEIR RESEARCH AND DUE DILIGENCE.
THEY UNDERSTAND THE ABSORPTION FOR THIS TYPE OF USE AND I WILL CLARIFY ONE THING. I MAY HAVE MENTIONED RETAILERS OR THE LIKE. WHAT I MEANT WAS COMMERCIAL.
THERE IS NO RETAIL ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.
AND THAT'S IN THE LIST. IF THERE'S A SHOP THAT SELLS WINDOW TINT OR CAR RIMS AND YOU WANT TO GO GET YOUR NEW RIMS ON YOUR CAR, BUT YOU WANT TO BUY A SET OF RIMS THAT'S A RETAIL BUSINESS, BUT ONLY ALLOWED AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO THE PRIMARY USE. THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A SUB SHOP OR A LOUNGE WITH A BAR AND LIQUOR LICENCE.
[01:10:01]
THIS IS A VERY COMMENSURATE WITH THE HEIGHTS, THE USES, THE INTENSITY. ANYTHING THAT'S BUILT THESE DAYS IS GOING TO GENERATE TRAFFIC. WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. WHAT DOES THAT TRAFFIC DO? WE'VE ALREADY ASSESSED IT. SHOWN THE CLEARANCE TIMES IN THE DIFFERENT INTERSECTIONS THAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO, OKAY? THE ONE AT OUTLET CENTRE FUNCTIONS BETTER THAN THE ONE AT INMAN, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S GROUNDS FOR DENIAL.THERE'S A 2018 ORDNANCE OUT THERE THAT PROMOTES INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES IN THE COUNTY AND WHAT THEY DID IS TAKE SOME OF THE HANDCUFFS OFF TO ALLOW THIS TYPE OF THING TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY SO FOLKS DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE OUT OF THE COUNTY TO BE EMPLOYED SOMEWHERE ELSE OR HAVE A SERVICE SOMEWHERE ELSE. KEEP IT LOCAL.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS PROJECT IS ABOUT.
YOU GOT A VERY COMPETENT GROUP FROM SOUTH CAROLINA THAT IS WILLING TO COME INTO ST. JOHNS COUNTY TO BUILD THIS FACILITY.
AND I STRONGLY URGE YOU CONSIDER AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS TYPE OF PROJECT AND MOVE IT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO BE HEARD AND WE'LL WORK WITH ANYBODY.
I TOLD YOU, WE'RE GOING TO BE GREAT NEIGHBORS.
WE'VE ALREADY SHOWN THAT IN WRITING HERE BY LIMITING THE USES. I AGREE WITH WHAT THE GENTLEMAN SAID, WHY ARE WE DOING A PROHIBITION LIST ON WHAT YOU CAN OR CAN'T DO. IF ANYTHING OF THAT CHANGES YOU HAVE TO COME IN FOR MODIFICATIONS.
YOU'RE BACK BEFORE THE BOARD FOR A HEARING AGAIN.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THOSE USES TO NOT BE A PART OF THIS, TO REALLY SHOW THAT WE'RE PUTTING IT IN WRITING AND COD FIEING SOME OF THE -- CODIFYING THE CONCERNS ON THIS BUSINESS PARK USE.
SO I ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL AND STAND BY FOR
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. >> MRS. SPIEGEL.
>> HI. CAN I JUST ASK YOU FOR A LITTLE
CLARIFICATION ON THE BUFFERS? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> YOU HAD REQUESTED A WAIVER FROM 20 FOOT TO 10-FOOT BUFFER, MORE COMMENSURATE WITH INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE.
AND THEN YOU SAID THAT YOU -- SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR WAIVER IS AND WHAT YOU'VE ADDED TO THAT?
>> YES. WE ARE -- THERE'S SOME RIGHT OF WAY RESERVATION AREA THAT WE HAVE TO SET ASIDE TO KIND OF ESSENTIALLY FOR THE NEW ROADWAY ON INMAN THAT EXTENDS NORTH.
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS PROVIDE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING IN THE BUFFER. WE'RE ASKING FOR THE SAME DISTANCE ON THE BUFFER, BUT ADDING MORE TREES AND MORE VEGETATION AND MORE SHRUBS OR HEDGES TO PROVIDE THE MAIN CONCERN IS FROM LIGHTS FROM CARS AND LIGHTS FROM THE BUSINESS.
THERE'S NO LIGHTS AT NIGHT IN THESE BUSINESSES.
IT'S LITERALLY JUST SECURITY LIGHTING.
SO ANY CARS THAT SHOW UP AND THEIR LIGHTS MAY BE PARKED THERE AIMING ACROSS THE STREET, THE TREE LINE AND THE HEDGES WILL BLOCK THAT. WE'RE ASKING FOR AN ENHANCED LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE ADJACENCY ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. SO THAT'S WRITTEN INTO THE CODE, SO PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL SCREENING IN THAT SPECIFIC WIDTH OF THAT AREA. THE BUFFER REDUCTION IS TO ACCOMMODATE -- IT'S A REGULAR IRREGULARLY SHAPED DEVELOPMENT AREA ON THIS PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE IT'S LIKE A -- ALMOST LIKE A PANHANDLE WITH A PAN.
THERE'S A SLIVER ALONG INMAN AND EXTENDS OUT TOWARDS THE NORTHERN PART OF THIS PROPERTY. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, WE'RE KIND OF INHERENTLY BOUND TO SOME OF THE CIRCULATION AREAS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR INTERIOR AREA VEHICLE CIRCULATION, ACCESS POINTS, PARKING AND THE LIKE.
SO ASKING FOR A WAIVER FOR THE WIDTH REDUCTION IS ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR BUT NOT THE SCREENING AND VEGETATIVE BUFFER ITSELF.
>>> SO MR. SMITH, WHAT IS THE NARROWEST BUFFER THAT WE HAVE
BETWEEN INCOMPATIBLE USES? >> FOR THE RECORD, JACOB SMITH.
THROUGH THE CHAIR TO THE QUESTION, INCOMPATIBILITY BUFFERS RANGE FROM 10A UP TO 30C AND THE "A" AND "B" AND "C" REPRESENT THE TYPE OF SCREENING INVOLVED IN IT AND THE NUMBER IS THE WIDTH OF IT. SO A TYPICAL BUFFER IS TYPICALLY 20B, THAT'S A FAIR BIT OF LANDSCAPING AND SOMETIMES A
FENCE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. >> OKAY.
SO 10 FEET IS THE -- PRETTY MUCH THE NARROWEST THAT WE HAVE --
>> YES, MA'AM, THAT'S THE STANDARD SMALL END OR LOW END OF
THE INCOMPATIBILITY SCALE. >> OKAY.
WELL, I DO UNDERSTAND YOUR CONSTRAINT.
IT JUST SEEMS VERY NARROW AND IF YOU JUST DRIVE AROUND AND LOOK AT THE BUFFERS THEY DON'T DO AS WELL AS YOU WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD DO. ALL RIGHT, THAT WAS JUST MY ONLY CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE HAD DISCUSSED LAST TIME AND I WAS TOLD IT WAS 15 FEET, BUT IT IS 10 --
>> AND ALSO WE HAVE THE 60-FOOT RIGHT OF WAY THAT WOULD BE BUILT
-- >> AND YOU CAN'T BUILD INTO THE DEDICATED PORTION THAT YOU'VE HAD TO --
>> RIGHT. >> YOU CAN'T PUT BUFFERING INTO
THERE WOULD BE NORMAL GRASS -- THE PAVEMENT AREA WON'T GO ALL THE WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE. THERE WILL BE A GRASS AREA FOR THE DIFFERENT UTILITY AND SWALE SECTION AND THEN ALONG THE
[01:15:03]
RESIDENTIAL AREA THERE'S A REAR YARD SPACE MADE UP OF BOTH -- NOT ONLY THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT THE REAR YARDS OF THE COMMUNITY.AND THEN -- >> SO IT'S NOT RIGHT INTO
PEOPLE'S WINDOWS, YEAH? >> THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF BREADTH BETWEEN AN ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL BACKYARD AND THE NEAREST BUILDING IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK.
>> BUT THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR MORE BUILDING TO GO ON AT THE NORTHERN END OF YOUR PARCEL THAT HAS NOT BEEN BUILT YET AND THAT MAY NOT BE THE CASE, BUT THEY'RE COMING IN AFTER YOU --
>> AND THAT'S NOT NEAR THE RESIDENTIAL.
THE RESIDENTIAL WILL ONLY SEE ONE BUILDING --
>> OH, INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.
IT SAYS INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL UNDEVELOPED PLAN TO THE NORTHWEST OF YOUR PARCEL. AT LEAST ACCORDING TO OUR STAFF REPORT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, IRSIR.
>> MR. LABONOWSKI. THIS QUESTION IS FOR MR. SMITH.
IN REGARDS TO THE AMAZON WAREHOUSE, I WASN'T HERE AT THAT TIME, HOW FAR ALONG IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS DID THAT GO AND IF SOMEONE COULD GO IN THERE TODAY AND BUILD THAT SAME SIZED
I'LL HAVE TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH.
I BELIEVE THEY CAME THROUGH WITH CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SO THAT WOULD BE FAIRLY FAR ALONG UP UNTIL THE POINT WHERE THEY DIDN'T EXECUTE ON THEM. THIS PUD HAS EXPIRE AND SO IF AMAZON WANTED TO COME BACK AND DO THAT EXACT SAME THING, THEY WOULD BE BEFORE YOU IN THIS SAME MANNER.
>> THANK YOU. >> AND THAT BEING BEFORE YOU WOULD BE FOR A DEVELOPMENT ORDER EXTENSION, RIGHT, MR. SMITH? NOT NECESSARILY FOR ANY OTHER USES OR OTHER CONCERNS? LITERALLY TO EXTEND OR RE-ENACT THAT PUD?
>> ULTIMATELY TO THE QUESTION, IT WOULD STILL BE A MAJOR MODIFICATION, EVEN IF THEY CHANGED NOTHING AT ALL TO THE PUD, THEY HAVE TO M COTHROUGH A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO UPDATE THEIR PHASING TIME LINES TO MAKE IT ACTIVE AGAIN, WHICH WOULD ULTIMATELY BE EXTENDING THE DEVELOPMENT.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
>> SEEING NONE, WE'RE BACK AT THE AGENCY FOR MOTION, DISCUSSION. IS THERE A MOTION?
MR. GREEN? >> THE LAST MEETING I WAS WILLING TO PUT ONE ON THE FLOOR, SO I'LL DO IT AGAIN.
AGAIN, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION, BUT I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION APPROVE MAJOR MOD 2025-12 ST. AUGUSTINE, INMAN PUD BASED ON THE SIX FINDINGS OF FACT. IT'S IN OUR STAFF REPORT, AND
ADDING ONE MORE CONDITON -- >> DISTRIBUTION CENTRES
>> -- DISTRIBUTION CENTRES. >> SECONDED.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. GREEN, SECONDED BY MRS. PERKINS. ANY DISCUSSION? I WILL SAY THAT I'M TOTALLY TORN ABOUT THIS AND HAVE BEEN LOSING SLEEP FOR AT LEAST THREE WEEKS OVER THIS.
SERIOUSLY. THE TRAFFIC IS MY MAJOR CONCERN.
STILL, YOU DID ADDRESS THAT AND ALLEZ SOME OF MY FEARS.
THE TOTAL EXISTING TRAFFIC ARE 126 AND 131.
SO WE'RE WAY OVER CAPACITY, INTO THE WAY DEFICIENT TERRITORY THERE. AND IT'S NOT GETTING ANY BETTER, AND WITH THE APARTMENT COMPLEX BUILT DOWN THE ROAD ON THE NORTH SIDE, THE FERBER APARTMENT COMPLEX, THE ONE FURTHER DOWN BY HIGHWAY PATROL STATION . . . THOSE OUT THERE AND ELEVATION POINT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF I-95. THERE'S WHERE ALL YOUR TOTAL COMMITTED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COMES FROM.
AND IT WAS A REVELATION WHEN MR. DA SOUSA REVEALED THAT THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION CENTRE TRAFFIC WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC. THAT WAS A . . . EYE OPENER.
BUT I'M REALLY TORN ON THIS. BUT THE COUNTY COMMISSION GETS THE FINAL VOTE, SO . . . THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION TO THEM. SO . . . . ALL RIGHT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, PLEASE PUT OUR VOTING SCREEN UP. THAT FAILS 4-3.
[2. MINMOD 2026-05 Dutch Bros Coffee. Request for a Minor Modification to the Red Lobster Planned Special Development (Ordinance 1997-9) to allow for a Restaurant with Drive-Through Facilities as an allowed commercial use.]
ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 2 IS A -- WE NEED EX PARTE ON THIS. THIS IS A MINOR MODIFICATION, THE DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE OUT ON STATE ROAD 16, BUT FURTHER WEST.[01:20:08]
OH, NO, EXCUSE ME, IT'S ON 312. SORRY.312 -- THE OLD RED LOBSTER SITE. THE OLD RED LOBSTER SITE.
YEAH, THE ONLY ONE NOT ON 16 TODAY.
SO THE OLD REMEMBER LOBSTER SITE.
MR. GREEN EX PARTE? >> I'LL ACTUALLY USE ONE OF THE FACILITIES -- OR TWO OF THE FACILITIES THAT'S ON THIS
>> YES, I VISITED THE SITE. >> MS. SPIEGLE.
>> YES, I'M BY THAT SITE ALMOST DAILY.
>> BEEN BY THAT SITE 192 TIMES AT LEAST.
AND I HAVE A BANK ACCOUNT AT SOUTH STATE, SO I GO THERE NOT INFREQUENTLY. SO IT'S RIGHT THERE.
SO DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE, COME FORWARD, LET US HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION, SIR. IS -- THE FLOOR IS YOURS, THIS
IS KIM RICK MANCILLA? >> NO, THIS IS BOB ZEGUSFUS.
REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> 201 EAST ROBIN STREET, ORLANDO, FLORIDA.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME.
THIS IS A MINOR MOD. IT IS THE OLD RED LOBSTER SITE AS MANY OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW. THE SITE WAS REDEVELOPED, A PORTION OF IT WAS REDEVELOPED TO BE ANOTHER BANK.
SO THERE'S TWO BANKS. THERE'S ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THIS NOW EMPTY PARCEL AND THERE'S A STORM WATER COMPONENT THAT'S THERE AT PRESENT TODAY AS WELL.
SO AS WE GO THROUGH A MINOR MOD, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE LOOKING AT SECTION 5.03.05 OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE DEVELOPMENT WE MUST HAVE TO BE GRANTED A MOD.
I WILL GO THROUGH THIS HERE. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE MAJOR THINGS IN THERE WE WANT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, THE -- NO INCREASE IN DENSITY, NO DECREASE IN PARKING, ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE BEING DONE HERE.
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DENSITY.
THE OLD RED LOBSTER WITH 1817 SQUARE FEET.
THE CHASE BANK BUILT THERE IS 3,432 SQUARE FEET AND OUR PROPOSED FACILITY IS 986 SQUARE FEET.
I'M NOT SURE IF EVERYBODY IS FAMILIAR WITH DUTCH BROS COFFEE AND THEIR BRAND. THIS IS A SITE PLAN HERE OVERLAID ON AN AERIAL. BUT DUTCH BROS IS A DRIVE-THRU ONLY FACILITY. IT'S 986 SQUARE FEET, THEY DO HAVE THE EMPLOYEES ENTERING THE BUILDING, BUT THERE ARE NO P PATRONS THAT ENTER THIS BUILDING.
THEY USE A DOUBLE DRIVE-THRU LANE TO PROVIDE PLENTY OF STACKING. THERE IS NO MINI BOARD OR SP SPEAKER POST EITHER. THEY HAVE THE FOLKS OUT THERE SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE AT CHICK-FIL-A WHERE THEY'RE TAKING THE ORDERS ON THE IPAD TO MOVE THE PEOPLE THROUGH THE DRIVE-THRU LANES AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.
SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS IN THE SECTION OF YOUR CODE DEALING WITH MINOR MODS OR THAT WE DON'T CHANGE THE ACCESS SO THAT ACCESS POINT THAT YOU SEE THERE TODAY IS THE SAME ACCESS POINT THAT WAS THERE FOR THE RED LOBSTER AND HAS CONTINUED TO BE THE MAIN ACCESS FOR THIS SITE. GETTING THE DISCUSSION OF THE FRONT SETBACKS FOR LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND BUILDING SETBACKS VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU SAW WITH THE RED LOBSTER BUILDING, THE LAYOUT, THE FRONT FACING OF THE BUILDINGS IS RIGHT IN LINE WITH WHAT THE RED LOBSTER WAS AND THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER HAS REMAINED AS WELL ON THIS SITE THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT PROCESS. TRIP COUNTS.
WE'LL GET INTO TRAFFIC AGAIN HERE.
MINE IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER STORY TO TELL THAN THE LAST CASE. AND WHAT I DID IS I LOOKED AT THE ITE TRIP GENERATION MANUAL AND WHAT I DID IS I KIND OF LOOKED AT -- YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES HERE REALLY SAYING LET'S LOOK AT EVERYBODY IN THE P.M. PEAK HOUR, RIGHT? IN THIS CASE, KWOUF GOT A -- YOU'VE GOT A COFFEE USER. I COMPARED FOR THE RED LOBSTER WOULD BE A P.M. PEAK HOUR, THAT WAS THE HIGHER TRIP GENERATOR.
BANK IS THE SAME WAY. THAT P.M. PEAK HOUR, THAT'S THE TIME YOU CAN IMAGINE MOST PEOPLE ARE VISITING THE BANK AS WELL.
SO I TOOK THE HIGHEST OF THE NUMBERS IN ORDER TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND THEN COMPARED THEM TO THAT RED LOBSTER THAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RED LOBSTER AND LOOKING AT THE P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIPS WE CAME UP WITH 180, AND WHEN YOU COMBINE THIS REDEVELOPMENT WITH THE CHASE BANK AND THE DUTCH BROTHERS IT COMES OUT TO 163.
YOUR CODE ACTUALLY ALLOWS I BELIEVE IT'S FOR NO MORE THAN A 5% INCREASE. WE'RE ACTUALLY DECREASING FROM 180 TO 1623 -- 163 WITH THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE. THAT PRETTY MUCH COVERS ALL OF THE, YOU KNOW, STANDARDS IN 5.0.5.
[01:25:03]
I WILL MENTION TOO THAT IT'S -- THEY WANT TO SAY THAT IT'S NOT IN CON FREDERICTON WITH THE -- CONFLICT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA OR CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.THIS IS BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING A DRIVE-THRU THAT WAS NOT IN THE PREVIOUS PUD AND WE DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, JUST ACROSS THE STREET AND DOWN THE WAY TO THE WEST IS THE PUBLICS DEVELOPMENT AND THERE'S A WATER BURGER AND ARREST BYES IN THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE SIMILAR. SO WE FEEL THIS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA. OBVIOUSLY IT'S A WELL-DEVELOPED COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND THIS USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THAT CORRIDOR. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? MR. LABANOWSKI
>> JUST ONE -- WELL, ACTUALLY A COMMENT.
I'M SURPRISED YOU'RE TRYING TO PUT IT -- A COFFEE SHOP THERE WHEN YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO GET THE TRAFFIC FROM ONE AREA.
THAT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BE ON THE WESTBOUND SIDE OF THAT ROAD.
THE OTHER ONE IS YOUR MONUMENT SIGN, HOW TALL IS THAT SIGN
GOING TO BE? >> WELL, WE WOULD BE IN KEEPING WITH CODE. THE FINAL SIGN DESIGN IS NOT COMPLETED AT THIS TIME, BUT THEY WOULD -- WE WORK WITH THIS BRAND ACROSS THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THROUGH THE SOUTHEAST, AND THEY ALWAYS GO IN AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY MEET CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS. THEY'RE PROPONENT OF NOT REQUESTING VARIANCES ON THAT FRONT.
>> CAN YOU MAKE THAT 15-FOOT MAX?
>> YES, BE IF THAT'S THE CODE REQUIREMENT, THEY WOULD BE
MEETING THAT -- >> NOT NECESSARILY THE CODE REQUIREMENT. I THINK YOU CAN GO HIGHER THAN THAT. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE REST OF THE AREA AND HOPEFULLY YOU KEEP THAT AT 15 FEET.
>> YEAH, IF -- WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.
I'LL MAKE A NOTE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH THE SIGN COMPANY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS AND I'LL MAKE A NOTE TO
MENTION THAT TO THEM. >> THANK YOU.
>> MR. GREEN. >> YES, COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. WHAT IS YOUR NORMAL AMOUNT OF -- I SEE YOU GOT DOUBLE DRIVE-THRU WHICH IS GREAT.
WHAT IS YOUR STACKING? I MEAN, WHAT IS YOUR PEAK -- I MEAN, WHAT -- I MEAN, I'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS UP AT POLENCIA.
SO MY QUESTION HERE IS ARE WE GOING TO GET TRAFFIC ON THE
SERVICE ROAD STACKED UP? >> SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, TWO, FOUR, SIX, EIGHT, TEN . . . JUST WHAT I EXPECTED.
WE'RE AT 24. THEY LIKE TO GET A MINIMUM OF 16 IS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. 20 TO 24 IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET FOR THEM THROUGH THE MARKET RESEARCH.
IT'S SIMILAR TO THE CHICK-FIL-A AS THEY'RE PUSHING CARS THROUGH QUICKLY. THE GOAL IS 24 IS THE MAX, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE ON THIS SITE. FROM THEIR OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS THAT THEY'VE DONE, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SEEING AS THE MAXIMUM
NUMBER, 24. >> YOU MAKE A GREAT CUP OF COFFEE. IT'S A GREAT CONCEPT.
MY CONCERN BEING A FORMER BANK BOARD MEMBER IS THE SECURITY AT THESE TWO BANKS. ANY TYPE OF ROAD -- ANY TYPE OF VEHICLE THAT'S GOING TO BLOCK EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO GET -- ESPECIALLY TO CHASE -- REALLY CONCERNS ME.
I MEAN, BANKS, FACE IT, THEY GET ROBBED AND WHEN THEY HIT THE PANIC BUTTON, THEY'RE COMING. EVERYBODY IS COMING.
IF THAT ROAD IS BLOCKED, THEY BLOCK THAT ENTRANCE OFF IMMEDIATELY. NOBODY IS LEAVING, NOBODY IS COMING. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY WORRIED ME. ALSO, NOT TO REALLY GET INTO CERTAIN SECURITY MEASURES, BUT BANK FRONT DOORS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE UNLOCKED IF THERE'S A CAR PARKED OUT FRONT.
IF SOMEBODY'S STANDING OUT FRONT, SITTING IN THE CAR LOOKING AT THAT FRONT DOOR. THAT DOOR DOES NOT GET UNLOCKED.
IT REALLY CONCERNS ME BECAUSE RED LOBSTER WAS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL AS FAR AS THEIR PEAK BUSINESS PROBABLY STARTED FOUR OR FIVE O'CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON.
BUT THE BANK'S DOORS LOCKED AT FOUR.
SO, YES, THEY HAD A LUNCH RUSH, BUT BANKING AS YOU MENTIONED, NINE O'CLOCK IS THE PEAK TIME FOR THEM TOO.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHEN THEY OPEN.
THAT'S NOT WHEN THE STAFF GOES IN.
SAME WAY WITH COFFEE. I MEAN, IT'S A MORNING THING.
I MEAN, I'VE USED YOUR COFFEE PLACE MANY A TIMES.
SO IN TERMS OF -- THE OTHER THING, WHEN YOU COME AROUND THIS TURN, THERE'S PEOPLE WALKING FROM THE PARKING THAT'S TO THE SOUTH OF SOUTH STATE WALKING ACROSS THERE AND PEOPLE COME
[01:30:03]
FLYING AROUND AND TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC BACKUP.YOU GOT A LOT OF -- YOU BASICALLY HAVE -- IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO GET ACROSS TO MAKE IT TO GO EASTBOUND.
YOU KNOW, WESTBOUND AND THEN YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE COMING OUT OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH TELLER AT NINE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
HOW DO YOU ADDRESS SOME OF THIS TRAFFIC CONCERN?
>> SO YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE
PARKING SPACES TO THE BUILDINGS? >> WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DRIVEWAY IN. YOU COME AROUND THAT CORNER, AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BLIND SPOT.
BECAUSE I PARK THERE AND WALK ACROSS.
I'VE HAD TO RUN A COUPLE OF TIMES.
AND THAT'S A TIGHT CORRIDOR IN THERE.
I ASSUME IT WOULD BE COUNTY STANDARDS.
THAT'S A VERY TIGHT CORRIDOR AND YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE WRAPPING AROUND TO GO TO THE DRIVE-THROUGH AND YOU'VE GOT CARS COMING IN AND STACKING AND I REALLY WORRY ABOUT BLOCKING OFF BACKING UP TRAFFIC ON THAT LITTLE SERVICE ROAD FOR THE BANK. IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THAT BANK AND THEY NEED POLICE PROTECTION IMMEDIATELY, THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME. REALLY REALLY CONCERNS ME.
>> I GUESS I'LL ADDRESS THE STACKING AND THE BLOCKING FROM OUR DRIVE-THROUGH FIRST. THEY'VE DONE MARKET STUDIES AND LOOKED AT THEIR FACILITIES. I SITED UP IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL AND COUNTY COMMISSIONS TALKING ABOUT THIS OFTEN WITH THIS PARTICULAR USER AND SO THEY DO LOOK AT THIS VERY CLOSELY.
SO WE'RE ON THE HIGHEST END OF WHAT THEY SEE AS THEIR RANGE.
WE FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT IT WILL BE A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF STACKING AND THE WAY THAT THEY DO THEIR ORDER TAKING AND MOVING THROUGH WILL HELP TO MOVE THAT DRIVE-THROUGH TRAFFIC.
YOUR SECOND CONCERN WITH THE FIRST BANK THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF US, AS PEOPLE COME IN, THIS IS A SITE CONSTRAINT DOESN'T CHANGE WITH THE USE. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>> IT'S A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE ARE COMING IN TO UTILIZE A FACILITY WHETHER IT BE THIS DUTCH ROSE COFFEE OR ANOTHER USER THAT GOES ON THIS SITE. SOME SIGN AGENDA MIGHT HELP TO WATCH FOR PEDESTRIANS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE HERE AND SOMETHING THAT COULD BE WARRANTED.
BUT I WOULDN'T SAY THIS USE SPECIFICALLY CONTRIBUTES TO
THAT. >> AND AGAIN, YOU MENTIONED ACROSS THE STREET WE GOT A LOT OF BURGER, OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE DRIVE-IN. THEY'VE GOT MULTIPLE ENTRANCES, MULTIPLE EXITS AND THEY'VE ALSO GOT BIGGER PARKING.
SO I DON'T COMPARE THAT TO THIS SITE.
THIS SITE ONLY HAS ONE WAY IN. ONE WAY OUT.
AND YOU GOT TWO BANKS. >> YES, SIR.
I WAS REFERRING MORE TO THE USE BEING IN THE AREA, THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE USE WITH THE DRIVE-THROUGH, NOT NECESSARILY EXACT SITE CONDITIONS.
>> THAT'S MY CONCERN. WHETHER IT'S A CONCERN THAT WILL HAPPEN OR NOT, I HOPE THE PLACE IS VERY SUCCESSFUL.
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T WANT TO SEE TRAFFIC BACKED UP WHERE LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN'T GET TO A BANK THAT MAY HAVE SOME KIND OF EMERGENCY PROBLEM GOING ON INSIDE.
THAT'S JUST SORT OF A BIG CONCERN OF MINE.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, HENRY.
WHILE YOU WERE ASKING THAT QUESTION, I LOOKED UP ON THE COUNTY'S TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET AND IT SHOWED THAT SEGMENT OF 312 IS TOTAL CURRENT TRAFFIC 88% -- 84% OF CAPACITY.
TOTAL COMMITTED, 89%. I AGREE.
IT'S HARD TO TURN OUT OF THERE. >> ONCE IN A WHILE YOU'LL GET A
BREAK BUT IT'S NOT OFTEN. >> IF YOU WANT TO GO EAST, IT'S
VERY DIFFICULT. >> USUALLIRY I GO MAKE A U TURN
AND COME BACK. >> IF YOU WANT TO GO FROM THERE,
GOOD LUCK. >> THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS.
IS THE SECURITY OF THE TWO BANKS AND THE DRIVE-INS GETTING BACKED UP AND BLOCKING THE TRAFFIC. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE COFFEE SHOP, WITH THE DRIVE-IN. I HAVE PROBLEMS THAT SOMETIMES WHAT DRIVE-INS CAN DO ON A PLACE THAT ONLY HAS ONE IN AND ONE OUT. THAT'S ALL.
>> THAT IS A GOOD PERSPECTIVE. I DIDN'T THINK OF IT AT ALL.
[01:35:06]
THAT'S THE REASON WE HAVE A DIVERSE BOARD UP HERE.>> I WAS A BANK MEMBER OF A BOARD FOR OVER TEN YEARS AND I UNDERSTAND OUTDOOR SECURITY AS WELL AS INDOOR SECURITY.
THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT BALLGAME.
THIS IS STRICTLY OUTDOOR. WHEN YOU'RE ALLOWED TO UNLOCK THE DOOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LOT OF TIMES IT DOESN'T GET OPEN FOR
A WHILE. >> I'VE NEVER EXPERIENCED THAT SITTING IN FRONT OF A CAR OR STANDING AND THEM LOCKING THE DOOR ON ME. I WOULD CHANGE BANKS PRETTY
QUICK, I GUESS. >> THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR BOARD MEMBERS.
SEEING NONE, ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION AND DISCUSSION.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE 2026-05 DUTCH BROTHERS COFEE.
THAT PASSES SIX TO ONE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
[3. REZ 2026-07 501 Comet Drive. Request to rezone approximately .59 of an acre of land from Open Rural (OR) to Industrial Warehouse (IW) with conditions. Located along the western side of Industry Center Road, southwest of its intersection with State Road 16.]
TIME. WE'RE MOVING ONTO ITEM 3.WE NEED EXPARTE ON THIS. >> YES, I VISITED THE SITE.
>> YES, SIR, I VISITED THE SITE AS WELL.
>> MR. GREEN? >> YES, I VISITED THE SITE.
OWNS THE PROPERTY THAT'S SOUTH AS WELL AS STARGATE DRIVE.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED IW. THE PIECE OF THE LEFT HAS BEEN REZONED TO COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE AND GO SHE'S SURROUNDED PRETTY MUCH ENTIRELY BY ALL ON ALL SIDES EXCEPT FOR THE NORTH SIDE.
IT'S CURRENTLY THAT PIECE IS STILL ZONED OR.
AS IT SITS. IS THERE A WAY I COULD POSSIBLY PRESENT MY PRESENTATION ON HERE? THIS GUY, SORRY.
THANK YOU. SO IT'S OBVIOUSLY A HEAVY TOPIC OF THE DAY. INDUSTRY CENTER ROAD IS THERE TO THE EAST DIRECTLY. THAT SHOWS 95 INTERSECTION FOR THE FAR LEFT. THIS IS THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, THE YELLOW SITE. ALL THE AREA HATCHED OUT IN BLACK TO THE SOUTH IS THE LAND SHE OWNS AS WELL.
THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED IW. THAT PINK LINE IS THE COMMENT DRIVE ACCESS THAT GETS TO THAT PIECE OF OR PIECE LAND THAT SHE OWNS IN THE BACK THERE. CURRENTLY SHE WOULD LIKE TO COMBINE THE TWO PARCELS BUT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING SAYS SHE CAN'T DO THAT. THIS IS ALL THE ZONING MAPS SURROUNDING. THE YELLOW WOULD BE THE EXISTING IW AROUND IT. OFF TO THE WEST, THERE WOULD BE COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSING AND THEN TO THE NORTH, THERE IS THE RP UP AGAINST 16. THAT'S THE FUTURE MAP THAT SHOWED ALL MIXED USE. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT FOR NOW.
THERE'S NO CURRENT PLANS OR ANYTHING THAT SHE HAS.
SHE WOULD LIKE TO OF COURSE GET IT REZONED AND COMBINE IT WITH HER PIECE TO THE SOUTH THERE AT THE MOMENT.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
MS. SPIEGEL? >> IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR NDP GOT CUT OFF ON MY PAPER. IT'S 49,000 SQUARE FOOT OF WAREHOUSE IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT
>> CURRENTLY THERE'S NO CURRENT PLANS.
WE HAVE SUBMITTED PLANS IN THE PAST FOR INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING FOR HER EXISTING PIECE. THAT'S THERE TO THE SOUTH.
THE PIECE TO THE NORTH, SHE WOULD NEVER ACTUALLY PROPOSE ANYTHING ON. IT'S .59 ACRES THAT WOULD ALLOW
FOR ANOTHER -- >> THIS IS FOR THE OTHER PART.
THIS PARCEL THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO REZONE IS TO BE AN ADJUNCT TO WHAT'S ALREADY ZONED AND COULD ALREADY BE DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW,
[01:40:02]
MAYBE BUT FOR THE WANT OF A STORMWATER POND TO DO IT WP THE CAPACITY YOU WOULD LIKE. WHAT YOU COULD DO GO THIS WASN'T REZONED IF YOU COULD DO YOUR STORMWATER POND.>> WE HAVE THE SAME THOUGHT AS YOU, ACTUALLY, TO USE IT AS STORMWATER FOR THE SITE PRIOR. BECAUSE IT IS ZONED OR WE CANNOT COMBINE IT WITH THAT PROJECT TO THE SOUTH.
>> WITHOUT BE BEING ZONED IN THE SAME ZONING AREA.
>> I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE TRYING TO COMBINE THE TWO PROPERTIES.
CURRENTLY THERE'S A NUMBER OF TRAILERS THAT ARE OUT THERE ON THE PROPERTY. ARE THOSE GOING TO BE CLEANED UP IN THE NEAR FUTURE OR ARE THERE PEOPLE STILL LIVING IN THERE? SHE'S TOLD ONCE THEY BECOME DILAPIDATED WHERE NOBODY CAN LIVE THERE ANYMORE, THEY HAVE TO BE HAULED OFF.
IT'S HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST.
THERE WERE SEVERAL PREVIOUSLY. NOW THERE'S I THINK DOWN TO
FOUR, MAYBE FIVE. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION AND DISCUSSION. MR. GREEN.
>> BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT AND ONE CONDITION THAT'S IN
OUR STAFF REPORT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. GREEN, SECONDED BY MS. PERKINS.
I WILL LIKE TO SAY, AND I'M SURE YOU KNOW THIS, BUT COUNTY STAFF SAID THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS FOR HABITAT AND SPECIMEN TREES. YOU ALL ARE PREPARED TO DEAL WITH ALL THOSE ISSUES IF THEY ARISE?
IT SAID YOU ARE WAIVING YOUR RIGHT TO THE LIVE LOCAL ACT THAT YOU WOULD NOT BUILD WORKFORCE HOUSING THERE.
>> YES. >> ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT'S TOO BAD BECAUSE I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT SITE FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING. THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY, THIS IS JUST ME, STANDING ON THE SOAP BOX AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR PROJECT. YOU'RE OFF STATE ROAD 16 SO NOBODY'S GOING TO SEE YOU. BUT STATE ROAD 16 IS ONE OF THE MAJOR GATEWAYS INTO ST. AUGUSTINE FROM I95.
SURE YOU COULD GET OFF AT INTERNATIONAL GULF PARKWAY, GET OVER TO U.S. 1 OR YOU COULD COME FROM THE SOUTH, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY DO THIS. BUT FOR YEARS, IT'S WAY BEFORE I WAS ON PCA, IT SORT OF BOTHERED ME THAT COMING IN ON 16 THAT IS THE GATEWAY AND IT'S REALLY NOT ALL THAT ATTRACTIVE IN TERMS IT OF ALL THE DIFFERENT USES ALONG THERE.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF A MASTER PLAN VISION FOR WHAT THAT STATE ROAD 16 QUARTER COULD BE AS PEOPLE DRIVE IN TO THE NATION'S OLDEST CITY.
A HUGE TOURIST MECCA. IT'S TOO LATE FOR THAT NOW.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I'M SAYING IT.
MAYBE SOME GENERATION FROM NOW, SOMEBODY WILL COME UP WITH PLAN AND IMPLEMENT IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING DONE THERE. BESIDES MORE LANES FOR TRAFFIC.
MS. SPIEGEL? >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT ABOUT COMPARING THIS TO THE PREVIOUS ITEM THAT I VOTED TO DENY. THERE'S ALREADY ENTITLEMENT HERE. A LOT COULD BE BUILT THAT WOULD TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD AND AS MUCH AS WE'RE TRYING TO NOT ADD A BUNCH OF TRAFFIC ONTO 16, I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN.
THE DIFFERENCE IN MY MIND BETWEEN THIS.
IT WASN'T ONLY TRAFFIC ON THE OTHER.
>> ALL RIGHT. READY FOR A VOTING SCREENS.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS.
>> THANK YOU. >> GOING TO ITEM NUMBER 4 WHICH
[4. REZ 2026-17 Arapaho Commercial. Request to rezone approximately 5.29 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Commercial Intensive (CI), located at 1470 Arapaho Avenue, 1480 Arapaho Avenue, and an unaddressed Arapaho Avenue parcel.]
IS REZONING ON ARAPAHO, EXPARTE, MR. MANAVINA.>> I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH MR. MILLER.
HE CALLED ME TO SEE IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APPLICATION.
[01:45:02]
EKS I WAS ON SITE ON TUESDAY. >> YES, I DID A SITE VISIT AS WLL AND I ALSO HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH ZACH MILLER YESTERDAY DISCUSSING THE SAME THINGS.
>> MR. GREEN? >> I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. MEATOVINA YOU DIDN'T CALL ME.
>> WELL, HE CALLED ME. >> DID YOU ANSWER?
>> I DID NOT ANSWER. DID I RETURN YOUR CALL? YES, I DID. YOU DID NOT ANSWER BUT YOU
CALLED ME BACK. >> I KNOW HOW BUSY SHE IS.
>> I HAD NO REAL QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
THAT COULD CHANGE. THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
>> DO YOU WANT MY EX PARTE? >> SCREEN IS NOT LIT UP.
>> YOU TURNED ME ON. DON'T FEEL BAD.
HE DIDN'T CALL ME EITHER. MR. MILLER, THE FLOOR IS YOURS,
SIR. >> AFTERNOON, ZACH MILLER, 3203, OLD BASH BARN COURT. I'M GOING BRING YOU ANOTHER INTERESTING SITE FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY ON ARAPAHO. IF YOU KNOW WHERE THE TARGET IS ON U.S. 1 SOUTH OF "S"ING AUSTIN, THIS IS RIGHT BEHIND IT.
ST. AUGUSTIN. THIS IS FROM YOUR STAFF REPORT.
IT SHOWS WHAT'S AROUND IT. YOU'VE GOT A TARGET, RECENTLY DEVELOPED MULTI-FAMILY. THERE'S A FUTURE PARK LISTED ON THERE THAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE TO ASK YOUR STAFF.
FUTURE TOWN HOMES. I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 55.
AND THEN FUTURE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
I THINK ABOUT 51. I THINK THERE'S ABOUT 370 RESIDENCES THAT ARE SURROUNDING THIS ON THREE SIDES.
WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THE SITE ON THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE. IT'S MIXED USE.
IT IS ALMOST ENTIRELY SURROUNDED BY THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
OR DOESN'T REALLY FIT THERE. THIS IS THE ZONING.
INTERESTINGLY, THIS PLOTTER PROPERTY HAS BEEN OWENED OR FOR FOUR YEARS. I COULDN'T REMEMBER WHEN IF I WAS ON THIS BOARD. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AND WAS ZONED OR IN 2022 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A CHILDREN'S MUSEUM. WHICH IS INTERESTING PAUSE BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW YOU COULD DO A CHILDREN'S MUSEUM IN OR.
I PULLED THIS FROM THE SITE. YOU CAN SEE THE FIVE ACRES.
THAT'S WHERE OR SITE IS. IT SHOWS THE LAYOUT OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. IT SHOWS THE LAYOUT OF THE TOWN HOMES. IT SHOWS THE MULTI-FAMILY.
IT SHOWS THE PLANNED HOTEL AND MARINA.
BASICALLY THIS ENTIRE AREA HAS BEEN KIND OF GOING THROUGH AN URBAN TRANSITION WHERE THEY'RE ADDING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL TRYING TO MAKE IT A WALKABLE MIXED USE AREA AND THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE THE TARGET RIGHT THERE.
THIS IS THE SURROUNDING ZONINGS OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S MOSTLY PUD AND THEN WITHIN THE CITY, THEY HAVE A CATEGORY RGO. YOU DON'T GET MANY PROJECTS THAT ARE BORDERING THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTIN SO I THOUGHT I WOULD GIVE YOU A REFRESHER. RGO IS ACTUALLY TITLED RESIDENTIAL AND GENERAL OFFICE. EVEN THOUGH RGO SOUNDS MEDIUM INTENSE, IT'S INTENSE USE FOR THE ST. OF ST. AUGUSTINE.
IT IS IN A PUD APPROVED BY THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE.
THERE'S 270 APARTMENTS RIGHT IN THE SITE.
I BELIEVE THEY OPENED A FEW YEARS AGO.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE COMMERCIAL USES WE'RE PROPOSING WILL COMPLIMENT THAT. ONE THING THAT CAME UP, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO USE THIS FOR LIVE LOCAL.
ONE OF THE ELEMENTS IS COMPATIBILITY WITH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YOU HAVE AN ELEMENT THAT YOU
[01:50:01]
SHOULD PRIORITIZE INFILL DEVELOPMENT.INSTEAD OF EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY, IDENTIFY AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT WE THINK THE REZONING MAKES SENSE. 1.11.1 SIMILAR, SUPPORT COMMERCIAL USES AND MIXED USE DISTRICT.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF COULD HE LOCATING COMMERCIAL USES AND MULTI-FAMILY AND OTHER HOUSING. WHICH ARE BELOW A LOT OF THE MAX REQUIREMENTS IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT.
ALSO YOUR FAVOR IS CONCENTRATED COMPATIBLE ACTIVITY.
AGAIN, WITH THIS KIND OF COMMERCIAL USE NEAR OTHER COMMERCIAL USES, BUT ALSO NEAR THE MULTI-FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL WE FEEL LIKE THIS MEETS THIS CRITERIA.
THE OR DOESN'T REALLY FIT. OR HAS VERY LIMITED USEINGS.
THERE ARE SOME COMMERCIAL USES. THEY'RE GENERALLY PRETTY LOW ON THE INTENSITY. I DIDN'T KNOW MUSEUM WAS ALLOWED. THERE'S A LOT OF PROPERTY IN THE COUNTY THAT IS OR AND MIXED USE BUT IT'S SURROUNDED BY EXISTING RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL USES. SO AGAIN THIS IS AN EXPANDING DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY. IT IS FILLING IN AN AREA WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR COMMERCIAL USES.
SOME OF THE USES -- WE'LL GET TO THE SITE PLANS WE'RE PROPOSING.
HOTEL, RESTAURANTS, MEDICAL OFFICE, INDOOR RECREATION.
WE THINK THOSE ARE THE MOST APPROPRIATE USES UNDER THE CI DESIGNATION THAT WE WOULD GO FORWARD WITH.
THE REASON BEING IS WE'RE NOT ON U.S. ONE.
SO MORE INTENSIVE USES WE DON'T THINK THE PROPERTY IS APPROPRIATE FOR. THESE ARE THE CI USES THAT ARE ALLOWED UNDER CI BUT WE DON'T THINK THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. THINGS LIKE TRUCK STOPS, GAS STATIONS, CONVENIENCE STORES. YOU DO HAVE THE POWER TO CONDITION CONVENTIONAL ZONINGS TO TAKE OUT USES AND WE'RE CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT. WE DO THINK THAT THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE LACK OF WE'RE OPEN TO THAT.
MY CLICKER STOPPED WORKING. I'M SHOWING YOU ALL THE POOR ICE AUTOSES ON THE PROPERTY. HERE'S ULTIMATELY WHAT MY CLIENT WANTS TO DO WITH IT. THERE'S A BLACK JACKS CONCEPT.
IT'S A MIXED USE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE WITH FOOD AND A DOG PARK AND THEY HAVE SORT OF MUSIC, ACTIVITIES AND THINGS FOR KIDS.
TESE ARE PICTURES DIRECTLY FROM THEIR WEBSITE SHOWING THE OUTDOOR FOOD AND GATHERING AREA AND FAMILY RECREATION, DOG PARK.
I WAS ACTUALLY DOING A REZONING ACROSS THE STREET THE OTHER DAY.
THEY DO THINGS LIKE WORKOUT CLASSES, EVENTS FOR KIDS.
WE THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD COMPLIMENT TO THE MULTI-FAMILY AND THE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S THERE.
IT'S NOT FAR FROM DOWNTOWN ST. AUGUSTINE.
THIS IS WHAT THE CLIENT WANTS TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY.
>> MY MENTOR SAID ANY CHANCE TO SHOW A CUTE DOG IN A PRESENTATION, PLEASE SHOW A PICTURE OF A CUTE DOG.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN LAYOUT. IF WE DID THE CONCEPT.
IT'S HARD TO SEE BUT YOU CAN SEE WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF PARKING AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE BOARDING AREA FOR THE ANIMALS AND THEN SORT OF THE ENTERTAINMENT PLACE TAKES UP A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF THE PROPERTY. THE ALTERNATIVE IDEA FOR THE PROPERTY IS A HOTEL. THIS IS MY SUGGESTION TO THE CLIENT AND UNDER THE CI, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD USE.
IT'S A SLIGHTLY MORE INTENSE USE WE THINK WOULD BE A GOOD COMPLIMENT GIVEN HOW CLOSE THIS IS TO DOWNTOWN ST. AUGUSTINE.
THERE'S ONLY ONE NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T FIT INTO THE MULTI-FAMILY OR MIXED USE IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF US.
THEY'RE CURRENTLY ZONED OR AND THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF THE RESZOKE. REZONING.
WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
MR. OLSON? >> JUST FOLLOWING UP ON YOUR PRESENTATION, AND SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX, HOWEVER YOU DESCRIBE THAT, HAD ONE OF ITS GOALS IS TREE PROTECTION. THERE'S A NICE STAND OF TREES ON THAT SITE BEYOND THE SPECIMEN TREES IS THAT WHAT WOULD BE
[01:55:08]
REFERRED TO OR ADDRESSED WOULD BE PROTECTING MORE OF THE TREESTHAN THE SPECIMEN ONES? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR TO AGENCY MEMBER OLSON, THAT'S CORRECT. AS NOTEND YOUR STAFF REPORT, WHATEVER WE DO, WE WOULD HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE CODE.
WITH THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, THAT ALLOWS FOR MORE OPEN SPACE AND KEEPING EXISTING TREES ON IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE.
>> THE HOTEL WOULD BE MIX THE USE.
MY CLIENT WANTS TO PURSUE THE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE.
I WANT TO SHOW HOTEL SINCE THAT'S A USE I THINK THAT WOULD BE IF THE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE DIDN'T WORK WOULD BE A VERY FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE AS OPPOSED TO SOME MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL
USES. >> FOR THE RANGE OF USES THAT -- I THINK YOUR CONDITIONING THE ZONING AND TO MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF THE USES YOU LISTED WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IS A GOOD PLAN. ARAPAHO ROAD, WHAT'S THE -- BASED ON THE PLANNING YOU ALL ARE DOING AND FOR VARIOUS USES, WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR ARAPAHO ROAD? IT LOOKS LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED WITH MORE DEVELOPMENT GOING IN. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'LL PROBABLY NEED FOR A SIGNALSATION IF THAT'S ALLOWED AT U.S. 1.
WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO TAKE THE LEAD ON THAT? IS THT A CITY RESPONSIBILITY, A COUNTY OR --
>> TWO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. ON ARAPAHO, IT'S THE WIDTH OF THE PAVEMENT AND WHATEVER USE WE HAVE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH TRAFFIC REVIEW AND GIVE UP PART OF OUR PROPERTY FOR THE WIDENING. THAT'S THE PART OF THE IMMEDIATE ACCESS. YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN AT THE INTERSECTION OF U.S. ONE IN ARAPAHO.
HE PULLED THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST FEW CITY COMMISSION OF ST.
AUGUSTINE AND THEY'VE SAID THEY'VE CONTRIBUTED, I THINK, EARMARKED 500,000 DOLLARS ALONG WITH 1.5 OR $2 MILLION WITH FDOT FOR SIGNALSATION THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT FEES WOULD BE FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE.
IT'S NOT EASY TO CALCULATE. WE WOULD BE ABOUT HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN IMPACT FEES IF WE DID THAT HOTEL.
THAT WOULD BE FDOT'S RESPONSIBILITY BUT MONEY THAT GENERATED AND THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE HAVE WOULD GO TO IT.
>> OKAY. THE ROAD ITSELF MERELY WIDENING IT PROBABLY TO MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS WOULD REQUIRE A CUSHING AND SIDEWALKS AND THAT COULD GET EXPENSIVE AND I'M NOT SURE AT WHAT POINT IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE NEEDED OR REQUIRED, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE ON MY OTHER QUESTIONS.
>> CERTAINLY. I'LL SAY RIGHT NOW, 18-YEAR-OLD
TARGET TRUCKS DO DRIVE DOWN IT. >> MR. LABANOWSKI.
>> TO MOVE THAT CANOPY THAT'S IN THERE RIGHT NOW.
IT IS A REAL NICE AREA MUCH THE CONCEPTUAL -- I ASSUME THERE'S ONLY TWO CONCEPTUALS THAT YOU GOT IN HERE BECAUSE ONE OF THEM IS CONCEPTUAL 1 AND THE OTHER IS 12.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU HAVE A BUNCH MORE THAT
ARE LINED UP IN THERE OR NOT? >> THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES I'VE SEEN. I ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE THE HOTEL ONE. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE OTHER CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THE BLOCK. YOU'RE SAVING A LOT OF THE TREES THAT ARE EXISTING THERE RIGHT NOW.
THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >> MY CLIENT REALLY WANTS TO PURSUE THE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE. I JUST WANT TO PRESENT THE HOTEL AS WHAT I THOUGHT WOULD BE SINCE WE'RE GOING TO A CONVENTIONAL ZONING MOST LIKELY ALTERNATIVE IF THAT DID NOT WORK.
>> MR. GREEN. >> I LOOKED -- I WAS SHOCKED THAT THIS WASN'T IN THE CITY. DID THEY EVER APPROACH YOU ABOUT ANNEXING THIS PIECE IN? THE TAX REVENUE -- THEY GOT ALL
AROUND IT. >> INTERESTINGLY, THE -- THE COUNTY ACTUALLY, I THINK, THIS IS PART OF THE PROGRAM FOR THE LAMP PROGRAM AND IT DIDN'T MAKE THE LIST FOR PURCHASE BY THE COUNTY. AS FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE CITY, I HAVE THEORIES ON WHY THIS IS NOT IN THE CITY BUT
[02:00:02]
THEY'RE JUST THEORIES. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO BACK ITUP. >> I ASSUME YOU GOT -- I WAS LOOKING UP -- YOU'VE GOT UTILITIES THERE FOR THE CITY.
>> I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE ACTUAL UTILITIES BUT THE FACT THAT THERE'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX RIGHT NEXT TO US, I WOULD ASSUME THERE'S UTILITIES. > THEY'RE THERE.
I THOUGHT I WAS LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT WAS WRONG.
BECAUSE I KNOW TARGET AND ALL IS PART OF THE CITY.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? SEEING NONE, ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO ADDRESS THIS? COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> I WANT TO MAKE IT APPARENT, I AM AN INTERESTED PARTY ON THE OUTPOST. IT IS NOT THE SAME CONCEPT AS A BLOCK BUT IT'S SIMILAR. I THINK THE BLOCK IS A GREAT IDEA. I HAVEN'T BEEN TO IT YET.
IT SOUNDS LIKE A PHENOMENAL THING THAT WOULD BE COOL TO HAVE SOMEWHERE CROWS CLOSE TO HOME. I'VE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE ANNEXATION. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE THERE'S A COUNTY PIECE INSIDE EVERYTHING THAT'S SURROUNDED BY CITY, THEREFORE, IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG, IF THERE'S TRAFFIC ISSUES, IF THERE'S DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, WHOSE JURISDICTION IS IT? STAISTIC C IS IT THE CITY? THIS IS A PERFECT PROPERTY FOR ANNEXATION.
I DON'T SEE HOW IT REALLY MAKES A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE FOR US AS A COUNTY TO HAVE THAT PARCEL WITH COUNTY ZONING IN THE MIDDLE OF CITY ZONING. THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, THE SALE OF MARIJUANA AND THC HTHAT ARE NOT ALLOWED. THAT'S A CONCERN.
ARAPAHO, I DON'T DOUBT THAT 18 WHEELERS DO DRIVE DOWN IT.
I'M SURE THEY DO. TAT'S A LONG STRETCH BACK THERE. THEN JUST THE TRAFFIC.
WITH INGRESS AND EGRESS IT'S A PROBLEM.
WE JUST HEARD A PREVIOUS PRESENTER AND I DON'T WANT TO TALK OFF TOPIC ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING MORE THAN ONE ENTRANCE. THERE WAS THREE ENTRANCES AND EVERY OPPORTUNITY THE COUNTY HAS TRIED TO GET DOWN TO ONE.
AND THAT'S PART OF WHY THE FIGHT HAS BEEN SO SEVERE AND SO STRONG BECAUSE I'M BEING ASKED TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD MATERIALLY IMPACT MY PROPERTY, MY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY VALUE AND ITS FUTURE AND THE SAME QUESTIONS ARE BEING BROUGHT UP ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE DONE BEFORE.
NOW THIS PLACE HAS ONE ENTRANCE. IT'S AN ISSUE.
IT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO SAY BUT NOBODY HAS LISTENED TO ME AT ALL FROM DAY ONE.
SO IT'S REALLY FRUSTRATING. THE OTHER THING IS I DON'T CARE WHAT DEVELOPMENT THEY PROPOSE, EVERY TREE WILL BE GONE.
IF YOU BRING IT UP, THERE WILL PBE AN UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BECAUSE OF THE VALUE OF THAT PROPERTY AND THE NEED TO DEVELOP IT TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL.
YOU CANNOT PUT AN UNDERGROUND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WITH TREES THAT ARE THERE. YOU HAVE TO SCRAPE THE GROUND IN ORDER TO PUT THIS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN.
YOU GOT TO DO THE SAME THING IF YOU'RE GOING TO ADD ASPHALT, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO A DETENTION OR RETENTION POND.
THE IDEA THAT SOMEHOW WE HAVE A PARK-LIKE SETTING, IT'S NOT EVER GOING TO HAPPEN. WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CHANGE ADAPTIVE REUSE FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. THERE WILL BE NO DEVELOPMENT THAT LOOKS PARKLIKE AND NATURAL IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY UNTIL WE ADDRESS THAT. IT'S A PROBLEM.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS DEVELOPED IN A WAY THAT IS
IMPOSSIBLE TO DO. >> THANKS FOR THOSE COMMENTS.
ARE YOU ONE OF THE APPLICANTS FOR A PCA POSITION?
>> THE COUNTY PROBABLY DOESN'T WANT ME UP THERE.
>> ANYWAY, A LOT OF THE THINGS YOU ASKED ARE ABOVE OUR PAY GRADE. GOOD POINTS.
I LIVED IN THAT AREA FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE RELOCATING TO HASTINGS. AND I JUST FELT LIKE I NEEDED TO ADVOCATE FOR THE BEAUTY OF THAT LAND.
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL CANOPY THERE. IT WILL BE JUST A SHAME -- IT'S ONE OF THE LAST GORGEOUS PIECES OF NATURAL PROPERTY REMAINING IN OUR AREA. I WANTED TO ADVOCATE FOR THE BEAUTY OF IT. THERE MAY BE NO SAVING IT.
BUT I THINK AS THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER SAID, THERE IS NEED FOR CHANGE. SO THAT OUR IMPACT IS NOT ON JUST BUILDING BUT RETAINING SOME OF THE BEAUTY.
AS YOU WALK THROUGH THAT AREA, AND I FREQUENTLY WALKED MY ANIMALS THERE WHEN I LIVED IN THAT AREA, THE PEACE THAT YOU GET FROM THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY IS INVALUABLE.
[02:05:12]
>> MR. MILLER, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
>> IT JUST REAL QUICK. ON THE APPEAR NEXTATION, IF IT WERE SOME REASON TO GET ANNEXED BY THE CITY OF AUGUSTINE, IT WOULD MAINTAIN ITS LAND USE UNDER THE COUNTY AND THE ZONING END OF THE COUNTY. SO ANNEXATION DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY CHANGE THE ZONING OR THE LAND USE.
ON THE TREES, I APPRECIATE THAT. OBVIOUSLY PROPERTY WITH TREES ON IT IS USUALLY MORE VALUABLE THAN TREES BEING CUT DOWN.
THAT'S WHY WE THINK THE ENTERTAINMENT CONCEPT IS THE BETTER ONE. THIS PROPERTY FOUR YEARS AGO WAS DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE WHICH WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN THIS TREE CANOPY BEING TAKEN DOWN LIKELY.
>> THANK YOU. I GUESS WE'RE BACK IN THE BOARD AND THE AGENTS FOR MOTION AND DISCUSSION.
MR. LABANOWSKI? >> JUST FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ARAPAHO. NOT TOO LONG AGO WE APPROVED A GROUP OF TOWN HOUSES RIGHT THERE ON ARAPAHO AS WELL.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON ARAPAHO AND IT CAN'T BE IMPROVED BY THE SOUNDS OF THINGS.
THE BLOCK CONCEPTION MAY WORK OUT BETTER THAN THE HOTEL.
THAT'S FOR SURE. >> MR. GREEN?
>> I MEAN, I'VE BEEN GUILTY OF IT.
I CUT THROUGH SOMETIMES THE PARKING LOT THERE OF THE BIG BOX STORE TO GET OUT. SOMETHING EVENTUALLY HAS TO HAPPEN AND SOMETHING'S GOING TO TRIGGER IT.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE REZONING OF 2026-17-ARAPAHO COMMERCIAL BASED ON THE FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION? MR. OLSON? LET ME TURN YOUR MIC ON MREESHGS. PLEASE.
>> I WAS GOING TO URGE THAT WE ADD THE CONDITIONS THAT MR. MILLER LISTED INTO THE MOTION TO CONDITION OUT CERTAIN USES UNDER CI THAT APPARENTLY MR. MILLER EVEN AGREES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE -- NOT APPROPRIATE AT THIS SITE.
>> MR. GREEN? >> DID YOU NEED TO ENTERTAIN
THAT MOTION? >> MAYBE I MISHEARD IT BUT WE KNOW THAT A TRUCK STOP CAN'T FIT THERE.
DO YOU WANT TO ADD -- >> I'M HAPPY TO PRESENT THAT TO BCC AND CARRY THAT IF THEY WANT TO MAKE THAT CONDITION UNLESS MR. OLSON WANTS TO SPECIFICALLY LIST THE USES OR I CAN BRING IT
UP THE ONES THAT I BROUGHT UP. >> SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT 7
INITIALLY. >> I'M FINE WITH IT.
>> INSTEAD OF -- I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO MY SCREEN SO WE COULD
SPECIFICALLY HAVE A MOTION. >> COULD YOU DO THAT?
THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN --
OKAY. >> WHILE WE'RE WAITING, MS.
SPIEGEL WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. >> WELL THIS WAS SORT OF A BETWEEN THE MOTION AND THE VOTE COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE.
REGARDING THE LAND PARCELS TO BE PURCHASED AND IF PERHAPS THIS PROJECT WAS DENIED IF THIS PARCEL MIGHT COME BACK.
IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PARK, IT WESTBOUND A BEAUTIFUL PARK.
IF IT'S A COUNTY WAS ABLE TO RECONSIDER PURCHASING IT AGAIN.
I JUST ALMOST CRIED WHEN I WENT OUT THERE AND I SAW IT.
IT'S SO LOVELY OUT THERE. JUST WITH THAT COMING UP ON THE BALLOT, THE TIMING IS JUST INTERESTING.
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, IT'S OBVIOUSLY MR. OLSON'S SUGGESTION TO AMEND THE MOTION. ON PAGE 14, I'VE GOT TRUCK STOPS, LARGE VEHICLE SERVICE AND STORAGE, OUTDOOR CONTRACTOR YARDS, BODY SHOPS, VEHICLE SALES LOTS, GAS STATIONS, HIGH VOLUME DRIVE-THROUGHS AND CAR WASHES IS CONDITIONS NOT TO BE ALLOWED UNDER THE CI ZONING FOR THIS. I WASN'T SURE IF THERE WAS
ANYTHING ELSE. >> THAT SEEMS PRETTY EASY SINCE
[02:10:02]
THOSE REALLY WOULDN'T GO BACK THERE.>> I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD. >> I HAVE NO PROBLEM AMENDING
>> IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY.
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. IT'S GORGEOUS.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> HAS THERE BEEN A SECOND?
>> SHE AGREED WITH YOUR WANTING TO AMEND THE MOTION.
6-1 APPROVED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU TO MR. MATOVINA FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE AND PUTTING
UP WITH ME FOR TWO YEARS. >> DO WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK?
LET'S TAKE A BREAK. >> WE WILL TAKE APPROXIMATELY A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. I KNOW IT'S A LONG MEETING.
[Item 5 & 6]
[02:25:34]
OF THIS ZONING MODIFICATION. I BELIEVE THE SUPPLY STORE IS[02:25:40]
WHAT OUR CORRIDOR NEEDS. IT IS IMPORTANT BETWEEN A[02:25:43]
STANDARD HARDWARE STORE AND AN AGRICULTURAL SUPPLIER WHICH PERFECTLY MATCHES THE LIFESTYLE THE RESIDENT IN THE AREA OF THE.HAVING ACCESS TO INTERESTING PRICE SELECTION AND KNOWLEDGEABLE CUSTOMER SERVICE RIGHT DOWN THE STREET WILL BE INCREDIBLY CONVENIENT. FINALLY REGARDING THE SUPPLY IN THE AREA, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE IN OUR AREA SAVE US FROM HAVING TO GO DOWN TO ST. AUGUSTINE OR JACKSONVILLE WHERE WE ARE COMPLETELY EXCITED TO HAVE THIS PROJECT.
TRAFFIC AT 250. I THINK IT'S 249.9 OR 8, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 250%.
SO -- >> ALSO DID WANT TO REITERATE THAT THIS IS OPERATING PER THE 2018 ORDINANCE ADOPTED TO PROMOTE NONRESIDENTIAL USES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.
THAT BENEFITS THIS AND ALL OTHER COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE COUNTY. THAT HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO THE RECORD AND ACCOUNTED FOR. WE'RE HERE ABOUT ACCESS MANAGEMENT AND WE'LL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PERCENTAGES, THE TRIP, DISTRIBUTION AND OBVIOUSLY THE
TRIP GENERATION. >> STEVE GAR BY.
FORTUNE PARKWAY JACKSONVILLE, 32256.
THE KEY THING REGARDING YOUR COMMENTS -- I WON'T DISPUTE
THOSE IN MAJOR DETAIL. >> THEY'RE FROM THE COUNTY.
>> FROM YOUR TAS SPREADSHEET, YES.
SO LET'S FOCUS ON TRIP GENERATION.
SO THIS SITE GENERATES THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 275 TRIPS, 36 -- 35 IN THE P.M. PEAK HOUR. I ESTIMATED 32.
THERE'S SOME MINOR NUMBERS. LET'S ROUND THAT TO 36 TO DO SOME SIMPLE MATH. SO THEN THAT MEANS 18 ARE INBOUND, 18 ARE OUTBOUND IN THE P.M. PEAK.
THEN YOU HAVE EAST AND WEST DIRECTION SO THAT MEANS THERE'S NINE TURNING IN FROM THE RIGHT AND NINE TURNING LEFT AND FROM THE WEST. AND SO IF YOU ROUND THAT OFF TO TEN TO DO SIMPLE MATH, BECAUSE IT'S GETTING LATE IN THE DAY, THERE'S 60 MINUTES IN AN HOUR, SO THAT'S ONE VEHICLE EVERY SIX MINUTES THAT WILL BE COMING TO THIS SITE.
WITH THAT IN MIND, AND WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE DRIVEWAY OPERATIONS, THE DELAY ASSOCIATED WITH LEAVING THE DRIVEWAY IS ROUGHLY 53 SECONDS PER VEHICLE. SO YOU CAN HAVE ONE PERSON WOULD SIT THERE LEAVING THE SITE AND NOT EVEN NECESSARILY ENCOUNTER ANOTHER TRIP EXITING THE SITE AS WELL.
FOR THOSE REASONS, THE SITE WILL OPERATE FAIRLY WELL AND PROVIDE ALL THE BENEFITS THAT BRAD HAS TALKED ABOUT.
THAT'S A QUICK OVERVIEW RELATIVE TO YOUR DEFICIENCIES WITHIN YOUR SPREADSHEET. THE ONLY OTHER THING IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH THERE, YOU NOW HAVE A SIGNAL AT FRANCES AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS, YOU'RE NOW LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT KIND
[02:30:04]
OF CLASSIFICATION ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR TAS.YOUR SERVICE VOLUME IS SET AT 1330 VEHICLES.
SO THAT GIVES YOU A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF BEING DEFICIENT VERSUS USING A SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION WHICH WOULD GIVE YOU A SERVICE VOLUME OF 2,000 AND PUT YOU RIGHT AT THE EXISTING THRESHOLDS. SO I SAY ONE.
BUT I WON'T DISPUTE YOUR FUTURE PERCENTAGES BEING HIGH WITH ALL THE ENCUMBERED TRIPS AND SO FORTH.
>> VERY THOROUGH. >> BRAD WESTER, WE ALSO DID -- WE HAD A DOT PERMIT ON HAND FROM ACCESS AND WE HAVE IT IN OUR PUD. THAT WILL BE MODIFIED WHEN THAT ROADWAY IS WIDENED TO A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY.
THAT'S CODIFIED AS PART OF OUR WRITTEN DESCRIPTION IN THIS PUD.
>> I LIKE YOUR SITE PLAN. I THINK IT'S GOOD.
YOU'RE WELL OFF THE ROAD AND THAT'S 75-FOOT BUFFER THERE ALONG 16. IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH DOT AND PERMIT FOR ACCESS AND EGRESS, WAS IT DISCUSSED WHEN DOT IS GOING TO FOUR LANE THAT SEGMENT OF STATE ROAD 16?
>> I'LL BRING MY TRAFFIC ENGINEER BACK UP HERE.
YOU MENTIONED THE BUFFERS. I WOULD LIKE TO DO A MOTION THAT YES, WE HAVE A WAIVER IN THE BACK BUT WE'VE COMPENSATED AROUND THE SIDES. THAT'S A KEY ELEMENT.
>> THAT WAS CLEAR. >> SO WITH BEING PART OF THE FDOT MEETINGS AS WE WERE LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, THEY CANNOT STATE A SPECIFIC SCHEDULE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE WIDENING OF THE ROADWAY. THEY DID SAY THAT THEIR DESIGN WAS NEARING A HUNDRED PERCENT COMPLETION WITH THE DESIGN PHASE. AND THAT THEY ARE STARTING ACQUISITION, WHATEVER THAT COMPONENT IS.
>> OKAY. >> I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC DATE.
>> SIMILAR TO WHAT I'VE HEARD ALSO.
OKAY. >> I WILL ADD TO THAT TOO.
SOMETIMES THAT'S A SET ASIDE. IT'S ADEQUATE IN THAT SPECIFIC AREA ALONG THE FRONTAGE. WE'RE NOT DEDICATING IT.
>> I DO WANT TO STATE I LIKE TRACTOR SUPPLY.
I THINK THEY'RE A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL.
I'VE BEEN TO THEM ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS.
I USED TO DRIVE FROM TALLAHASSEE UP TO THOMASVILLE TO GO TO A TRACTOR SUPPLY TWENTY YEARS AGO. YOU TWRIEF DRIVE UP THERE.
>> THERE'S A CLOSER ONE NOW. >> I HOPE SO.
I WOULD THINK. >> YOU WERE REMINISCING ABOUT TRACTOR SUPPLY. THAT'S A GOOD THING.
>> I GOT ALL EXCITED ABOUT BROWSING SOME OF THE STUFF IN THERE. IT IS A GOOD BUSINESS.
I LIKE THEM. THE TRAFFIC IS AN OVERRIDING CONCERN. GRAND OAKS IS WHAT I WANTED TO MENTION. I VOTED TO APPROVE THE GRAND OAKS DEAL THAT WAS BEFORE US A MONTH OR SO BACK.
I DID THAT IN LIEU OF THE FACT THAT NOT ALL THE TRAFFIC -- THE FOUR LANES WAG GOING WAS GOING TO BE DONE THAT WAS PROMISED BY THE ORIGINAL GRAND OAKS DEVE DEVELOPER. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED IN THERE BASICALLY FACING BANKRUPTCY.
SO THAT'S WHAT REALLY TIPPED MY HAND TO VOTE FOR THAT AND THE FACT THAT I BELIEVE IT WAS PUTTING FORWARD 20 MILLION BUCKS FOR ROAD WIDENING. THAT WAS COMPELLING ENOUGH TO ME FOR VOTE FOR IT. STATE ROAD 16 IS STILL A REAL ISSUE AND I WISH IT WERE FIXED AND UPGRADED AND DIDN'T HAVE A HUGE MASSIVE DEFICIT. THAT'S A MAJOR CONCERN FOR ME.
OTHERWISE, JUST LIKE WITH YOUR --
>> DON'T BRING IT UP. >> I KNOW THAT WAS PAINFUL, I'M
[02:35:06]
SURE. VERY PAINFUL.IT WAS FOR US TOO. BELIEVE ME.
THIS IS SIMILAR COULD BE STRANT FOR ME.
I THOUGHT ABOUT IT A LOT. >> I HAVE ONE.
I WON'T MAKE A MOTION NOW. MAYBE YOU COULD COMMENT ABOUT THE TRACKER. BECAUSE TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS A KIND OF A LOW NUMBER OF VEHICLES.
BUT IT'S GOING TO KEEP VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD TRAVELLING THE OTHER TRAKT SUPPLY. I THINK IN A SMALL WAY, IT BENEFITS THE TRAFFIC IN THE AREA BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OUT THERE.
THOSE PEOPLE ONLY HAVE TO GO THAT FAR TO GET TO THE STORE.
THAT COMFORTED THE CRAZY TRAFFIC.
ANY DEVELOPMENT YOU DO, TRAFFIC GENERATION.
SO IT'S GOT TRAFFIC GENERATION BUT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE.
WE ALL UNDERSTAND THERE'S DEFICIENCIES AND CRITICAL DEFICIENCIES ON SOME OF THE ROADWAYS.
BUT YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD AND I REPRESENTED IN MY SLIDE THAT THIS IS MORE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL DRAW AND IT SERVES THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY, LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL, AGRICULTURAL, HOMESTEADERS, FOLKS THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY GOING TO OTHER HARDWARE STORES OR WANT TO GO TO HARDWARE STORES, SO THIS IS A VERY NEIGHBORHOOD CENTRIC USE, KEEPS PEOPLE AS THEY'VE SAID THEMSELVES, FROM DRIVING TO JACKSONVILLE AND ST. AUGUSTINE AND BURDENING OTHER ROADWAYS FOR LONGER DISTANCES. THAT HAS GOT TO COMPENSATE FOR SOMETHING IN THIS APPROACH WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. THAT WAS SENT TO ME FROM THE COUNTY. IT'S A -- WE COULDN'T BE MORE HAPPY TO HAVE AN ENDORSEMENT BUT TO PUT IT IN CONTEXT.
NO >> I DON'T THINK YOU READ THOSE.
I THINK YOU MEMORIZED THEM BECAUSE YOU WERE SO EXCITED
ABOUT IT. >> I'M SO TIRED, I CAN'T
MEMORIZE ANYTHING. >> I BELIEVE MR. LABANOWSKI HAS
THE FLOOR. >> JUST REAL QUICK, I WON'T TOUCH THE TRAFFIC. WE ALL KNOW IT'S BAD.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE BECAUSE I SIT ON THE CAC WITH TPO, THEY'RE ESTIMATING ANOTHER TEN YEARS OUT.
THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT YOU HAVE IT TOUGH.
I'M CONCERNED WITH THE REAR SETBACK YOU WANT TO REDUCE.
HOW IS THAT AFFECTING -- I COULDN'T PULL IT UP AND LOOK AT IT. HOW IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT THE
EQUESTRIAN THAT'S BACK THERE? >> NOT AT ALL.
IN TERMS OF THE SETBACK, GOING FROM 35 TO 25.
THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION IS THE EXACT SAME.
IT'S JUST THE DISTANCE IS COMPRESSED.
THE COUNTY DOESN'T ALLOW US TO USE OUR POND TO COUNT FOR THAT EDGE. IT IS PHYSICALLY PART OF THAT BUFFER. THE ONLY TINY PIECE IS THE APRON WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A TRUCK TURNAROUND MUCH THAT'S WHY WE NEED THAT DISTANCE TO PUSH BACK. THE REST OF IT IS POND, LANDSCAPING AND THEN WE COMPENSATE AROUND THE OTHER EDGES, THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH. WE ADD THAT WITH BACK ON THOSE OTHER EDGES. WE CAN TAKE IT AWAY AND ASK FOR THE WAY WE SHIFTED AROUND THE REST OF THE PROPERTY.
>> I KNOW THE EQUESTRIAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LOVE HAVING TRACTOR SUPPLY. THE ENTRANCE.
I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING IN THE FUTURE IT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY. CAN WE DO THAT BEFORE SINCE WEIR TALKING ABOUT SO FAR OUT, CAN IT BE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT NOW?
>> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IF DOT HAD MANDATED THAT, THAT'S WHAT OUR PERMIT WOULD SHOW. YOU CAN GO RIGHT ON AND IT'S NOT THAT WAY AT THIS TIME. SO IF DOT WANTED THAT, WE WOULD HAVE DONE THAT BUT WE HAVE A PERMIT FOR THE ACCESS RIGHT NOW
>> I'M THINKING ABOUT THE 16. THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE WIDENED
IN 2005. >> WE GOT TO CALL OUR STATE
[02:40:05]
AS OUR 16, I GUESS THE LATEST COST ESTIMATE IS AROUND 95 MILLION. AND AGAIN, AS OTHERS HAVE OBSERVED, THERE'S NO TIME PERIOD FOR SR16 THROUGH THIS AREA TO BE FOUR LANED OR IMPROVED FOR TRAFFIC CAPACITY.I GUESS I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SORT OF FUNDAMENTAL LAND USE CHANGE THAT OPENS UP THIS STRETCH ON THAT SIDE OF SR16 FOR COMMERCIAL. I RECOGNIZE THIS IS A HIGHLY SPECIALIZED OPERATION BUT I'M WONDERING WHETHER IT'S CREATING A LINEAR STRIP OF COMMERCIAL -- IT IS SPECIALIZED BUT IT'S BIG BOX RETAILING. AND I JUST WORRY ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO GO WITH THAT OTHER THAN I THINK IT WOULD BE FAR BETTER TO HOLD OFF APPROVING ANY LAND USE CHANGES ALONG THIS STRETCH WITHOUT MORE INFORMATION AND MORE ASSURANCE OF A NEAR-TERM UPGRADING OF SR16.
>> WELL, I'M GOING TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF MR. OLSON'S -- THIS IS NOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE A MOTION.
SO IF SOMEBODY ELSE HAS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, PLEASE GO AHEAD OF ME. OKAY.
SO IF WE LOOK AT PAGE 3 OF OUR REPORT, THE PROPOSED COLOR OF THE LAND USE STANDS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB AND THIS IS DIFFERENT. THIS IS A LAND USE CHANGE.
THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE? NATURE.
SO IT HAS A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF REQUIREMENTS TO ME AND THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE OUTLINED ON PAGE 5 AND 6 AND 7 OF OUR REPORT AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THESE REQUIREMENTS BUT SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS ARE THE EXTENT TO WHICH POPULATION GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS WARRANT APPEAR AMENDMENT, INCLUDING ANALYSIS OF BEST AND APPROVED BUT ON BUILT DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A LOT OF BESTED DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT EXISTS.
THERE'S A LOT MORE TO THAT PARAGRAPH BUT I'LL STOP RIGHT THERE. THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL HAVE BEEN RAISING. THERE IS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT ASSURES DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO AGRICULTURAL LANDS, SUPPORTS THE USE OF NONAUTOMOBILE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION AND ADDRESSES THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY OR THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE AMENDMENT RESULTS IN A POSITIVE MARKET, ECONOMIC AND FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE AREA DEMONSTRATED THROUGH MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS.
I'M NOT AGAINST THIS APPLICATION.
I DON'T REALLY SEE IN THE MATERIALS HERE WHERE THIS SITE BUT I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US THIS SITE IS RESTRICTED TO BEING A TRACTOR SUPPLY. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT, SIR. >> OKAY.
>> ANY MOTION WE MAKE, I THINK, IF THIS WERE A HOME DEPOT, THERE MIGHT BE ZERO-SEVEN VOTE UP HERE OR MAYBE -- SORRY, 0-7 OR 5-2 OR SOMETHING. TWO-FIVE.
IT'S NOT A HOME DEPOT. IT'S A TRACTOR SUPPLY.
AND IF IT IS A TRACTOR SUPPLY, IT'S PROBABLY OKAY.
IT PROBABLY KIND OF FITS WHICH MOST OF YOU ALL HAVE SAID, FITS WITH THE RURAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE MOTION BE A TRACTOR SUPPLY AND NOT BE ABLE TO BE CONVERTED TO AN MCDONALD'S IN TWO YEARS.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. ANYONE
>> ANYONE ELSE? >> CAN I TRY A MOTION? IS EVERYBODY READY FOR THAT? DRUMROLL.
THE FIRST ONE WE DON'T HAVE TO RESTRICT IT.
BECAUSE THIS IS A COMPLIMENT AMENDMENT.
[02:45:01]
WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ADOPTION TRACTOR SUPPLY BASED UPON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. SO THAT'S MOTION NUMBER ONE.>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MS. SPI
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. MATOVINA?
DID YOU WANT TO -- >> WHY DO YOU THINK WE DON'T
HAVE TO RESTRICT IT? >> BECAUSE THAT COMES UNDER THE
PUD. >> ONCE WE ADOPT THIS USE, THEN -- LET'S ADD THAT AT THE SUGGESTION OF MY LEARNED --
>> THE REASON IS A YEAR FROM NOW THEY CAN COME BACK AND WE HAVE A WHOLE NEW DIFFERENT SET OF CRITERIA THAT WE EVALUATE THE NEXT APPLICATION. BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE
LAND USE. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER NOW.
WE'RE GOING TO AMEND THAT MOTION TO LIMITED THE DEVELOPMENT TO A
TRACTOR SUPPLY. >> MS. SPIEGEL AMENDED THE MOTION AND MS. PERKINS AGREED WITH THAT WITH HER SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> ALL RIGHT.
VOTING SCREEN'S UP. MY VOTE WILL NOT REGISTER.
THAT PASSES 6-1. >> WE'RE GOING TO TRY ITEM NUMBER 6, MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD 2026-02, TRACTOR SUPPLY PUD BASED UPON NINE FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN THIS STAFF REPORT. I DON'T NEED TO LIMIT THIS ONE.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION. >> IS THAT CORRECT?
>> SECOND? >> PART OF THE PUD.
>> SHOULD I LIMIT THIS ONE ALSO TO TRACTOR SUPPLY?
>> IT IS. >> I THINK IT IS LIMITED.
>> THAT'S AS IT STANDS AND -- OKAY.
>> MOTION BY MS. SPIEGEL, SECOND BY MS. PERKINS.
ANY DISCUSSION? APPARENTLY PEOPLE ARE ALREADY VOTING, SO NO MORE DISCUSSION, I GUESS.
>> HAVING TROUBLE REGISTERING THE VOTES HERE.
IT'S 6-1 PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS.
[Item 7,8 & 9]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT.
WE ARE UP TO ITEM 7, 8 AND 9. SO WE HAVE A DRI MODIFICATION FOR BARTRAM PARK, DRI. WE HAVE A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE NEW NAME IT WOULD HAVE, BARTRAM GROVE.
AND THEN WE HAVE A MAJOR MOD TO THE BARTRAM GROVE PUD.
SO WE NEED EX PARTE. MS. PERKINS?
>> YES, I SPOKE WITH CASEY DENDORE AND THEY ANSWERED MY
>> I PLAYED PHONE TAG WITH CASEY AND I ALSO VISITED THE SITE AND WENT TO THE COMMUNITY MEETING AUGUST THE 15TH.
>> MS. SPIEGEL? >> I HAD A SITE VISIT AND A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH CASEY DENDORE AND JESSICA.
>> CLOSE ENOUGH. >> MR. MATOVINA?
>> I GOT A VOICE MAIL FROM MS. DENDORE LAST NIGHT AND TEXTED HER AND ASKED IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS TO CALL HER AND I TEXTED HER LATER AND SAID I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I SAID I WOULD CALL HER AND SHE SAID THAT WAS NOT NECESSARY.
>> MR. OLSON? >> I WAS CONTACTED BY MS. DENDOR AND VISITED WITH HER BY PHONE THIS MORNING ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
>> MR. GREEN? >> I DID A SITE VISIT THIS MORNING BUT DID NOT HAVE A CONVERSATION.
>> I DON'T HAVE YOUR PHONE NUMBER.
>> THAT'S OKAY. >> I GOT A CALL --
>> GIVING YOU A HARD TIME. >> I GOT A CALL YESTERDAY FROM MS. AVERY SMITH AND I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RETURN HER CALL. SO APOLOGIES TO HER.
>> I THINK THAT MIGHT BE ON THE NEXT APPLICATION.
ABOUT I ALSO DID NOT HAVE YOUR PHONE NUMBER.
>> WELL, IT'S OUT THERE APPARENTLY.
GET IS FROM ZACH MILLER. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> THE FLOOR IS YOURS. >> THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, CASEY DENDOR WITH ENGLAND-THIMS AND MILLER OLD ST. AUGUSTINE ROAD.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION THREE SERIES FOR DRI MODIFICATION TO
[02:50:02]
THE BARTRAM PARK DRI AND A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND COMPANION PUD MODIFICATION FOR BARTRAM GROVE.THESE THREE APPLICATIONS ARE GOING TO BE PRESENTED TOGETHER AND THE PURPOSE OF THESE IS TO INCORPORATE THE BARTRAM GROVE PROPERTY ABOUT 42.3 ACRES INTO THE EXISTING BARTRAM PARK DRI AND SPREAD THOSE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO REDUCE THE COMMITTED TRAFFIC ON RACETRACK ROAD.
WITH ME TODAY, I HAVE OUR APPLICANT TEAM, PATRICK CHATOWSKI FROM LEGAL IS SITTING IN THE BACK AS WELL AS ART LANCASTER WITH THE MASTER DEVELOPER AND SCOTT ENNIS FROM THE HOME BUILDER IS ALSO PRESENT AS WELL.
A QUICK HISTORY. BARTRAM PARK IS A 25-YEAR REGIONAL PROJECT THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2001 AS A TWO-COUNTY DRI SPLITTING ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND DUVAL COUNTY.
THEY PROTECTED OVER 5,000 ACRES OF WETLANDS AND CONSERVATION AREA AND REMAINED ABOUT 6,000 ACRES FOR THE ORIGINAL PROJECT.
25 YEARS LATER, BARTRAM PARK IS IN ITS FINAL PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT AND NEARING COMPLETION WITH A FEW REMAINING ENTITLEMENTS. THIS IS AN IMAGE OF THE CURRENT MAP AGED DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ADDITION FOR THE BARTRAM GROVE WHICH IS A -- I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A POINTER. NO POINTER.
WHICH IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RACE TRACK ROAD IDENTIFIED AS A PURPLE BOX WITH THE NUMBER 36. AS PART OF THE DRI, BARTRAM PARK DID HAVE SOME TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION INCLUDING A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS IN RIGHT OF WAY AND ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION.
33 MILLION OF WHICH WAS INVESTED IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.
BELOW THE LINE HERE, WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE DONE, INCLUDING BARTRAM PARK BOULEVARD WHICH WAS A REGIONAL PROJECT THAT IMPROVED ACCESS INTO ST. JOHNS COUNTY UP TO OLD ST. AUGUSTINE ROAD. RACETRACK ROAD FOUR LANING IMPROVEMENTS OF APPROXIMATELY FOUR AND A HALF MILES, RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATIONS FOR THE INTERSTATE 95 INTERCHANGE AS WELL AS THE OVERPASS ON RACE TRACK ROAD AND THE INTERCHANGE AT OLD ST. AUGUSTINE ROAD AND 95.
AND ALSO CONTRIBUTING $720,000 TOWARDS THE FDOT OVERPASS ENGINEERING. AS FOR CONSERVATION AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS, 2006.96 ACRES WERE CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR THE PRESERVE WHICH IS A WELL-KNOWN PRESERVE IN THIS PORTION OF THE COUNTY AND SOUTH DUVAL COUNTY.
IT DOES HAVE AN EXTENSIVE TRAIL NETWORK AND AS PART OF THAT PRESERVE, THERE IS A PUBLIC CANOE AND KAYAK LAUNCH THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY PORTION OF THAT NEAR THE EXISTING PUBLIC AND BARTRAM MARKET.
THE PROJECT ALSO PROVIDED 12-FOOT LINEAR RECREATION PATHS EXTENDING 3.75 MILES AND HAS OVER 700 MATURE OAK TREES.
ALONG THE BOULEVARD. OTHER REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES ARE AT THE SITE, STATION 62 WAS CONVEYED ON BARTRAM PARK BOULEVARD, CITY OF JACKSONVILLE HAVE A MUTUAL AID IN THE LOCAL AGREEMENT SO THE STATION CAN PROVIDE AID TO SAINT JOHNS COUNTY. LOCATED WITHIN THE BARTRAM SPRINGS NEIGHBORHOOD. AGAIN, THIS IS A COMPARISON OF THE AERIAL MAP AND THE MAP EIGHT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE PLAN WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE SQUARE IN THE BOTTOM.
NOW IT DIDN'T GO AWAY. THE BARTRAM GROVE DEVELOPMENT IS A EXISTING CURRENTLY THERE'S A PUD ON THE PROJECT FOR PROJECT FAMILY AND WE ARE LOOKING TO DO A PUD MODIFICATION TO ALLOW 90 TOWNHOMES AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS WELL AS 50,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. ALL OF THAT ENTITLEMENT WE ■LOOK TO PUT IN THE BARTRAM GROVE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE CONVERTED FROM BARTRAM REMAINING ENTITLEMENTS WITHIN A ST. JOHN'S ST. JOHN'S COUNTY. SHOWN ON YOUR SCREEN AND ALSO INCLUDES 33% OF THAT SITE AS PRESERVED WETLANDS.
THERE'S ALSO A SPECIMEN OAK TREE ON THE PROPERTY BEING PRESERVED AND FEATURED IN ONE OF THE PARK AREAS.
THE BARTRAM PARK EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IS 404,956 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL ABOUT 22,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE.
[02:55:01]
PORTIONS OF THAT ARE BEING CONVERTED FOR THIS PROJECT FOR THE 180 HOMES AND THE 50,000 SQUARE FEET.THE PROJECT FAMILY DEVELOPMENT HAS ABOUT 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR RECREATION USES AND COMMERCIAL USES.
THOSE TRIPS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED. THE PROJECT FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AS THEIR FINAL CERTIFICATE OF CONCURRENCY ISSUED BY STAFF HAD 411 NET EXTERNAL TRIPS. AND WITH THIS PROPOSED USE BARTRAM GROVE WE ARE TAKING THE EXISTING TRIPS OF 264 NET EXTERNAL WHICH WILL RESULT IN 147 TRIP REDUCTION ON RACETRACK ROAD AND IN THIS EXISTING AREA. AS FOR BARTRAM GROVE SITE ACCESS SITES WILL BE REVIEWED AT THE TIME OF CIVIL PLAN SUBMITTAL BUT AS PART OF THE RACETRACK ROAD WIDENING PROJECT WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE PROJECT EVENTUALLY BEING DEVELOPED SO THAT INCLUDED PROJECT SIGNALIZATION WHICH IS EXISTING IN OPERATIONAL TODAY AS WELL AS LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES INTO THE PROPERTY. OTHER LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA INCLUDE THE NEWLY IMPROVED RACETRACK ROAD AND THERE'S A NEW OPERATIONAL SIGNAL AT EAST PATTON PARKWAY EAST TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. OTHER ITEMS TO NOTE ON THE PROPERTY IS THAT THERE IS LESS THAN A TENTH OF AN ACRE OF PREVIOUS PERMITTED AND MITIGATED IMPACTS AND NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS ARE PROPOSED. AS FOR THE SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IT'S DESIGNATED AS COMMERCIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND PROPOSED TO CHANGE THE NEXT USE DISTRICT. THE INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL WILL ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY USES SUCH AS TOWNHOMES, DUPLEXES, MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS, THOSE TYPES OF USES AND THE MIXED USE DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW US TO PROVIDE A LOWER INTENSITY INCLUDING SOME OF THE SINGLE FAMILY PROPOSED ON THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY ALSO IS ADJACENT TO THE DURBIN PARK DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A VERY INTENSE COMMERCIAL AREA.
ONE OF THE MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL AREAS IN THIS REGION OF SOUTH DUVAL AND NORTHERN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.
WE DID RECEIVE A COMMENT DURING OUR NORTHWEST SECTOR COMMUNITY MEETING ASKING WHY THERE WAS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ALTERNATE ACCESS TO EAST PEYTON PARKWAY AND THAT'S IN LARGE PART DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE WETLAND SYSTEM THAT SURROUNDS THE PARKWAY SO IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL CONNECTION. WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR TODAY IS A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR THE BARTRAM PARK DRI MODIFICATION PARK OF THE BARTRAM GROVE MAJOR MODIFICATION AND A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT SPREAD THE EXISTING RIGHTS INVESTED TRIPS. ADOPT A PROPOSED MIXED USE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE PROPERTY AND ADJUST DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE MAJOR MODIFICATION. REDUCE VESTED TRAFFIC ON THE LOCAL ROADWAY NETWORK. WITH THAT I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR BOARD MEMBERS? SEEING NONE, ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY, MR. MATOVINA.
>> I WAS GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION SINCE IT'S IN MY
DISTRICT. >> THERE'S TWO OTHER PEOPLE.
OKAY. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF DRA MOD 2025-02 BASED ON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
WHEN WE GET TO THE LAND USE CHANGE.
ALL THOSE THINGS I WAS WORRIED ABOUT ON THE LAST ONE THIS ONE YOU CAN PRETTY MUCH CHECK THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. MATOVINA AND SECONDED BY MISS PERKINS. NOW WE HAVE A COMMENT BY MISS
SPIEGEL. >> I DON'T THINK IT APPLIES EXACTLY TO THIS PARTICULAR ONE. MISS DENDORE CAN WE ON THE RECORD DISCUSS AS THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. YOU HAD A MEETING ON TUESDAY WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND 88.65 STUDENTS OR SOMETHING.
CAN YOU JUST GET ON THE RECORD WITH THE RESULT OF THAT?
>> YES. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MEETING, THERE WAS CAPACITY AT THE ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOL LEVELS AND THE SAINT JOHNS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
[03:00:01]
APPROVED A PROPORTIONATE SHARE MITIGATION AGREEMENT FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT WERE NOT ALREADY DASHED THAT DID ALREADY NOT HAVE AVAILABLE CAPACITY.>> THANK YOU MA'AM. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, COMMENTS? MR. MATOVINA.
I GUESS WE ARE READY TO VOTE. OUR VOTING SCREEN IS UP PLEASE.
THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
SO WE ARE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 8 WHICH IS THE COUNT PLAN AMENDMENT. MR. MATOVINA.
>> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CPA 2025-07 BARTRAM GROVE PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. MATOVINA SECOND BY MISS PERKINS. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE. VOTING SCREEN IS UP.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 9 WHICH IS THE MAJOR MODIFICATION OF THE BARTRAM GROVE PUD. WE HAVE A MOTION.
MR. MATOVINA. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MAJOR MODIFICATION 2025-08 BARTRAM GROVE PUD BASED ON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
>> MOTIONED BY MR. MATOVINA AND SECONDED BY MISS PERKINS.
[Item 10 & 11]
THAT ONE SAILS THROUGH 7-0. ALL RIGHT.WE ARE NOW TO ITEM NUMBER TEN WHICH IS A COUNT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE FRUIT COVE BAPTIST CHURCH PROPERTY AND MAYBE I SHOULD SAY FRUIT COVE, THERE IS NO EXPERT ON THIS.
THERE IS NO PLAN AMENDMENT. AND WE HAVE 11 RESOUNDING.
WE DO NEED -- THANK YOU. MR. MATOVINA.
>> I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION YESTERDAY WITH AVERY SMITH ABOUT THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS APPLICATION.
A CALL FROM MISS DENDORE AND I SPOKE WITH HER BRIEFLY ABOUT THE
>> I TALKED WITH CASEY DENDORE ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
>> MISS. >> YES, I DID A SITE VISIT AND I HAD A PHONE CALL CONVERSATION WITH AVERY SMITH AND CASEY
DENDORE AND JESSICA. >> MR. LABANOWSKI?
>> I HAD 16 CHANNELS ALSO A MISSED CALL WITH CASEY DENDORE AND ALSO VISITED THE SITE AND ATTENDED THE COMMUNITY MEETING
>> I ALSO HAD A CONVERSATION. YES, AVERY SMITH.
ALSO DID A SITE VISIT. >> AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED EVEN THOUGH I MIXED UP THE ITEMS I HAVE A CALL FROM AVERY SMITH YESTERDAY ABOUT THIS ITEM. I DID NOT GET BACK WITH HER.
APOLOGIES. THE FLOOR IS YOURS, SIR.
>> MY NAME IS JACOB LYNCH, I'M THE PASTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE AT FRUIT COVE BAPTIST CHURCH. WE HAVE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS AFTERNOON ON STATE ROAD 16 AND COUNTY ROAD 168 IN THE SILVERLEAF AREA. BEFORE ETM COMES BACK UP AND DELIVERS ALL OF THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THINGS, I WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHO WE ARE AS FRUIT COVE BAPTIST CHURCH. WE EXIST TO SEE GENERATIONS AND THE HOPES OF JESUS CHRIST. WE DO THAT WITH FIVE CORE COMMITMENTS, THAT IS WORSHIP, THE WORD OF GOD, THE FAMILY OF GOD, THE MISSION OF GOD, ALL FOR THE GLORY OF GOD.
OUR CHURCH IS MINISTERED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS AND IS CURRENTLY ACTIVE FAR BEYOND SUNDAY MORNINGS AND WEDNESDAY NIGHTS. OUR CAMPUS SERVES A COMMUNITY SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. THAT INCLUDES A WEEKDAY PRESCHOOL PROGRAM, A GROWING HOMESCHOOL MINISTRY, MINISTRIES FOR KIDS, STUDENTS COME A MAN COME A WOMAN COME A COUPLES COME A SENIOR ADULTS COME AND THOSE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.
WE ALSO RUN A COMPREHENSIVE SPORTS MINISTRY THAT INCLUDES BASKETBALL, FOOTBALL, CHEERLEADING, IN COMPETITIVE CHRISTIAN CHEER PROGRAM. FITNESS CLASSES, PICKLEBALL THAT GOES PRETTY MUCH SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.
A FOSTER AND ADOPTIVE FAMILY MINISTRY AND A COUNSELING MINISTRY ALL FROM OUR CURRENT CAMPUS.
AS OUR CONGREGATION HAS GROWN WE BELIEVE IT'S TIME TO EXTEND THE
[03:05:02]
WORK OF THAT MINISTRY TO THE SILVERLEAF COMMUNITY.WE OWN JUST OVER 29 ACRES THERE. OUR CURRENT CAMPUS SITS ON 18 ACRES. OUR HOPE IS TO SERVE SILVER LEAF WITH THE MINISTRIES THAT MEET THE REAL NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE. WE WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AS WE DO SO AND MEET THE NEEDS OF THOSE FAMILIES.
ON OUR STATE ROAD 13 PROPERTY, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN FIRST HAND HOW OUR CHURCH AND THE BUSINESSES AROUND IT CAN STRENGTHEN ONE ANOTHER. OUR MEMBERS AND GUESTS AND REGULAR CUSTOMERS OF OUR NEIGHBORS THAT CURRENTLY SURROUNDS US. AND WITH THAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED A GREAT TURNOVER WITH THEM AND A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM.
WE'VE PARTNERED WITH ETM TO HELP US PLAN THIS EXPANSION THOUGHTFULLY. AND SO I'M GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH, THE IMPACT WE HAVE ON OUR CURRENT COMMUNITY BUT I WILL ASK CASEY TO COME BACK UP AND SHARE ABOUT ALL THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THESE THINGS
BECAUSE I'M A PASTOR. >> HELLO AGAIN.
PCASEY DENDORE. JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.
THIS IS A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND CONTAINED IN REZONING APPLICATIONS.
FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT STATE COUNTY ROAD 16 A AND JUST WEST OF THE STATE ROAD 16 INTERSECTION.
AS PASTOR JAKE MENTIONED, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 29 ACRES AND SO THEY'RE LOOKING TO REZONE THE FRONT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY NINE AND A HALF ACRES TO ACCOMMODATE SOME NON RESIDENTIAL USAGES. OUR CURRENT FEATURE LAND MAP USE IS CURRENTLY A PASTURE. THE ZONING IS DESIGNATED AS OPEN RURAL. QUICK CLARIFICATION ITEM, THE CHURCH AND ALL OF THOSE USES THAT PASTOR JAKE MENTIONED ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT UNDER THE CURRENT AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN RURAL ZONING IN THE DESIGNATIONS.
THE APPLICATION WE ARE LOOKING AT IS APPROXIMATELY 9.5 ACRES OF FRONTING COUNTY ROAD 16A OF THE 29-ACRE TRACT OWNED BY FRUIT COVE BACK THIS CHURCH SORRY. THERE WE GO.
WE ARE PROPOSING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WITH THE TEXT POLICY. THE PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION WOULD BE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND THE TEXT AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT EDGES.
THE PROPERTY WILL MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED SCENIC EDGE ALONG COUNTY ROAD 16 A. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALLOWS 2E ADJACENT TO NON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SO WE'D BE LOOKING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT ADJACENT TO THE RURAL COMMERCIAL TO THE EAST. THEN WE WOULD INCREASE OUR DEVELOPMENT EDGE FROM 35 FEET-5D NEIGHBOR FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST.
AND THEN WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING THERE WOULD BE NO DEVELOPMENT EDGE REQUIRED BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL AND CHURCH PARCEL AS IT'S RETAINED UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP.
THIS SITE SHOWS YOU AN IMAGE OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WITH THE UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED FOR THE 2050 COMP PLAN. IT ALLOWED THAT INSTEAD OF PROCESSING A PUD IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR THAT WE COULD PROPOSE A STRAIGHT ZONING DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT WHEN A CIVIL ENGINEER PLAN IS SUBMITTED THE MASTER SITE PLAN WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD FOR APPROVAL BEFORE ANY CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS WOULD BE APPROVED. SO IN LOOKING AT THIS SITE PLAN, WE ARE PROPOSING A SPINE ROAD TO ACCESS THE CHURCH PARCEL THROUGH THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL FROM 1680. THAT WOULD SPLIT THE COMMERCIAL AREA INTO TWO SIDES, EAST SIDE AND A WEST SIDE.
ON THE WESTERN EDGE YOU HAVE THAT INCREASE 50-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE AND THEN ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY IS THE ARBOR MILLS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ARBOR MILLS HOA HAS A COMMON AREA WHICH INCLUDES THE WARDS CREEK AND WE'VE INCLUDED SOME DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS THERE WHERE THAT AREA RANGES FROM APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET IN WIDTH TO WELL OVER 300 FEET IN WIDTH WITH THE CREEK. THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT TO THE AREA. THAT'S THE ARBOR MILLS HOA COMMON AREA. THE EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION AS MENTIONED IS OPEN RURAL AND WE'D BE PROPOSING THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DESIGNATION TO POLICY A 211C OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. NORTHWEST SECTOR COMMUNITY MEETING WAS HELD FOR THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 23RD WHERE WE DISCUSSED TOPICS RELATED TO TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, USE
[03:10:02]
LIMITATIONS, AND PROJECT TIMELINES.DURING THE NORTHWEST SECTOR COMMUNITY MEETING THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION RELATED TO THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED ON THIS PROPERTY WITH THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING.
THETWO IN COMBINATION ARE USES THAT WOULD SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THEY ARE NOT DESTINATION USES WHERE PEOPLE WOULD GET IN THEIR CAR AND SAY I'M GOING TO DRIVE TO COSTCO. IT'S GOING TO BE A USE THAT IS JUST TO SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRIMARILY PAST TRAFFIC, BUT ALSO TO ACCOMPANY THE EXISTING NATURE OF THE FRUIT COVE CAMPUS ON 13.
THEY'D LIKE TO REPLICATE THAT. THE EXISTING CAMPUS ON 13 IS ABOUT 19 ACRES AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL PARCEL TO THAT WITH COFFEE SHOPS, SANDWICH SHOPS, THEY WOULD LIKE TO BASICALLY RECREATE THAT TO PROVIDE COMMUNITY AND OTHER AREAS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY, THE CHURCH COMMUNITY TO CONGREGATE TOGETHER OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. AS PART OF THE FOLLOWING COMMUNITY MEETING WE MET WITH SOME OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND WITH THE CHURCH TO PROVIDE A LIST OF PROHIBITED USES AS PART OF THE CONDITIONAL ZONING DESIGNATION.
SO USES SUCH AS BILLIARDS AND POOL PARLORS, A BED AND BREAKFASTS A WAREHOUSE FACILITIES, STORAGE, GROUP HUBS, MICROBREWERIES, SIDEKICKS, MARINOS, OUTDOOR STORAGE, BAIL BONDS, TREATMENT FACILITIES, PACKAGE LIQUOR SALES AND ON-SITE LIQUOR CONSUMPTION WOULD BE PROHIBITED.
AND THEN OTHER MORE INTENSE USES UNDER THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUCH AS GAS STATIONS, CAR WASH FACILITIES, TIRE SALES, OIL CHANGE FACILITIES WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE EASTERN PARCEL MUCH FURTHER AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN A COMMERCIAL NODE AND IT IS APPEARS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS SPECIFICALLY THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY, THE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATIONS ALSO TO THE SOUTH AT THE NODE AND THE SILVERLEAF MAP H. DRI DESIGNATES ALL THE AREAS ON SILVERLEAF PARKWAY AT THE COUNTY ROAD 16 A INTERSECTION FOR SOME COMMERCIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TYPE USES AS WELL.
AND WITH THAT I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION IS THERE AN INTENTION TO BUILD A
SCHOOL ON THE PROPERTY OR -- >> IN THE FUTURE.
IT WOULD START WITH THE CHURCH CONGREGATION AND IN THE FIELDS AND THEN IN THE FUTURE THERE'D BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND THE
SERVICES TO ACCOMMODATE. >> A POSSIBILITY OF A SCHOOL OF.
JUST CURIOUS, THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS MATTER PLEASE COME FORWARD.
THANK YOU. WHICHEVER ONE YOU LIKE.
>> I THINK I HEARD ONE OF YOU SAID IT'S CONCERNING.
WHY DOES THE CHURCH NEED COMMERCIAL REZONING IF THE CHURCH IS ALLOWED ALREADY TO OPERATE BY RIGHT IN THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT. IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE BEING ABLE TO OPERATE A CHURCH AND COMMERCIAL VENUE IN THE SAME ENVIRONMENT WHICH IS PROBABLY FINE.
IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS THEN THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT THE CHURCH AT THAT POINT.
IT'S ABOUT THE ABILITY TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL SUPPORTING THE CHURCH OR ANCILLARY TO THE CHURCH. IT SEEMS A LITTLE ODD.
THE OTHER THING I WOULD ASK IF THIS IS APPROVED WITH THE PCA RECOMMEND THE THOUSAND FOOT BUFFER FOR ALCOHOL SALES BE REMOVED FROM THIS BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE THIS SINGLE POINT RIGHT HERE ON THIS X THE CURRENT LAND USE WE WILL SAY WITHIN 1000 FEET OF A PROPERTY LINE SO THIS IS ACTUALLY LIKE ACREAGE.
THIS IS MUCH BIGGER THAN A POINT.
GO OUT 1000 FEET AND IF YOU REMEMBER PI 3.14 CUBED, IT IS 72 MILES. IF YOU ALLOW THIS CHURCH TO COME IN AND REZONE THIS AND OPERATE BASED ON THE CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT I. KNOW IT SOUNDS CRAZY RIGHT? IT'S THE MATH. I HAD TO DOUBLE CHECK IT.
1000 FEET FROM ANY OF THOSE CHURCHES BORDERS NOBODY IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY CAN SELL ALCOHOL WITHOUT COMING BEFORE YOU TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO GET PERMISSION TO DO THIS.
72 MILES IS HUGE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY DID THE CALCULATION BEFORE THEY CAME UP WITH A 1000-FOOT RADIUS.
I THINK CHURCHES ARE GREAT FOR THE COMMUNITY.
THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO PROMOTE CHURCHES.
BUT I'M SANDWICHED BETWEEN TWO CHURCHES AND I CAN'T -- I'M
[03:15:01]
RESTRICTED BECAUSE OF THAT. YOU KNOW AND IN THIS REGARD I KNOW THAT THIS IS COMING BEFORE THE 1000-FOOT RULE.IT WAS AN ISSUE. I THINK IT GOT MAYBE TABLED.
I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THAT.
I MEAN IT IS STILL AN ISSUE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. 1000 FEET, 72 ACRES.
THAT'S CRAZY. HOW MANY CHURCHES IN 72 ACRES CANNOT SOLVE ALCOHOL BEFORE THIS AND THEY HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU TO ASK FOR PERMISSION FOR A GENERAL PURPOSE COMMERCIAL USE THAT OTHERWISE WOULD PROBABLY NORMALLY BE ALLOWED.
WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMERCIAL SIDE IS ANCILLARY OR ACCEPTABLE OR SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, THAT'S FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE.
1000 FEET IS A REAL IMPEDIMENT TO OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY WHO ARE TRYING TO OPERATE AS GOOD NEIGHBORS, IN GOOD FAITH. I WOULD SAY IT'S FAIR TO ASK THE
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? I SEE A PERSON OVER THERE. OKAY.
>> OH, FRONT ROW. LOOK AT THAT TECHNOLOGY.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY. MY NAME IS VIVIAN HERNANDEZ.
I LIVE ADJACENT TO 6351 COUNTY ROAD 16 A WHICH MY FAMILY HAS COME TO KNOWN AS THE PATCH. THE PATCH IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL INTENSIVE TODAY SITS BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY LINE AND A RECORDED CONSERVATION EASEMENT FED BY THE ST. JOHNS RIVER. OUR HOME IS OUR SANCTUARY.
AS THE WIFE OF A PROUD MILITARY VETERAN, IT'S A DAILY REMINDER OF THE SACRIFICES HE MADE TO COME HOME TO IT.
MORE THAN 20 VETERANS LIVE AROUND THIS LAND.
SOME TOO ILL TO BE HERE TODAY. THEIR VOICES ARE NOT YET RECORDED. OUR NOTICE ARRIVED SEPTEMBER 19TH JUST FOUR DAYS BEFORE THEY HAD ALREADY SCHEDULED COMMUNITY MEETINGS. ONLY ABOUT SEVEN RESIDENTS ATTENDED. THEIR RESPONSE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED. THE LIST OF USES, THE APPLICANTS SAID IT WOULD PROHIBIT WAS EMAILED ONLY TO A HANDFUL OF ATTENDEES AND IS NOT IN YOUR PACKET.
A DECISION THIS PERMANENT DESERVES A RECORD WHERE THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN HEARD. POLICY A ONE FOR 11 SAYS NEIGHBORING USE MUST COEXIST IN A STABLE FASHION OVER TIME JUDGED BY TRAFFIC, NOISE, LIGHTING, AND WILDLIFE.
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MEANS PARKING LOTS, LIGHT ALL NIGHT, DELIVERIES AS EARLY AS 4:30 IN THE MORNING UNTIL PROBABLY TEN OR 11 AT NIGHT AND A PUBLIC LOT AT OUR BACK FENCE.
THE BUFFERS ON THE SITE PLAN ARE NOT BINDING.
YOUR OWN STAFF REPORT SAYS THE SITE AND BUILDINGS MAY DIFFER.
THAT SAME POLICY NAMES WILDLIFE AND PROTECTED SPECIES YET THE STAFF REPORT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT WILDLIFE ON THIS SITE.
THE APPLICANT CITES AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BUT IT IS NOT IN YOUR PACKET. WE HAVE WATCHED A BALD EAGLE AND HAWKS OVER THE PATCH AND NEIGHBORS HAVE REPORTED SIGHTINGS FOR OVER TWO YEARS AS NESTING SEASON BEGAN OCTOBER 1ST AND THE LDC SECTION 4.01 TEN PROTECTS NEST TREES.
MAY I ENTER THESE PHOTOS INTO THE RECORD? THEY SPEAK FOR THE LIVING BEINGS ON THIS LAND WHO CANNOT ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES. SO THIS GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF OUR PROPERTY VERSUS THEIR PROPOSED. THIS ITEM HAS ALSO BEEN EMAILED AND SUBMITTED TO THE RECORD. ON THIS RECORD I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO RECOMMEND DENIAL. AT THE VERY LEAST YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO A DATE WHEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND BALD EAGLE NESTS ARE IN THE RECORD AND THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN PROPERLY NOTIFIED AND HEARD. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. >> I JUST WANTED TO LET THE MEMBERS KNOW THAT STAFF WAS ABLE TO FIND THE POWERPOINT.
WE DO HAVE IT DIGITALLY IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SEE. WE CAN PULL THE IMAGES UP NOW.
[03:20:02]
IT JUST TOOK US A MINUTE BECAUSE IT WENT TO A DIFFERENT EMAIL.>> OKAY, I JUST DID WANT TO SAY THAT SHE IS CORRECT.
THAT THE NOTES FROM THE COMMUNITY MEETING WERE NOT IN OUR PACKET BUT THEY WERE SENT OUT SUBSEQUENTLY.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK OH, COME FORWARD PLEASE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ERNEST HERNANDEZ.
I LIVE OFF 177 WALKER DRIVE. MY PROPERTY LINE ENDS AT WARD'S CREEK WHICH WOULD -- IT BASICALLY BACKS INTO THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA. I AM DEFINITELY OPPOSED TO THIS.
WE JUST MOVED INTO THIS PROPERTY ON FEBRUARY AND WE SPECIFICALLY CHOSE THIS PROPERTY. THERE'S TONS OF PROPERTIES AVAILABLE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WE CHOSE THIS PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS BACKING UP TO A CONSERVATION AREA AND IT HAD THE PASTURE AREA WHERE ALL THE COWS ARE AT. WE'RE CONCERNED THAT SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN TO THE COWS IF THIS IS APPROVED.
IT'S NICE TO HAVE THEM BACK THERE.
THE WILDLIFE AS THE YOUNG LADY MENTIONED EARLIER, ALL THE WILDLIFE AND EVERYTHING THAT IS BACK THERE.
I CAN IMAGINE ALL OF THAT BEING AFFECTED TOO.
MORE THAN ANYTHING IT IS THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE TRAFFIC BEHIND MY PROPERTY THAT REALLY HAS ME CONCERNED.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER DIFFERENT STANDARDS HERE THAT I THINK NEED TO BE MET. THEY WERE NOT MET.
I DID NOT ATTEND THE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 23RD.
HOWEVER I DID NOTE THAT THERE WERE IT WAS VERY SHORT NOTICE FOR THAT AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS BY DESIGN.
BUT THERE'S DEFINITELY A LOT MORE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS REZONING EFFORT IF IT IS APPROVED.
THEN I THINK ARE AVAILABLE TO ACTUALLY ATTEND THAT MEETING OR VOICE THEIR OPINION ON THAT. LET'S SEE.
SO I THINK IT WAS EARLIER THIS YEAR THE AGENCY DEV VOTED 6-0 TO DENY THE COMMERCIAL CHANGE FOR THE U-HAUL AND ACE HARDWARE AND SILVER LEAF'S NEW COMMERCIAL ACROSS THE ROAD FROM WHERE THEY ARE AT. I THINK THEY WERE TRYING TO GET THE REZONING AS WELL. THIS IS BASICALLY THE SAME SCENARIO FOR THAT. AND LET'S SEE.
, I THINK THAT IS IT FOR ME RIGHT NOW.
I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY CONCERNS.
STATE ON THE RECORD THAT I OPPOSE THIS.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, APPRECIATE IT.
ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM?
SEEING NONE, ANY REBUTTAL? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, ELLEN AVERY SMITH TOWER 100 WHETSTONE PLACE IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND
INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> 14775 OLD SILVERLEAF ROAD.
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT THAT IS MY DAY JOB, MY NIGHT JOB IS I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE LONG RA RANGE COUNTY COMMITTEE OF FRUIT COVE BAPTIST CHURCH. I'M REALLY NEAR KIND OF WORKING
FOR THE CHURCH. >> OKAY, JUST FOR SOME REBUTTAL AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH. I'M GOING TO BACK UP THE POWERPOINT BECAUSE I'M GOING TO ADDRESS COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DEFINING ON THE PROPERTY.
THE GENTLEMAN WHO TALKED ABOUT -- FIRST OF ALL I WANT TO START WITH JUST THE FACT THAT -- SORRY.
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO, AGAIN YOU CAN SEE ON THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU SEE SILVERLEAF ACROSS THE STREET WHICH IS COMMERCIAL AND THEN WE ARE TRYING TO DO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AGAIN WITH THE PROHIBITED USES WHICH I WILL GO THROUGH IN JUST A MINUTE.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN THAT EXISTED IN FRUIT COVE THAT YOU SAW EARLIER REGARDING THE SPECIFIC USES AND BUFFERS.
THE SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT HAS SITE SPECIFIC TEXT POLICIES. WHEN YOU SEE ON THIS LAND, ON THIS MAP IT'S A COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE
[03:25:02]
DESIGNATION BUT THERE ARE ALSO SITE SPECIFIC TEXT POLICIES THAT GUARANTEE THE 50-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE WETLAND WHICH WE WILL TALK ABOUT AGAIN. THEN THE 20-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE ON TH EAST SIDE NEXT TO THE RURAL COMMERCIAL AND NO DEVELOPMENT EDGE BETWEEN THE COMMON OWNERSHIP OF THE CHURCH.I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT THIS TEXT POLICY WILL RUN WITH TITLE TO THE PROPERTY.
AGAIN, YOU CAN LOOK AT IT MORE CLOSELY.
SOME OF THE PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT SPECIFICALLY THE WILDLIFE, THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS A COW PASTURE.
THERE'S NO WILDLIFE OUT THERE. IT'S COWS.
I THINK THE HAWKS AND THINGS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THE PICTURES THAT WERE SHOWN. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP, YOU CAN SEE THE WETLAND THAT INCLUDES WARD'S CREEK.
THAT PROPERTY IS OWNED BY THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
WARD'S CREEK HAS ABSOLUTE CONTROL OVER THAT PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S UNDER A CONSERVATION EASEMENT OR NOT BUT THAT COMMUNITY HAS LEGAL RIGHT TO PROHIBIT ANYTHING FROM HAPPENING IN THAT AREA BECAUSE IT IS A COMMON AREA AND IT'S HEAVILY VEGETATED. THAT ALSO SERVES AS A SCREEN FOR NOISE AND LIGHTING FROM THIS PROPERTY.
AND YOU SEE ALSO THE NEAREST, THE SHORTEST DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY LOT AND THIS CHURCH'S PROPERTY IS 195 FEET PLUS THE 5S GUARANTEED IN THE PLAN AMENDMENT TEXT POLICY ITSELF.
AND THEN GOING INTO THE ZONING, WE DID PROVIDE APPROPRIATE NOTICE FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING AS WELL AS THIS MEETING AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION. PURSUANT TO THE LAW.
I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR BUT AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING, BOARD MEMBER LABANOWSKI CAN ATTEST TO THIS.
WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT PROHIBITED USES AND DEED RESTRICTIONS AND WHY THE CHURCH WAS DOING THIS.
AS A RESULT THE PROHIBITED USES YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE ARE ACTUALLY IN THE STAFF REPORT. HE DID A GREAT JOB IN HIS STAFF REPORT AND I WILL POINT YOU TO PAGE -- I. BELIEVE IT IS 7 WHERE IT LISTS THE FOLLOWING USES ARE PROHIBITED.
AND IT LISTS ALL OF THESE SO THEY DID MAKE IT INTO THE STAFF REPORT. THEY ARE BINDING ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT IS A ZONING TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL WITH THAT CONDITIONAL USE OF ALL OF THESE BEING PROHIBITED.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT WAS DONE IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMUNITY MEETING THAT WE HAD RELATED TO T GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE ABOUT THE ALCOHOL DISTANCE SEPARATION. I'M GOING TO GO TO THE COMMERCIAL NOTE. HERE WE GO.
YOU MAY KNOW THAT I REPRESENT THE DEVELOPER SILVERLEAF.
WE CAME IN FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SILVERLEAF PUD A COUPLE YEARS AGO. YOU MAY RECALL THAT THERE IS A WAIVER IN THIS SILVERLEAF PUD THAT AFFECTS THE PROPERTY RELATED TO DISTANT SEPARATION. TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE ABOUT 72 ACRES AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MATH IS RIGHT OR NOT.
FROM SILVER LEAVES PROPERTY WOULD BE AFFECTED IT HAS A WAIVER FROM THE DISTANCE SEPARATION.
IT'S ALREADY BUILT INTO THE PUD. OTHER USERS AROUND THE AREA WILL BE PROHIBITED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 16 A.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE -- AGAIN.
WE HAVE THE BALD EAGLE MAP I CAN SHOW YOU.
THERE IS NOT A BALD EAGLE NEST WITHIN THE VICINITY OF THIS PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE IT AS THE RED DOT RIGHT HERE AND THE BALD EAGLE NESTS ARE NAMED S.J. WHATEVER.
YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE NO BALD EAGLES NESTS WITHIN THIS PROPERTY OR ANY PROXIMITY OF IT. CERTAINLY AS WE ALL KNOW THINGS LIKE WETLAND IMPACTS COME ON WILDLIFE, SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT LAWS. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND A REZONING TODAY.
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY LAWS THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS TO COMPLY WITH. WE'LL GET TO SPECIES AND WETLANDS AND STORMWATER AND ALL THAT AS THE CHURCH GETS INTO DESIGN OF THE COMMERCIAL USES ON THE PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO MENTION.
>> JUST A COUPLE THINGS. LET'S GO BACK TO THIS NOW.
WHEN YOU MAKE THESE GRAPHICS LIKE YOU DO AND WE SEE THEM IN
[03:30:02]
THE HEARING LIKE THIS. IT'S NOT SUPER CLEAR SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS SUPER CLEAR. TWO POINTS.ONE. THIS BEING THE CHURCH PROPERTY.
RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE PARCEL THAT WE ARE REQUESTING REZONING ON. THESE DIMENSIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN IN HERE ARE MEASURED FROM THE CHURCH PROPERTY LINE TO THE CONSERVATION LINE THAT'S ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.
ALL THESE DIMENSIONS ALMOST LOOK LIKE LOTS BUT THEY ARE NOT.
THE LOTS ARE ALL OVER HERE. THE CLOSEST LOT TO THE CORNER IS 195 FEET. WE MADE THE DECISION WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS AS A CHURCH THAT RIGHT IN THIS AREA, I KNEW WE WERE REQUIRED TO DO A 35-FOOT BUFFER.
THE CHURCH VOLUNTEERED TO BECAUSE WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE PROVIDING AN ADEQUATE BUFFER.
BUFFER. WE CAN ADEQUATELY PLAN - HERE THEY'VE ALREADY GOT 200 FEET THAT'S CONSERVATION THAT BELONGS TO THE HOA.
IT DOES NOT BELONG TO INDIVIDUALS.
WE BELIEVE WITH THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATELY BUFFERED OURSELVES AND USES. THAT COMBINED WITH HOW WE LIMITED USES, THE U-HAUL ON THE CORNER AND WE SUBDIVIDED THIS INTO TWO PIECES NOT LIKE A FLAT SUBDIVISION BUT IN THE ZONING WE TALKED ABOUT EAST AND WEST. OUR USE IS KIND OF STEP DOWN FROM THE CORNER THROUGH U-HAUL. FOR INSTANCE THIS SIDE WOULD BE AND THIS SIDE WOULD NOT. WE ADDRESSED THAT AND DEALT WITH THAT IN THE PAST. WE'VE WENT AHEAD AND ADDRESSED THOSE ISSUES TO MAKE SURE IT IS VERY, VERY CLEAR THAT WE ARE STEPPING DOWN THE USES AS WE MOVE FROM THE CORNER TOWARDS THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEN WE HAVE A 200-FOOT PLUS BUFFER. THIS ALSO DOES SHOW -- WE TOOK THE COLORS OFF ON THIS MAP SO YOU CAN SEE THE CONDITION.
THIS IS AN AREA OFF SIDE. THERE'S A COUPLE.
>> CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CHURCH'S VISION AND WHY FROM THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL STANDPOINT HOW YOUR FRUIT COVE CAMPUS, YOU MERGE YOUR CHURCH IN WITH THE COMMERCIAL BECAUSE YOU GO TO PLACES LIKE STARBUCKS AS A MINISTRY OR RESTAURANTS AROUND YOU AND HOW THOSE ARE BENEFICIAL TO YOUR CHURCH AND ALSO WITH RESPECT TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY JUST HELPING YOU TO FINANCE THE CHURCH'S EXPANSION
AND NEED TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY. >> CERTAINLY.
DID TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF POINTS. THIS IS OUR EXISTING CAMPUS IN FRUIT COVE. IT SERVES AS A GREAT CASE STUDY ONE IN LAND USE AND SECOND IN CHURCH MINISTRY.
THIS IS THE CORNER. THIS IS RACETRACK ROAD.
AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THIS IS THE PUBLIX PARKING LOT.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE SOUTHEAST. THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER.
WALMART NEIGHBORHOOD GROCER MANY YEARS AGO.
SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE MORE INTENSE USES AT THE CORNER AND THEN IT STEPS DOWN. THIS IS A STRIP CENTER AND THIS WAS THE OFFICE COMPLEX AND THIS REPRESENTS THE CHURCH PROPERTY TODAY. THE CHURCH OFFICES ARE BACK BEHIND THE STARBUCKS. THIS WAS DEVELOPED AS AN OFFICE, REPURCHASED THAT. WHAT WE FIND AT THE CHURCH IS PART OF THE COUNSELING MINISTRY THAT REVEREND LYNCH SPOKE ABOUT.
PART OF THE MINISTRY IS PEOPLE WILL COME TO THE CHURCH FOR COUNSELING. THAT'S OPEN TO ANYONE IN THE COMMUNITY. BUT OFTENTIMES THEY FEEL LIKE BUT OFTENTIMES THEY FEEL THEY DON'T WANT TO COME INTO A CHURCH, THEY ARE JUST NOT READY FOR THAT BUT THEY DO WANT TO MEET WITH SOMEONE SO IT'S REAL EASY TO SAY LET'S GO TO STARBUCKS OR LET ME MEET YOU FOR LUNCH AT FIREHOUSE SUBS OR HURRICANE WINGS IS RIGHT HERE, THERE'S PIZZA HERE, PARLOR DOUGHNUTS IS HERE, SO THE ABILITY TO GO TO THOSE LOCATIONS AND MEET ONE ON ONE WITH SOMEONE IS VERY IMPORTANT, REMEMBER WE TALKED ABOUT THE CHURCH OFFICE HERE AND THERE IS A SIDEWALK THAT CONNECTS THE CHURCH TO THE BACKSIDE OF THE STARBUCKS, AND SO THE ABILITY TO DO THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE CHURCH.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT THIS WORKS VERY, VERY WELL, AND THIS IS THE FEEL WE WANT TO DUPLICATE. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO DUPLICATE BIG BOXES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE ARE TRYING TO DUPLICATE THIS TYPE OF LOW INTENSE, COMMERCIAL HUM IT CAN BE VERY INTERACTIVE WITH THE CHURCH, AND SINCE WE OWN THE LAND AND WE WILL BE THE SELLER, THERE IS DEED RESTRICTIONS, THERE IS COVENANTS THAT WILL BE PUT IN PLACE, ALL OF THIS INVOLVES THE LAST THING THE CHURCH NEEDS IS SOME KIND OF -- WE CONTROL THAT SINCE WE
[03:35:02]
ARE THE LAND OWNER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. MR. MATOVINA?
>> FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO CORRECT HUGH BECAUSE HE SPOKE INCORRECTLY. IT IS NOT HURRICANE WINGS COME IT'S GATORS WINGS, AND MY WIFE WOULD BE REALLY MAD AT YOU FOR MAKING THAT MISTAKE. [LAUGHTER]
>> I HAD THE WINGS PART RIGHT. >> HURRICANES IS A CROSS.
>> THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, COULD YOU PULL UP THE MAP THAT HUGH WAS JUST SHOWING THAT THE DISTANCES? THE 245 FEET COME WITH A 195 FEET...
AND CAN WE ZOOM IN ON THAT A LITTLE BIT, PLEASE? THAT'S GOOD. OKAY.
I BELIEVE, AND SOMEBODY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BECAUSE WHEN I SAW THIS INFORMATION ABOUT THE PATCH IT WAS VERY CONFUSING TO ME AND I DON'T WANT THE REST OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS TO BE CONFUSED. BUT I BELIEVE THE PATCH IS THE WESTERN END OF THE 245-FOOT DIMENSION.
THAT IS WHERE THAT LOT IS FOR THE PATCH.
SO THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE FOR WETLAND.
THE PATCH HAS A BITE OUT OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ITS LOT AND THAT APPEARS TO BE THE BITE, SAME BITE THAT IS OUT OF THE CORNER OF THAT LOT THAT'S ON THE WESTERN END, YEAH, RIGHT THERE.
THANK YOU. >> MR., WE DO AGREE THERE IS NOTHING. YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE ON THIS MAP THAT THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THE HOA EXTENDS TO THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY LINE WHICH IS THE CATTLE PASTURE SO EVERYTHING IN THAT WARD'S CREEK WOODED AND CONSERVATION AREA AND THEY
CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS TO IT. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS?
MR. LABANOWSKI? >> JUST A QUICK ONE, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE LIST OF EXCLUDED ITEMS?
>> YES, COULD YOU PUT THE POWERPOINT BACK UP? WE KEEP SWITCHING BACK AND FORTH, WE ARE TESTING YOU LADIES. LET ME -- THERE IT IS.
>> SO YOU DON'T HAVE LIVE LOCAL, THIS IS PRIVATED?
>> THAT DIDN'T GET LISTED. WE HAD DISCUSSED THAT IN SOME ONE ON ONE MEETINGS AND THE CHURCH AGREED THAT LIMITING THE
LOCAL WOULD BE FINE. >> WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE LIVE
LOCAL. >> TO YOUR POINT, AND I FORGOT THIS, THE STAFF REPORT ALSO POINTS OUT THE FACT THERE HAVE BEEN TWO EFFORTS TO PUT HOUSING ON THIS, BOTH OF WHICH WERE OBJECTED TO BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND. HOPEFULLY, THEY LIKE HAVING THESE BETTER THAN THEY LIKE HOUSING.
>> THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION.
>> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL ADOPTION OF CPA SCALE 2026-08 BASED UPON PROVIDED IN
THE STAFF REPORT. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY MISS PERKINS, SECOND BY MR. MATOVINA. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, VOTING SCREEN UP, PLEASE.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REZONING 2026-16 FOR CHURCH, BASED ON FINDINGS
PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM 11 BY
>> SECOND BY MISS SPIEGEL. ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEEING NONE COME A VOTING SCREEN IS UP.
AGAIN, PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH, AND MR. MATOVINA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR DEDICATION.
ALL THESE YEARS TO THE PC A AND ALL THE MONEY YOU'VE MADE FROM THIS THANKLESS JOB. [LAUGHS] I'M SAYING IT TONGUE IN CHEEK FOR THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THE PC
[12. ZVAR 2026-31 6951 Charles Street. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section 6.01.03.E.3 of the Land Development Code to allow for a reduced second Front Yard setback of four (4) feet in lieu of the required 15 feet for a Corner Lot located in Residential, Single Family (RS-2) zoning to accommodate construction of a detached garage.]
[03:40:02]
MEMBERS DO NOT GET PAID. [LAUGHS]>> ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12, THE ZONING VARIANCE ON CHARLES STREET. SO WE NEED EX PARTE.
MR. LABANOWSKI? >> ALSO HAD A MEETING WITH DYLAN HANCOCK, AND I TALKED TO NEIGHBORS RELATIVE AND I
RECEIVED NUMEROUS EMAILS. >> MR. OLSON.
>> SITE VISIT AT THE TIME EVERY YEAR ON THIS PROPERTY PLUS NUMEROUS EMAILS, CONCERN FROM SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
>> MISS SPIEGEL. >> YES, I DID A SITE VISIT, TWO SITE VISITS FOR THE PAST TIMES WE'VE HEARD THIS.
29 PLUS EMAILS AND I HAD CONVERSATION BY PHONE AND BY
EMAIL WITH JEN LUNDBERG. >> I RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM DYLAN HANCOCK FROM LAST WEEK, BUT I DID NOT SEE IT UNTIL THIS MORNING. HE WAS REQUESTING AN ON SITE MEETING, BUT I DIDN'T SEE IT UNTIL 10:00 THIS MORNING, RESPONDED TO HIM, SORRY. I ALSO RECEIVED THE PACKET OF LETTERS, SOME IN MY PC A.M. EMAIL, 15 OR 17 OR SO OBJECTING TO THIS. AND I HAVE BEEN BY THE SITE BEFORE A COUPLE TIMES IN THE PAST SO THE FLOOR, YOU DON'T
APPEAR TO BE ZACH ADAMS. >> I AM NOT, SIR, I AM JULIE KURTZ, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, 32084.
I AM COUNSEL FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER CONCERNING THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE. ANY OF Y'ALL FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY, TODAY WE ARE HERE ON A REALLY SPECIFIC ISSUE AND IT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 4 FEET. I HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH, AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY AND THE AREA WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS ALONG GRACIE STREET HERE ON THIS SORT OF NORTHERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY. WE ARE REQUESTING A 4-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE GRACIE STREET AREA.
IF Y'ALL HAVE BEEN OUT TO THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW THIS IS -- THIS WAY -- THIS IS A RATHER ODDLY SHAPED LOT.
I THINK THAT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS FROM THE SHAPE OF THE LETTER ITSELF, THERE'S ONLY ONE COMPARABLE SUPER NARROW LOT AND IT IS ACTUALLY DOWN HERE, SIMILARLY ABOUT 50 FEET AT ITS WIDEST POINT AND ALL OF THESE LOTS ALONG HERE HAVE DETACHED GARAGES. SOME OF THESE DETACHED GARAGES WERE BUILT QUITE SOME TIME AROUND BEFORE THE CURRENT SETBACKS WERE IN PLACE SO THEY ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR OUR CONSTRUCTION ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT HAVING A DETACHED GARAGE ALONG ONE OF THESE LOTS IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT OTHER PROPERTIES HAVE.
ACTUALLY, BEFORE I TAKE THIS DOWN, THIS OTHER PROPERTY THAT IS REALLY NARROW, I KNOW THERE IS A SHADOW HERE BUT THE GARAGE IS ACTUALLY DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, IF YOU'VE BEEN OUT NOT JUST TO VIEW THE SITE, IT'S A SINGLE LANE ROAD. THERE IS NO TWO-WAY TRAFFIC ON THAT ROAD. ONCE YOU TURN DOWN CHARLES STREET TO GO SOUTH, YOU ARE COMMITTED TO GOING SOUTH TO ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES OR YOU ARE DRIVING INTO SOMEONE'S DRIVEWAY AND TURNING AROUND, WHICH IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, CAN BE A LITTLE BIT SCARY. THE SITE PLAN WAS ALREADY APPROVED BY THE COUNTY. I KNOW YOU HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE. SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE COUNTY BACK IN 2024 AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS, TO HAVE THE GARAGE IN THIS LITTLE NOOK AREA OF THE PROPERTY. I HAVE A BETTER VIEW OF THAT HERE. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR.
AND I KNOW I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF YOU BE CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC, WITH SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP, AND I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, AND IT'S PARTICULARLY PERTINENT FOR THIS PARTICULAR VARIANCE. NOT ONLY DOES IT MAKE REASONABLE SENSE TO UTILIZE THIS AREA OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT'S WHERE THE PARKING GOES TO SAFELY ACCESS THIS HOUSE BECAUSE YOU TURN ONTO CHARLES STREET, YOU TURN INTO THE PROPERTY, AND THE
[03:45:06]
ONLY WAY TO EFFECTIVELY TURN AROUND AND BACK UP SO YOU CAN PULL FORWARD ONTO CHARLES STREET WHICH IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE AGAIN, THERE'S ONLY ONE LANE ON THAT ROAD AND THE VISIBILITY IS SOMEWHAT LIMITED BY SHRUBBERY ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THIS SPACE TO TURN AROUND.
IT IS THE MOST REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY AND BECAUSE THE LOT IS SO NARROW IN ORDER TO MAKE IT EFFECTIVE WE NEED THE SETBACK FROM GRACY STREET. AGAIN, IF YOU'VE BEEN OUT TO THE PROPERTY YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THIS AREA LOOKS LIKE.
IT'S AN EXTREMELY NARROW AREA BETWEEN THOSE TWO POWER POLES OR TELEPHONE POLES, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE AN ISSUE HERE BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO WORK AROUND THEM WE ARE WORKING ON THIS VERY NARROW PIECE OF PROPERTY. IF YOU LOOK DIRECTLY STRAIGHT AHEAD, THIS IS THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
IT IS OWNED BY MR. JOE PERRY, HIS ADDRESS IS...
I DON'T HAVE HIS ADDRESS HANDY. HE IS ACTUALLY ON GRACY STREET, AND THE ROCKS THAT PROVIDE HIS DRIVEWAY COME ALL THE WAY OUT ON GRACY STREET, ALL THE WAY OUT TO WHERE CHARLES AVENUE MEETS RIGHT HERE. HE EFFECTIVELY HAS A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY ON GRACY STREET, AND IMPRTANTLY, HE'S THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT'S GOING TO BE MOST AFFECTED BY THIS.
THE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO BE ESSENTIALLY SORT OF RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE HIS PROPERTY LINE OTHERWISE SITS, AND HE IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS. HE'S ALREADY SENT AN EMAIL SUGGESTING THAT HE HAS NO PROBLEM WITH IT.
THIS IS A RENDITION OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE GARAGE ON THE SIDE AND LET ME SAY THIS COME I DON'T THINK THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE BUT I DO THINK THIS GIVES AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT IT WILL BE TO BE ABLE TO PULL DIRECTLY INTO THE PROPERTY OFF OF CHARLES STREET, SEE THE FRONT DOOR, HAVE THE FRONT DOOR BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, AS WELL, YOU LOOK OUT THE FRONT DOOR AND SEE WHO IS DRIVING IN AND UTILIZE THAT LITTLE NOOK OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO PARK IN THE GARAGE AND MOST IMPORTANTLY TURN AROUND SO YOU CAN PULL STRAIGHT FORWARD ONTO CHARLES STREET WHEN YOU ARE LEAVING.
THIS IS ANOTHE RENDITION, AND I THINK AGAIN THIS JUST SHOWS IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE BE ABLE TO USE THAT LITTLE PARTICULAR NOOK OF PROPERTY BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU ARE BLOCKING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, FIRST OF ALL, BUT ALSO YOU ARE LIMITING THE ABILITY OF CARS TO TURN AROUND AND PULL STRAIGHT FORWARD, SO ALL OF THE TRAFFIC GOING IN AND OUT OF THIS HOUSE IS GOING TO BE BACKING OUT OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S ANOTHER ONE, AS WELL, AGAIN I'M NOT SURE THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE BUT IT'S A GOOD INDICATION OF HOW THE ARRANGEMENT WILL BE TO REDUCE THE SETBACK SO THAT WE CAN PUSH THE GARAGE INTO THE LITTLE NOOK AREA OF THIS PLOT AND ALLOW FOR THE CARS TO MANEUVER AROUND.
THAT'S ANOTHER AERIAL IMAGE OF THE PROPERTY AND ALSO SHOWS WHERE 295 GRACY STREET AND 290 GRACY STREET ARE.
THESE ARE THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THE MOST IMPACT BASED ON THE EASEMENT WE ARE REQUESTING BECAUSE THIS IS THEIR ACCESS TO THEIR HOMES. IT IS, AGAIN, THAT SAME PRIVATE DRIVEWAY, THAT ROCK DRIVEWAY AT 295 GRACY STREET AND THIS IS ESSENTIALLY DIRT AND GRASS. THERE IS REALLY NO PAVING OR ROCKS OR ANYTHING MAKING A DRIVEWAY ONTO 290 GRACY STREET BUT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THAT BECAUSE IT IS TECHNICALLY A ROAD, WE NEED TO REDUCE THE SETBACK ALONG THAT ROAD AREA APPEARED YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE EMAILS FROM MR. PERRY AND MR. KEELY, THE OWNERS OF THOSE PROPERTIES, WHO HAVE NO OBJECTION AND ARE IN FACT IN SUPPORT OF THIS SETBACK.
I HAVE SOME OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS, AS WELL, SIMILAR RENDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY, BUT REALLY THIS IS THE MOST REASONABLE USE OF THIS ODDLY SHAPED LOT. AND BECAUSE IT IS KHAKSARI, THERE YOU GO. BECAUSE IT IS CHARLES STREET, IT IS APPROPRIATE THAT THIS BE THE DRIVEWAY, THAT ACCESS BE ABLE TO PULL INTO THE PROPERTY COME APART, TURN AROUND COME AND PULL STRAIGHT BACK OUT ONTO THE ROADWAY, SO FOR THOSE REASONS WE ARE REQUESTING A 4-FOOT SETBACK COME A REDUCED FROM 15 COME ONLY ALONG THE GRACY STREET SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND I'M CERTAIN YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AND I WILL TAKE THEM.
>> MR. OLSON. >> COULD YOU, THIS HAS BEEN HERE
[03:50:05]
ONCE OR TWICE BEFORE. >> YES, SIR,.
>> COULD YOU LIST CONCISELY WHAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THIS APPLICATION, THE DIFFERENCE FROM THE PRIOR APPLICATIONS? I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS IS SETBACK HAS BEEN INCREASED BY 1
FOOT, BUT WHAT ELSE IS THERE? >> OTHER THAN IT BEING A STAND-ALONE ISSUE AND ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE, I DON'T BELIEVE
ANYTHING HAS CHANGED. >> WE HAD A LOT OF CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND GOING BEYOND THE TRAFFIC, AND I UNDERSTAND THE SAFETY OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE OUT ON CHARLES STREET. HEAD FIRST RATHER THAN TRYING TO BACK OUT. I THINK MY IMPRESSION IS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN IS THE SHEER...
OVERWHELMING PRESENCE OF THIS TWO STORY GARAGE, A GARAGE THAT ESSENTIALLY HAS ADDITIONAL LIVING QUARTERS ON THE SECOND LEVEL. THAT'S MY IMPRESSION.
I BELIEVE THIS IS THE ONLY FREESTANDING GARAGE IN THAT AREA THAT IS TWO-STORY, BUT I MAY BE WRONG, SO COULD YOU SPEAK TO ANY
>> COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE ISSUE. >> I ABSOLUTELY CAN.
SO... WHETHER THE GARAGE IS ONE STORY, TWO STORIES, OR EVEN A COVERED CARPORT, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IT BE PUT IN THIS AREA OF THE PROPERTY.
>> RIGHT. >> SO, RESPECTFULLY, WHETHER IT IS ONE STORY OR TWO STORY DOESN'T AFFECT WHERE WE NEED TO PUT THE GARAGE ON THIS PROPERTY. THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY ISSUE HERE, IS CAN WE GO WITHIN THE 9 FEET AND PUT THE EDGE OF THE GARAGE OR THE EDGE OF THE CARPORT OR THE ONE STORY GARAGE OR TWO-STORY GARAGE OR WHATEVER IT IS, CAN WE GO THAT CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE? I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO DO SO BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOST REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE GARAGE LOOKS LIKE, REGARDLESS OF ITS STYLE, REGARDLESS OF ITS COLOR, WE NEED THE DISTANCE, WE NEED THAT REDUCED SETBACK TO PROVIDE PARKING IN THAT AREA.
>> YES, OKAY, WELL, AGAIN, MY IMPRESSION IS THE SHEER BULK OR MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION PUT INTO THIS VERY SMALL LOT, THERE IS CONCERN THAT IT DOES NOT FIT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO
THIS IS NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT'S NOT GOING TO LOOK LIKE SOME OF THE OLDER HOMES THAT ARE ON THE STREET OR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S JUST NOT.
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT NEW CONSTRUCTION AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SOME OF THESE OLDER HOMES, SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
AND NUMBER TWO, WHEN I WENT OUT TO VISIT THE PROPERTY THE FIRST TIME, I WAS STRUCK BY THE FACT IT'S HIGHER UP THAN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. I MEAN, BECAUS THEY HAD TO PUT, I BELIEVE IT WAS 6 FEET FILTERED, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT DOES SIT HIGHER UP THAN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, BUT WE DIDN'T CHOOSE TO DO THAT.
WE DID THAT BECAUSE THE COUNTY REQUIRED THAT WE LIFT IT UP, SO I CAN APPRECIATE THAT, BUT SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE SIMPLY SAFETY ISSUES THAT WE ARE COMPLYING WITH.
BUT WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO LOWER IT DOWN TO THE GROUND A LITTLE BIT AND IT MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE LESS IMPOSING, BUT THAT'S NOT
FUNDAMENTALLY, WHAT IS THE HARDSHIP WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE? WHAT IS THE TRADE OFF BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS ABOUT INCOMPATIBILITY, GIVEN THE
CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? >> WELL, AGAIN, THE STYLE OF THE HOUSE AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE MIGHT SEEM INCOMPATIBLE, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT A REGULAR LOT AND WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY PUTTING THE GARAGE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, SO IT'S SOMEWHAT INCONSISTENT, THIS ONE EVEN HAS A CARPORT RIGHT UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE, SO HAVING A DETACHED GARAGE IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT EVERYBODY
[03:55:01]
HAS, BUT IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE BECAUSE OF THIS LITTLE NOOK ON THE PROPERTY AND BECAUSE THAT ROAD IS AT THE FAR END OF A DEADEND ROAD. >> I UNDERSTAND THE PLACEMENT, IT'S JUST, I THINK I'VE EXPRESSED MYSELF ALREADY.
>> BRINGS UP A GOOD QUESTION. IT'S A NONCONFORMING LOT BUT YOU DO NOT EXCEED LOT COVERAGE, DO YOU?
>> NO, SIR. IN FACT I BELIEVE THERE WAS 700 ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET THAT THEY COULD HAVE USED THAT THEY HAVE
NOT USED. >> OKAY, SO IF YOU DO NOT EXCEED THE LOT COVERAGE, OKAY. I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE ELEVATION. YOU'VE GOT A STAIRWAY TO THE SECOND FLOOR. IS THAT PART OF THE SETBACK?
>> SO -- >> I CAN'T REALLY -- WE JUST GET THESE SMALL THINGS. AND I SEE THE STAIRCASE, WHICH I ASSUME IS FACING GRACEY ROAD, AM I RIGHT ON THAT?
>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. THE DEPICTIONS DO HAVE A STAIRCASE ON THE BACK OF THE GARAGE ON GRACEY STREET.
>> FROM THE STAIRCASE ON OR FROM THE WALL, OR MAYBE THAT'S A
STAFF QUESTION. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE SETBACK WE ARE ASKING FOR IS GOING TO BE FROM THE LINE TO WHERE THE STAIRCASE BEGINS AND THEN THE BUILDING ITSELF IS GOING TO BE 7 FEET FROM THE LINE.
>> OKAY. SO THE BUILDING IS 7 FEET.
BUT THE SETBACK YOU ARE REQUESTING IS FOUR, IS THAT
CORRECT? >> I GUESS TECHNICALLY --
>> THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT.
OKAY. I WAS SORT OF SURPRISED HOW GRACY STREET CAME DOWN, THAT'S WHY I WROTE DOWN, I GREW UP JUST DOWN THE ROAD, AND I DIDN'T REALIZE GRACY WENT ALL THE WAY
PAST THE LITTLE -- ALL RIGHT. >> MR. LABANOWSKI.
>> YES, I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE HARDSHIP BECAUSE THAT GARAGE COULD BE PLACED IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IT COULD BE PLACED IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND YOU'D STILL HAVE ENOUGH TURNAROUND WHERE YOU PLAN ON PUTTING THE GARAGE NOW.
REALLY THERE IS NO HARDSHIP BECAUSE YOU CAN RELOCATE THAT
GARAGE. >> I ACTUALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU.
I AM NOT SURE YOU WOULD HAVE SUFFICIENT ROOM TO PULL AROUND BECAUSE IF YOU PULL IN YOUR DRIVEWAY IS GOING TO BE RIGHT ON THE EDGE, AND THEN YOU WILL PULL INTO THE GARAGE AND YOU WILL BASICALLY HAVE TO BACK OUT THE SAME WAY, SO YOU'D END UP BACKING OUT ONTO CHARLES STREET, PROBABLY CLOSE TO THE CORNER AND THAT PHONE POLE THEN THROUGH THE WIDER AREA OF THE ACCESS ON
CHARLES STREET. >> AFTER TALKING WITH DYLAN ABOUT IT, THE RELOCATION OF IT, HE SAYS IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO THAT AND STILL HAVE ENOUGH TURNAROUND, I MEAN, HE'S THERE ON SITE, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WHY CAN'T YOU JUST RELOCATE THAT GARAGE? THOSE TWO THINGS. STILL GIVES YOU THE ACCESS, BUT THEN YOU ARE NOT PUTTING A GARAGE RIGHT IN FRONT OF A NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE. AND I KNOW -- NO PROBLEM WITH IT. BUT AGAIN IT'S JUST THE VISUAL.
NEITHER ONE OF THOSE ARE REALLY THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT IT IT IS ALL OUT TO THE RIVER.
IT IS ALL OUT TO THE RIVER. THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT.
YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE ENTRY.
I KNOW -- I'M JUST SAYING, WHEN YOU GO INTO THAT HOUSE BECAUSE I WENT INTO WHAT THEY WERE BUILDING AND YOU ARE LOOKING OUT COME A WIDE OPEN TO THE RIVER, THE NEIGHBOR IS THE SAME WAY COME A WIDE OPEN TO THE RIVER, THAT'S THE VIEW YOU ARE LOOKING AT. NOT CHARLES STREET OR GREASY OR WHATEVER. TO MOVE THAT GARAGE IN FRONT, THERE IS STILL ENOUGH ROOM FOR TURN AROUND, AS WELL AS SPACE BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE GARAGE.
>> I GUESS WHAT I WOULD SAY TO THAT, IF THAT IS A TECHNICAL POSSIBILITY, I'M GOING TO TELL MY HUSBAND THAT I'M NOT BUYING THAT HOUSE BECAUSE IF AMAZON3 SHOWS UP AND THEY PULL UP TO THE FRONT DOOR, I CAN'T SEE WHO IS PULLED UP IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
I CAN'T SEE WHO IS PULLED IN FRONT OF MY DRIVEWAY FROM MY FRONT DOOR BECAUSE THE GARAGE IS IN THE WAY, AND THAT'S A SAFETY ISSUE FOR ME, AND I DON'T THINK I'M ALONE IN THINKING THAT.
THAT'S JUST ANOTHER PIECE OF CONSIDERATION FOR WHY IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO SET IT OFF TO THE SIDE, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THIS LOT DOES ALLOW FOR THE GARAGE TO BE SET OFF TO THE SIDE BECAUSE
[04:00:01]
WE HAVE THAT ODD LITTLE NOOK ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IT.>> NOW IS THIS GOING TO BE YOUR PERMANENT RESIDENCE?
>> IT'S NOT, BUT I DO THINK MY POINT IS VALID.
>> I'M ASKING A QUESTION. >> IT'S NOT IN MY HOME, NO IT'S INTENDED TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
>> SO ONCE IT'S COMPLETED, IT WILL BE UP ON THE MARKET FOR
SALE? >> I DON'T EXACTLY KNOW IF THEY ARE GOING TO SELL IT OR IF THEY HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS GOING TO BUY
IT OR MOVE INTO IT. >> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
OKAY, THANK YOU. >> MISS SPIEGEL.
>> THANK YOU, JULIE. CAN YOU GO TO THE OVERHEAD THAT
>> YEAH. THE ONE THAT HAD THE MOCK UP OF THE GARAGE IN IT. IT WAS AN AI-GENERATED, THE WAY THE OVERHEAD FROM ABOVE, I THINK THERE WAS -- I'M SORRY, I KNOW THAT IS A LITTLE SLIPPERY KIND OF SLIDE.
THAT'S FINE. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. OKAY.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THIS NO PLACE TO TURN AROUND THING WITH THE GARAGE THERE. JOE SEEMS THE CONFIGURATION OF THE GARAGE COULD BE NARROWER IN ORDER TO FIT.
AND THEN IT COULD BE PULLED FORWARD A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALL THAT ROOM TO THE EAST OF THE GARAGE FOR TURNING AROUND YOU'D STILL HAVE ROOM TO PULL UP.
I AM ALSO HAVING A HARD TIME SEEING THE HARDSHIP.
IT'S LIKE THIS IS OUR DESIGN, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT, AND WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT FIT INTO THE LOT.
>> I THINK ON THE SITE PLAN IT IS 26 FEET WIDE.
>> 26 FEET WIDE. >> I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH LESS WIDE IT COULD BE IF IT'S ALSO GOING TO ACCOMMODATE TWO
VEHICLES SIDE BY SIDE, BUT. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> I WILL HAVE TO SAY I'M ALSO HAVING TROUBLE SEEING THE HARDSHIP. I THINK IT'S MORE OF A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP, AND THAT'S BEEN POINTED OUT IN NUMEROUS LETTERS. CONCERNING YOUR AMAZON DELIVERY THYPOTHETICAL AMAZONDELIVERY, IF YOU HAD A ONE-STORY GARAGE AND IT WAS IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION SUCH AS IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AMAZON DRIVER PULLED IN, YOU COULD LOOK OUT THE SECOND STORY WINDOW OF YOUR HOME AND SEE WHO WAS OUT THERE, SO I
MEAN, YOU COULD SEE IT. >> THAT'S TRUE YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO UPSTAIRS AND SEE WHO WAS AT YOUR DRIVEWAY.
>> ALSO, PEGGY COOK, WHO LIVES RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE SOUTH, WROTE IN, AND THIS PERHAPS IS HEARSAY BUT SHE IS HERE TO SAY IT ON THE RECORD THAT SHE WAS TOLD BY THE OWNER IF THIS WAS DENIED FOR A THIRD TIME, SHE IS HERE, SHE IS WAIVING, THAT THE OWNER WOULD BUILD THE HOUSE TOWARD THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE LOT, SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE PARTIALLY IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
>> I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT WAS SAID TO HER.
>> IF THE VARIANCE IS DENIED AND REALLY THE ONLY OTHER PLACE TO PUT IT IS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THIS IS HER PROPERTY LINE, SO THE GARAGE WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE TO GO CLOSER.
>> I'M JUST QUOTING WHAT I READ IN THE LETTER.
YEAH, WE ARE DEFINITELY GOING TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE DID NOT -- AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS SOME PEOPLE TO SPEAK.
YOU BROUGHT UP THE PHIL, SO I'M GOING TO BRING IT UP.
YOU SAID THE COUNTY REQUIRED THE PHIL TO BE BROUGHT IN?
>> I BELIEVE THEY HAD TO INCREASE THE ELEVATION OF THE PROPERTY BEFORE THEY COULD BUILD.
>> YOU CAN BUILD UP ON WALLS AND OTHER WAYS TO BUILD UP, BUT IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS TRUE OR NOT, JACOB COULD CORRECT ME, THAT THE FILL WAS BROUGHT IN ON THE LOT IN QUESTION IN ORDER TO MAKE A T THEY COULD JUSTIFY THE 8-FOOT WALL, THE 8-FOOT WALL WAS BUILT, SO IT'S 8-FOOT TALL FROM PEGGY COOK'S PROPERTY, BUT NOW, FROM THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY, IT'S ONLY 6 FEET TALL BECAUSE 2 FEET OF PHIL OR MORE PERHAPS WAS BROUGHT IN. SO CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT?
>> IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THE FILL WAS BROUGHT IN WAS BECAUSE THE PROPERTY ELEVATION NEEDED TO BE RAISED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION COULD BEGIN, AND THE GRADING IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE COUNTY ASKED THEM TO DO, WHICH WAS PUT THIS HINGE POINT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY, SO THIS FRONT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY DRAINS INTO CHARLES STREET AND THE BACK SIDE DRAINS INTO THE MATANZAS RIVER.
WITH RESPECT TO THE FENCE ISSUE, ALL I KNOW IS THAT PERMIT WAS
[04:05:03]
APPROVED AND THE FENCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE.>> THAT WALL THAT WAS DENIED TWICE BY THE PZA AND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THEN WE FIND OUT THAT THE COUNTY APPROVED IT, SO COULD YOU ADDRESS THIS, JACOB?
>> YES, SIR. JACOB SMITH, FOR THE RECORD. THE WALL OR THE FENCE, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT, WE DON'T DO PERMITS FOR FENCES.
BEING PERMITTED OR BEING ALLOWABLE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN GETTING A PERMIT FOR IT BUT NONETHELESS, SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT ULTIMATELY THE APPLICANT HAD TO DEMONSTRATE THIS 8-FOOT WALL ACTUALLY MET THE CODE REQUIREMENT, WHEN YOU PREVIOUSLY WERE HERE, THAT HAD NEVER BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO STAFF THROUGH ALL THE RIGAMAROLE AND BACK AND FORTH AND ULTIMATELY COUNTY STAFF MADE IT ON SITE, TOOK THE MEASUREMENTS, IT WAS ULTIMATELY DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY EITHER DO OR WILL MEET AS THEY FINALIZED THAT SITE TO ALLOW FOR THOSE 8-FOOT FENCES.
THERE IS NO LONGER A VARIANCE NECESSARY FOR THE FOOT FENCE.
>> OKAY, BUT THEN PEGGY COOK COME WHO HAS LIVED THERE FOR 43 YEARS, IS COME I'M GOING TO USE THIS WORD, THAT SHE DID, SUFFERING WITH THAT 8-FOOT WALL IN HER FACE WHEN SHE LOOKS OUT HER DOOR AND I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT, SOMEBODY BUILT AN 8-FOOT WALL AND NOT GET THE VARIANCE APPROVED.
>> THE CODE VARIANCE IS FAIRLY INTERESTING, IN MY OPINION IT'S NOT QUITE INTENDED FOR THIS PREDICAMENT BUT I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT OPINIONS FROM MY ENGINEERING STAFF THAT THE COE WAS WRITTEN TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE DIFFERENCES IN FILL FOR OLDER VERSUS NEWER LOTS BECAUSE AGAIN, AS YOU POINTED OUT, IF YOU ARE IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, YOU EFFECTIVELY HAVE A 6-FOOT TALL FENCE ON YOUR SIDE. WE ARE NOT HERE FOR THAT NOW.
THE AMOUNT OF FILL -- >> SO THE COUNTY WOULD REQUIRE FILL AND NOT JUST SAY A WALL. 4-FOOT OR 6-FOOT STEM WALL AND RAISE THE ELEVATION OF THEIR HOUSE WITHOUT HAVING TO BRING IN
FILL. >> THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT. I BELIEVE THE COUNTY WILL FORCE THE APPLICANT INTO A PARTICULAR SITUATION.
FILL IS ONE OF THOSE WAYS. >> SO THE COUNTY WOULDN'T HAVE
FORCED THEM INTO THAT FILL. >> I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.
>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT.
ALL RIGHT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? I THINK IT'S TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
PLEASE COME FORWARD. MR. HAMILTON, SIR.
>> MY ADDRESS IS 6989 CHARLES STREET, I'M THE THIRD SOUTH. I GREW UP, MY DAUGHTER INTERVIEWED AND WHAT I WOULD SAY TO YOU IS WE HAVE A REAL CHARACTER. GO TO DOWNTOWN CRESCENT BEACH.
IT IS A DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, AND BEFORE THE -- THERE WERE SEVERAL HOUSES BUILT IN THAT SPOT AND THEY ARE MOSTLY ALL STILL THERE.
AND THERE IS CLEARLY CHARACTER. WE LIKE HAVING THAT ONE LANE DIRT ROAD AND PEOPLE DON'T DRIVE FAST, OKAY? AND I DON'T HAVE A GARAGE. JUST AS AN ASIDE.
THE HOUSE AT 251 251 -- A. HYDROELECTRIC PLANT, LIGHTS BUILT IN THE EARLY 20S, AND THE BURNS FAMILY DOWN THE ROAD, THE HOUSE IS STILL THERE, THEY HAD AN EASEMENT TO USE THAT. ALL OF US WHEN WE WERE GROWING UP, IN THE SUMMERS WE WOULD GO DOWN THERE AND SWEEP OUT THE BAIT SHOP, AND A LOT OF THAT AREA, I'VE BEEN IN MY HOUSE FOR OVER 30 YEARS, AND I'M THE NEWCOMER OF THIS BUNCH OF YOU GOT YOUR LETTERS FROM. WE HAVE A NICE OLD NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT'S GOT A CHARACTER, AND THESE GUYS BOUGHT A 40-FOOT WIDE LOT, THAT'S A TINY LOT, AND THEY ARE PUTTING WAY TOO MUCH ON THEIR, AND IT LOOKS, THEY HAVE SCRAPED IT CLEAN, PULLED IT UP, HAD IT BEEN GOOD NEIGHBORS, DRAGGING ON PEGGY'S SIDE AND WALTER'S SIDE AND THE ROAD, DIDN'T MAKE MUCH OF AN ATTEMPT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. THE BEACH COTTAG WE HAVE AS A
[04:10:04]
KID THAT WE STILL HAVE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER WHEN CAROLE BRADSHAW GIVES HER PRESENTATION, THIS IS A TYPICAL MENORCAN HOUSE AND WE WISH WE WERE MONACANS BUT WE LIKE THE CHARACTER OF OUR HOUSE. THESE GUYS ARE SOPHISTICATED, THEY KNEW WHAT WAS ALLOWED, AND NOW THEY WANT TO PUT MORE THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED, AND IT IS NOT GOOD FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.AS YOU SAID, THIS BOARD HAS UNANIMOUSLY DENIED THIS BEFORE.
THE COUNTY COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY DENIED THIS BEFORE, AND REALLY THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY CHANGE SUBSTANTIAL TO THIS PROJECT. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PLEASE DENY THIS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME ON DOWN. I SEE IT'S ANOTHER MR. HAMILTON.
>> MY NAME IS BILL HAMILTON I LIVE AT 7000 CHARLES STREET, MY DRIVEWAY IS ONE OF THE ONES THAT PEOPLE TURN AROUND OR PULL INTO WHEN TWO CARS MEET ON CHARLES STREET.
SO I'M A PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN 300 FEET.
I URGE YOU TO DENY THE ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST.
MY REASONS INCLUDE THERE'S NO HARDSHIP.
THE LOT IS UNDERSIZED. THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A GARAGE TOO BIG FOR THE LOT. HE CAN BUILD A SMALLER GARAGE THAT STAYS WITHIN THE LDC SETBACKS THAT HE ACTUALLY SHOWED A RENDERING WITH A SMALLER GARAGE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE AT ONE POINT, SO HE CAN BUILD A GARAGE.
ANY CLAIM OF THERE IS NO HARDSHIP, ANY CLAIM OF HARDSHIP IS SELF-IMPOSED AND IS A SELF-CREATED DILEMMA, A FINANCIAL INCONVENIENCE COME AT A DESIRE FOR GREATER PROFIT.
DO NOT QUALIFY AS LEGAL HARDSHIP.
OVERSIZE GARAGE PROVIDES AN ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE.
ST. JOHN'S COUNTY STRICTLY PROHIBITS VARIANCES THAT WILL ALLOW FOR A USE NOT ALLOWED BY ZONING.
BURDEN OF PROOF AND COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. THEY MUST APPROVE THE APPLICATION OF THE LDC, CREATE AN UNDUE BURDEN.
THEY HAVE NOT MET THAT STANDARD. ST. JOHN'S COUNTY ZONING VARIANCE REQUIRES PROVING THAT UNNECESSARY AND UNDUE HARDSHIP EXIST DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS. TO ESTABLISH A LEGAL HARDSHIP, A ZONING VARIANCE WITH ST. JOHN'S COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING MUST MEET SPECIFIC CRITERIA UNDER ARTICLE TEN OR 10.04 .00, ST. JOHN'S COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE HARDSHIP CANNOT BE THE RESULT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER'S OWN ACTIONS. PRIOR ILLEGAL MODIFICATIONS OR SELF-IMPOSED DILEMMA. THE APPLICANT MUST PROVIDE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PROVING THE LITERAL APPLICATION OF LDC CREATES AN UNDUE BURDEN, FINANCIAL INCONVENIENCE, A DESIRE FOR GREATER PROFIT OR PERSONAL PREFERENCE DO NOT QUALIFY AS LEGAL HARDSHIPS. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE MUST REMAIN IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE LDC AND MUST NOT HARM THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY VALUES. THE VARIANCE GRANTED MUST BE THE MINIMUM DEVIATION NECESSARY TO ALLOW REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND STRUCTURE. NO VARIANCE -- VARIANCES ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED USING A PROPERTY FOR A USE COMPLETELY UNPERMITTED IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT, VARIANCES OR RESTRICTED AREA, STANDARDS LIKE SETBACKS HEIGHT LIMITS OR LOT COVERAGE. THEY CAN BUILD A GARAGE, THEY CAN PUT IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE LIKE LOTS OF THE OTHER GARAGES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM TO TURN AROUND ON THE LITTLE BUMP OUT PART OF THE PROPERTY, AND THEY HAVE ALREADY PLANNED FOR THAT AND THEY HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS IT, SO I ASK YOU RESPECTFULLY DENY THIS REQUEST.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION AND DISCUSSION. OH, YOU HAVE REBUTTAL, SO COME ON UP. SORRY.
>> JUST BRIEFLY. THE GARAGE, THE HOUSE, THE GARAGE COME EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS NOT MORE THAN ALLOWED. IT'S NOT OVERSIZE.
IT'S NOT TOO BIG. IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THE COUNTY. I THINK I DID THE MATH AND IT'S LIKE 25% OF THE LOT COVERAGE BASED ON THE SITE PLAN, AND THE SITE PLAN, FRANKLY I'VE NEVER SEEN ANOTHER SITE PLAN.
I SAW THE ONE THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY.
IT'S IN YOUR MATERIALS. AND IT'S THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE GARAGE IN THE LITTLE NOOK. THIS WAS...
THIS WAS THE PLAN ALL ALONG, WAS TO UTILIZE THIS LITTLE JUT OUT
[04:15:05]
OF THE PROPERTY AND USE IT FOR A GARAGE IN THE WAY THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE TO DO THAT IS TO PUSH THE GARAGE AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN .WHICH, FRANKLY, IT'S NOT REALLY A ROAD.
IT'S ACTUALLY MR. PERRY'S PRIVATE DRIVEWAY, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE CALL IT, WE CALL IT GREASY STREET.
THAT'S WHAT IT IS AND ANY ATTEMPT TO SAY THIS IS TOO MUCH, OVERSIZE, NOT APPROVED, SIMPLY NOT TRUE, THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE.
NO MATTER WHETHER THIS IS A CARPORT, A TWO-STORY GARAGE, SINGLE-CAR GARAGE, THE BEST USE OF THIS PROPERTY IS TO ALLOW THE PARKING AND THE TURNAROUND ON THAT AREA AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT WE NEED TO REDUCE THE THANK YOU.
MR. LIMANOWSKI? >> NOT NOW, I'M SORRY.
I WISH YOU WOULD COME EARLIER. SHE'S GIVEN HER REBUTTAL, SORRY, THAT IS OUR RULES AND POLICY. SORRY.
>> DO YOU BY CHANCE HAVE A LAYOUT FOR THE UTILITIES GOING TO THAT LOT? OKAY.
>> WHAT IS THE FRONTAGE ON CHARLES STREET? HOW MUCH FRONTAGE IS THERE? 59 FEET?
OKAY, THANK YOU. >> OKAY, WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION AND DISCUSSION.
MR. MATOVINA? >> WHERE ARE WE HERE ELIPSIS I.
WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY 2026-3161 -- 6951 CHARLES STREET, BASED UPON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT MOVING THE GARAGE TO THE SOUTH, IN MY OPINION, DOES NOT BLOCK THE VIEW OF THE HOUSE, IT ACTUALLY ENHANCES THE VIEW OF THE HOUSE AS YOU APPROACH IT FROM THE EAST.
YOU WILL BE STARING RIGHT AT THE HOUSE, WHEREAS RIGHT NOW AND BLOCKS THE VIEW OF THE HOUSE WHERE PROPOSED.
MOVING THE GARAGE TO THE SOUTH DOES CAUSE THEM TO LOSE 4 FEET OF BUILDABLE WIDTH, SO TO SPEAK, FOR THE SOUTH TO NORTH DISTANCE.
BECAUSE THEY ARE ASKING FOR A 4-FOOT SETBACK OF THE NORTH LINE AND DO NOT HAVE A VARIANCE OF THE SOUTH LINE THAT HAS TO COMPLY WITHIN AN 8-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.
THEY ARE LOSING 4 FEET. IF THE GARAGE IS 26 FEET DEEP AND THE SETBACK IS EIGHT, IN MY MATH THAT IS 34.
THAT LEAVES 25 FEET FOR THE DRIVEWAY NORTH OF THE GARAGE.
AND FOR THE TURNAROUND AND FOR ENTERING AND LEAVING THE DRIVEWAY, I WILL TELL YOU, I HAVE A LOT LESS THAN 25 FEET TO BACK OUT OF MY SIDE ENTRY GARAGE AND MAKE A TURN LIKE THAT.
THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM. THAT IS THE REASON FOR MY MOTION. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IT IS VERY DISAPPOINTING TO ME THAT ON JUNE 18TH, WILL BE VOTED TO ALLOW -- TO WAIVE THE ONE YEAR.
ON THE BASIS OF A NEW SITE PLAN COMING FORWARD AND THE CHANGE FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW IS 1 FOOT.
MOVING THE GARAGE 1 FOOT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. MATOVINA, SECOND BY MR. LABANOWSKI.
>> NO, NEVER MIND. >> SEEING NO DISCUSSION, PLEASE PUT OUR VOTING SCREENS UP. A YES VOTE IS FOR DENIAL.
[Item 13 &14]
THAT IS DENIED UNANIMOUSLY. SO WE ARE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 13 AND 14. THIS IS THE LONG AWAITED, LONG ANTICIPATED PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE PROTECTION ADOPTION HEARING.>> WE FINALLY GOT APPROVAL FROM THE STATE OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, SO WE ARE HERE. AND THEY HAVE NO ISSUES WITH OUR AMENDMENT. LEX TAYLOR FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY APARTMENT AND FOR UTILITIES.
WE'VE GOT BOTH A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT AND NOW THE CHANGES TO GO WITH IT. THESE ARE THE SAME SLIDES YOU SAW BEFORE, SAME JUSTIFICATIONS. EXPLANATIONS.
THE ONE THING I WILL POINT OUT HERE IS THAT OUR COUNTY
[04:20:02]
UTILITIES ONLY USE THE DEEP WELLHEADS AND SO A LOT OF THE CONCERNS ARE LESS NECESSARY. THESE ARE THE CURRENT ZONES.THESE ARE THE CHANGES, WE WILL GO FROM A 200-FOOT PRIMARY TO A 500-FOOT PRIMARY THAT MATCHES THE STATE.
WE WILL ELIMINATE SPECIAL USE PERMITS BECAUSE THE STATE WON'T ALLOW THE SPECIAL USE PERMITS WITHIN THAT FIRST 500 FEET.
WOOD IS NOT AN EXTRA BURDEN, THAT IS JUST MATCHING WHAT THE STATE DOES AND REQUIRES. AND WE ARE LOOSENING AND MATCHING THE STATE REQUIREMENTS.
EVERYTHING -- THESE ARE THE CHANGES.
IF YOU HAVE CHANGES COMING YOU'VE SEEN THEM COMING YOU'VE APPROVED THEM. IF ANYTHING HAS CHANGED.
ESSENTIALLY WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW EVERYTHING TO BE -- THINGS TO BE BUILT IN THERE AND WE ARE MATCHING THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHANGES WE'LL UPDATE TO MATCH THAT.
BUILDERS WILL KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT.
PEOPLE THAT HAVE QUESTIONS WE'LL KNOW WE ARE BUYING OUR WELLHEAD SITES PAID EVERYBODY AROUND THEM KNOWS WHAT CANNOT AND CANNOT BE BUILT. A LOT OF IT IS REGULATED BY THE RIVER WATER, SAINT JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT THROUGH THESE THINGS GET TAKEN CARE OF IN DIFFERENT PLACES IN OUR CODE. THIS PUTS US IN A CLEAR KIND OF WHERE WE ARE BACK TO DOING BUSINESS.
I APOLOGIZE THESE. IT'S TAKEN ME A SECOND TO GET ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT. I PUT IT ALL IN THERE JUST IN CASE. THESE ARE THE EMOTIONS THAT I AM DEFINITELY HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
THESE ARE THE TWO MOTIONS. SPEAKER ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? SEEING NONE, ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, OH.
MISS PERKINS. SHE IS READY TO GET OUT OF HERE.
>> I AM. MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION. THE FIRST, THE SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, OKAY.
IT APPEARS TO BE UNANIMOUS, SIR. ALL RIGHT.
ON TO ITEM 15. >> WE'VE GOT ONE MORE.
MOTION TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF LDC A. 25-07 WELLHEAD
WE HAVE A MOTION BY MISS PERKINS AND A SECOND.
IT LOOKS LIKE THAT AGAIN. [LAUGHS]
[ 15. Recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for Planning and Zoning Agency Member Appointment. There will be one PZA vacancy effective November 1, 2026, due to the expiration of Agency Member Greg Matovina's term. This position was most recently advertised for the required thirty (30) days. The attached applications meet the minimum criteria for consideration; the Planning and Zoning Agency shall recommend a new Agency Member to the Board of County Commissioners.]
THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT.AND NOW WE ARE ON TO RECOMMENDATION OF AN APPLICANT FOR THE PZA TO RECOMMEND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR A NEW PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY MEMBER TO REPLACE MR. GREG MATOVINA AS OF NOVEMBE. THERE IS A PROCEDURE FOR THIS.
JACOB. THEY WILL GO OVER THAT SO I
DON'T MESS ANYTHING UP HERE. >> THANK YOU, SIR, FRED I'M GOING TO LET LEX TALK ABOUT THE PROCEDURE BUT I WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT AND THANK MR. MATOVINA FOR SERVING WITH US.
IT'S BEEN GREAT TO KNOW YOU, GREG.
I AM SAD THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE GONE BUT I'M GLAD YOU GET TO SPEND YOUR TIME, YOU KNOW, DOING THIS EVERY THURSDAY BASICALLY.
WE HAVE A LITTLE MOMENTUM I'M GOING TO BRING UP THERE FOR YOU COME A NICE BLACK. -- A. NICE PLAQUE.
TRULY GREG IT'S BEEN GREAT WORKING WITH YOU AND LISTENING TO YOU AND GETTING YOUR INSIGHTS.
ME AND MY STAFF APPRECIATE YOU. WE LOOK FORWARD TO EITHER YOUR REPLACEMENT AND MAYBE THE CONVERSATION THAT COMES FORWARD HERE SO UNLESS YOU WANT TO COME TAKE A PHOTO WITH ME, I WILL BRING IT TO YOU. WE'LL GO DOWN.
>> NOT THE LAST TIME. WE HAD THE PHOTO OF THE APPLICANT WHOSE TERM HAD EXPIRED WITH THE ENTIRE BOARD.
>> WE SHOULD GO DOWN THERE. >> ALL RIGHT.
[04:25:58]
JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY ABOUT PROCESS.YOU'LL OPEN NOMINATIONS. THE NOMINATION WILL BE TO HAVE A SECOND. ONCE WE HAVE ALL THE NOMINATIONS, YOU'LL CLOSE NOMINATIONS.
AT THAT POINT IN TIME WE'LL OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU CAN DELIBERATE.
THEY ARE VOTED ON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE NOMINATED.
THE FIRST PERSON NOMINATED IS THE FIRST PERSON YOU WOULD VOTE.
ONCE ANY CANDIDATE GETS A MAJORITY, THAT'S THE
RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD. >> OKEY DOKE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT REFRESHER. OH,, SORRY.
YES. >> THIS IS DISTRICT 1, AM I
>> THERE IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE A MEMBER OF THIS BOARD THAT IS FROM DISTRICT 1.
BUT ONCE MR. MATOVINA LEAVES THERE WILL NOT BE A MEMBER FROM DISTRICT 1 SO THERE IS A -- NOT A RULE BUT A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU AT LEAST DECIDE A GOOD REASON NOT TO APPOINT SOMEBODY FROM DISTRICT 1. YOU SHOULD REALLY FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE NO GOOD CANDIDATES FROM DISTRICT 1 OR JUSTIFY VOTING FOR
DO WE ONLY MAKE ONE RECOMMENDATION?
TWO RECOMMENDATIONS? >> WHOEVER GETS THERE FIRST.
>> AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
SO ANYTHING THAT THE BOARD WANTS TO INCLUDE IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION, THEY CAN INCLUDE IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
IF YOU WANT TO SAY WE LIKE THIS PERSON FIRST AND WE LIKE SOMEBODY ELSE SECOND, YOU CAN DO THAT BUT THAT WOULD BE ABNORMAL.
>> OKAY. >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD WELL BALANCED BOARD.
I LIKE THIS BOARD. MR. MATOVINA LEAVING IS REALLY GOING TO SHIFT THINGS A LOT. AND I KNOW THIS IS MAYBE GOING A LITTLE OUT OF CONTROL, BUT WE -- IF WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT YOU THINK, MR. MATOVINA, THAT WOULD SORT OF EMULATE SOME OF THE CHARACTER THAT YOU BRING TO THIS BOARD, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, IF WE COULD HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT. I WANTED TO SAY, TO CALL YOU OR TEXT YOU AND SAY CAN YOU PICK SOMEBODY THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE
GOOD? >> I'M SURE WE ALL HAVE OUR
CHOICE. >> HE'S ONE OF A KIND.
>> YEAH. >> DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT? LET ME TURN YOUR MIC ON.
>> I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.
>> WELL, YOU DID. >> THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE
IN HERE FROM DISTRICT 1. >> THERE'S TWO.
>> QUITE FRANKLY, YOU KNOW. I DON'T REALLY SEE SOMEBODY NECESSARILY WITH THE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE -- I DON'T KNOW THESE PEOPLE. I'M JUST GOING OFF A VERY SHORT RESUMÉ. THE CLOSEST ONE I SEE IN HERE IS JAMES GALLOWAY. WE INTERVIEWED HIM WHEN HE RAN FOR OFFICE AND I JUST DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT WAS ALL AB ABOUT. MEGAN IS GIVING ME THE EYE.
I MUST SAY THAT IT'S PRETTY IMPRESSIVE SOME OF THE INFORMATION ON CATHERINE MCAVOY.
I DON'T KNOW. SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE, MAYBE NOT. KIND OF SPEARHEADED THE EFFORT TO DEFEAT THE APARTMENTS OFF SAN JOSE BOULEVARD IN FRUIT
[04:30:01]
COVE. IT WAS A PRETTY IMPRESSIVE EFFORT BUT WHAT'S MORE IMPRESSIVE IS THE LETTERS AND INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE ABOUT HER SUGGESTED SHE REALLY GOT INTO READING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CODE AND ATTEMPTED TO USE THAT TO BE READY TO MAKE ARGUMENTS SHE NEVER HAD TO MAKE BECAUSE IT NEVER GOT HERE. YOU ALL MAY OR MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY WAS PROPOSING TO GO BEHIND THE PUBLIC'S -- OFF OF STATE ROUTE 13.THEY SOMEHOW PUT TOGETHER A FOUR OR FIVE PROPERTIES BIG ENOUGH TO PUT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX IN. AND SO THEY WERE HAVING PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PUTTING APARTMENTS IN.
I BELIEVE CATHERINE MCEVOY, IF I HAVE THE RIGHT PERSON, KIND OF LED THE GROUP TO OPPOSE IT. MS. A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION Y GOSH, LET ME MAKE SURE I HAVE THE RIGHT PERSON.
>> I THINK YOU ARE THINKING OF SOMEBODY ELSE.
>> NO, KRISTA DUBY. SPEAKER THAT IS WHO IS IN THE
SHE IS FROM DISTRICT ONE AS WELL.
>> I THINK WE HAD TWO LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO AGAIN, IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO TELL FROM THE INFORMATION PROVIDED. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY IN HERE WITH MY SKILL SET. BUT I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND LIKE I AM PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY IN HERE WITH THAT BACKGROUND. SO OF ALL THESE PEOPLE.
IF I CAN LEAVE YOU ALL WITH ANY WORDS OF WISDOM, ANY WORDS OF WISDOM ARE, YOU KNOW IT'S NOT OUR JOB TO GET INTO, IS THE GARAGE TOO BIG? I HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE.
SHOULD IT HAVE AN AWNING? THAT SORT OF THING.
THAT'S NOT OUR JOB WHEN SOMEBODY ASKS FOR A VARIANCE.
OUR JOB IS TO EVALUATE THE VARIANCE.
IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE KRISTA MIGHT BE THAT SAME SORT OF FACT BASED PERSON WHO WILL RELY ON THE LAW AND NOT JUST NECESSARILY SAYING I DON'T LIKE THIS. THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE SOMETHING I SHOULD LIKE. DOCTOR HILSENBECK, YOU HAVE OVER THE LAST FIVE OR SIX YEARS, YOU HAVE LEARNED TO USE THE CODE FO% YOU AND I TO DISAGREE ON THINGS. I LIKE THAT.
>> IT HAS AT TIMES CAUSED ME TO PAUSE.
>> I AM JUST BATTLING ON. THAT'S THE BEST I CAN DO AT THIS POINT IS SUGGEST PERHAPS THE YOUNG LADY IN THE CROWD MIGHT BE
IS THAT A NOMINATION? >> SURE.
I'LL MAKE A NOMINATION IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE ME TO.
I KIND OF FEEL LIKE I SHOULDN'T BE THE ONE MAKING Y'ALL'S
>> YOU'RE MAKING A NOMINATION. WE STILL HAVE TO VOTE.
>> I WILL NOMINATE, LET ME GET THE NAME RIGHT.
KRISTA DUBÉ. >> WE HAVE A NOMINATION OF KRISTA DUBÉ. A SECOND.
DO WE HAVE ANY MORE NOMINATIONS. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO, RIGHT? TAKE NOMINATIONS UNTIL WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE. DO WE HAVE ANOTHER NOMINATION?
>> I AM NOT ON. >> MR. LABANOWSKI HAD WANTED TO SPEAK AT ONE POINT. NOT NOW? OKAY. MR. GREEN.
ARE WE PAST THAT? >> DISTRICT 1.
>> THAT'S WHO I WAS GOING TO. I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE HER, A VERY WELL ROUNDED PERSON I THINK WITH NO REAL AGENDA.
BASICALLY HAS BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY FOR YEARS.
THAT'S SOMETHING I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE.
PEOPLE THAT EITHER WENT TO SCHOOL HERE OR THEIR KIDS GREW UP HERE AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, THE WHOLE DEAL.
SO I WANT TO PUT OUT ELIZABETH, BETH.
>> I WOULD SECOND THAT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ABOUT MISS TAIT, SHE DOES SERVE ON THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
[04:35:03]
SHE SHOWS UP AT EVERY MEETING. SHE WRITES THE SYNOPSIS OF WHAT'S GOING ON. SHE'S VERY EVEN.I THINK SHE'S PRETTY BALANCED. WE ARE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAKES THE FINAL DECISION. I LIKE KRISTA AS WELL.
>> WE HAVE A SECOND NOMINATION BY MR. GREEN.
ELIZABETH TAIT. A SECOND BY MISS SPIEGEL.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMIN NOMINATIONS?
>> SHE IS IN DISTRICT 1 ALSO. >> THEY BOTH WERE, ISN'T THAT
INTERESTING? >> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NO OTHER NOMINATIONS, SHALL WE CLOSE THE NOMINATING PROCESS? OKAY.
AND WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? HE'S COMING FORWARD.
>> I MIGHT AS WELL ADDRESS THIS NOW.
I REALIZE THAT I HAVE NOT LIVED IN THIS AREA PROBABLY AS LONG AS ELIZABETH TAIT HAS. I DID NOT HAVE A JOB THAT ALLOWED ME TO LIVE IN ONE SPECIFIC AREA.
MY JOB REQUIRED A LOT OF TRAVEL. THAT WOULD JUST NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE. BUT LET ME GO AHEAD.
ONCE AGAIN, GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY. MY NAME IS KRISTA DUBÉ AND I AM A DISTRICT 1 RESIDENT. I AM RESIDING IN THE FRUIT COVE COMMUNITY OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY. I NEVER IMAGINED THAT I WOULD BE STANDING HERE TODAY ASKING TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY. BUT SOMETIMES LIFE TAKES US IN DIRECTIONS THAT WE NEVER ANTICIPATED.
MY INVOLVEMENT BEGAN WITH A LAND USE ISSUE AFFECTING MY NEIGHBORHOOD UNLIKE MANY RESIDENTS, I BECAME INVOLVED BECAUSE I WAS SO CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED AND HOW IT MIGHT AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY. I BEGAN -- LET ME GO BACK.
SOMETHING INTERESTING HAPPENED ALONG THE WAY.
I BEGAN READING STAFF REPORTS, STUDYING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS.
AND LEARNING HOW LAND USE DECISIONS ARE MADE.
AND I DISCOVERED SOMETHING ABOUT MYSELF.
I ACTUALLY ENJOY DOING THE HOMEWORK.
THE MORE I LEARNED, THE MORE INTERESTED I BECAME.
NOT SIMPLY IN ONE APPLICATION BUT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS ITSELF. I ALSO DEVELOPED A GENUINE APPRECIATION FOR THE MEMBERS OF THIS AGENCY.
I WATCHED HOW YOU LISTENED TO THE RESIDENTS, QUESTIONED APPLICANTS, EXAMINED THE FACTS, AND WORKED THROUGH VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS. I CAME TO UNDERSTAND THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT COMES WITH SERVING ON THIS AGENCY.
WHAT BEGAN AS AN EFFORT TO PROTECT MY NEIGHBORHOOD GREW INTO A BROADER INTEREST FOR THE FUTURE OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY.
I BEGAN TO APPRECIATE THE DELICATE BALANCE BETWEEN GROWTH, PROPERTY RIGHTS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, AND PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITIES.
I HAVE ALSO LEARNED THAT THERE ARE OFTEN REASONABLE PEOPLE ON DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE SAME ISSUE.
I BELIEVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS AGENCY IS NOT SIMPLY TO HEAR THOSE PERSPECTIVES BUT TO GIVE EACH ONE FAIR CONSIDERATION BEFORE REACHING A DECISION. IF APPOINTED, MY RESPONSIBILITY WOULD BE TO THE ENTIRE COUNTY. APPROACHING EACH APPLICATION WITH AN OPEN MIND, LISTENING RESPECTFULLY, AND APPLYING THE COUNTY'S PLANNING POLICIES FAIRLY AND CONSISTENTLY.
THE FIRST TIME I SAT IN THIS ROOM, I WAS HERE TO SPEAK FOR MY NEIGHBORHOOD. TODAY I'M HERE BECAUSE I WOULD BE HONORED TO SERVE MY COUNTY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME
AND CONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU.
RIGHT ON THE BUTTON. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I AM GOING TO SAY I LIKE THAT YOU WERE THE ONLY MEMBER OUT OF THE 20, THE ONLY CANDIDATE OUT OF THE 20 THAT APPLIED THAT WAS HERE TODAY, AT LEAST THAT WE KNOW OF.
AND SAT THROUGH THE ENTIRE MEETING WHICH WAS NOT EASY.
ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. WE VOTE ON FIRST TO FORWARD KRISTA DUBÉ NAME TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR CONSIDERATION TO REPLACE MR. MADDALENA'S SEAT IN DISTRICT
[04:40:06]
ONE. ALL RIGHT.CAN WE HAVE OUR VOTING SCREEN? IS TOM STILL BACK THERE? WHO IS CONTROLLING THE VOTING SCREEN? ALL RIGHT. TIME TO VOTE.
YOUR NAME HAS BEEN FORWARDED ON TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. WHEN WILL THEY TAKE THAT UP? DO WE KNOW? NOVEMBER 3RD.
YOU MAY WANT TO ATTEND THAT MEETING.
OKAY. YOU WILL SEE MRS. KEEBLE AND
[Staff Reports]
MR. LEWANDOWSKI THERE. MS. SPIEGEL.PROBABLY NOT MR. MATOVINA. ANY STAFF REPORTS?
>> NO STAFF REPORTS, MR. CHAIR. JUST TO LET THE BOARD KNOW OUR NEXT UPCOMING MEETING IS NOVEMBER 5TH.
>> NOVEMBER 5TH? HOW MANY ITEMS?
>> JUST TO ADDRESS, THANK YOU ALL FOR SPENDING YOUR TIME.
THIS WAS A VERY LONG MEETING. NOT HELPED BY THE CONTINUANCE OF THAT FIRST ONE. THIS ONE DOES HAVE 12 ITEMS ON IT. I APOLOGIZE.
WE ARE ALREADY SCHEDULING FOR FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR.
WE ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE IN. THERE'S A LOT OF BUSINESS TO DO.
SOMETIMES IT TAKES A LONG MEETING.
BUT I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S EFFORTS ON IT.
>> STAFF HAS DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB ON ALL OF THESE ITEMS.
>> THANK YOU. NOVEMBER 5TH WILL BE OUR NEXT
MEETING. >> ANY AGENCY REPORTS OR COMMENTS? GOODBYE, GREG.
ADIOS. >> I WON'T BE WATCHING.
>> AFTER WHAT, SIR?
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.