Mar 05, 2020 Planning and Zoning Agency

[Call to Order]

[00:00:03]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I HAVE 1:31 BY MY CLOCK, AND I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY MEETING FOR THURSDAY, MARCH 5TH.

WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER HERE. AND WE'LL START OFF BY HAVING A

READING OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE OF STATEMENT BY MY VICE CHAIR. >> THIS IS E PROPERLY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS FORWARDED BY LAW.

THE PUBLIC WILL GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE AGENCY'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AND THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE SO BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CARD, WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD ONLY AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN. SPEAKER CARDS MAY BE TURNED IN TO STAFF. THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A I DURING THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM AND FOR A LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES.

SPEAKERS SHALL IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHOM THEY REPRESENT AND THEN STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY.

IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OR TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF A PERSON DECIDE TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.

ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS WILL BE RETAINED BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD.

THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARD OR AGENCIES IN THE COUNTY OR MI REVIEW OF APPEAL RELATED TO THE ITEM. 3.

BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER THEY HAVE HAD ANY 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 SHALL THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSON INVOLVED IN THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION. IV CIVILITY CLAUSE. WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE. WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES.

WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACK. >> THANK YOU, ARCHIE. UP NEXT IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.

THIS IS THE TIME WHEN THE PUBLIC CAN SPEAK ON ANY TOPIC THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY.

[Public Comment]

[Item 1]

WITH GENDA NUMBER 1 ITEM. >> . MR. SMITH, HOW ARE YOU TODAY?

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND AGENCY MEMBERS. SCWHRAIB SMITH WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT PRESENTING JEANLD I'M NUMBER 1 MAJOR MODIFICATION 2019-6 FOR THE ROBERT F. INSULIN ARMY PUD. IT'S A REQUEST FOR A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE ARMORY TO ALLOW FOR THE EXPANSION OF APPROXIMATELY 60,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE EXISTING PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE OF THE FLORIDA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD HEADQUARTERS. THE.

THE LOCATION MAP INDICATES TEAR OF PUD IS APPROXIMATELY ONE AND A HALF MILES NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF I-95 ON STATE ROAD 207. IT IS IN A MIXED USE DISTRICT ADJACENT TO BUSINESS COMMERCIAL AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL B. AGAIN IT IS A PUD AND ADJACENT TO SEVERAL DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS INCLUDING COMMERCIAL TOURIST TOURIST, COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE AS WELL AS OPEN RURAL. AND LASTLY AN AERIAL MAP DEFIXT CURRENT STATE OF THE SITE.

AGAIN THIS IS A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE EXISTING ARMORY PUD IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD HEADQUARTERS. THE EXPANSION IS PROPOSED. THAT IS AN LARRY UP THERE.

IT'S ABOUT 60,500 SQUARE FEET, NOT 65. IT WILL ALSO EXPAND THE PARKING AREA TO INCLUDE 199 NEW SPACES AS WELL AS TO RECONFIGURE THE STORM WATER PONDS AND ADD A STORM WATER POND. PEE DEE DEPICTED IS THE CURRENT LAY OUT OF OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT MAP. JUST FOR SOME ORIENTATION THERE'S TWO DRIVE ACCESSES ON THE LOW SIDE OF THE MAP, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE MAP. THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING BUIE

[00:05:08]

I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE LOCATION OF THE NEW BUILDING IN THE CENTER LEFT AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES AND THE RETENTION POND, STORM WATER PONDS ARE STARRED.

EVERYTHING ELSE ON THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY UNCHANGED. THE PROPOSED MOPPED IF I CASE DOES NOT CHANGE SETBACKS, MAXIMUM SCREENING HEIGHTS OR OPEN SPACE.

THERE IS A MALL PORTION OF WETLANDS ABOUT WANT 4 ACRES THAT WILL BE IMPACTED DUE THE TO EXPANSIO OF THE PARKING LOT. SIGNAGE OR ACCESS AS PROPOSED. THE APPLICANT DID REQUEST SEARLE WAIVERS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION. ALL THE WAIVERS ARE CURRENTLY ENACTED AND WERE APPROVED WITH THE ORIGINAL PUD UNDER ORDINANCE 2008-54.

STAFF DOES NOT PROPOSED WAIVERS, AND I JUST DID A LITTLE RECATCH WHAT THEY REGARD.

THE SCREENING FOR SOLID WASTE AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, THE LACK OF A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN, AS WELL AS THE PARKING REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENTS. FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE ANALYSIS, THE PROPOSED MAJOR MODIFICATION FOR THE ARMY RI PUD DOES NOT APPEAR TO CONFLICT WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA AND IS CONSISTENT REQUEST THE CURRENTLY ON THE OTHER HAND 2008-54 WHICH ESTABLISHED THE PUD. THE WAIVERS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION ADDRESS THE CURRENT EXISTING FACILITIES AND LAYOUT OF THE SITE AND HAVE NOT PROVED TO BE OTHERWISE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND THE PUD DESIGN STANDARDS AND DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ARE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS INCLUDING THE MIXED USE DESIGNATION, THE SETBACKS AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO AND BUFFERING.

STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE OR OBJECTIONS RELATING TO THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION. AND FINALLY, WITH THE FINDINGS, STAFF DOES SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL MAJOR MODIFICATION 2019-6, FINDS THE REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE LAND USE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND HAVE PROVIDED SIX FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS WELL AS SIX FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL.

I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, AND I'M CERTAINLY AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU

MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU, JACOB. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I SEE NONE. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT.

HELLO, MS. APPLICANT. >> HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, AGENCY MEMBERS. I'M LAURA DIETRICH WITH DIETRICH PLANNING 1332 AVEL DALE ANN JACKVILLE, FLORIDA. I'VE HAD THE PLEASURE OF SPEAKING WITH THE REVIEW AND I LEFT MESSAGES SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THOSE OF YOU I DIDN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH.

I DON'T WANT TO BE DUPLICATIVE OF JACOB'S STAFF REPORT BECAUSE IT WAS VERY THOROUGH.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS. BACK IN 2008 WHEN I WAS WITH KIMLEY HORNY DID THE ORIGINAL PUD ACTUALLY IN WORKING WITH MSE THE GUARD HAD NOT BEEN GOING THROUGH CERTAIN PERMITTING APPLICATIONS DUE TO PAST INTERPRETATIONS OF HOW FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES WERE TO BE PERMITTED. SO WE SPENT THE LAST 15 YEARS OR SO BRINGING DIFFERENT FACILITIES UP TO AND READINESS CENTERS UP TO COMPLIANCE.

THE PUD WE STARTED WITH FIRST, AND THAT WAS TO TAKE EXISTING FACILITY AND MAKE IT WHOLE SO THAT PUD WAS DONE AFTER THE FACT, SO SOME OF THOSE WAIVERS HAVE TO DO NOT ONLY WITH FACT THAT IT WAS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED BUT ALSO DUE TO ANTI-TERRORISM BUILDING STANDARDS, PATRIOT ACT, ARMY REGULATION NUMBER 1, SO A LOT OF THOSE THINGS CAME WITH THE SITE AND/OR DUE TO REGULATIONS. AND THERE'S ON ONE THING THAT'S BEING OMITTED AND THAT'S THE HELICOPTER PAD. SO WHILE THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE, THAT WILL BE REMOVED AND THE 60,535 SQUARE FEET IS THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT'S BEING ADDED TO THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE. EVERYTHING ELSE IS EXISTING AND PERMITTED.

SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WINL HERE. TOM NORMAN THE ARCHITECT AND ED

GIBSON THE ENGINEERING IS ALSO WITH US AS WELL. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

THE APPLICANT ANY SEE NONE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT.

SURE. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS?

>> NO. >> THEN WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY.

THOUGHTS, COMMENTS OR A MOTION. MR. MATOVINA. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE APPROVAL

OF THE FIND STAFF'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, WAS THERE ANY ERR EX PAR TO

[00:10:07]

ANY EX-PARTE TO BE. >> I DAVE CONVERSATION WITH IT AGENT IN RESPONSE THE HERFIELD EMAIL ASKING ME TO RECALL. WE DISCUSSED THE HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT.

>> I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRESIDENT APPLICANT AND REQUESTING A CONVERSATION, I CALLED THE NUMBER THAT WAS GIVEN. I NEVER GOT A CALL BACK SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT REALLY CUTESG CONSTITUTES COMMUNICATION OR NOT.

>> WE'LL LEAVE IT UP TO LEGAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU ALL. GOT THAT ONE DONE IN RECORD TIME, GUYS. ITEM NUMBER 2, MS. FRAZIER. WAIT.

[Item 2]

THAT'S NOT MS. FRAZIER. PULLED A FAST ONE ON US. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN AND AGENCY. UNFORTUNATELY, MS. PHRASEDDER COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY SO I AM GOING TO DO HER ITEMS. THIS IS THE FIRST ITEM.

IT IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2. IT IS A MINOR MODIFICATION 20-01 CALLED THE DOLPHIN RESIDENCE PAIPTS REQUEST FOR A MINOR MODIFICATION TO THE ODOMS MILL PLANNING DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS ORDINANCE NUMBER 96-8 TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT INTO THE YEAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE DISCLOSURE YOU OF SCREEN END ENCLOSURE ANOTHER 336 OH 336 ODOMS MILL BOULEVARD.

THIS IS JUST A LOCATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL B ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. IT IS ZONED PUD.

AND THEN THIS ISING AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE PROPERTY THERE. YOU CAN SEE ITS HOAX ADJACENT TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER.

AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK TO PUT A SCREEN ON THE PATIO. THE IT REQUESTS AN CLOSURE IN THE FU OF ROCKS REPLY 3 HEAVEN FEET AT THE SOUTHERN BOUND RIP. THE MASTER MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PUD REQUIRES I ACCESSORY STRUCTURES INCLUDING SWIMMING POOLS, SCREENED DISCLOSURES TO MEET THE SAME SETBACK AS THE MAIN USE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE ENCROACHMENT IS OCCURRING IN THIS LOCATION.

AND THEN THE LIES APPROXIMATELY 1.64 EARKSZ, 6,009 GIVEN FLEFN SQUARE FEET MEASURED AT THE FRONT FROM 60 EFNT. AND DEAPTH RANGING FROM 88.0 FEET TO 88.75 FEET.

AND THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE SURVEY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY MAKES THE MINIMUM SIZE REQUIRED BY THE PUD OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET. BUT APPEARS SMALLER AS COMPARED TO THE SURROUNDING LOTS WITHIN THE UNIT 2 ROWNG BE ON DOMS MILL BOULEVARD TO BIG TREE ROAD.

THE LOTS TO THE NORTH RANGE FROM 1.8-ACRE IN SIZE THE .31-ACRE IN SIZE AND THEY GENERALLY HAVE DEPTHS OF 96 TO 153 FEET. THE PROPERTY IS THE LAST RESIDENTIAL LOT ON ODOM'S MILL BOULEVARD IT IS DISWREANT RECREATION IS A PARK A MEN CITI FOR THE COMMUNITY TO THE WEST AND IT BACKS UP TO RESIDENTIAL COMMON PRESERVATION PEAR THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT THE SIDES EXPTD DEPTH OF THE LOT AS COMPARED THE TO SURROUNDING LOTS WITHIN THE PUD CREATE A HARDSHIP TO MEET THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF OUR REGULATIONS.

THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE SCREENED DISCLOSURE WITH NO ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL LOT TO THE SOUTH DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IT WOULD NOT BE VALUABLE FROM ANY ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A COPD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION DID LOOK AT THIS PROPOSAL AND THEY HAVE GIVEN US A COPY OF THE APPROVAL OF THE HOA, AND STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THIS REQUESTED MODIFICATION.

SHAFF STIENDZ THE REQUEST FOR THE MINOR MOD PICATION TO ODOM'S MILL ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND APPEARS TO MEET THE CRITERIA IN THE CODE DUE TO THE LIMITED LOT AREA AND DEPTH COMBINED WITH THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS WHICH MAY CONSTITUTE A HARDSHIP FOR THE PLACE. A SCREENED-IN CLOSURE. THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. BASED ON THE LOCATION OF THE LOT, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION APPROVAL, AND THE MINIMAL ENCROACHMENT OF THE 374 SQUARE FEET.

[00:15:02]

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT MAY BE HERE. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I

WILL TRY TO ASSIST. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF? I SEE NONE. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD, PLEASE. STATE YOUR NAME AND A ADDRESS

FOR RECORD AND IF YOU'D LOOK TO ADD ANYTHING. >> MY NAME IS IS JAN JOHN DOLT G A. THE PONT PONTE VEDRA BEACH. I JUST WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME AND IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF WORK. I'M LITERALLY JUST PUTTING A SCREEN OVER MY EXISTING PATIO, BUT, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'VE GOT TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCES SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR THAT LITTLE WAIVER. I HAVE TALKED TO ALL MY NEIGHBORS. WE GOT TO HOA APPROVAL. THEY WERE ALSO KIND OF SURPRISED THAT I HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. BUT IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE PROCESS. WE REALL WANT A SCREENED-IN PORCH.

I THERE'S A LOT OF MOSQUITOES. I JUST MOVED DOWN HERE FROM VIRGINIA.

A LOT OF MOSQUITOES. I'M STILL GETTING USED TO THAT. I HAD TO COME IN IN UNIFORM.

WE'RE TRYING TO GET TWO WARSHIPS ON DPOIMENT DEPLOYMENT SO I'VE GOT TO GET BACK UP TO MAIN PORT BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND HOPE THAT YOU GUYS WILL APPROVE THIS.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE.

WELCOME TO FLORIDA. >> THANK YOU. >> A LITTLE BIT MORE RED TAPE MAYBE. BEATS NEWPORT NEWS, THOUGH, RIGHT?

>> YEAH, THE TRAFFIC THERE WAS CRAZY. THIS IS RELAXING.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANKS. >> DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER

CHAR? >> NO. >> WE'RE BACK IN AGENCY.

COMMENTS, THOUGHTS, MOTION? MR. MATOVINA. >> I'LL MOVE APPROVAL IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS PRESENTED BY STAFF. >> WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND NOW.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS.

SAY GOODBYE TO THE BUGS. MOVING RIGHT ALONG NOW, ITEM NUMBER 3.

[Item 3]

MS. BISHOP AGAIN. >> ITEM NUMBER THERE IS I SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR POSTAL FLEET SERVICE PARKING. IT IS A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE& PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR TEMPORARY OFF-SITE PARKING FOR UP TO 12 VEHICLES IN RS 3 ZONING PURSUANT SECTION 2.03.15 OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 28554TH STREET.

THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE STATE ROAD 16 IS LOCATED A LITTLE NORTH OF THAT ALONG 4TH STREET. THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL C. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED RS 3. AND THEN THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY. POST FLEET SERVICES IS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR TO THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. IT HAS OFFICES LOCATED IN THE CENTURY PROFESSIONAL PARK PUD.

THAT IS THIS PROPERTY RIGHT THERE. THE OFFICE COMPLEX IS SHARED WITH SEVEN OTHER BUSINESSES PROVIDING A TOTAL OF 75 PARKING SPACES WITH APPROXIMATELY 22 SPACES RESERVED. POSTAL FLEET UTILIZES THREE UNITS WITHIN THE CENTURY PROFESSIONAL PARK WESTERN AROUND 2,340 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AND THERE'S 55 EMPLOYEES.

THE NARRATIVE EXPLAINS THAT THE BUSINESS HAS OUTGROWN THE CURRENT LOCATION AND IT IS SEEKING TO RELOCATE TO ON THE LOCATION IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. EMPLOYEES HAVE UTILIZED THIS PARKING ALONG NORTH FOURTH STREET FOR OVER I DON'T BUFFET RECEIVED COMPLAINTS FROM RESIDENTS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INTO THE MEDICINE ADJACENT TO THE BUSINESS OFFICE. THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL LOT THAT DOES SEPARATE.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET IN WIDTH AND IT DOES SEPARATE THE CENTURY PARK TO THIS PARKING.

THERE'S A SIX FOOT CALL WOODEN FENCE WHICH HAS BEN INSTALLED AT THE PARCEL PERIMETER ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL LOTS, AND IF APPROVED THE APPLICANT WILL PROVIDE FOR STABILIZATION OF THE PARKING AREA AND LANDSCAPING, PLANTINGS TO MITIGATE FOR THIS TEMPORARY USE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE SITE.

YOU CAN SEE THEY DO SAY UP TO 12 PARKING STASIS. ALL SPACES WILL BE AT LEAST 12-FOOT WIDE AND THAT THERE WILL BE A WOOD FENCE, OPAQUE WOOD FENCE PLACED AROUND THE PROPERT PROPERTY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A RESIDENTIAL RS 3 ZONING CLASSIFICATION WHICH MAY PERMIT OFF-SIDE UNPAVED, PARKING SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL USE

[00:20:02]

THE PROPOSED OFF-SITE PARKING WITH KNEW WITH ALL REGULATIONS SET FORTH IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED SLIDE IS REQUESTED FOR OFF-SITE PARKING THE EXISTING OFFICE COMPLEX PROVIDES THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, AND THOSE ARE PROVED BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THE SPECIAL USE IS SOUGHT ON THE TEMPORARY OVERFLOW DUE TO AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AT THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS, AND WITH THE OFFICES LOCATED IN THE CENTURY PROFESSIONAL PARK. THE APPLICANT HAS INSTALLED THE OPAQUE FENCE. NO EXTERIOR LIGHTING IS PROPOSED FOR THE PROPERTY.

USE OF YAWFT SITE PARKING WILL BE LIMITED TO DAYTIME HOURS ONLY.

THE SPECIAL USE PER SUMMIT REQUESTED FOR PARKING ONLY. AND THE ORDER INCLUDES A CONDITION TO PROHIBIT ANY TYPE OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY ON THIS PROPERTY.

ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS MAY ALLOW FOR UNPAVED PARKING SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SITE TO DEMONSTRATE ADEQUATE STABILIZATION, STALL DIMENSIONS, ACCESS AISLES FOR VEHICLE USE AND ALL PARKING AREAS.

THIS PROPERTY AND THIS APPLICATION HAS COME TO US VIA A PRIDE SYSTEM WHICH IS OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND IT WAS DUE TO THE APPEARANCE OF THE A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY GOING ON ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE. CODE ENFORCEMENT INSPECTION REVEALED THAT THIS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WAS BEING UTILIZED FOR PARKING BY POSTAL FLEET SERVICES.

COUNTY STAFF HAS CONTINUED TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT DURING THIS PROCESS FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE PARKING, AND STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IT APPEARS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO SECTION 2.0315. STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AND NINE CONDITIONS TO APPROVE AND FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT TO DENY THE REQUEST. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WILL TRY TO ASSIST. >> THANK YOU.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I SEE NONE.

IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT& STEP FORWARD, PLEASE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR.

AGENCY NBC. I'M PAUL WATERS. I'M THE OWNER FOR THE APPLICANT.

TO BEGIN I'D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU. STAFF HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I'M SORRY BEVERLY IS NOT HERE TODAY BUT I HAVE MET WITH HER ON SEVERAL CASES, AND SHE'S BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL. YOU HAVE THE AGENDA MATERIALS SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO A LONG DETAILED PRESENTATION. LONG STORY SHORT, WE HAVE OUTGROWN OUR CURRENT OFFICES. WE DON'T WANT TO PARK ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET SO OUR ONLY OTHER OPTION IS TO PARK IN THIS RESIDENCE WHICH IS ON 100 FEET AWAY FROM OUR CORPORATE OFFICE, AND ACTUALLY SINCE YOUR AGENDA MATERIALS HAVE BEEN CREATED, THERE HAS BEN A NEW DEVELOPMENT.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE A SITE UNDER CONTRACT TO BUILD OUR NEW CORPORATE OFFICE.

I THINK WE CLOSE IN ABOUT 30 TO 45 DAYS. AND WE'VE ACTUALLY -- WE'RE STARTING TO WORK WITH A LOCAL ENGINEER TO HELP US WITH THE ZONING AND THE LAND USE AND THE CONSTRUCTION. AND WE HOPE TO HAVE THAT PROCESS DONE WELL WITHIN THE YEAR, BUT WE ARE ASKING FOR A YEAR, AND AGAIN I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A TEMPORARY USE.

IT IS ONLY DURING DAY HEIGHT HOURS. IT WILL NOT BE OVERNIGHT.

[00:25:03]

IT'S STRICTLY TO HELP OUR EMPLOYEES PARK. SO THEREFORE I RESPECTFULLY HOPE THAT YOU GRANT THE MOTION TO APPROVE OUR APPLICATION, AND I'LL SIT BACK AND ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE OR TWO.

>> SO THE MAIN OFFICE IS YOU ONE OF THE BUILDINGS UP BY 16. >> 16 YES,

SIR. >> WHAT CARS ARE PARKED BACK THERE? ARE THESE EMPLOYEES PERSONAL VEHICLES OR ARE THEY SOME SORT OF FLEET VAN THAT YOU USE FOR

YOUR BUSINESSES? >> THESE ARE STRICTLY EMPLOYEES' PERSONAL VEHICLES.

WE OPERATE TRUCKS. WE HAVE ABOUT 4,000 TRUCKS -- I'M SORRY -- ABOUT 3,000 TRUCKS AROUND THE COUNTRY, BUT WE DO NOT PARK THOSE TRUCKS ON SITE. THIS IS STRICTLY A BUSINESS

OFFICE. >> OH SO THESE ARE JUST EMPLOYEES WHO ARE WORKING IN

THAT BIZ OFFICE ITSELF 1 NOT OUT DRIVING VEHICLES AROUND. >> THAT'S RIGHT, YES, SIR.

AND IT IS ONLY THE OVERFLOW EMPLOYEES. IT'S NOT ALL THE EMPLOYEES, JUST

THE ONES THAT CAN'T FIND PARKING IN THE OFFICE CONDOS. >> ALL RIGHT.

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> WILL YOU TELL US THE ROUTE THAT PEOPLE WILL GET FROM 16

INTO THIS PARKING LOT AND OUT AGAIN. >> YES, SIR.

THERE IS ONE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IN BETWEEN OUR CORPORATE OFFICE AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

IT'S 100 FEET, 200 STEPS. IT'S A QUIET RESIDENTIAL ROAD. IT'S DOWN 14TH STREET, 14TH AVENUE. SO THAT'S HOW THEY'LL COME, THEY'LL GO TO AND FROM THE CORPORATE OFFICE TO THE RESIDENCE AND AND THEY'LL GO FROM 16 NORTH ON NORTH FOURTH

STREET TO GET TO THIS PARKING LOT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR.

THAT'S THE EASIEST ROUTE TO GET TO THAT PARKING LOT, YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. >> ANYBODY HAVE INNER OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS?

>> ONE. MS. MARY IS IT DONALD? IF YOU WOULD, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS WHEN YOU GET HERE.

>> MY NAME IS MARY DOUG ADDRESS IS 2830 NORTH FOURTH STREET. I LIVE ALMOST DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THIS OFFICE COMPLEX. A FEW MONTHS AGO OUR STREET TURNED INTO A PARKING LOT.

PEOPLE COMPLAINED. THE FOLKS THERE HEARD OUR COMPLAINTS AND TRIED TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION, AND THEY BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY FOR THAT PURPOSE. I APPRECIATED THAT VERY MUCH.

OUR STREET BECAME A ONE-WAY STREET WHEN THEY WERE THERE. THERE WERE TIMES THAT WE HAD TO ZIG AND ZAG TO GET IN AND OUT, AND WE DIDN'T LIKE LIKE IT AND THERE WERE TIMES -- I'M NOT SURE THAT EVEN AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE COULD HAVE GOTTEN DOWN OUR STREET.

SINCE THEY BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY& IT HAS ALLEVIATED MOST OF THE PROBLEM.

SOME PEOPLE STILL DO PARK ON OUR STREET. I'D LIKE TO STOP THAT IF POSSIBLE, BUT THEY HAVE CLEANE UP THAT PROPERTY, MAINTAINED THE PROPERTY, THEY'VE BEEN GOOD NEIGHBORS, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THEY HAVE DONE. AND THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS YOU SAY 12 CARS. I'VE SEEN MORE THAN 12 CARS ON THAT PROPERTY AT TIMES WITH WHAT LOOKED LIKE TO ME STILL PLENTY OF ROOM FOR MORE TO PARK, AND I'D FA RATHER THEY BE PARKED ON THAT PROPERTY THAN ON THE STREET, AND I THINK YOU WOULD, TOO, IF YOU LIVED THERE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS?

>> NO. >> THEN WE'RE BACK -- I'M SORRY. IF YOU COULD REBUT THAT OR

ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> NO, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS, AND WE DID ASK FOR 12, BUT IF THE AGENCY IS SO INCLINED, WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE MORE.

>> THAT'S UP TO YOU AND ENGINEERING. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> THAT'S NOT AT OUR LEVEL HERE. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> MR. CHAIR, I THINK THE ORDER ITSELF LIMITS THE NUMBER OF CARS.

YOU CAN UP THE LIMIT IN YOUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH DRIVE REQUIREMENTS, PARKING AISLE REQUIREMENTS. RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE A CATCH 12.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE THAT, IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING BUT AT LEAST YOU

WOULDN'T HAVE THAT ARTIFICIAL CAP. >> MS. BISHOP.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO INDICATE WHAT PAUL HAD JUST SAID, THAT YOUR ORDER IS LIMITED TO 12, AND THEY WILL BE SUBJECT TO, EVEN WITH THE 12, THEY WILL BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE ENGINEERING

AND STABILIZING THAT SITE. >> RIGHT. SO BACK DO YOU, MR. APPLICANT.

SO AGAIN, YOU MIGHT BE RESTRICTED FOR OTHER REASONS. YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TOO PUT MORE CARS ON THERE BUT IT MIGHT NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT YOU NEED TO ADHERE TO.

ARE YOU PROPOSING A DIFFERENT CAP? AND IF SO WHAT NUMBER?

>> NO, SIR. 12 IS FINE. WE WILL ABSOLUTELY TAKE THAT.

[00:30:02]

>> WELL, YOU'RE CAPPED AT 12 WITHOUT COMING BACK HERE. SO IF WE SAY 15, AS AN EXAMPLE, IF YOU CAN EKE OUT THREE MORE, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AND FRANKLY WE DON'T WANT

TO SEE YOU FOR THREE PARKING SPACES. >> YES, SIR.

ABSOLUTELY. >> ALL RIGHT. SO WOULD YOU SAY YES TO THE 15

SPACES THEN, CAPPING THAT? >> YES, SIR, ABSOLUTELY. >> MR. WAINRIGHT, A QUESTION?

>> I'VE HEARD THAT PEOPLE ARE STILL PARKING ON THE STREET, YOUR EMPLOYEES.

YOU MIGHT ENCOURAGE THEM NOT TO. >> YES, SIR, UNDERSTOOD, AND IF I MAY ADDRESS THAT, WE SHARE THAT OFFICE COMPLEX WITH SIX OTHER BUSINESSES, SO I BELIEVE IT'S A MIXTURE OF THOSE.

WE STRICTLY TOLD OUR EMPLOYEES THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PARK ALONG THAT ROUTE IN CERTAIN AREAS SO IT IS OTHER BUSINESSES AS WELL. BUT WE HAVE TRIED TO CONTAIN OUR

EMPLOYEES, YES, SIR. >> BUT NOW WE KNOW YOU. >> YES, SIR, ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. YOUR CAP IS AT 15.

THAT'S ON THE TABLE. ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN SIT DOWN.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> BACK IN THE AGENCY. MR. MATOVINA.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, UNFORTUNATELY I HAVE A DISAGREEMENT WITH STAFF. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST COMPLIES WITH 2.03.15A WHICH REQUIRES THE AREA WHERE THE PARKING IS TAKING PLACE TO ADD JOIN THE BUSINESS, WHERE THE BUSINESS IS HAPPENING. IT REQUIRES -- IT REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING WHICH IS ALREADY BEING MET AT THE BUSINESS, AND IT PROVIDE WILL NOT BE AN INTERVENING STREET, WHICH THERE IS. SO I'M JUST GOING TO POINT OUT THAT WHEN I VOTE NO, I SUSPECT THIS WILL PASS BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT WHY I'M VOTING NO.

THANK YOU. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A -- LOOKING FOR A MOTION. >> MR. CHAIR, I THINK FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY, IF YOU VOTE IT WOULD BE TO CHANGE CONDITION NUMBER 8 TO HAVE 15

INSTEAD OF 12 CARS. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE. THAT IS WITH THE MODIFICATION TO

SPECIAL CONDITION 8 THAT ALLOWS UP TO 15 CARS. >> DR. MCCORMICK.

>> GREG IS CORRECT, IT HAS TO ADD JOIN THE PROPERTY. >> WAIT A SECOND.

WHAT WAS THIS MOTION ABOUT? >> I THINK IT WAS A MOTION TO APPROVE, BUT DR. ILLNESS HIRNLS SEEMS TO HAVE AGREED WITH MR. MATOVINA ABOUT THE INTERPRETATION OF 2.0315.

>> IT'S NOT IN THE MOTION, BUT IT IS IN THE CONDITIONS. I GUESS WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS SECOND THE AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 8. IS THAT PROPER?

>> NO, THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ENTIRE APPLICATION WITH AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION

NUMBER 8, AND YOU WOULD BE SENDING THAT MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND THEN WE

HAVE A SECOND. >> SECOND. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. ITEM CARRIES. YOU HAVE YOUR PARKING LOT.

MOVING RIGHT ALONG, ITEM NUMBER 4. IN.

[Item 4]

COCOST BOAT LANDING. >> YOU MAY HAVE RECEIVED EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, MAY HAVE RECEIVED ON-SITE VISITS. IF YOU DISCLOSE ANY OF THAT NOW WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME.

>> ANYONE DECLARING EX-PARTE? I SEE NONE. MS. BISHOP, PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND AGENCY MEMBERS. THIS IS SPECIAL USE PERMIT 2019-20 IT IS ROSCOE LANDING BOAT STORAGE. THIS GOES A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN RV BOAT STORAGE AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL CD ZONING IN ACCORD ANSWERING WITH SECTION 2 WANT 03.42 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 405 SOUTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD AND IT IS WITHIN THE PALM VALLEY OVERLAY DISTRICT.

THIS IS A LOCATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

IT IS DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL. IT IS ZONED CG. AND THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE

[00:35:03]

THE APPLICANT ASSERTS THAT THE BOAT STORAGE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES AND WILL PROVIDE A CONVENIENT LOCATION FOR RESIDENTS THAT SEEK TO STORE THEIR VESSELS CLOSE TO THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY AND THE PALM VALLEY BOAT RAMP. DAILY HOURS OF OPEN RAIRGS FOA BOAT STORAGE WILL BE LIMITED TO ONE-HALF HOUR PAST SUNRISE TO ONE-HALF HOUR PAST SUNSET.

THERE'S NO ACCESSIBLE GRANTED TO THE BOAT STORAGE AREA ON SITE OUTSIDE OF THOSE HOURS OF OPERATION. THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN DEPICTS THE PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE TRAILER FACILITY WITH DIRECT ACCESS TO SOUTH ROSCOE PLFD. THE AREA FOR STORAGE IS STATED AT APPROXIMATELY 32,175 SQUARE FEET THE, AND THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED THAT THE FACILITY MAY STORE UP TO 75 VEHICLES WITHIN THE FENCED AREA. THE IMED RAIRM OF THE SITE WILL BE UTILIZED FOR COMMERCIAL RETAIL USES APPROXIMATELY 12,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CG STOANG AS WELL. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE PROPOSED RETAIL IS AND THE BOAT AND RV STORAGE AREA. THE CG ZONING CLASSIFICATION WHICH ALLOWS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD AND BUSINESS, GENERAL BUSINESS USES IN ADDITION ON OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL, CULTURAL, INSTITUTIONAL, NEIGHBORHOOD, PUBLIC SERVICE AND ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL.

THE USE OF THE SITE FOR BOAT STORAGE REQUIRES A SPECIAL USE SUBJECT TO THE GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE OUTLINED IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. BASED ON THE APPLICATION MATERIALS, THE GRANTING OF A SPECIAL USE DOES NOT APPEAR TO RESULT IN A DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD OR IMPAIR THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE PROPERTY HAS A COMMERCIAL PLUME.

PUT LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION OF COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING WHICH MAY ALLOW FOR A NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL USES BY RIGHT. APPLICANT SEEKS TO UTILIZE THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY FOR BOAT STORAGE WHICH LIES ADJACENT TO THE PALM VALLEY PUBLIC BOAT RAMP.

THE RO COLANDING BOAT STORAGE PROPOSED BOAT STORAGE FACILITY WILL COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIRED REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS SET FORTH IN ARTICLE 2 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THIS SUBMITTED SITE PLAN DEMONSTRATES IMLIENTS ALL REQUIRED BUFFER AND SCREENING CONSISTENT WELL PALM VALLEY OVERLAY AND LAND DEVELOPED. COAKSD 6 WANT 06.4 TO MITIGATE ANY POSSIBLE IMPACTS. THE RV BOAT STORAGE IS PROPOSED TO BE ENCLOSED BY A PERIMETER 8-FOOT TALL FENCE 100% OPAQUE FENCE TO SCREEN THE OPEN PARKING FROM THE PUBLIC VIEW AND ADJACENT ROADWAYS. THE COMMERCIAL SITE WILL ALSO PROVIDE A MINIMUM 20-FOOT BUFFER ADJACENT TO ROADWAYS AND RESIDENTIAL USES AS REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED THE SITE PLAN THAT DEMONSTRATES COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS.

THAT SITE PLAN WILL BECOME PART OF THIS ORDER P. SHOULD YOU DECIDE TO APPROVE THIS.

THE RV BOAT STORAGE FACILITY WILL HAVE STAFF LOCATED ON ITS OFFICE.

SIGNAGE FOR THE ENTIRE COMMERCIAL SITE ARE REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE PALM VALLEY CROR A ARC ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SUBJECT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

GROUND SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO BE WIDE BASED MONUMENT STYLE AND NOT MORE THAN EIGHT FEET ABOVE THE SITE GRADE. THE PALM VALLEY OVERLAY REGULATIONS STATE THAT ADEQUATE LIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED IF ON-SITE PARKING SPOB USED AT SNIET NIGHT THE LIENDZ LIGHT CAN STHALG BE I OBJECT STALLED TO MINIMIZE GLARE. THE PARKIN AREA ILLUMINATION SHALL BE CON PIEMED TO THE PARKING AREA NOT EXTENDING BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE, AND BULBS SHALL BE CONCEALED. STAFF HAS RECEIVED ONE PHONE INQUIRE WELL QUESTIONS REGARDING POSSIBLE CONSTRUCTION OF MULTIPLE STORAGE RACKS FOR BOATS ON THE SITE SHOULD THIS SPECIAL

[00:40:03]

STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED SIX FINDINGS OF FACT WITH EIGHT CONDITIONS TO APPROVE AND FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT TO DENY THE REQUEST. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WILL TRY TO ASSIST, AND THE

APPLICANT IS HERE. >> THANK YOU. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> TERESA, COULD YOU PLEASE GO BACK ABOUT SIX SLIDES, MAYBE SEVEN.

IT WAS TO THE DIAGRAM OF THE PROPERTY. I'M GOING TO POINT UP ON THAT SCREEN UP THERE. THIS IS A VERY WEAK POINTER . THIS ENTRANCE RIGHT HERE COMING OFF SOUTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD, ISN'T THIS THE WHOLE BOAT RAMP PROPERTY RIGHT HERE? IS THIS THE -- THIS PROPERTY TO WHICH THIS DRIVE GOES THE BOAT, PUBLIC BOAT RAMP?

>> MR. CHAIR, THAT IS THE PUBLIC BOAT RAMP IS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO THE PARKING AND BOATING ALL OCCURS WITHIN SOUTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD, SO THAT IS CURCHLT I THINK BEING USED AS A BOAT RAMP AS PART OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IF SOMEBODY BACKING A BOAT.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND. IT WAS CALLED AN EMERGENCY EXIT OR EMERGENCY ENTRANCE IN THE APPLICATION. I DON'T SEE WHERE IT REALLY GOES TO.

IT JUST DEAD-ENDS RIGHT HERE. I UNDERSTAND THIS ENTRANCE. I'D LIKE TO SEE EVERYTHING MOVED OVER TO THE SOUTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD EXTENSION. BUT THERE'S ALREADY AN ENTRANCE HERE FOR THIS RETAIL SPACE SO I'M SURE SOMEONE ABOUT ADDRESS THAT.

>> THE APPLICANT MAY BE BETTER TO ADDRESS THEIR SITE LAYOUT. >> QUESTION, TERESA, FOR YOU.

WHAT WAS THE COMPELLING REASON THAT THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL WAS OVERTURNED BY THE BCC?

IT WASN'T IN THE STAFF REPORT, AND I GENERALLY WASN'T AWARE OF >> I BELIEVE THE GENERAL -- THERE'S TWO THINGS ABOUT THAT PROCEDURALLY. IT WAS OVERTURNED BY THE BCC FOR FAILURE TO IDENTIFY A HARDSHIP INITIALLY, AND THEN THE DECISION WAS RECONSIDERED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THEN HAS BEENIE POSTPONED INDEFINITELY UPON THE OUTCOME OF THIS APPLICATION, SO THIS IS A, KIND OF A USE THAT THAT WOULT REQUIRE A HARD SHOIRP A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE USED WHILE WHATEVER DISCUSSIONS POTENTIAL FUTURE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE NORTHERN PROPERTY IS GOING IN PLACE.

SO RIGHT NOW THE BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED A LACK OF A HARDSHIP, BUT THAT IS KIND OF UP IN THE AIR OF WHETHER THEY WILL STILL MAINTAIN THAT DECISION BECAUSE THAT DECISION HAS BEEN

RECONSIDERED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DR. HILSENBECK AGAIN.

>> PAOLO, YOU STATED NORTHERN PROPERTY WAS ALSO GOING TO BE CONSIDERED.

CAN YOU TALKING ABOUT PALM VALLEY ROAD? >> YES, BUT THAT IS ANY FUTURE APPLICATION. THAT'S NOT BEFORE THIS AGENCY. WHAT IS BEFORE THIS AGENCY IS MEETING THE STANDARDS UN2 WANT THEIR WANT 01 AND THE RV BOAT STORAGE CRITERIA FOR PLACEMENT

OF THIS SPECIAL USE. >> THANK YOU. >> TERESA, I THINK THAT'S IT.

IF WE WOULD COULD HAVE THE AT REPRESENTATIVE STEP FORWARD. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRPERSON, AGENCY MEMBERS. MY NAME IS HURNLT FAULKNER, 8 AND II 2A1A NORTH PONTE VEDRA BEACH. I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY LLC SEEKING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO AAL FLOOR A BOAT AND RV PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.0. OF THE LAND DEVELOPED.

CODE. PLEASE NOTE BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS RV STORAGE WILL NOT BE A PART OF THIS APPLICATION. IT'S SIMPLY LIMITED TO BOATS ON TRAILERS, NOT ON RACKS AS THE INQUIRY FROM A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SENT IN BY EMAIL. IT WOULD SIMPLY BE BOATS ON TRAILERS. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP AT THE GET-GO.

AGAIN A LOT OF THIS WILL BE A RECITATION OF WHAT TERESA ALREADY SAID YOU BUT THIS IS THE A LOCATION MAP OF 405 SOUTH ROSCOE. HERE'S THE POORM SO WE DO HAVE

[00:45:03]

AND THEN WE -- THE PROPERTY ALREADY HAS WATER RETENTION IN THE BOND DOWN HERE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. AS STATED BREWER FUTURE LAND USE HAS DESIGNATED THIS AS A SPECIAL PROPERTY. EXCUSE ME. ZONING IS COMMERCIAL GENERAL.

THE DEFINITION OF A SPECIAL USE WITHIN THE CODE IS A USE THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATELY GENERALLY OR WITHOUT RESTRICTION THROUGHOUT A ZONING DIVISION OR DISTRICT BUT WHICH IF CONTROLLED IS THE NUMBER AREA AERIAL LOCATION OR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD MER AT THIS TIME THE PELTSDZ HEALTH, STATE OF, WELFARE, MORALS, ORDER, CONVENIENCE, APPEARANCE OR THE GENERAL WELFARE, SUCH USES PEAR MAY BE PER MIBELAS IS IS IN A SOAFNG CLASSIFICATION OR UPON GRANTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SOWED CODE. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TABLE 2.3.01 SHOWS THAT PARCELS THAT ARE ZONED COMMERCIAL GENERAL AS THIS PARCEL IS CAN ALLOW RV BOAT STORAGE TO BE A SPECIAL USE. SEBLTION 2 WANT 03.42 DESIGNS CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT HAVE TO BE MET BY THE APPLICANT SITE PLAN IN ORDER TO CONSIDER GRANTING THAT SPECIAL USE.

SO I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THOSE AND OTHER ITEMS WITH THE SITE PLAN. SO INITIALLY THE STORAGE AREA WHICH HAS BEEN. SO THE STORAGE AREA IS REQUIRED TO BE SURROUNDED WITH A BUFFER, BE IT VEGETATIVE OR FENCING. WE ARE GOING TO SURROUND THAT WITH A 80-FOOT HIGH OPAQUE FENCING. WE'D LIKE TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A MASONRY WALL ALTHOUGH IT WOULD BE CALL THE DEPENDING ON THE MATERIALS CHOSEN.

I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE STRUCTURE OF THE WALL WOULD BE BUT IT WILL MEET CRITERIA BASED UPON SUBMISSION TO PALM VALLEY OVERLAY AC HAVERC. THE CODE ALSO STATES THAT THE SITE PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY STAFF AND COMPLY WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE'S CRITERIA. WE HAVE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN, OF COURSE, FOR COMMENTS.

WE'VE GONE THROUGH A COUPLE ROUNDS OF COMMENTS WITH STAFF, ADDRESSED THEIR CONCERNS THAT THEY HIGHLIGHTED IN THE APPROPRIATE MANNER. BACK TO THE BOAT STORAGE AREA, THIS IS, LIKE WE SAID IT WAS GOING TO HAVE 75 BOATS, 75 BOAT CAPACITY.

OF COURSE THAT WILL BE SIZE DEPENDENT. IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A LARGER VESSEL IN THERE, THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE THAT NUMBER. DOCTOR, YOU WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ENTRANCE HERE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER. THIS IS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS ONLY. THAT ACCESS IS NOT GOING TO BE UTILIZED BY THOSE INDIVIDUALS FOR STORAGE FACILITY HERE ON THE NORTHERN. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT FOR PEOPLE UTILIZING THE STORAGE, TAKING THEIR BOAT AND THEIR TRAILER OUT TO THE RAMP TO ACCESS THE WATERWAY. THE ENTRANCE ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS THOSE PATRONS COMING INTO THE RETAIL BUILDING, AND THAT'S -- SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ENTRANCES AND EXITS HERE. SO THERE WILL NOT BE ANY BOATS ON TRAILERS COMING DOWN HERE.

WE ARE AWARE THAT THIS IS THE -- THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WAY ESSENTIALLY DEAD-ENDS INTO THE BOAT RAMP.

TO ADDRESS SAFETY PRECAUTIONS, WE'VE SPOKEN WITH SITE -- EXCUSE ME -- WITH STAFF AND WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT WITH ADDITIONAL SIGNING AND STRIPEAGE ALONG THE SIDEWALK AND ALONG THE ENTRYWAY HERE ON THE SITE PLAN. THAT'S ONLY GOING TO PROMOTE SAFETY FOR THOSE PEDESTRIANS THAT ARE WALKING ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. BACK TO THE CODE, ANY SIGNAGE THAT IS GOING TO BE PUT ON THE PROPERTY WILL, OF COURSE, MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PLUS THOSE REQUIREMENTS OF PALM CENTRALLY VEIL OVERLAY DISTRICT.

ANY OUTDOOR LIGHTING AGAIN WILL NOT SHINE INTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

WILL IT SHINE DOWN AS APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROPERTY -- THE PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY THAT WILL BE USED AT NIGHT. WE ARE NOT IN -- EXCUSE ME. THE APPLICANT IS NOT INTENDING, AND FER SITE PLAN AND WOULD BE RIN TO THE ORDER, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE USING THE BOAT STORAGE AREA PRIOR TO ONE-HALF HOUR PAST SUNSET AND AFTER ONE -- EXCUSE ME -- PRIOR TO ONE-HALF HOUR PAST SUNRISE AND AFTER ONE-HALF HOUR PAST SUNSET. WHICH THIS WOULD -- FOR SAFETY REASONS WE WANT TO LIMIT NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS. FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE USING

[00:50:03]

OBVIOUSLY, IT'S A LOT EASIER TO GET INTO AN ACCIDENT WITH YOUR BOAT ON A TRAILER WHEN YOU'RE OPERATING IT AT NIGHT THAN IT IS DURING THE DAYTIME, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO THAT THRAIMENT TO DAYTIME ORGANIZATIONS. THE FACILITY WILL BE LOCKED OUTSIDE THAT OF TIME FRAME, SO PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO UTILIZED THE FACILITY UNLESS THEY ARE THERE IN BUSINESS HOUR HOURS. BACK TO THE CODE, THE FACILITY SHALL CONTAIN A STAFF ON-SITE OFFICE. THERE WILL BE A STAFF ON-SITE OFFICE IN THE RETAIL BUILDING HERE. SO THEY WILL BE THERE WHEN THE BOAT STORAGE WILL BE OPEN DURING THE HOURS I JUST MENTIONED. THEN AGAIN, ACCESS TO THE FACILITY SHOOL BE RESTROICT HOURS OF MANAGEMENT, PERSONNEL BEING ON-SITE UNLESS INDIVIDUAL ELECTRONIC ACCESS IS AVAILABLE.

AS STATED WE WILL HAVE A STAFFED ON-SITE OFFICE A HALF POWER PAST SUNRISE, HALF POWER PAST SUNSET UNTIL A HALF HOUR PAST SUNSET. THERE ARE 55 PARKING SPACES. WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE 54.

THAT'S ON 7 NOW SQUARE FEET AND THEN THE REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MET FOR THE ARRAIGNMENT USE. THOSE ARE DISCLOSED DOWN HERE ON THE SITE PLAN WHICH WOULD BECOME A PART OF THE ORDER. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST DOES MEET THE PROVISIONS REQUIRED FOR A SPECIAL USE. THERE'S NO DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD, AS STAFF ALREADY INDICATED OR IMPAIRMENT TO THE INTOARNT PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

THERE WILL BE NO SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECTS TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

THIS PROPERTY IS A GREAT LOCATION FOR BOAT STORAGE. THERE THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE WEST, THE BOAT TROOMENT NORTH. WE HAVE ESSENTIALLY THE IGUANA PRESERVE DIRECTLY TO THE EAST AND THEN THERE IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.

WE'VE GOT A BIT OF A TREE BUFFER IN BETWEEN THERE AND THE SOUTHERN PROPERTIES.

AGAIN, CONVENIENCE. THE CLOSEST BOAT TRAILER AND STORAGE FACILITY WOULD BE THE ST. JOHNS BOAT AND RV STORAGE WHICH IS SEVEN MILES TO THE WEST OF INTRACOASTAL ON US-1.

THERE IS NO BOAT TRAILER STORAGE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF PALM SEVERELY NT PONTE VEDRA, SO FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO MAYBE CAN'T FIND A SPACE IN A MARINA OR CAN'T AFFORD A SPACE IN A MARINA AND MOST OF THE GATED NEIGHBORHOODS OUT IN PONTE VEDRA YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PARK YOUR BOAT IN YOUR DRIVEWAY SO THIS WOULD PROVIDE A CONVENIENT RESOS FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

LIKE I SAID, THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOAT RAMP IS LOCATED MEL ADJACENT TO NORTH, SO THAT WOULD LIMIT PEOPLE HAVING TO HAUL ALL THE WAY TO US-1 IN ORDER TO PICK UP THEIR BOAT AND BRING IT ALL THE WAY BACK. WE HAVE CONVENIENT ACCESS RIGHT NEXT TO THE SITE.

THE COUNTY BOAT RAMP HERE IS THE ONLY PUBLIC ACCESS POINT ON THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY IN NORTHEAST ST. JOHNS COUNTY TO DROP YOUR BOAT INTO THE WATER. YOU DO HAVE A KAYAK LAUNCH ACROSS THE WATERWAY BUT AGAIN THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP OUT ANYBODY PUTTING IN A MOTORIZED VESSEL INTO THE WATER. AND SO AGAIN THIS WILL BE A JENN CONVENIENT RESOURCE FOR THOSE RESIDENTS IN NORTHEAST ST. JOHNS COUNTY. STATE OF PRECAUTIONS.

A STATED IN THE SITE PLAN BOATERS TRAILERS GOING TO USE A SEPARATE DESIGNATED ENTRANCE IN ORDER TO NAVIGATE TO THE COUNTY LITTLE LIMIT TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT OF EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY WHICH WE WANT TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC FLOW GOES DOWN TO THOSE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE ON CANAL ROAD.

ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE AND STRIPING WILL BE ADDED AT EACH ENTRANCE AS STATED.

CAPACITY IS GOING TO BE LIMITED TO 75 TOTAL. AND AGAIN, THE ACCESS TO THE BOAT STORAGE FACILITY WILL BE LIMITED MOST PRIMARILY DAYLIGHT HOURS.

AND THEN AGAIN ACCESS TO THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY IS SOLELY GOING TO BE VIA THE CROWN BOAT RAMP. THERE IS NO CRITERIA WITHIN MY CLIENT'S APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO AN ADDITIONAL MEANS TO DROP BOATS INTO THE WATER AS IN PREVIOUS ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST LAST YEAR. THIS IS THE ONLY MEANS FOR WATER ACCESS WILL BE VIA THE COUNTY BOAT RAMP. WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU CONSIDER OUR PRESENTATION AND APPROVE THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. MR. -- ALAIMO, QUESTION. >> IT'S JUST BOAT STORAGE.

IS YOUR STAFF -- IS THE STAFF AT THE BOAT STORAGE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THE BOATS IN

[00:55:02]

ARE THEY GOING TO BE CLEANING THEM THERE? IS THERE A PLACE FOR THEM TO

CLEAN THEIR BOATS OR IS IT SIMPLY STORAGE? >> IT'S SIMPLY STORAGE.

>> SO THERE'S NO BOAT RENTALS. ANY RENTALS WOULD BE PROHIBITED. BUT THERE IS NO CLEANING, NO

ASPECT OF ANY MARINA. IT WOULD JUST SOLELY BE STORAGE. >> OKAY.

AND IN THE BEGINNING YOU MENTIONED SOMEONE HAD SNENT A LETTER OICING SOME COMPLAINT.

I DIDN'T SEE ANY CORRESPONDENCE FROM ANY OF THE CONSTITUENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT OR REPORTS SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT MAYBE WAS FROM THE PRIOR APPLICATION OR WHATNOT.

>> I'M NOT SURE. IT WAS JUST IN STAFF'S PRESENTATION.

SHE NOTED THERE WAS ONE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THERE WOULD BE BOATS ON RACK AND IS I WANTED TO ASSURE THE AGENCY KNEW THAT THERE WOULD NOTING BOATS ON RACKS.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> MR. WAINRIGHT, QUESTION?

>> WITH WOULD A BOAT OF THIS HEIGHT BE ALLOWED ON THAT SITE IF THIS WERE NOT A SPECIAL USE

APPLICATION? >> YES, SIR. YOU ARE LIMITED TO 35 FEET

MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON THIS PARCEL ZONED COMMERCIAL. >> WHILE IT MATE MIGHT BE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE APPLICATION, THE BUILDING IS TO BE AN OFFICE BUILDING OR A BOAT

SNOARNLGSOME. >> NO, IT'S RETAIL. RETAIL THAT WOULD FIT WITHIN THE ZONING CRITERIA OF COMMERCIAL GENERAL. IT'S NOT DESIGNATED OFFICE.

I MEAN, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT ON THE SECOND STORY THERE WOULD BE INDIVIDUAL OFFICE SPACE ABOUT THE RIGHT NOW IT'S BEING PROPOSED WITH THIS SITE PLAN AS RETAIL AND, OF COURSE, THE SITE

PLAN, IF APPROVED, WOULD BECOME A PART OF THE ORDER. >> THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. >> DID HILSENBECK. >> I CERTAINLY WANT TO VOTE FOR THIS ITEM AND YOU MADE SOME VERY GOOD POINTS IN YOUR PRESENTATION BUT I'M JUST REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT EMERGENCY ENTRANCE OR EXIT. PETER, IF YOU COULD PUT AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY BACK UP THERE. NUMBER ONE, I DON'T SEE WHERE THAT EMERGENCY EXIT GOES TO. IT WILL LOOKS LIKE A GREAT PLACE FOR TEENAGERS TO GO PARK ALONG THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE FINE, BUT -- I DON'T SEE WHERE IT GOES OR THE NECESSITY FOR IT WITH THESE OTHER ENTRANCES. AND ALSO, AND I DID NOT DRIVE BY HERE AND I SHOULD HAVE LOOKED AT IT, BUT THIS TREE LINE APPEARS TO BE ON THE BOAT RAMP PROPERTY, PUBLIC PROPERTY, AND FROM THE SHADOWS BEING CAST FROM THE SUN ON THIS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, THOSE APPEAR TO BE PINE TREES ALONG THERE. THAT ENTRANCE THAT YOU'RE PLANNING, THE EMERGENCY ENTRANCE OR EXIT RIGHT THERE, AND I NOTE IT WOULD HAVE A GATE ON IT, I CAN READ THAT BARELY IN THE FINE PRINT ON THE MAP. BUT WOULD THOSE BE DESTROYED IN

THE PROCESS? >> I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY THE -- WHETHER OR NOT THAT BOUNDARY LINE IS SPECIFIC TO THE SURVEY, TO AN ACCURATE SURVEY, BUT THE TREES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME DOWN OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD APPLY FOR THE APPROPRIATE TREE REMOVAL PERMITS.

BUT AS FAR AS WHERE THE PROPOSED ENTRANCES ARE, IF THERE WERE TREES THERE, WE WOULD SUBMIT THE APPROPRIATE PAPERWORK TO HAVE THE TREES COME DOWN AND PUT ON THE ACCESS POINTS.

>> IT APPEARS THE OWNER SAID SOMETHING TO YOU DURING MY QUESTION, BUT I JUST, AGAIN, THIS ENTRANCE THAT COMMENTS IN HERE AND CURVES TOWARD THE INTRACOASTAL IS AN EMERGENCY ENTRANCE OR EXIT, IS THAT REALLY NECESSARY? WHERE DOES THAT GO?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. >> LET'S GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN.

>> RIGHT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE IT GOES.

WHAT EMERGENCY VEHICLE DRIVING TO THIS POINT ON THE PROPERTY WOULD DO FOR YOU.

>> FOR INSTANCE, A FIRE OR ANYTHING, IF THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY, IF THERE ARE DOCKS ON THE INTRACOASTAL RIGHT THERE THAT ARE PERMITTED WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SO IF THERE ARE ANY EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR ANY BOATS THAT ARE ON THE DOCKS THERE, PERHAPS A FIRE ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE RETAIL SPACE. THOSE WOULD BE POTENTIAL USES FOR THAT.

THERE IS A FIRE ACCESS GATE CODE ON THAT GATE. WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THE EMERGENCY ACCESS, SO THOSE WOULD BE THE TWO SCENARIOS WHERE I FEEL AS THOUGH THAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR IT, ESPECIALLY IF THERE IS AN EMERGENCY WITH MY WATERCRAFT AT

THOSE DOCKS, YOU WANT TO GET THEM OUT AS EASILY AS POSSIBLE. >> SO YOU STATED YOU ARE

[01:00:03]

REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS? >> YES, WE ARE.

IF STAFF NEEDS TO ADDRESS THIS IN A DIFFERENT MANNER, I'D BE OPEN TO THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS AS WELL. BUT THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE ACCESS IS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES

IS REQUIRED. >> THANK YOU. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE.

SO THE RETAIL BUILDING, JUST CALL THAT RETAIL, THE FOOTPRINT IS 110 BY 110.

THAT'S THE 12,100 SQUARE FEET. YOU MENTIONED THAT MIGHT BE TWO STORIES?

>> IF IT'S UP TO 35 FEET, MR. CHAIR, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR TWO STORIES

OF -- >> WITH THE SAME GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 12,100, GIVE OR TAKE.

>> CORRECT. >> YOUR PARKING WOULD INCREASE IF YOU WERE TO ADD ANOTHER FLOOR

ON THIS. >> THEN LET ME RETRACT MY PREEFTS PREVIOUS STATEMENT.

THAT WOULD JUST BE A SINGLE-STORY USAGE BECAUSE WE COULDN'T ADJUST THE PARKING PAST

THE EXISTING SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE. >> SO I LIVE IN THIS AREA.

I HAVE A BOAT AND I USE THAT BOAT RAMP AND IT IS QUITE A HASSLE BECAUSE, LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED, THERE'S A LARGE AREA OF THE COUNTY THAT IS JUST USINS ONE SINGLE LANE BOAT RAMP, AND I DID VOTE IN FAVORITE BOATEL THAT YOU HAD THERE. WHAT CAN YOU TELL ME, IF YOU WANT TO, ABOUT THE OVERALL GOAL HERE. THIS HAS NOT GONE BACK BEFORE THE BCC. I EXPECT THAT IT IS FOR OTHER REASONS.

AND THEN THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, I'D LIKE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT, IF YOU

WOULDN'T MIND. >> WHAIBLG TELL YOU SPECIFICALLY AT THIS SITE THERE IS SOMEWHAT OFF SHARED OWNERSHIP BETWEEN THE NORTHERN PARCEL. I'M NOT REPRESENTING THE CLIENT ON THE NORTHERN LAND USE. THERE HAS A MODIFICATION OF AN EXPIRED PUD THAT WAS PROPOSED.

THERE ISN'T MOVEMENT ON THAT RIGHT NOW. A LOT OF THE ISSUES LIE WHEN WE DID RECEIVE AN APPEAL TO THE ZONING VARIANCE, A LOT OF PUBLIC OPPOSITION CAME TO THE HEARING STATING CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY, SO THOSE CONCERNS WERE HEARD, AND ALTHOUGH I DIDN'T AGREE WITH THE DECISION, WE WERE OVERTURNED. WE HAVE SINCE HAD MEETINGS WITH THE APPELLANTS AND THE PEOPLE WHO WERE OPPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY MARINA PROJECT.

TRANSPARENCY WAS MORE WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE AND IF THIS WAS GOING TO BE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS PARCEL THAT'S AT ISSUE TODAY AND THE NORTHERN PARCEL, THEY WANTED THAT TO BE DISCLOSED. AND SO PART OF THAT -- THERE HAS BEEN NO MOVEMENT ON THAT FOR THE TIME BEING. THIS IS A MEANS FOR THIS SITE TO BE DEVELOPED, BECOME INCOME-PRODUCING BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST SITTING THERE BURNING HOLES IN THE LANDOWNER'S POCKET. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF PROVIDED, THERE WOULD BE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BOTH LOTS. IT WOULD LIKELY BE A PUD BIFURCATED BY PALM VALLEY ROAD THAT WOULD PROVIDE, BEST CASE SCENARIO WOULD BE TO PROVIDE FOR ANOTHER MEANS OF WATER ACCESS. AGAIN, THAT'S IN THE FUTURE, MR. AT THIS POINT THAT SITE PLAN HAS NOT BEEN CONCEPTUALIZED, HAS NOT BEEN PRESENTED, BUT THAT IS WHERE WE STAND RIGHT NOW.

>> SO THE NORTHERN PROPERTY HAS NOT GONE THROUGH THROUGH THE PROCESS YET.

>> NO, SIR. >> CONDITION NUMBER 1 CALLS THIS TO BE NON-TRANSFERABLE.

IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF THAT. >> SO MEANING IF THIS WERE TO GO WITH THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT --

>> IF OWNERSHIP CHANGED, IS MY GUESS, IF IT CONNECTED TO ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY,

ASSUMING -- I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS OF IT, BUT -- >> THAT'S CORRECT, SPECIAL USE PERMITS, USUALLY THE YOU SEE THESE WITH ALCOHOL SALES WHERE YOU HAVE AN IDENTIFIED CORPORATE ENTITY, AND IF ANOTHER ENTITY OWNS THE PROPERTY, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT KIND OF FAILS, AND THE NEW ENTITY HAS TO COME BACK BEFORE THE AGENCY AND WE GET REAPPROVED FOR A SAME OR SIMILAR USE. SO IF NUT ISLAND PROPERTIES DOESN'T -- ISN'T THE OWNER ANY LONGER OF THE BOAT TRAILER AREA, THEN THE USE HAS TO CEASE AND THE NEW OWNER HAM TO COME BACK BEFORE THE AGENCY AND JUSSIE UP IT. WE'VE SEEN THAT WITH USUALLY FOR ALCOHOL SALES WITH AN EXISTING RESTAURANT. THEY HAVE TO CEASE THE ALCOHOL

[01:05:05]

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO YOUR CLIENT. >> IT IS ACCEPTABLE BUT THERE IS NO FORESEEN SALE OF THIS PROPERTY. AGAIN, THEY BOUGHT IT TO DEVELOP IT AND TO BE A BENEFICIAL USE FOR THE AREA. IN THE EVENT THAT THAT SALE IS CONTEMPLATED, HOWEVER MANY YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED WITH THE POTENTIAL BUYER AT THAT POINT, BUT RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO INTENT TO TRANSFER THAT AND THAT

CONDITION WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. >> OKAY. MR. WAINRIGHT, QUESTION.

>> FORGIVE ME. I FORGOT ONE QUESTION I MEANT TO ASK.

THE PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THIS SITE, AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS A TREE-COVERED

SITE WITH DOCKS THERE. IS THERE A RESIDENTIAL SITE? >> THAT'S A VACANT LOT, SIR.

I THINK IT IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND THERE IS A DOCK THERE, BUT THERE IS NO STRUCTURE ON THE

PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU. >> TO GO BACK TO THE EARLIER COMMENT, YOU COULD CERTAINLY REQUEST FOR IT TO BE TRANSFERABLE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO FORCE YOU INTO DOING SOMETHING YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THERE.

>> IF YOU CAN GIVE MIA BRIEF MOMENT, I'LL DOUBLE-CHECK WITH THE CLIENT.

THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT. >> MAKING IT TRANSFERABLE OR NON-TRANSFERABLE?

>> AS IT'S WRITTEN IN THE CONDITION. IF THE AGENCY WOULD LIKE TO

CHANGE IT TO BE TRANSFERABLE -- >> IT'S NOT OUR DESIRE TO DESIGN THINGS, JUST TO RENDER A VOTE.

SO LET'S LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS?

>> WE HAVE ONE. MR. PETER SCHWAB. I THINK I'M PRONOUNCING YOUR LAST NAME CORRECTLY, IF NOT, CORRECT ME. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, SIR. >> PETER SWHAWB 404 NORTH HARBOR LIGHTS DRIVE PONTE VEDRA FLORIDA. I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS THAN COMMENTS THE FIRST OF MY QUESTIONS IS THE, ONE OF THE QUEMENT MADE MENTION OF THE FACT THAT YOU CAN'T USE THIS PROPERTY FOR RENTAL PURPOSES LIKE RENTING BOATS.

I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT THAT WOULD NOT -- THAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE FREEDOM BOAT CLUB AND ANY OTHER ENTITY THAT OF NATURE WHERE THEY'RE PROVIDING ACCESS TO BOATS THROUGH A CLUB OR THROUGH ANY OTHER KIND OF RENTAL PROCESS. MY SECOND QUESTION IS ON THE TECHNICAL TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SECTION OF THE COUNTY OR THE PCA'S COMMENTS, THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A SITE VISIT WITH STAFF, AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THAT SITE VISIT HAD TAKEN PLACE WITH RESPECT TO THE CONFLICT FOR TRAFFIC. AND IF THE SITE VISIT HAS TAKEN PLACE, WHAT WERE THE RESULTS. THIRDLY, MY THIRD QUESTION ST. IS THERE'S 14 EXISTING BOAT SLIPS AT THAT PROPERTY. I WAS WONDERING WHAT USE OF THOSE BOAT SLIPS DOWN THE ROAD IS GOING TO BE AND WHAT THE PROVISION IS FOR THOSE BOAT SLIPS WITH RESPECT TO THE BOAT STORAGE. AND MY LAST QUESTION IS IF I GO THERE AND I HAVE MY BOAT AND TRAILER STORED THERE AND I HOOK UP MY BIC PICKUP TRUCK TO THE BOAT, LAUNCH THE BOAT, WHERE DO I PUT MY BOAT AND TRAILER -- EXCUSE ME -- MY TRAILER AND MY PICKUP TRUCK AFTER I'VE LAUNCHED THE BOAT BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THAT SITE PLAN, IT LOOKS TO ME THAT IF YOU HAVE FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE LAUNCHED THEIR BOATS AND THEY HAVE THEIR TRUCK AND TRAILER PARKED THAT PARKING LOT 1 THERE'S NO WAY FOR ANYBODY ELTS TO GET IN THE PARKING LOT. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT NOW WHAT YOU HAVE DONE IS CREATED A SITUATION WHERE IF I HAVE MY TRUCK CONNECTED TO THAT TRAILER, I'VE GOT TO PARK IT UNDER THE BRIDGE, EVERYBODY ELSE. SO THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. >> THERE ARE ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKER WARDS CADS?

>> THAT'S IT. >> THE APPLICANT -- I'M SORRY. WE'VE GOT ONE MORE PUBLIC

SPEAKER. >> I DID SUBMIT A CARD. >> YOU DID.

ARCHIE. IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND DRESS.

>> JEROME HOFFMAN 303 SOUTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD, PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

THAT WAS I WAS ONE OF THE A PENALTIES ON THE ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE WHEN THIS THING FIRST CAME WAS A BOAT STORAGE AND A MARINA. THE ISSUE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE ON SOUTH CANAL ROAD WAS THEY DIDN'T WANT A RESTAURANT AT THIS SITE SO I'M REALLY YOURS AS TO WHAT THIS 12,000 SQUARE FIEWT BUILDING IS GOING TO BE. IF IT'S GOING TO BE A RESTAURANT, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A DIFFERENT TRAFFIC PATTERN, DIFFERENT HOURS OPERATION, PROBABLY MORE TRAFFIC, AND I THINK THAT GOES TO MR. SCHWAB AB COMMENT ABOUT WHAT DO YOU DO WITH PARKING AT

[01:10:05]

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD ABOUT THIS FACILITY DID RELATE TO THE USE OF THE FLOATING DOCKS THAT ARE THERE ON THE INTRACOASTAL, AND FRANK WILL IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS AN EFFORT TO TRY TO GET THEIR NOSE UNDERNEATH THE TENT HERE A LITTLE BIT, AND I REALLY QUESTION WHY THEY NEED THAT PARTICULAR ACCESS ROAD BECAUSE IT LOOKS SUSPICIOUSLY LIKE THE SPOT WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO ORIGINALLY INSTALL THEIR FORKLIFT TO DROP BOATS INTO THE WATER.

SO I QUESTION THE NEED FOR THAT. THERE SEEM TO BE PLENTY OF ACCESS TO THIS FACILITY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND THE LIKE. AND I REALLY WONDER WHY THEY'RE DOING THAT.

SO THE LAST THING I WANT TO MENTION IS THE S. THERE WAS A REPRESENTATION THAT THERE'S NO MORE BOAT STORAGE ANYWHERE EXCEPT ON PHILLIPS HIGHWAY SOMEWHERE SOUTH.

THAT'S WRONG. THE PALM VALLEY OUTDOOR RESTAURANT HAS A CHAINED LINK BOAT STORAGE AREA WHERE THERE ARE BOATS RIGHT NOW. YOU CAN DRIVE DOWN THERE AND LOOK AT THEM. AND IT'S NOT USED VERY MUCH. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BOATS ARE THERE, MAYBE 20, THE 25 AT TOPTS. BUT IT'S WRONG TO SAY THAT THERE AREN'T OTHER BOAT STORAGE OPTIONS. THERE'S ONE RIGHT THERE WITHIN

500 YARDS. THANK YOU. >> SIR, FOR THE RECORD, WOULD

YOU REPEAT YOUR NAME, PLEASE. >> JEROME HOFFMAN. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS? >> ONE MORE. >> ONE MORE.

>> MR. PAUL ROMAN. >> I BELIEVE HE'S WITH THE APPLICANT.

>> I BELIEVE HE IS THE APPLICANT. >> ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE COME UP AND ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS.

>> SURE. AGAIN, THE FIRST COMMENTS BY MRE ORIGINAL APPELLANTS, THERE IS NO BOAT RENTALS. THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. THAT WAS ADDRESSED IN MY PRESENTATION. IT'S GOING TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE ORDER.

THE APPLICANT IS WELL AWARE OF THAT. THERE WILL BE NO BOAT RENTALS ON SIE. THE SITE VISIT TOOK PLACE. I WAS THERE.

IF THEY NEED ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF ABOUT THE RESULTS THAT OF SITE VISIT, THEN THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN THE EEDGES MEMBERS AND THE STAFF. -HOUR, I THINK IF THERE WERE ISSUES PRESENTED, THEN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED APPROPRIATELY AND AGENCY MEMBERS WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE EVER AWARE OF ANY -- BOAT SLIPS, THE DOCKS PERMITTED BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THAT'S SEPARATE AND APART FROM THIS HEARING.

THERE'S NO -- QUITE FRANKLY, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO RUN ANYTHING BY OR SNEAK ANYTHING UNDER THE NOSE OF COUNTY STAFF, OF THE BCA, OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY IMPLEMENTING ANY OTHER MEANS OF WATER ACCESS OTHER THAN THE COUNTY BOAT RAMP. UNDERSTAND THERE WOULD BE SEVERE PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS IF THIS SITE PLAN IS NOT COMPLIED WP. THE APPLICANT IS WELL AWARE OF THAT. TO THINK OTHERWISE, I DON'T KNOW THE MOTIVATION FOR THAT THOUGHT, BUT IF IT'S JUST A MEANS TO COME BACK UP HERE AND PICK AT THIS APPLICATION AFTER WE DISCUSSED FULL TRANSPARENCY WITH THE A PENTS, THEN THAT COULD BE ANOTHER ISSUE.

WITH REGARD TO PARKING, AGAIN WE'VE COMPLIED WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AS PER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THE. THE CAST HAS BEEN MET. THE SITE LAN HAS WENT BEEN REMOVED AND APPROVED BY STAFF TO COME FORWARD TO A HEARING. AND AGAIN, THE DOCKS.

IT'S A CORE ISSUE. PEOPLE, IF THEY ARE -- THE DOCKS BEING PER MIETD BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO TIE THEIR BOATS UP. THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY WATER ACCESS OR TAKING BOATS IN OR DROPPING THEM OUT OF THE WATER ON THIS SITE.

ALL WATER ACCESS WILL BE LIMITED COMPLIEWFL HAVE EXCLUSIVELY TO THE COUNTY BOAT RAMP.

>> HOW ABOUT THE RESTAURANT USAGE? >> THE USAGE OF THAT HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE USES THAT COULD GO FORWARD THERE, BUT IT WOULD MIXED USE, LIGHT RETAIL AS FAR AS IF PEOPLE NEED A CONVENIENCE STORE FOR GOING OUT TO TAKE THEIR BOATS OUT AND WANT TO PICK UP DRINKS OR SNACKS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HOTDOG, SOMETHING SMALL LIKE THAT, BUT THERE'S OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A FULL RESTAURANT, THE SEATING CAPACITY WOULD HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED AND THEN WE'VE HAD TO POSSIBLY GO BACK AND RECONFIGURE PARKING BASED UPON THE SEATING CAPACITY. THAT'S NO THE INTENT.

THE USE OF THE RETAIL FACILITY -- EXCUSE ME. THE USE OF THE FACILITY WILL BE

[01:15:03]

THERE HAS NOT BEEN A DESIGNATED USE FOR THAT OTHER THAN THE OFFICE FOR THE STAFF MONITORING

THE BOAT STORAGE AREA. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT.

QUESTION, TREES ALL UNDER THE CG ZONING, IS A RESTAURANT ALLOWED BY RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR, A RESTAURANT SAL LOUD BY RIGHT. >> SO IF THIS BECAME A PORTION OF THIS BECAME A RESTAURANT, STAFF WOULD REVIEW THIS AT THAT LEVEL AND DETERMINE PARKING AND

ALL THAT. >> YES, SIR, WE WOULD. IT WOULD ALL BE THROUGH THE REVIEW AND THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW AND THROUGH APPLICATION AND LICENSE

REVIEW. >> BASED ON LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS.

>> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE HAD OUR PUBLIC COMMENT, TALKED TO OUR APPLICANT. BACK THE IN AGENCY.

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS. I'VE TRACKED A BOAT UP THERE.

IT'S A LONG WAY TO GO. IF THERE ARE THERE ARE ALTT THERE AREN'T VERY MANY.

THIS LOOKS LIKE A GOOD USE TO ME. I DON'T LIKE THAT TALL BUILDING STICKING UP IN THE AIR THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S OUT OF THE SCOPE -- OR I THINK IT IS OUT OF THE SCOPE OF OUR CONSIDERATION HERE. THE FACILITY LOOKS LIKE A

REASONABLY WELL-DESIGNED GOOD USE OF THE PROPERTY. >> I'M GOING TO TAKE A SECOND TO CLARIFY. THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHTS IN THE PALM VALLEY OVERLAY IS 3.

>> I'M THINKING THAT -- >> I'M JUST SAYING THAT, THAT THAT RETAIL BUILDING COULD BE 3.

ANY OTHER BUILDING AROUND THERE OR ANY OTHER HOUSE COULD BE 35 FEET TALL.

THERE'S NO BUILDING FOR THE STORAGE LOT. IT IS JUST AN OPEN TO THE AIR WITH A FENCE AROUND IT. SO WITH THAT SAID, WOULD YOU LOOK TO MAKE A MOTION, ARCHIE.

>> ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTSSOME. >> THERE ARE NONE. >> I'D OFFER A MOTION TO APPROVE 2019-20 ROSCOE LANDING BOAT STORAGE BASE UPON EIGHT CONDITIONS AND SIX FINDINGS OF

FACT AS PROVIDED IN THIS STAFF REPORT. >> SECOND.

> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS. WHAT DO YOU SAY WE MOVE RIGHT ALONG HERE.

ITEM NUMBER 5. MS. COOLLY. YOU'RE UP.

[Item 5]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND AGENCY MEMBERS FOR THE RECORD MARIE KEEL, GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THE NEXT ITEM FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS ZONING VARIANCE 2019-30 FOR ADDRESS OF 5243 MADORE IS A AVENUE ALSO KNOWN AS IS THE DESTEFANO SHED. THE REQUEST IS FOR A ZONING VARIANCE TO TABLE ISN'T, TO ADD LOY FOR SEC SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 25 FEET REQUIRED TOGETHER TWT REDUCED STUBBORN YARD AT THE TIME PAC FIVE FEET IN LIEU OF EIGHT FEET.

THIS WOULD BE TO ALLOW FOR THE COMPLETION OF A SHED AND IT'S LOCATED AT 5243 MEDORAS AVENUE.

THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL C. THE CURRENT ZONING IS RS 3 WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THEY DISEFNED TO COMPLETE FRUSTRATION CONSTRUCTION AFTER 12 BY 24 ACCESSORY STORAGE BUILDING. IT WOULD BE REPLACING ONE THAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY THAT WAS LOST DUE TO HURRICANE MATTHEW. THE PROPERTY CONTAINS A BULKHEAD RETAINING WALL THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED TO STOP EROSION OF SLOPE PREVENTING WASHDOWN ONTO CUNTY PROPERTY AND POSSIBLE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ALONG ALTA VISTA AVENUE.

TRUCKS OF BULKHEAD AND RETAINING WALL ELIMINATES ANY AVAILABLE ACCESS TO ALTA VISTA AVENUE WHICH IS THE SECOND FRONT YARD. THE APPLICANT IN AN UPDATED NAIR IS I HAVE STATES HAVE THAT THE BEING AN NONE CONFORMING RECORD AND A THROUGH PROPERTY LOT, THE BUILDABLE AREA IS LIMITE.

FURTHER, THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THE CHANGE IN LOCATION FROM WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ON THE PROPERTY ALLOWS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THE PROPERTY WHICH MAY INCLUDE A POOL AND PERGOLA.

PLACING THE STRUCTURE IN THE PREVIOUS LOCATION WOULD STILL WARRANT A ZONING VARIANCE, AND AS I STATED WOULD LIMIT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM LIMITS POSSIBLE

[01:20:04]

RIGHT NOW THE SHED IS IN THIS AREA RIGHT THERE. SO THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE FIRST SUBMITTAL. AFTER DISCUSSING WP APPLICANT I DID ASK HA THEY REMOVE ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN AS IT MOVES THROUGH THIS SITE PROCESS, YOU ARE ALL AWARE WHARF GETS APPROVED IS WHAT WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD WP.

SINCE THE POOL AND THE PERGOLA WERE PROPOSED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, I DID ASK THAT THEY RESUBMIT AND REMAI MOVE ANY OF T INFORMATION. SO THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE CURRENTLY IN REVIEW. THIS IS EXHIBIT B. AND SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED, THIS WILL MOVE FORWARD TO OUR -- THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

THIS APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AS A RESULT OF PRIDE COMPLAINT OF CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO RECEIVING A BUILDING PERMIT, AND THAT IS WHEN IT WAS DETERMINED THAT A ZONING VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT REFERENCED THE LOCATION OF THE SEPTIC AND DRAIN FIELD BUT FAILED TO SHOW IT ON THE SECONDARY SITE PLAN AND THEREFORE STAFF REQUESTED INFORMATION FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE THE LOCATION, AND THEY PROVIDED US A SITE PLAN DATED MAY 2 OF 2015. AND THAT WOULD BE IT RIGHT THERE. SO THE GREEN PORTION RIGHT HERE IS WHERE THE SEPTIC TANK IS CURRENTLY LOCATED, AND THE BLUE IS THE DRAIN FIELD. THE PROPERTY FRONTS ALONG MEDORAS AVENUE AND HAS FRONTAGE OFF ALTA VISTA AVENUE RESULTING IN THE PROPERTY BEING CONSIDERED A THROUGH LOT FOR OUR CODE, AND THROUGH LOTS CONTAIN TWO FRONT YARDS AND TWO SIDE YARDS.

BOTH FRONT YARDS REQUIRE A 25-FOOT SETBACK WITH FLOW LEIF ADMINISTRATIVELY AS THE YOU MIGHT SEE ON A CORNER LOT WHERE YOU WOULD GET A REDUCTION ON THE SECOND FRONT, SO WITH OUR THROUGH LOTS THERE IS NO REDUCTION THAT'S PERMITTED BY CODE.

I HAVE PROVIDE YOU AN EXCERPT FROM OUR CODE TO SHOW YOU A BRIEF.

THIS IS A TRUE THROUGH LOT. SO YOU HAVE A STREET THERE AND THE STREET THERE.

THE PROPERTY APPEARS TO HAVE TOPOGRAPHICAL CONSTRAINTS DUE TO THE PROX 45-DEGREE SLOPE OF THE LANSD PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT LOPG ALONG ALTA VISTA AND STAFF CONCURS WITH THE APPLICANT REGARDING THAT ELEVATION CHANGE WHILE I WAS THERE ON A SITE VISIT I TOOK THE LISH OF TAKING PHOTOS WHEN I POSTED A SIGN. THIS IS FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS LOCATED ON MEDORAS AVENUE, AND THIS IS THE REAR OR THE SECOND FRONT WHICH WOULD BE ON ALTA VISTA. AS YOU CAN SEE THERE IS QUITE A LARGE SLOPE THERE.

THEY'VE GOT THE RETAINING WALL IN PLACE. THIS IS A -- I CLIMBED UP THE WALL, SO TO SPEAK, TO TAKE THE PHOTOGRAPH INTO THE BACKYARD. AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER ANGLE OF THE BACKYARD. AND HERE IS THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING AS IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW.

AND THESE ARE JUST SOME DIFFERENT VIEWS OF WHERE THE BUILDING IS LOCATED.

I ALSO PROVIDE THIS SLIDE. I KNOW THAT OUR VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS SAY THAT YOU CAN'T USE EXISTING VIOLATIONS, NEIGHBORING VIOLATIONS, BUT THIS IS A STRUCTURE THAT IS MEL TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WITH REGARD TO THE CODE CITATIONS, THE RARE VARIANCE IS A RELAXATION OF THE TERMS OF THIS CODE WHERE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CON RARE TO THE PUB INTEREST BY REAFNT NARINESS, SHALLOWNESS OR UNUSUAL SHAPE OF THE SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY OR BY REASON OF EXCEPTIONAL TOP GRAPHIC SWAIGDZ OR YOU OTHER EXTRAORDINARY CONDITION WHICH I HIGHLIGHTED BASICALLY DUE HAD TO THAT HIGH SLOAPT SECOND FRONT WHICH COULD IN THIS CASE BE DETERMINED AS A REAR YARD SINCE THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS THE LITERALLY ENFORCEMENT OF THE CODE WOULD CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP OR TO CARRY OUT THE PURPOSE OF THE CODE, THE VARIANCE NO WOT KNOB CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT AND CONTEXT OF THE CODE.

PERSONAL, FAMILY OR FAMILY DIFFICULTIES, LOSS OF PERSPECTIVE PROFITS, NEIGHBORING VIOLATIONS ARE HARDSHIPS CREATED BY MI ACT OF OWNER NOT CONSIDERED HARDSHIPS JUSTIFYING A VARIANCE. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NUMEROUS CORRESPONDENCE IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION IN YOUR PACKET YOU WILL HAVE RECEIVED ONE THAT WAS INITIALLY NOT IN FAVOR AND THEN THEY RESCINDED THAT. ALSO TODAY YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN STLIED WITH ONE ADDITIONAL ONE

[01:25:04]

QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO AVAILABLE. >> IS THIS A PRIDE COMPLAINT?

>> IT ORIGINATED THROUGH THE PRIDE SYSTEM, YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I SEE NONE. IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWAR, PLEASE IF YOU COULD START BY TELLING US WHY I DON'T LIKE GRASS.

>> I PREVIOUSLY LIVED IN -- I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS ROB DI STEFANO 5324 MEDORAS AVENUE. WHEN I LOCATED DOWN HERE I MOVED INTO SEA GROVE, ST. AUGUSTINE GRASS IS PRETTY ROUGH TO MOPE T. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME AND THANK YOU FOR MS. KEEL FOR THE GREAT PRESENTATION. THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO ADD IS PRIOR TO THE SHED GOING UP, I DID SPEAK TO MY SURROUND NEIGHBORS, SPECIFICALLY THOSE HA THAT WOULD BE DRAMATICALLY AFFECTED BY WHERE THE SHED WOULD BE GOING, AND THAT WOULD BE THE TEVINS, THE WISEBECKER AND RAY KASHMIRI THAT LIVE ON ALTA VISTA THAT WOULD HAVE TO LOOK. ALSO IMMEDIATELY DONOVAN WHITE TO MY NORTH AND SONIA. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE DOCUMENTATION THAT MOST OF THEM ALL APPROVED.

THE ONLY INEFFECTIVE REJECTION WAS FROM MICHAEL REID WHO OWNS THE LOT DIRECTLY ACROSS ME, VACANT LOT. I BELIEVE IF I WAS SPEAKING DIRECTLY WITH MICHAEL, HE WOULD HAVE INTERPRETED THAT HAS SEEING A SHED, WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE MY FRONT YARD ON MEDORAS AVENUE.

I THINK HE'S HOW WE INTERPRET THAT AND THAT'S WHAT HIS COMPLAINT WOULD BE.

THAT BEING SAID, THE SHED IS THERE. THE NEIGHBORS APPROVED.

I THINK --LY HET THEM NOW WHAT THE FINISHED PRODUCT WAS GOING TO BE WANTS WHAT THE COLOR OF THE PAINT WAS GOING TO BE, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO FIT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PERFECTLY.

THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO SAY BECAUSE I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME QUESTIONS, THE SITE PLAN FOR THE SEPTIC SYSTEM, IT'& COMPLETELY WRONG. IT'S NOT WHERE IT'S AT.

FIRE AWAY WITH QUESTIONS. >> ALL RIGHT. THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT? MR. HILSENBECK. >> SINCE YOU SAY THAT THE SITE PLAN IS COMPLETELY WRONG, COULD YOU PLEASE INDICATE EXACTLY WHERE THE SEPTIC TANK AND

DRAINFIELD ARE. >> HOW DO I DO THAT? THE DRAIN FIELD VITE HERE OFF THE BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSE, FIVE FEET OFF THE BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

IT RUNS APPROXIMATELY FROM THE EDGE OF THE NORTH CORNER, BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSE, RUNS APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET TO THE SOUTH. THEN THIS OF COURSE IS THE TANK.

THE TANK'S IN HERE SOMEWHERE. SO IF THE SHED WERE TO GO BACK WHERE IT ORIGINALLY WAS, I WOULD BE STANDING IN FRONT OF YOU I BELIEVE AGAIN BECAUSE IT WOULD BE OUT OF CODE WITH THE SETBACKS AND THE SETBACKS FOR THE TANK, I BELIEVE. DID THEY DO THAT CORRECTLY?

AS FAR AS-- >> I DON'T KNOW. >> I WAS TRYING TO SHOW YOU WHERE EXISTING TANK IS. I HAD IT PUT IN BACK IN 2015. I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT IS.

IT'S NOT ACCORDING TO THIS SITE PLAN. SORRY.

>> YOU IS THAT IT HAD THE PREVIOUS SHED WAS ALSO OUT OF COMPLIANCE.

DID YOU KNOW THAT SHED WAS -- >> NO, I BELIEVE THAT WAS BUILT WITH THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.

AND THAT'S HINDSIGHT. I'M LEARNING THAT NOW, GIVEN WHY I'M HERE, THAT SHED WOULD ALSO BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE, ACCORDING TO THE SETBACKS. SO EVEN IF I WAS ABLE TO REPLACE THAT SHED AFTER IT WAS LOST AND STOLEN, I WOULD STILL BE STANDING HERE BEFORE YOU.

[01:30:02]

>> ARE YOU CONSTRUCTING THE SHED YOURSELF? >> I DID.

>> NO BUILDING PERMIT? >> NO. AT THE TIME -- AT THE TIME I WAS LIVING THERE WERE 5243 WHEN I TALKED TO THE ZONING DEPARTMENT, ASKED HEM WHAT THE SETBACKS.

I MEAN, 52 TWIE ATLANTIC VIEW WHICH IS THE NEXT STREET OVER EAST OF WHERE I'M CURRENTLY AT, I DID SPEAK WITH THE ZONING DEPARTMENT. I ASKED HEM WHAT THE SETBACKS WERE BASE WAS CONSIDERING PUTTING A SHED THERE. THE SETBACKS WERE FIVE FROM THE REAR. THREE FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

WHEN I SUBSEQUENTLY MOVED BACK OVER TO MEDORAS AVENUE, I JUST ASSUMED -- MISTAKE ON MY PART -- THOSE SETBACKS WOULD BE THE SAME. I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT I HAD WHAT WAS ZONED AS TWO FRONTS, THAT I DON'T HAVE A, LITERALLY DO NOT HAVE A BACKYARD.

SO THAT'S HOW THAT HAPPENED. AND THE PERMITTING, THE MER MITTING, MY IMPRESSION I WAS DIDN'T NEED A PERMIT, BUT NOT NEEDING A PERMIT WAS LIMITED TO THE SIDES OF THE SHED.

I EXCEEDED THAT SIZE LIMITATION THAT DID REQUIRE A PERMIT. I KNOW WHEN THE INSPECTOR CAME OUT AFTER THE COMPLAINT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A PERMIT, HE LOOKED AT THE SHED.

HE SAID IT'S WELL BUILT. I SAID, YES, I TRIED TO BUILD IT WELL.

IT'S BUILT TO CODE IF NOT BETTER THAN CODE. THAT'S IT.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> YES, SIR. WOULD YOU SHOW US AND TELL US ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE ORIGINAL SHED AND ITS LOCATION VIS-A-VIS THAT SHED.

>> APPROXIMATELY IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. THE SIZE OF THE SHED IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE CURRENT SHED THAT'S THERE.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. HILSENBECK. >> FIRST OF ALL, I DO NEED TO DECLARE EX PARTE ON THIS BECAUSE I DID DRIVE BY THE PROPERTY YESTERDAY.

AND THAT SHED REALLY DOES LOOM OVER THE STREET, YOUR SECOND FRONT YARD, IT REALLY DOES.

AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOW THAT WELL. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU ARE GETTING ANY ADDITION EROSION AFTER THE RETAINING WALL WAS BUILT AND IF YOU HAD BUILT THAT

RETAINING WALL. >> YES, WAS ENGINEERED AND PERMITTED.

DID I NOT BUILD PERSONALLY MYSELF, NO. AS FAR AS EROSION GOES, IT'S BEEN PRETTY MUCH ELIMINATED BECAUSE YOU GET A HEAVY RAIN, THAT IS SAND BACK TWHRB IT IS STILL A DUNE. YOU WILL GET SOME. I TAKE THE TIME TO REPLACE THE STAND IF IT IS ERODED, MOVE IT BACK TO WHERE IT CAME FROM OR ADD TO IT.

BUT IT'S BEEN MINIMAL SINCE THE WALL HAS GONE UP. AND WE DO PLANT BACK THERE.

WE ARE PLANNING TO PUT MORE PLANTS. YOU CAN SEE IF YOU DID DRIVE BY THAT THAT AREA IS TAKEN. I KNOW WHEN THE WALL WAS PUT UP, THE NEIGHBORS WERE LIKE, THAT REALLY LOOKS GOOD. I WISH EVERYBODY ELSE WOULD DO IT.

I SAID, YES THAT WOULD BE NICE BUT IT IS AN EXPENSE. NOT EVERYBODY CAN DO THAT TO MAKE THE BACK SIDE OF THE THAT PROPERTY LOOK NICER BECAUSE IT'S ALL OVERGROWN.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE. PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. DO YOU HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY.

THOUGHTS, COMMENTS IS? MR. WAINRIGHT. >> YEAH, IT LOOKS OKAY TO ME.

NOT PERFECT BUT PRETTY DARN CLOSE TO IT. NOTION MOTION THE APPROVEY 201930, 5243 MEDORAS AVENUE, DI STEFANO SHED SUBJECT TO SEVEN CONDITIONS AND BASED BON THE

FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> MOTION BY MR. HILSENBECK.

>> I'M NOT GOING TO SECOND IT. I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE STAFF'S FINDINGS HERE.

IT IS STATED TWICE IN THE APPLICATION THAT STAFF FEELS THAT THERE ARE OTHER LOCATIONS ON THE PROPERTY THAT AR SUITABLE FOR THIS WITHOUT VARIANCE BEING GRANTED, SO I

PREFER TO SUPPORT THE STAFF. >> ALL RIGHT. LOOKING FOR A SECOND ON AN APPROVAL. GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. ANY OTHER MOTIONS?

[01:35:08]

MR. MATOVINA. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY BASED UPON THE FINDINGS OF STAFF THAT

THERE IS ISN'T A HARDSHIP SHOWN HERE. >> MOTION TO DENY.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ANY FRTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, A VOTE OF YES IS A VOTE TO DENY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, PHIL.

MOTION CARRIES FOR DENIAL. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM LEGAL ON THIS?

>> YES. THE APPLICANT CANNOT SEEK ANOTHER ZONING VARIANCE FOR THE SAME TYPE OF REQUEST FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE RENDERING OF THE ORDER, BUT THE AGENCY, IF IT FIND GOOD CAUSE, CAN WAIVE THAT ONE-YEAR LIMITATION.

BUT THE DECISION CELTICS APPEALABLE TO THE COAFERRED COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WITHIN 30

DAYS OF THE SIGNING OF THE ORDE. >> IS THERE ANYONE DESIRE FROM ANYONE WHO VOTED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO WAIVE THE ONE-YEAR RESUBMITTAL?

>> HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT. >> YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE. I SEE NONE.

MOTION IS DENIED. THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

ITEM NUMBER 6. MR. KELLY. THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

[Item 6]

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AGENCY MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD JUSTIN KELL GROWTH MANAGING. I'LL BE PREVENTING I BELIEVE IT'S THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY REZONING 2019 STOKES INDUSTRIAL. THIS IS A REQUEST TO RESULT APPROXIMATELY 9 FNT 42 ACRES FROM INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING AND OPEN RURAL TO COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE. PROVIDE SAID AN AERIAL MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH IS LOCATED ALONG THE EASTERN SIDE OF US-1 NORTH JUST NORTH OF STOKES LANDING ROAD.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE AND IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING AND OPEN RURAL. AS MENTIONED, THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 9.42 AREAS, TO COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR FLEXED WAREHOUSE SPACE THAT WOULD ALLOW COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.

THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THE INCREASED FLEIVELT CW ZONING CLASSIFICATION IN ORDER TO OPERATE A WIRED RANGE OF A LOCALED USES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE RESTRICTED WITH THE CURRENT IW ZONING. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS COMPRISED OF THREE SEPARATE LOTS, PORTIONS OF THESE LOTS ARE EXCLUDE BRD THIS REZONING REQUEST AND RACHELLE ZONED OR AND IW RESPECT TISM. I HAVE TRIED TO MAP OUT ON THIS AERIAL EXACTLY WHAT WOULD BE GOING ON ON THE PROPERTY. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO LEAVE A 20-FOOT STRIP ALONG THE PRIM TERRITORY OF SITE THAT WILL REMAIN ZONED OR.

IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A BUFFER TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL LOTS, AND THAT THAT WOULD BE THIS AREA RIGHT THROUGH HERE. THEN A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERN PARCEL WILL REMAIN ZONED IW AND OR AND THE OR, THE OR PORTION THAT WOULD ABUT THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT THE COMMON BOUNDARY LINE THEY'RE LEAVING THAT THERE TO OFFER A FURTHER THAN BOUNDARY FOR THAT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED DOWN HERE. SO THIS PORTION WOULD REMAIN OPEN STOARND RURAL AND THIS PORTION WOULD REMAIN ZONE IW. IN APPROXIMATELY 1.5 AREA, POARKS OF THE NORTHERNMOST PARCEL WILL REMAIN ZONED IW AND THIS IS THE SITE OF A PROPOSED CABINET MANUFACTURING BUSINESS, AND THAT WOULD BE THIS PARCEL RIGHT HERE.

REVIEW BY STAFF SHOWS THAT PORTIONS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WERE REZONED TO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING PER ORDINANCE 2009-5 FOR A PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK, HOWEVER, THIS PROJECT NEVER COMMENCE PD A SIMILAR REZONING TO COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE WAS APPROVED FOR A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE NORTH PER ORDINANCE 2711-2 AND THIS REZONING ALLOWED SIMILAR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES THAT ARE PROPOSED A PART OF THIS REQUEST.

PROVIDED HERE IS A COMPATIBILITY MAP SHOWING SOME OF THE SIMILAR ZONED PROPERTIES LOCATED ALONG THIS SECTION OF US-1 NORTH. THIS THE SITE PLAN THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT

[01:40:03]

THE PROPOSED CABINET MAKING WAREHOUSE WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE PORTION OF LAND THAT'S GOING TO BE REMAINING IW AND THIS BUILDING WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 22,575 SQUARE FEET.

WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED BUFFERING, STAFF DOES NOT ON FOES 20-FOOT OR BUFFER LOOK THE SITE'S REAR PERIMETER NOR DOES IT A POSE THE AREAS LEFT ZONED IW OR OR.

STAFF NOTES THAT ADDITIONAL BUFFERING IS NOT REQUIRED BETWEEN TWO ZONING DISTRICTS LOCATED WITHIN THE SAME LOT BOUNDARY. THEREFORE THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONAL BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN THE DIFFERING ZONING DISTRICTS LOCATED WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AS PROPOSED, THE 30-FOOT BUFFER WITH A B STREENG STANDARD WOULD BE REQUIRED ON THE NORT EASTERN EARNINGS POARNTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS SOB ZONED IW AND OR AND THIS IS THE SITE OF THE CABINET MAKING BUSINESS.

THE PROVIDED HERE IS A STABLE TABLE SHOWING THE TYPES OF USE CATEGORIES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN CW ZONING. THE CW ZONING DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT ARE PROPOSE AS A PART OF THIS APPLICATION. THIS REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE YOU AT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN AN AREA WITH OTHER SIMILAR INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ZONED PROPERTIES. THIS REZONING WOULD ALSO ELIMINATE SOME OF OTHER INTENSE USES THAT ARE CURRENTLIAL OWD IN IW AND OR SUCH AS MINING AND EX TRANSITION, SOLID WASTE FACILITIES OF AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES.

STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE OR PHONE CALLS REGARDING THIS REQUEST.

THE OVERALL STAFF FINDS THIS REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY NEITZ THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LVC AND COMP PLAN AND HAS PROVIDED THE AGENCY WITH FOUR FINDING TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL.

THAT CONCLUDE STAFF'S PRESENTAS AND WE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND I DO BELIEVE.

THE A CAN'T IS APPROVAL. >> I SEE NO QUESTIONS. IF WE COULD HAVE.

THE A CAN'T COME FORWARD, PLEASE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

KAREN TAYLOR SB 77 SARAH GOSS A STREET WITH ME IS CHRISTIE SHAE AND CHRIS SHAE IS ONE OF THE THREE OWNERS AND AS WE GO THROUGH. STWIEWRT HERMAN AND LOUIS SEE SEE DID NOT BE HERE BUT HOPEFULLY WE CAN ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS OR NATION COMES UP. ANYTHING THAT COMES UP. BASICALLY, AND JUFNL COVERED THE GENERAL AREA BUT I'VE GOT JUST A FEW MORE SLIDES TO GIVE YOU A FEEL FOR THAT GENERAL AREA.

IT IS QUITE A JA RIGHT VARF DIFFERENT THINGS BUT CERTAINLY ALONG HERE THERE'S A LOT OF THE SAME SIMILAR USES. AND I DID THIS SLIDE TO SHOW YOU THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTIES.

THOSE ARE THE THREE PROPERTIES. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE PROVIDE A SITE PLAN, THE ONLY ONE THAT'S REALLY MOVING FORWARD IS MR. CECE WHO HAS THE CABINET BUSINESS AND HE OWNS THAT NORTH PIECE, WHICH IS RIGHT UP IN HERE. SO THIS KIND OF STARTED PROMPTING THIS CHANGE BECAUSE HE COULDN'T USE THE OR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO PUT HIS RETENTION ON, AND YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT, YOU'VE GELT DEALT WITH THAT BEFORE. WE LOOKED A DOING A VARIANCE FOR THAT, LIKE I DID ON THE CIP ON 207, BUT THAT IS A HARDSHIP AND IT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT KIND OF THING, SO IT KIND OF SPURRED THIS ON. AND AS WE GO ALONG I'LL KIND OF SHOW YOU. SO I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS HELPFUL TO SHOW THE FLEESES AND THE THREE ASSISTANT DIFFERENT OWNER SMIPS MR. HERMAN OWNS THIS ONE AND MR. SHAE STILL OWNS THIS ONE. THEY WERE NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL ZONING BACK IN 2009.

THAT WAS SOMEBODY ELSE THAT RESTOAND PROPERTY AT THAT TIME TO THE IW.

AND THAT'S JUST TO GET RID OF THOSE LINES SO YOU CAN SEE THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS ISN'T A TOTAL MIXED USE AREA.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN SEE ACROSS THE VEET IS ALL AN INDUSTRIAL AREA.

WE DO HAVE RESIDENTIAL ON EITHER SIDE OF THOSE AS WELL. AND THAT JUST KIND OF BRINGS YOU A LITTLE CLOSER IN. THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING AND KIND OF JUST TO SPREAD IT OUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF THAT AREA AND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ZONINGS, AS I SAID THERE'S OR, CN WITH THE DOLLAR GENERAL, CG, WHICH WOULD BE TO CORNWELL'S MARKET THAT'S BEEN NEXT DOOR FOR A LONG TIME. THERE IS OTHER CW ANDIW. THERE'S THE PUD THAT WOULD BE CORDOVA PALMS AND PAL ENSIA. THERE'S ALSO A PUD IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA AND LOTS OF

[01:45:09]

WE'RE TALKING WITH 20 FEET SO ALL THAT VEGETATION WILL STAY AND BE LIKE IT IS.

THEN TEN FEET WITHIN THE SITE ITSELF WHICH WILL BE FOR THE ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF BUFFER. THIS IS JUST A SURVEY IN CASE THERE'S QUESTIONS, I CAN COME BACK TO IT. WE G I HAVE GIVE A SITE PLAN.

WE PROBABLY GOT TEN, 15 SITE PLANS ON THIS, VARIOUS THINGS. CHRIS HAS HAD PEOPLE PROOF HIM.

HE'LL LAY OUT SOMETHING TO SEE HOW IT MIGHT WORK. THESE COULD DEVELOP INDIVIDUALLY AS FIVE PARCELS. IT -- AS THE THREE THAT YOU SAW. AGAIN, MR. CECE'S ON THAT NORTHERN SIDE. IT'S CHANGED A LITTLE BIT FROM THIS.

THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OLDER. BUT BASICALLY HE'LL HAVE THAT RETENTION AREA AND THEN A LITTLE BIT OF HIS TURNAROUND WOULD BE ABLE TO BE IN THAT CW AREA. BUT WHEN WE TALKED WITH STAFF, BECAUSE OF THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS ALONG HERE, THEY WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO HAVE THREE DRIVEWAYS, SO IT WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO SHARE THOSE DRIVEWAYS AND THAT, OF COURSE, IS DOT PERMITS AND THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN OBTAINED AT THIS POINT. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF PICTURE.

THIS IS A FROM THE SOUTH LOOKING NORTH ALONG THE FRONT OF THE SITE.

THIS IS KIND OF STANDING RIGHT IN THE CORNERWELL'S PARKING LOT KIND OF LOOKING FOR OVER AS WELL, SAME DIRECTION. CORNWELL'S PARKING LOT. THIS IS JUST NORTH OF THIS.

YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT, THERE'S DOG TOWN. THERE'S DIFFERENT THINGS UP IN THAT AREA. THAT'S KIND OF THE SAME TYPE OF THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA. THE BUILDING THAT WOULD BE THE FARTHEST TO THE SOUTH IS THE CW AND THEN THESE TWO WOULD BE THE IW BUILDING TO GO WITH THE ZONING.

AND JUST KIND OF SHOWING YOU THE SITE, NOTHING SPECTACULAR ABOUT IT.

THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF WETLAND. THERE IS A NUMBER OF WETLAND IN THE BACK AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT EACH OWNER WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IF THEY WANT TO USE THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. THIS IS JUST ONE OTHER SITE THAT'S ALSO INDUSTRIAL.

IT'S JUST TO THE SOUTH. SO THE PROPERTY AS A WHOLE SHAY SHOWED THAT I SHOWED NUT YELLOW WOULD BE 13.04 ACRES WITH WILL 862 FEET OF FRONTAGE AND THE PART THAT WE'RE REDOING IS 9.42 ACRES OF THAT, SO THAT'S ONLY ABOUT 680 FEET OF THE FRONTAGE AND SO IT LEAVES THAT PARCEL THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FOR CABINET THAT'S BASICALLY IW BUT IT INCLUDES THE CW PORTION THAT THEY COULD USE IT FOR CW PURPOSES.

THE INTENT RIGHT NOW IS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO USE IT FOR RETENTION.

AND REALLY OVERALL THIS CORRIDOR HAS A MIX OF COMMERCIAL. THERE'S RESIDENTIAL.

THERE'S ALL SOARCHT THIRCHT THINGS ALONG THIS. LOTS OF CI ZONING, CW ZONING AS WELL. AND, OF COURSE, WE LIKE THE CW BECAUSE IT IS THE HYBRID ZONING

[01:50:02]

AND AGAIN, I ALREADY MENTIONED THE STRIP IN THE BACK. SO THE ADJACENT LAND USES, I WOULD BE DEEMED COMPATIBLE. P IT'S A VERY LOGIC INCLUSION WITHIN THAT MIX USE AREA THAT RUNS ALONG THE MORTH AREA. WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE MADE MADE IT MORE COMPATIBLY BY LEAVING IS OR AREA AND, OF COURSE, WE'LL MEET ALL THE BUFFER STANDARDS ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL.

AND THE JONI SANDS REPRESENTS A VERY SIMILAR SENTENCETY TO PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

SO WITH THAT, WE DIDN'T THINK THIS WILL HAVE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON TRAFFIC.

IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT GOES ON ON US-1 AND IS IN AN AREA THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE THE TRAFFIC. IT DOESN'T REALLY ADD TO THE WEAR AND TEAR OF IT.

IT'S NOT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. YOU'RE NOT TALKING DEFINITELY LIKE DUMP TRUCKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND WE FEEL LIKE AGAIN THAT THE STRUCTURES AND ACTIVITIES ARE ALLOWABLE MIXED USE AND TBEEL THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING. AND WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WOULD THE CABINET -- WAS IT GOING TO BE MAINLY MANUFACTURING OR WILL HE HAVE LIKE A SHOWROOM THERE?

IS THAT THE INTENT, TO HAVE A SHOWROOM? >> YES.

AND YOU MAY KNOW LOUIS CECE HAS HAD A CABINET BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME.

HE HAD IT FOR A LONG TIME ON LOUIS SPEEDWAY RIGHT ON THE CORNER HERE.

NOW IT'S IN HASTINGS. HE MOVED. HE'S HAD A HARD TIME SELLING THAT BUILDING. BUT HE'D LIKE TO RELOCATE UP HERE SO HE BOUGHT THAT PIECE.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS FOR THE

EXISTING ZONING VERSUS THE NEW ZONING? >> NO.

BOTH CI, IW OR CW ALLOW 40 FEET. >> THANK YOU. AND THE SECOND QUESTION, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE WETLANDS ON THESE PROPERTIES ARE DISPOSEDCH OR TAKEN CARE OF? -- DISPOSED OF OR TAKEN CARE OF RESULTING FROM CHANGES IN THE ZONING?

>> NO. NO. THEY STILL HAVE TO BE -- AND I CAN GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN IF WE WANT TO KIND OF LOOK AT THAT, KIND OF POINT IT OUT TO YOU, WHERE IN ITS THAT BACK AREA. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, AND YOU HAVE ONE IN YOUR PACKAGE, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT COMES ALONG IN HERE, COMES DOWN IN HERE. THAT'S WHY WE LEFT THIS ONE LITTLE AREA IN HERE. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE OR IS GOING TO REMAIN, TOO, ANDOVER OR ON THIS SIDE THAT IS WETLAND. A LITTLE BIT PART IS WETLANDS IS THAT SENTENCED INTO THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. YOU STILL HAVE TO DO THE SAME PERMITTING, SAME TYPE OF REMEDIATION FOR WHEN YOU REMOVE THEM AND PUT THE DIFFERENT THINGS AND, AND YOU HAVE TO BUY

MITIGATION IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I SEE NONE, BUT I DO SEE A

PUBLIC SPEAKER CARD. >> YES. DR. MATTHEW YOUNG? IF YOU WILL, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> SURE. NIEWTH YOUNG 6851 ROAD, ST. AUGUSTINE FLORIDA.

I ACTUALLY LIVE, THAT BIG PROPERTY RIGHT THERE. THAT'S ME.

SO MY WIFE AND I BOUGHT ABOUT SIX ACRES THERE ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO.

THIS AREA IS OBVIOUSLY, DRIVEN IN NOW. IT WAS A RURAL HORSE FARM COMMUNITY AND WE LIKED THE PEACE AND QUIET BACK THERE. ONE OF THE BIG THINGS I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, I GUESS SB IS TWOFOLD. ONE IS THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY OVER THE YEARS, THE WETLANDS YOU SPOKE OF IS AN ISSUE WITH HEAVY RAINS ALREADY WE GET FLOODING ON

[01:55:03]

THEN THE SECOND QUESTION I HAD AS WAS THE BUFFERING ZONE. I THINK RIGHT NOW, AND I COULD BE MISTAKEN I BELIEVE IT'S AN 8L BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND THE WHAT'S I THINK NOW ZONED AS INDUSTRIAL, AND I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO CUT THAT DOWN TO 20 FEET AND OBVIOUSLY ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS PRIVACY BACK THERE. AGAIN WE BOUGHT THAT PROPERTY FOR PRIVACY AND HAVING A GIANT COMMERCIAL PARK THERE IS A LITTLE CONCERNING TO US. SO THOSE WOULD BE THE QUESTIONS PIF WHAT TYPE OF BUSINESSES THEY ARE PROPOSING TO PUT IN THERE AND AGAIN THEN AGAIN ABOUT THAT

BUFFERING. >> THANK YOU. ANY THEY ARE PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? KAREN, IF YOU CAN COME BACK UP AND ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. CHRIS SHAE 200 BUSINESS PARK CIRCLE SUITE 105, STWAWGHT FLORIDA 3 TWOBT 209 IF I HAVE. I AM THE OWNER OF THE SOUTHERN, I THINK SIX ACRES OR SO, AND I DID JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THE COMMENT DRAINAGE ANOTHER WETLANDS IF I CAN.

AND I'M SORRY FOR THE WAY I'M DRESSED IN JEANS TODAY. WE WERE OUT IN THE FIELD.

ALL RIGHT. IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE, BUT THERE'S A WETLAND THAT IS IN THE NORTHEAST SECTION HERE, AND THEN THERE'S AN AREA VERY NARROW SLIVER OF UPLANDS AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER WETLAND CHANNEL THAT RUNS THIS WAY. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE --EL WITH FIRST OFF, THE NATURAL FLOW FOR LOUIS CECE IS GOING TO BE TO GO BEHIND HIS PROPERTY THERE, AND THEN WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING IS PUTTING IN RETENTION AT THIS POINT.

WE PLAN IT ON IT BEING OVER HERE AND IN THE BACK. THAT'S A SWAIL TO TRANSPORT THE STORM WATER INTO THE POND BUT THAT BACK AREA IS GOING TO -- IT'S THE LOIJ LOGICAL PLACE FOR THE STORM WATER TO GO SO THAT WILL LIKELY PROVIDE THE BUFFER TO YOU BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE, AND YOU MIGHT KNOW THIS ALREADY, SIR, BUT WE HAVE TO DO PRE AND POST DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS, SO WE WILL LOOK AT HOW MUCH WATER ALREADY SHEDS FROM THE SITE TODAY AS A VACANT PARCEL VERSUS HOW IT WILL BE ENGINEERED, AND THAT DIFFERENCE -- THERE CAN'T BE A RIRCHES DIFFERENCE ARE THE PEEVE WOO MAINTAIN OUR WATER JUST AS IT IS IN PRE-DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT -- LET ME TRY TO FIND A GOOD AERIAL.

THIS IS A GOOD ONE ACTUALLY. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE POWERPOINT.

I JUST WANT TO SHOW SOMETHING REAL QUICK HERE. THIS IS -- SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE WETLAND IN THAT AREA, THAT LIGHTER GREEN AREA, AND THERE ARE WETLANDS BEHIND THIS PROPERTY OR BEHIND ALL THOSE PROPERTIES, SO THAT IS WHY WE FELT THERE'S A GREAT BUFFER BETWEEN THOSE PARCELS. WE'LL KEEP THE OR OVER HERE. THEN WE PURPOSELY LEFT THIS PART IN OR TO ADD ANOTHER NATURAL BUFFER FOR THAT HOMEOWNER THERE. SO WE TRY TO BE AS COGNIZANT AS POSSIBLE TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND TRY TO KEEP NATURAL BUFFERS. THAT'S THE SITUATION.

KAREN, DID YOU WANT TO GO OVER THAT, YOUR WETLAND SLIDE? >> I THINK THE AERIAL KIND OF SHOWS YOU, DEFINITELY ON THIS YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN THE ONE THAT IS ON THE SCREEN, THAT IT COMES BACK IN THROUGH HERE, SO AGAIN, YEAH, AND IF THERE'S ANY PORTION OF IT, AND A PORTION OF IT DOES -- NOT THIS GENTLEMAN'S LOT THAT STOOD UP.

I THINK HE'S OVER ON THIS SIDE. >> DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE USES.

>> AND AGAIN ABOUT THE USES, IT IS A HYBRID AS WE HAVE SAID THAT DOES ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE USES AS WELL AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL KIND OF USES, SO YOU CAN GET ANYWHERE FROM -- THERE'S ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACTIVITIES WITHIN EACH OF THOSE. SOME OF THOSE THAT ARE LISTED IN THE CODE I CAN CERTAINLY -- I LEFT THAT AT MY SEAT -- SOME OF THOSE ARE ALLOWABLE BY RIGHT AND SOME OF THOSE ARE ALLOWABLE BY SPECIAL USE. MOST OF THE MORE INTESTINES KUNZ ONES THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF LIKE TRUCK STOP, SOMETHING LIKE THAT ARE BY SPECIAL USE WHICH REQUIRES ANOTHER HEARING BEFORE YOU ALL. AGAIN, THE BUFFERING STANDARD CHANGES IF THE USE CHANGES TO BE MORE INTENSE, AND THAT'S BASED ON STAFF WHEN YOU COME IN WITH

[02:00:04]

YOU'RE ALL KIND OF FAMILIAR WITH THAT. WE JUST HAD THAT ON THE STRATTON ROAD PIECE FOR THAT. IF YOU WANT ME TO GET MORE SPECIFIC I CAN LIGHT WHAT ALL THE USES ARE. AGAIN, MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSING AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS ARE ALLOWED IN THE IW PORTION. THE CI PORTION IS KIND OF A MISHMASH OF A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENT USES. BUT I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 50% OF THOSE ARE ALLOWABLE ONLY BY SPECIAL USE. AND I DON'T KNOW.

YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE NEW TABLE THAT CAME UP, I USED TO BRING THE TABLE ALONG WITH ME, BUT THIS NEW TABLE IS MAYBE EIGHT PAGES LONG INSTEAD OF THREE, SO IT'S KIND OF HARD TO KIND OF GO THROUGH WITH YOU AS THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. I'M HAPPY TO IF YOU'D LIKE ME

TO. >> NO, I'M SATISFIED. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS? >> AND I THINK ONE THING WITH MR. YOUNG, IF HE DOES HAVE ANY PROBLEMS, AGAIN, CHRIS IS THE ONE THAT OWNS SHA THAT SOUTH PARCEL SO HE'S GOT HIM ON ROARED. CHRIS IS MASTER CRAFT BUILDERS.

>> THANK YOU. PUBLIC SPEAKERS EXHAUSTED. WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY.

THOUGHTS AND COMMENTS. MOTION. MR. MATOVINA.

>> I'LL MOVE APPROVAL.

DO WE HAVE SAIKD? MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS. THAT'S IT FOR OUR AGENDA ITEMS.

[Reports]

STAFF REPORTS. >> MS. BEVERLY FRAZER WHO IS OUR SENIOR SUPERVISING PLANNER, SHE DIDN'T HAVE A PRESENTATION OR SHE HAD TO GO OUT TOWN TODAY, SHE WASN'T ABLE TO PRESENT BUT THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN HER LAST MEETING. SHE HAS TAKEN A JOB AT ANOTHER JURISDICTION SO WE WISH HER WELL. AND IF YOU SEE HER, PLEASE WISH HER WELL, ALSO. OTHER THAN THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING GLELTS AND MR. CHAIR, SPEAKING OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS, THIS ISN'T MY LAST MEETING BUT IT'S EITHER NEXT MESQUITE OR THE AP 2ND, DEPENDING UPON SCHEDULING, BUT I HAVE TAKEN ANOTHER POSITION IN ANOTHER JURISDICTION, SO IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE. I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M SAYING IT NOW. ITE I'LL SAY IT LATER ON. BUT ALICE MORRIS WHO YOU'VE MET PREVIOUSLY WILL BE DOING LAND USE AFTER I LEAVE. SO I'M TRYING TO TEACH HER ALL

THAT I KNOW. >> THAT SHOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, SHOULDN'T IT? WE'RE SORRY TO SEE YOU GO, BUT GOOD LUCK IN THE NEW ENDEAVORS. GOOD LUCK TO MS. FRAZIER IF I DON'T SEE HER. AGENCY REPORTS. ALL RIGHT.

I DON'T SEE ANY. SEE YOU GUYS IN TWO WEEKS. MOTION TO ADJOURN.

WE'RE DONE. THANK YOU

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.