May 21, 2020 Planning and Zoning Agency

[Call to Order]

[00:00:04]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. WELCOME TO THE PLANNING & ZONING AGENCY'S MEETING FOR THURSDAY MAY 21 WITH 2020. I HAVE 1:31 ON MY WATCH. I'M GOING CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER HERE. WE'RE GOING TO STEWART A ROLL CALL.

-- START WITH A ROLL CALL GOING THROUGH THE LIST HERE. DR. MCCORMICK ARE YOU ON? DO WE HAVE OUR AGENCY MEMBERS ON, I'M HOPING? DR. MCCORMICK? OKAY. HEARING NONE, DR. HILSENBECK. ANY AGENCY MEMBERS ON YET? WE'RE GOING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT TECHNICAL WORKED OUT. I THINK THERESA IS WORKING ON IT. IF I HAD A HAND PUPPET I COULD DO A LITTLE SOMETHING HERE AND ENTERTAIN THE TROOPS HERE. A LITTLE KERMIT THE FROG HERE. I HAVE LITTLE KIDS, SO STILL DEALING WITH THAT. THERE'S A WHOLE NEW LEVEL OF MUPPETS NOW.

THEY'RE IN MOVIES. NO LONGER THE TV SHOW.

CAN ANY AGENCY MEMBERS HEAR ME?

MS. BISHOP? >> MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU. HE HAS THEM ON THE LINE.

THEY ARE ON THE LINE BUT THEIR VOICES AREN'T COMING THROUGH TO NOW SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THE

INCONVENIENCE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL GIVE THE A COUPLE OF

MINUTES, THEN. >> CAN THEY HEAR US? THERESA, CAN THEY HEAR US?

>> I'M NOT SURE THEY CAN HEAR YOU BUT THEIR VOICES ARE IN THE COMING THROUGH TO THIS ROOM, SO

DASH. >> OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PETER TELL US A STORY, THEN, THE NEXT TWO MINUTES.

>> NO, SIR, THEY CANNOT HEAR US, EITHER, AND MR. STALLINGS HAS ASKED IF WE CAN TAKE A BRIEF RECESS UNTIL WE CAN GET THIS TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY FIXED SOMEHOW.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR WORKING THROUGH THAT. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A SHORT RECESS. THE LENGTH IS UNKNOWN UNTIL WE WORK OUT SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

GREG MATOVINA ON THE LINE. >> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, GREG. GOOD TO HEAR YOUR VOICE. CAN WE BREAK OUT OF RECESS? ALL RIGHT. WE ARE OUT OF RECESS. WE WERE WORKING ON ROLL CALL AND

WE'RE GOING TO START THAT NOW. DR. MAC MCCORMICK. >> YES.

>> DR. HYMNALS DR. HILSEN. I HEARD HIM EARLIER. DR. HILSENBECK IS ON.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER IS HERE

MS. P. MS. PERKINS. >> HERE.

>> MR. ALAIMO. >> HERE. >> AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> I'M HERE. OKAY. UP NEXT IS READING OF THE PUBLIC

NOTICE OF STATEMENT BY MY VICE CHAIR, MR. WAINRIGHT. >> THERE MAY BE A QUIZ SO LISTEN UP. PUBLIC NOTICE. THIS IS A PROPER NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE AGENCY'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AND THE PUBLIC WILL

[00:05:02]

ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE SO BY COMPILING OUT A SPEAKER CARD WHICH IS VOLLEYBALL AVAILABLE IN THE NOIRP 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 TIME DURING THE MEETING ON EEP ITEM AND TO AIR LENGTH OF TIME THAT'S SPECIFIED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH WILL 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. II.

IF A PERSON SCIEDZ DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTERS CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING, MUCH 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 TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE REPRESENTED DURING A HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS WILL BE RETARN BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD. THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARDS OR THE COUNTY IN ANY REVIEW OR REPEAL RELATED TO THE ITEM.

III. BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER THEY HAD ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE AGENCY.

IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE AGENCY MEMBERS SHOULD THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSON INVOLVED IN THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNITY CASES. IV, CIVILITY COMPLAWPS WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE. WE SHALL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO

THE ISSUES. WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS. >> THANK YOU, MR. WAINRIGHT.

UP NEXT IS OUR READING OF THE VIRTUAL QUORUM AND REMOTE PUBLICATION OR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. I'VE CONFIRMED THAT THE MEMBERS ARE PRESENT BY THE ROLL CALL.

AND AN INTRODUCTION TO MEETING WITH VIRTUAL QUORUM AND REMOTE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

GOOD AFTERNOON, THIS MEETING OF THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY IS BEING CONDUCTED WITH THE GOVERNOR DESANTIS TEA EXECUTIVE ORDER 20-69 SPENDING DID REQUIREMENT OF A PHYSICAL QUORUM AND PROVIDING FOR ARE VIRTUAL QUORUM DUE TO THE STATE STATE OF EMERGENCY IN THE STATE GIVEN THE OUTBREASKT NOVAL CORONAVIRUS EXOACHEDZ IN ORDER TO FURTHER GHAIT THE TRANSMISSION OF CORONAVIRUS AND REDUCE THE RISK OF COVID-19 ILLNESS THE BOARD F COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAS ADOPTED PROCEDURES TO CONDUCT MEETINGS USING REMOTE PARTICIPATION THROUGH EMERGENCY PROCLAMATION NUMBER 2020-3 SO THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A MEANS TO COMMENT DURING THE MEETING PHYSICALLY ATTENDING. ALONG WITH PRIOR COMMUNICATIONS, INCLUDING MEEM, FUMBLE WILL BE ABLE TO COMMENT BY TELEPHONE WHILE WATCHING THE MEETING VIA GTV OR BY STREAMING POSTED ON COUNTY'S WEBSITE. THE WEBSITE ALSO PROVIDE A TELEPHONE NUMBER TO USE TO CALL INTO THE MEETING. EVEN IF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DO NOT PROVIDE COMMENT PARTICIPATES ARE ADVISED THAT PEOPLE MAY BE LISTENING WHO DO NOT PROVIDE COMMENT AND THOSE PERSONS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS MEETING IS BEING RECORDED. FOR THOSE OF YOU CALLING IN TO COMMENT, IF YOU RECEIVE A BUSY SIGNAL, PLEASE CALL BACK. IN ADDITION, CONTINUE TO WATCH GTV WHILE YOU ARE COMMENTING BECAUSE THE THREE-MINUTE TIMER WILL BE VISIBLE TO YOU.

FINALLY, PLEASE MUTE YOUR PHONE WHILE YOU ARE WAITING TO COMMENT.

PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THERE WILL BE A FIVE TO NINE SECOND DELAY IN THE VISUAL PRESENTATIONS AND PERHAPS UP TO A 30-SECOND DELAY IN THE VERBAL RESPONSE TIMES. IF WE EXPERIENCE ANY TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, LIKE WE HAVE, WE WILL RECESS WHILE THEY ARE BEING RESOLVE AND RESUME THE MEETING.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE, AS HAS BEEN SAID MANY TIMES BEFORE.

UP NEXT IS PUBLIC COMMENTS. THAT'S WHEN ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC CAN SNEAK ON ANYTHING THAT IS NOT -- SPEAK ON ANYTHING THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY. SEEING NONE HERE, DO WE HAVE ANY

ONLINE? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE ARE CLOSING THAT PART OF PUBLIC COMMENTS OUT. ITEM NUMBER 1, MS. KATZ, WE'RE

[Item 1]

[00:10:01]

HELLO? WELCOME. >> MANAGEMENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1 IS SPECIAL USE PERMIT 2020-03 FOR ST. MARKS P&D DISPOSAL. THIS IS THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND THIS IS MODULAR BUILDING TO BE PLACED WITHIN AN APPROVED SOLID WASTE FACILITY. THIS SOLID WASTE FACILITY HAS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN PLACE ALREADY AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 1908 EAKS. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN AN INDUSTRIAL FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT AND HAS OPEN RURAL ZONING.

THIS IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE SITE. AS YOU CAN SEE THE PROJECT AREA HAS A BLUE CIRCLE AROUND IT. IT'S ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF DOWN ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD WHICH IS KIND OF SOUTHEAST OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY WHICH IS ABOUT LESS THAN A MILE FROM US-1. THE FUTURE LAND USE IS INDUSTRIAL. THE ZONING FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS OPEN RURAL.

THE ORIGINAL FACILITY IS ALLOWED BY SPECIAL USE. IT WAS APPROVED IN OCTOBER OF 2000. THE REQUEST IS REALLY BASICALLY TO AMEND TO ALLOW THE ADDITION OF 528 SQUARE FOOT MODULAR BUILDING, AND IT'S TO BE LOCATED THE IN EXISTING SCALE HOUSE AREA. THE USE OF THE BUILDING IS TO PRESERVE FOR OFFICE, TRAINING AND STORAGE PURPOSES AND ALL CONDITIONS OF THE PREVIOUS SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL FACILITY SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT. THIS IS SORT OF A CLOSE-UP OF THAT LOCATION WITHIN THE SITE AND IT'S SHOWING THE PROJECT TO BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THE DISPOSAL FACILITY THERE. HERE'S A SITE PLAN. IS THE SUBJECT APPLICATION APPEARS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SPECIAL USE APPROVAL INCLUDING COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING INDUSTRIAL AREA. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION, AND STAFF FIND THAT THE SUBJECT PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING INDUSTRIAL AREA. STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE OR PHONE CALLS REGARDING THE APPLICATION, AND FINDS THE REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE REQUEST CAN BE GRANTED WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD AND WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIR THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THERE ARE EIGHT CONDITIONS AND FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO APPROVE OR FIVE FINDINGS TO SUPPORT A MOTION TO DENY THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS, AND I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

>> THANK YOU, MS. MAYE. SORRY FOR CALLING MISSISSIPPI MS. KATZ.

>> THAT'S POCK THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS HERE. >> IF THE AP CAPTAIN WOULD STATE FORWARD, AT A TIME YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING FOR THAT

PREGNANCY. >> MY NAME IS REASONED SHERMAN I'M A ST. JOHNS COUNTY RESIDENT AND I WORK FOR PUBLIC SERVICES HERE AT ST. BOXER DISPOSAL FILT P SPH PILT MY REST DISTRESS IS 1333 ST. PARADISE PALM, SANTIAGO, FLORIDA WWW.PPINES.COM WITH REGARD TO THE PRESENTATION I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PROVIDE AT THIS TIME.

IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I CAN ANSWER IF I QUESTIONS. >> I UNDERSTAND FROM THE STAFF REPORT YOU JUST GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THAT LITTLE TRAILER, AND YOU NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE

SPACE. >> WE HAVE EIGHT PEOPLE IN A 12-BY-60.

WE HAVE TBFL PEOPLE TBHORNG A 18 AREA. >> HOPE EVERYONE HAS A MASK ON.

DO WE HAVE IN YOU QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> ONE QUICK QUESTION. A NUMBER PEOPLE LIVE FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD THERE.

THE SCREENING ON THE SIDES OF YOUR BUILDING, WHAT'S THE PLAN? >> WELL, WE HAVE EXISTING VEGETATION LEASE SLOONG ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD. THAT WAS INSTALLED A PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION. THERE WILL BE NO EFFECT OF THAT. THERE IS ONE TREE IN THE WAY WHICH WE'LL MOVE TO A LOCATION IN A SIMILAR AREA. SO I DON'T EXPECT ANY CHANGES TO THE SCREENING. THE BUILDING WILL BE PRETTY SIMILAR TO WHAT'S ALREADY THERE.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND MATCH THE DLORT EXISTING FACILITY THAT'S THERE.

>> THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU CARE TO ADD?

I HAVE. >> NOTHINGELS. >> IF YOU COULD STAY OUT THERE, WE'LL SEE IF ANY OF THE MEMBERS HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE ROLL CALL LIST. DR. MCCORMICK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, I DON'T HAD. >> DR. HILSENBECK. >> NO.

[00:15:03]

>> MR. WAINRIGHT HAS ASKED HIS. ION ANY . ANY QUESTIONS.

MISPERKINS, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> NONE.

>> MR. ALAIMO. >> NONE. >> AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> NO. >> OKAY. SEEING NONE, YOU CAN HAVE A

SEAT. >> THANK YOU. >> DO WE HAVE IN PUBLIC SPEAKER

CARD? >> NO. >> IF WE CAN CHECK ONLINE IF

WE'VE GOT ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS IN THE QUEUE. >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY. THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, AND A

MOTION, PLEASE. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION. THAT'S MCCORMICK.

>> GOT YOU, BILL. WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US WHICH MOTION YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE?

>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT MAG 2020-03 ST. MARKS C&D DISPOSAL FACILITY. A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO A ROW THE ADDITION OF A PER MIST A 12-BY-44 MODULAR BUILDING IN THE EXISTING SOLID WASTE FACILITY PURSUANT TO LDC SECTION 2.03.11 SUBJECT TO EIGHT CONDITIONS AND BASED ON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. WAINRIGHT.

DO WE HAVE IN YOU OTHER COMMENT? SEEING NONE, I WILL GO DOWN THE ROLL CALL.

DR. MCCORMICK. I ASSUME YOU'RE A YES. >> APPROVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS.

>> YES. >> MR. ALAIMO ALAIMO. >> YES.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> YES. >> GREAT.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS 7-0. YOU'VE GOT YOURSELF A TRAILER. UP NEXT, ITEM NUMBER 2.

[Item 2]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> MR. CANARY AND AGENCY MEMBERS. FOR THE REGARD MARIE KEEL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

THE NEXT ITEM FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS SUIT PAGE 20002006 FOR THE CRACKER BARREL C20 LICENSE THIS. CRACKER BARREL REQUEST TO AAL HOW FOR ON-SITE CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING RESTAURANT THAT'S LOCATED A 2441 STATE ROAD 16. THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.

THE REQUEST, AS I STATED, IS TO ALLOW FOR ON-SITE SALE AND CON YOU SUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE PURSUANT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA TYPE 2 LICENSE. THE BUILDING IS COMPRISED 9 NOW 970 SQUARE FEET AND CONTAINS 1 UWE SEATS WITH MOW OUTDOOR SEATING.

THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M., FRIDAY AND SATURDAY FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M., AND SUNDAY FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M.

IT'S LOCATED WITHIN A MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AREA.

AND IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TOURIST BUT IT HAS A CONDITIONAL ORDNANCE ASSOCIATED WITH IT WHICH IS 8701. HOWEVER, THAT CONDITIONAL ORDINANCE WILL NOT AFFECT THIS APPLICATION TODAY. THIS IS THE SEATING PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, AND I'M SURE MOST OF US ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CRACKER BARREL. WE'VE BEEN IN THERE ONCE OR TWICE.

SO THIS IS WHAT WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR APPROVAL. THE EXISTING RESTAURANT HAS BEEN IN OPERATION SINCE 1997. THE REQUESTED 2COP LICENSE SEAR A PARTS OF A BONA FIDE RESTAURANT MEETS ALL CRITERIA OUTLINE IN THE CODE AND THERE ARE NO SCHOOLS ON CHURCHES WITHIN 1,000 FEET. STAFF FEELS THE REQUEST CAN BE GRANTED WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE GOOD AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE INTENT AND PUMPT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CONTIGUOUS AND SURROUND CAN AREA AND ABOUT WILL NOT IMPOSE A BURDEN OR HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ADJACENT USES OR ON SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES OR SERVERS. ALSO THE USE WHICH IS LISTED AS A SPECIAL USE IN THIS DISTRICT COMPLIES WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND REGULAR LAIFTIONZ STANDARDS OF ARTICLE 2 AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE OR PHONE CALLS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. STAFF FIND THE REQUEST SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND

[00:20:02]

APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS AVAILABLE VIA TELEPHONE. >> OKAY.

WE'RE GOING TO GO RIGHT TO THE APPLICANT, THEN. MS. MAGGIE SCHULTZ.

ARE YOU ON? >> HI. MY NAME IS AMANDA HELPIN.

I'M HERE WITH MAGGIE SCHULTZ AND WE ARE FROM -- A LAW FIRM HERE IN TALLAHASSEE.

OUR ADDRESS IS 119 SOUTH MONROE STREET, 3002 TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA.

WE REPRESENT CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY STORE, INC. DOING BUSINESS AS CHARACTER BARREL NUMBER 289. THEY ARE SEEKING A 2 2COBP LICE TO OFFER BEER AND WINE ONLY.

TO CONSUMERS OF LEGAL DRINKING AGE ONLY. AS HAS DEM STRAYED THE RESTAURANT NOT WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF A SCHOOL OR CHURCH PURSUANT TO SECTION 2 PERSISTENT 03.02 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THE CRACKER BARREL CURRENTLY HAS 182 SEATS AND DOES CONFIDENTIAL AS A BONA FIDE RESTAURANT UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE.

AND WE ARE SEEKING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE 2COP LICENSE. >> EXCELLENT.

ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD TO THAT, MA'AM? >> NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

DO THE AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'LL GO DOWN THE ROLL CALL LIST.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> I HAVE NONE. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY, THANK YOU. >> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> NO, THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE NONE MYSELF. MS. PERKINS. >> NONE.

>> MR. ALAIMO. >> YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT IS THIS DONE ON JUST FOR THIS FRANCHISE OR IS THIS COMING DOWN FROM CRACKER BARREL CORPORATE THAT ALL OF THE RESTAURANTS ARE GOING TO BE DOING THIS, ALL THE CRACKER BARRELS OR IS IT JUST THIS

LOCATION HERE OR -- >> DID THE APPLICANT HEAR THE QUESTION?

>> YES. WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS LICENSE CLASSIFICATION FOR A

MAJORITY OF THE STORES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. >> OKAY.

SO THE OTHER CRACKER BARRELS ARE FOLLOWING SUIT? >> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THAT WAS ALL I WANTED TO KNOW. >> NO PROBLEM.

>> MR. MATOVINA, QUESTION? >> NO QUESTIONS, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS, ARCHIE?

>> NO. >> THERE ARE NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS HERE IN PERSON.

ELECTRONICALLY OR ONLINE. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> OKAY. PUBLIC COMMENT IS THEN CLOSED.

AND WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY. THOUGHTS WITH COMMENTS AND/OR A MOTION, PLEASE.

>> I'D OFFER A MOTION. >> PLEASE DO, MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MOTION TO APPROVE SUB 2020-06 TO ALLOW FOR THE CON SITE SAFELY BEER AND WINE TO 2COP IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING RESTAURANT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.02 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TOURIST CHT ZONING DESIGNATION, SPECIFICALLY LOCATED AT 2441 STATE ROAD 16 SUBJECT TO 12 CONDITIONS AND EIGHT FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION, AND NOW WE HAVE A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MEMBERS PLEASE JUST SPEAK UP. SEEING NONE, I WILL ASK FOR A

ROLL CALL VOTE. DR. MCCORMICK. >> YES.

I WAS GOING TO PASS THE MOTION TO ARCHIE. THAT'S WHY I LAUGHED.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER IS YES. MS. PERKINS.

>> YES. >> MR. ALAIMO. >> YES.

>> THEN MR. MATOVINA. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT.

MOTION CARRIES P UNANIMOUS 7-0. UP NEXT, MS. MAYE AGAIN. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

[Items 3 & 4]

THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A PORTION OF THE AREA AND REZONING FOR THE ENTIRE

[00:25:01]

-- RURAL COMMERCIAL. IT'S LOCATED APPROXIMATELY A MILE WEST OF US-TWHIE 1 ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AND WEST OF ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD AND I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FIRST AND THEN FOLLOW WITH THE REZONE APPLICATION. THIS IS A LOCATION AT THE SORT OF EVIDENT NORTHWESTERN PART OF THE ENTIRE PRD SHOWING THE LIMITS OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IT'S ADJACENT TO INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY. THE COMPANION APPLICATION IS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM COMMERCIAL RURAL -- FROM PRD TO COMMERCIAL RURAL AND THE REMAINDER OF THE PRD WOULD BE TO OPEN RURAL. THIS PROPOSAL IS TO DEVELOP A 74.14-ACRE PROPERTY AS AN RV RESORT AND CAMPGROUND WITH A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, AND THAT'S APPROXIMATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY PART OF THE ST. MARKS POND PRD AND COMPRISES ABOUT 46 ACRES, MOST OF IT IS A BURROW PIT, SURROUNDED BY ABOUT 16.5 ACRES OF UPLAND AND ALMOST 12 AREAS, OF WETLANDS. THE RAIMENT OF THE PRD IS WITHIN THE ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BANK AND THE REMAINDER OF THE ST. MARKS POND PRD WOULD STAY RURAL SILVICULTURE. HERE'S THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWING THE RURAL SILVICULTURE IS THE CURRENT FUTURE LANT USE. WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO CHANGE THAT TO RURAL COMMERCIAL. YOU CAN SEE THAT TO THE EAST IT IS INDUSTRIAL AND IT'S NOT VERY FAR FROM THE INTERSECTION WITH US-HIGHWAY 1 WHERE THERE ARE PUDS AND MORE KINDS OF OF THINGS ZONING GOING ON. THAT'S THE CURRENT SOANGT A PRD. THIS IS A GENERALIZED CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN SHOWING THAT THE PARKWAY IS A LITTLE BIT TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE THAT THE POND TAKES UP THE MAJORITY OF THIS SITE. THE PROPOSED CAMPGROUND WOULD WRAP AROUND THE POND, AND THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT AREA WOULD BE RIGHT NEAR THE ROAD.

TRANSPORTATION, PLANNING TOOK A LOOK AT THIS, THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM CONCURRENCY REVIEW.

STAFF DID AN NON-BINDING TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND IT WAS BASED ON 150 CAMPSITES WITH ABOUT A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT SCWAWLT QUALITY STRIENTS ABOUT TO GENERATE RFN HUNDRED PEAK OUR HIPSERY TRIPS.

THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS SITE IS REALLY LIMITED BASED ON THE UNIQUE SITE CHARACTERISTICS, AND THE DIRECTLY ACCESSED ROAD SEMGHTS OF INTERNATIONALFUL GO PARKWAY DO HAVE ADEQUATE CAPACITY FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED BY THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT. AND IT IS WITHIN FIVE ROAD MILES OF A PRIMARY FIRE STATION WITH CREDIBLE WATER SUPPLY. THE PROPERTY'S ADJACENT TO INDUSTRIAL AND CONSERVATION LAND, RURAL COMMERCIAL WOULD ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES INTENDED TO SERVE THE RURAL COMMUNITIES, AND WOULD INCLUDE THE ALLOWANCE FOR MANY CA GROUND AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARKS. THE APPLICATION ADDRESSED THE PUBLIC BENEFIT, WHICH IS RAIMENT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. AND IDS THEY DECIDED TO DO ADD JAE CENTS TO THE TWELVE MILE SWAMP WILDLIFE AREA WHICH PROVIDES AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR A CAMPGROUND. THE PROPOSED CAMPGROUND IS A LOW IMPACT USE IN A RURAL SETTING WITH LIMITED IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCTURE ON COUNTY RESOURCES.

USE WOULD PROVIDE AN ECONOMIC AND RECREATIONAL BENEFIT TO THE COUNTY.

THE COMPATIBILITY MAP SHOWS HOW THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WOULD TUCK IN WITH THE SURROUNDING RURAL SILVICULTURE AND CONSERVATION USES WITH THE SPRIL OFF TO THE EAST.

THE CHANGE TO THE RURAL COMMERCIAL WOULD INTRODUCE RURAL COMMERCIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL USES BUT THEN THOSE WOULD BE LIMITED TO WHAT COULD ACTUALLY WORK AROUND A UPON. THE PLANNING AND ZONE AGENCY EARD THIS ITEM IN FEBRUARY AND SOATD 7-0 IN FAVOR OF RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL. THE BOARD HEARD THE ITEM THE FOLLOWING MONTH AND VOTED 5-0 IN FAVOR OF TRANSMITTING TO REGIONAL STATE AGENCIES.

THE STATE AND REGIONAL REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS DID NOT PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF THE PLAN. NOW, AS FAR AS THE REZONING APPLICATION SUMMARY, THIS IS TO REZONE 2,012,022.4 ACRES OF LAND FROM PLANNED RURAL DEVELOPMENT TO COMMERCIAL RURAL AND OPEN RURAL. THE FIRST PART IS TO REZONE THE

[00:30:05]

THE REMAINING LITTLE MORE THAN 1,000 ACRES -- EXCUSE ME -- IS TO BE REZONED TO OPEN RURAL WITH THE MAJORITY 780 ACRES SUBJECT -- OR CONTINUING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BANK. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND BURROW MITT WITH A WOOD RECYCLING ARE THE ONLY USES THAT ARE PERMITTED AND THEY'RE ALL PERMITTED IN OPEN RURAL ZONING.

THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW SHOWING THE ENTIRE PRD. POND AREA WITH THE CAMPGROUND REACHES THE NORTHWEST. AND THE BORROW IT. WITH THE RECYCLING FACILITY IS DOWN TO THE SOUTHEAST. THIS IS THE CURRENT ZONING. AND THIS WOULD BE THE CHANGE TO THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGING IT TO OPEN RURAL AND COMMERCIAL RURAL.

REZONING THE PRD TO COMMERCIAL RURAL AND OPEN RURAL APPEARS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. COMMERCIAL IS COMPAT YOU WILL BE WITH RURAL DENSITIES. IT WOULD ALLOW THE RV CAMPGROUND TO BE NEAR THAT POND UP NEAR INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AND OPEN RURAL ZONING IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE RACHELLEING ACREAGE, THE MARTY OF THE LAND TO BE VOAND OR WOULD BE KEPT IN THAT ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BANK OR CONSERVATION EASEMENT. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE OR ANY OTHER INQUIRIES REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. STAFF FIND THAT THE COMPANION APPLICATION TO AMEND BOTH SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLY WITH THE COMP PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BASED ON THE RELEVANT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO STAFF AND OTHER EVIDENCE PROVIDED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. STAFF DOES NOT OBJECT TO A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD TO& APPROVE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND THAT'S BASED ON THREE MIND FINDINGS OF FACT. THEN WITH APPROVAL OF THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO APPROVE VOANG THAT BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS HERE. >> THANK YOU, MS. MAY.

LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THE QUESTIONS LATER.

GOOD AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. SHANNON OS VEED OH WITH MATTHEWES DESIGN GROUP 7 WALDO STREET FOR THE RECORD. IT'S BEEN A LITTLE WHILE SO I'LL GIVE A BRIEF REVIEW BUT TRY NOT TO BELABOR ATOP BUT THERE IS FOR THE ST. MARKS RV RESORT AND CAMPGROUND FOR A COMP PLAN AND THEN COMPANION REZONING. JUST TO REFRESH, THIS IS THE ACTUAL PARCEL ID ID BOUNDARY D THIS WILL BE THE ONLY MAP THAT SHOWS THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY SEEKING TO AMEND FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMMERCIAL RURAL THE ENTIRE PARCEL BUT ONLY THE PORTIONS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BANK AREA.

AND THIS JUST KIND OF GIVES YOU A GENERAL IDEA WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM AN AERIAL SHOT.

AND THEN THERE'S THE MAIN -- THE BIG POND. SO THE SITE IS CURRENTLY RURAL SILVICULTURE. THERE'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO THE EAST, AND MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL FURTHER EAST WHERE YOU GET INTO PLENSIA AND THOSE AREAS.

THE TWELVE MILE SWAMP CONSERVATION PLANNED SURROUNDS AND OTHER DIRECTIONS.

THEN AS YOU GET CLOSER TO I-95 YOU COME TO ANOTHER MIXED USE NODE.

SO THE PROPOSED LAND USE WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE AREA YOU SEE IN TURQUOISE THERE FOR RURAL COMMERCIAL. IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR AN RV RESORT CAMPGROUND.

AND THEN THIS JUST GIVES YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF WHERE IT IS WITH RESPECT TO THE CURRENT PRD BOUNDARY. THE ST. MARKS PRD MAKES UP 11.2F THAT PROPERTY IS WETLAND, AND THESE AREN'T NEWTUALLY EXCLUSIVE TO GIVE YOU SCALE 788 ACRES ARE WITHIN THE ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BANK. MOSTLY IT'S VACANT BUT THERE IS A BORROW PIT AND QUOOD WOOD CHIPPING FACILITY THAT'S BEEN PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED, AND THAT'S IN THIS GENERAL AREA HERE TO THE SOUTHEAST. AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THESE TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY ARE OH

[00:35:02]

IT DOES NOT FACILITATE URBAN SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT AND WOULD NOT PRODUCE UNREASONABLE IMPACTS OR NUISANCES TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS. SO JUST DEFINED GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE IMPETUS FOR THIS, WHY NOT DWEFLT EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING, THIS WAS THE PRD WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THERE WAS SOME RESIDENTIAL THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PUT ONTO AN MDP MAP. THE AREA, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE IN THIS BUT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THAT HATCHED PATTERN IS. THAT'S ALL THE MITIGATION BANK AREA SO THAT'S NOT A VIABLE OPTION ANYMORE. THIS -- THERE'S PLENTY OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE ST. MARKS POND MITIGATION BOUNDARY SO WE THOUGHT THE MOST SIMPLE SOLUTION TO BE TO SIMPLY DISSOLVE THE PRD AND REVERT. RESULT ANALYST PROPERTY BACK TO OR. THIS WOULD FURTHER REINFORCE PRESERVATION OF NATURAL LANDS THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY IN 12-MILE SWAMP.

FOR THE RURAL COMMERCIAL PIECE, WE FEEL THAT THIS AREA -- I'VE GOT IT HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN YELLOW -- IS A GOOD LOCATION FOR SOMETHING LIKE AN RV CAMPGROUND RESORT.

THERE'S DIRECT ACCESS TO A TWO LANE MAJOR COLLECTOR. OBVIOUSLY HAVING THE NATURAL LAND SURROUNDING IT IS A GREAT A MEN RI TO THE SITE AND TO THE COUNTY AND THE COMMERCIAL RECREATION IS AN OPTIMAL USE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT'S REALLY QUITE A UNIQUE SITE.

SO THIS JUST KIND OF GIVES YOU ANED WHY OF THE MITIGATION BANK. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE DOTS ARE.

THAT'S WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS IN RELATION TO THE PRD BOUNDARY AND THERE'S IAN SOME AREA THAT HAS BEEN ADDED OUTSIDE THE PRD BOUNDARY WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE STRIPED BLUE.

IN TERMS OF COMPATIBILITY AND ANTI-SPRAWL, THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO AN INDUSTRIAL LAND USE. SO THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, THAT'S WHAT YOU SAW ON THAT ORIGINAL PARCEL ID BOUNDARY SO THIS IS ALL ONE PROPERTY BUT THE REASON WHY YOU SEE THE GAP IS THERE IS WE'RE NOT INCLUDING THAT WITHIN THE LAND USE APPLICATION. SEASON SHE'LL YOU'VE GOT BRONZE GLOW AND THE ST. MARKS, ACTUALLY THE APPLICATION THAT WE JUST HEARD FROM WITH THE DISPOSAL CENTER, POD, SOME OTHER INDUSTRIAL TYPE USES THAT GO OUT UNTIL US-1.

THE BALANCE OF THE PRD WOULD REMAIN OR AND RS. AND IT KIND OF PROVIDES A SMOOTH TRANS I GO BETWEEN SOME OF THESE HIGHER INTENSITY DEVELOPMENT AREAS AND 12-MILE SWAMP.

NO EXTENSION OF TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD BE NEEDED. IGP PARKWAY IS A SCENIC ROADWAY WHICH I THINK IS KIND OF ANOTHER REASON THAT WOULD MAKE IN THIS A GOOD ASSET AND LOCATION TO SITE SOMETHING LOOK AUN RV RESORT PARK. IT IS GOING TO BE A EXACT DEVELOPMENT COMOIP THIS IS A LOT OF ACRES, BUT AS MS. MAY STARTED TO POINT OUT IN HER BREAKS A LOT OF THIS IS AN EXISTING POND, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT REALLY A FEW NUMBER OF UPLANDS AND HOW TO USE THOSE MOST STRATEGICALLY. THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE FOCUSED AROUND THE POND AND ALONG IGP PARKWAY AND NO DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT IS PROPOSED AGAIN WITHIN ANY OF THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS OR THE MITIGATION BANK. THIS JUST KIND OF GIVES YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT THE ENTRANCE COULD LOOK LIKE, AND THIS WOULD BE THE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT AND THEN 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE ACTUAL CAMPGROUND FACILITY AND OFFICE SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY AND ITS RESIDENTS -- NOT RESIDENTS, BUT PATRONS TO THE RV PARK. SO IN TERMS OF POSITIVE MARKET, WE THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE AN EXCELLENT WAY TO INCREASE THE BED TAX AND AD VALOREM TAX VALUE. THE TYPICAL -- THIS IS JUST SOME STATISTICS WE RAN IN AS WE DID A

[00:40:01]

WE THINK THIS RURAL COMMERCIAL USE COULD SITE OF CATALYST TO ENHANCE COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE-ORIENTED INDUSTRIES IN THE AREA, PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF ENERGY MAYBE TO THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER AND SOME OF THE ENTITLED AREAS AROUND THAT ARE CLOSE BY TO THE RV PARK.

THE CLIENT BASE IS THE TRAVELING PUBLIC, BUT THERE'S ALSO LOCAL RESIDENTS THAT COULD BE SUPPORTING THIS BUSINESS WITH THE RESTAURANT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

IT WOULD MAXIMIZE THE IMENT JOFT SURROUNDING NATURAL LANDS, AND REALLY COMPLEMENT KIND OF MORE ON A REGIONAL SCALE THE ECOTOURISM THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO ALWAYS INCREASE IN VALUE IN THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY. SO IN TERMS OF THE CONCEPT PLANL AT THIS POINT BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA, WE'RE LOOKING AT UP TO 150RV SITES, UP TO 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT COMMUNITY SPACE, AND THIS WOULD CONSIDER THAT WE WOULD MAINTAIN A 25-FOOT AVERAGE UPLEFT HAND BUFFER TARN AREA AND THE FISH BOND TO BASICALLY REMAIN IN ITS SAME CONFIGURATION. THERE MIGHT BE SLIGHT VARIATIONS IN GRADING WITH YOU BUTT ESSENTIALLY THE POND WOULD STAY. IN TERMS OF IMPACTS, THERE IS ADEQUATE CAPACITY FOR WATER AND SEWER. WE EXPECT REPUBLIC SERVICES WOULD HANDLE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION. AND THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC COUNT WOULD BE 111 PEAK HOUR TRIPS. SO ADDING THESE TRIPS INCREASES THE CAPACITY FROM 84 TO 91.6% ON INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY FOR THIS SEGMENT. SO IN A PREVIOUS HEARING WE HEARD FROM A PUBLIC COMMENTER ASKING ABOUT ANTICIPATED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS.

SO WE WANTED TO SHARE THIS EXHIBIT THAT JUST KIND OF GIVES A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT WE THINK WILL BE ANTICIPATED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH WOULD PLAN FOR RIGHT TURN LANE INTO THE PARK AND ALSO A LEFT TURN LANE INTO THE PARK, AND THESE ARE ABOUT THE SAME THING BUT IT JUST KIND OF GIVES AN IDEA OVER THE AERIAL WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN IN BLACK AND WHITE.

KIND OF SOOJ INTO THAT ENTRANCE AREA, WE'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY A TWO-STORY BUILDING, RESTAURANT AND CAMP FACILITY. THINKING ABOUT CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA NEXT TO THE FACILITY, AND CAR PARKING, THIS WOULD BE REGULAR CAR PARKING, RV PARKING JUST WHILE PEOPLE ARE CHECKING IN SOLVE SOME SPACE FOR THAT -- SOME SPACE FOR THAT.

ALSO SOME SMALLER GOLF CART PARKING WITHIN THE FACILITY AS WELL.

AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT HERE THAT WE HAVE PUT SOME CONSIERATION INTO THE FACT THAT THERE WILL BE SOME SHARED USERS OF THE RESTAURANT IN THE CAMP RESORT BUT ALSO THERE COULD BE OUTSIDE VISITORS THAT ARE JUST COMING TO THE RESTAURANT. SO WE WANTED TO CREATE A LITTLE BIT OF SEPARATION THERE. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE HERE WITH THIS SORT OF LANDSCAPED AREA.

THIS WOULD BE GATED, AS YOU COME IN, AND SO THERE WOULD BE SEPARATE PARKING JUST FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE STAYING OVERNIGHT IN THE AN RV TO COME HERE, PATRONIZE THE RESTAURANT AND GO BACK. AND THE IDEA HERE IS WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL CAPTURE IN TERMS OF -- INTERNAL CAPTURE IN TERMS OF TRIPS AND OUTSIDE PEOPLE COMING INTO THE RESTAURNT AND THEN PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING TO USE THE CAMPGROUND BUT THEN ALSO GO TO THE RESTAURANT, AND THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED IN THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS THAT WE'VE CALCULATED. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE KNON THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE OF THINGS IN TERMS OF MEASUREMENT.

SO MOVING ON TO THE FLEX MAP, THERE ARE ABOUT 16 ACRES OF UPLANDS.

AND 11.77 ACRES OF WETLANDS. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY ABOUT 1.7 ACRES TO BE IMPACTED.

AND THEN THE RESULTING AREA OF THE COMMERCIAL RURAL AREA IS 46.3.

AND TAKING A LOOK AT PRESIDENT-ELECT PROTECTED WHIEFL WILDLIFE WE DID NOT FIND ANY LISTED SPECIES ON-SITE NOR DID WE FIND SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES.

THE CLOSEST DOCUMENTED BALD EAGLE IS 2.6 MILES NORTHEAST OF THE SITE.

AND I DID WANT TO ADDRESS CAMPFIRES. I THINK IT CAME UP IN THE STAFF REPORT AT THE RAS LAST HEARING TO GIVE AN GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING.

WE'RE LOOKING AT ALLOWING INDIVIDUAL CAMPSITES, AND THESE WOULD BE REGULATED AND SPECIFIED

[00:45:01]

SO IN TERMS OF TRANSMITTAL, STATE REVIEW, THERE WERE NO OPEN COMMENTS THAT HAD TO BE RESOLVED. NOTICE ONE TECHNICAL COMMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USE. HOPEFULLY I'VE ADDRESSED THAT TODAY WITH LOOKING AT THE SITE CONFIGURATION AND LIMITATIONS OF WHAT THAT HIGHEST IMPACT WOULD BE. THERE WAS ALSO JUST ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION.

THIS WAS MORE OF JUST A COMMENTARY FROM THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION THAT HAD SOME CONCERNS AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS RV CAMPGROUND WOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION BEAR MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT IS WHAT CAN WE DO TO MITIGATE AGAINST POTENTIAL BEAR VISITORS TO THE CAMPGROUND, AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST WAYS YOU CAN DO THIS IS HAVE BEAR RESISTANT TRASH CANS IN COMMUNITY AREAS AND INTERNAL DRIVES. ALSO LOOKING AT SECURING TRASH UNTIL IT'S READY TO BE PICKED UP, AND THED WHY WOULD BE THAT THE CAMPGROUND WILL COORDINATE WITH LOCAL WASTE SERVICES AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE IN TERMS OF MINIMIZING THE TIME THAT THE TRASH IS HELD ON SITE. AND THEN THE LAST THING THAT WE LOOKED AT IS PROVIDING LITERATURE THAT CAN BE PROVIDED TO THE CAMPERS WITH THE REGULATIONS AND ALSO SOME TIPS ON HOW TO DISCOURAGE BEARS WITHIN THE CAMPSITES.

SO IN SUMMARY, THE PROPERTY IS SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO RURAL COMMERCIAL AND THE COMPANION REZONING TO COMMERCIAL RURAL AND OPEN RURAL. AND IT IS COMPATIBLE IN TERMS OF HOW IT RELATES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. IT DOES CONFORM WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE DON'T EXPECT ANY UNREASONABLE IMPACTS TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS. THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC FLOW IS NOT GOING TO UNREASONABLY IMPACT PUBLIC ROADWAY OR SURROUNDING AREAS OR CAUSE A PUBLIC NUISANCE.

AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN, THE LDC AND THE PERMITTING AGENCY REQUIREMENTS.

WITH THAT, I AM FINISHED WITH MY PRESENTATION UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME.

>> YOU JUST MAY. I HAVE JUST A COUPLE. I'LL START OFF.

SO WITHIN THE LAST YEAR OR SO WE'VE SEEN SOME RESIDENTIAL BEING PROPOSED IN THE GREATER AREA, SO THAT'S GOING TO BE NO LONGER ALLOWED WHEN YOU CHANGE THE ZONING TO OR.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT RESIDENTIAL IS NOT ALLOWED IN ROR?

>> THE SIZE LOTS, I'M ASSUMING. >> THE QUESTION IS DOES THAT RESIDENTIAL STAY OR IS THAT

RESIDENTIAL GOING AWAY. >> NO. SO THE RESIDENTIAL THAT WAS IN THE PRD PLAN WOULD BE WIPED OUT BY REVERTING BACK TO OPEN RURAL. IN TERMS OF WHAT'S LEFT ON THE PROPERTY, IT IS NOT PART OF THE MITIGATION BANK IS THE BORROW PIT THAT'S ON THAT SOUTHEAST

PORTION. >> THE 111 TRIPS, GIVE OR TWEAKW DOES THAT INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF THE USE ALREADY ON IGP WHICH IS SOMEWHERE AROUND 84, 85 PERCENT?

>> >> SO IF YOU TAKE JUST A STRT CALCULATION OF WHAT THAT COMMERCIAL WOULD INCLUDE, YOU'RE

LOOKING AT CHANGING THE RATE OF CAPACITY FROM 84% TO 91.6%>> I . ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ONE COMMENT. THIS IS RICHARD HILSENBECK.

>> I WAS GOING TO GO THROUGH THE LIST HERE. GO AHEAD, RICHARD.

>> SHANNON, SINCE YOU BROUGHT UP CAMPFIRES AND WOOD BURNING, IT REMINDED ME THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXOTIC SPECIES THAT ARE BROUGHT IN FROM FIREWOOD UP NORTH THAT PEOPLE BRING WITH THEM WHICH IS A COMMON PRACTICE. ONE IS THE EMERALD ASH BORER THAT IS PEOPLE AT THE DEPARTMENT AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES ARE REALLY TRYING TO DISCOURAGE THE IMPORTATION OF FIREWOOD AND USE OF THAT IF THEY'RE GOING TO STAY IN FLORIDA.

[00:50:01]

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT COMMENT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT COMMENT. HONESTLY, IMPORT BE FIREWOOD WASN'T SOMETHING I HAD THOUGHT ABOUT, BUT CERTAINLY WE CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THOSE CONCERNS AND WE WERE PLANNING TO OF HAVE HAVE SOME KIND OF LITERATURE THAT WOULD GO OUT TO EACH OF THE VISITORS TO THE CAMPGROUND. AND, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, COLLABORATING.& I FOUND SOME GOOD LITERATURE ONLINE WITH THE PERMITTING AGENCIES THAT KIND OF HAVE A LOT OF THE HOMEWORK ALREADY DONE THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE INTO

THOSE REGULATIONS AND WITH THE LITERATURE AS WELL. >> ALL RIGHT.

GOING THROUGH THE LIST AGAIN, DR. MCCORMICK, MI QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS?

>> SHANNON, I'VE GOT A QUESTION, AND IT'S REGARDING THE RESTAURANT, THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT QUALITY RESTAURANT. AND MY ONLY QUESTION ON THAT IS IT MENTIONS THAT THEORETICALLY THAT YOU COULD HAVE A MAXIMUM RESTAURANT SIZE THAT WOULD INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE OF 15,750 SQUARE FEET WHICH WOULD BE 150% GREATER THAN THE 10,000.

BUT YOU SAY THAT WOULD BE LIMITED BY REQUIRED INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS PARKING, DRAINAGE, ET CETERA. NOW, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THAT COULD MOVE FORWARD YOU WITHOUT AGAIN GOING THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS? ZONING & PLANNING?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO THIS IS A STREET REZONING, SO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED IS CONCEPTUAL. PART OF THE HOMEWORK THAT WE GO THROUGH FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IS LOOKING AT WHAT WOULD THE HIGHEST USE BE IN TERMS OF IMPACT SO WE CAN GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE IF THE SITE WERE TO BE MAXED OUT. AND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO FIND IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS YOU NEED FOR PARKING AND BECAUSE THE SITE IS MOSTLY POND AREA, THE NUMBER THAT WE CAME UP WITH WAS WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND THAT'S HOW WE ARRIVED AT THAT NUMBER OF -- PULL IT UP AGAIN.

YOU JUST MENTIONED IT. >> THE NUMBER OF RETAIL SPACE COULD BE AS MUCH AS 250750

SQUARE FEET, I GUESS. >> SO THAT WOULD BE THE TOTAL, INCLUDING IF A RESTAURANT -- WHATEVER GOES INTO THE SPACE, WHETHER IT BE A RESTAURANT OR RETAIL SPACE OR SOMETHING ELSE, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR PARKING PER SQUARE FOOTAGE, SO HE'S THAT'S HOW WE CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER AS THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE NUMBER.

THAT SAID, I THINK THAT IN TERMS OF OUR SITE PLAN, I DON'T FORESEE BEING ABLE TO DO MUCH MORE THAN 20,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE, AS I MENTIONED, THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT AND THEN THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT AREA TO SUPPORT THE CAMPGROUND ITSELF.

THERE MIGHT BE SOME KIND OF ACCESSORY RETAIL AND THAT SORT OF THING BUT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT A FOOTPRINT GREATER THAN THAT. THANK YOU.

>> MR. CHAIR. >> YES. >> WHEN YOU'RE DOING QUESTIONS,

WOULD YOU PLEASE INCORPORATE THE EX PARTE IN FOR NUMBER 4. >> I WILL.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. WAINRIGHT, QUESTION. >> YES, I HAVE ONE COMMENT.

THE ROAD THERE, INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY, TO THE NORTHEAST IS INDUSTRIAL, TO THE SOUTHWEST IT'S A FOREST. IT'S KIND OF A FUNNY ACTIVITY GOING ON ALL ALONG THAT ROAD, WHICH IS A PRETTY -- VERY ATTRACTIVE ROAD IN PARTS AND PERHAPS NOT SO QUITE ATTRACTIVE IN OTHER PARTS. AND I -- RATHER THAN THE CREATE THE SCIENCE OR THE TECHNOLOGY, I'D JUST LOOK TO SAY THAT VISUAL IMPACTS HERE ARE IMPORTANT. I HOPE THAT YOU AND THE OWNER

[00:55:01]

THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. MS. PERKINS. QUESTIONS ARE ON COMMENTS?

>> NO QUESTIONS. NO COMMENTS. >> MR. ALAIMO.

>> YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION.

AND, YOU KNOW, I ECHO MR. WAINRIGHT THAT INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY IS A REALLY UNIQUE AREA, AND AS FAR AS IT'S GROWN A LOT. WE'VE GOT BUCKY'S GOING IN THERE, THE MIRABELLA PLAZA AND CERTAINLY IS AREA HAS GROWN. THE QUESTION THAT I HAD WAS THE PEAK HOUR TRIPS, AND I THINK YOU MAY HAVE TOUCHED ON THIS, MR. CHAIRMAN, BUT THE PEAK HOUR TRIPS, THAT WAS BASED ON THE 150 MAXIMUM CAMPSITES, BUT WOULD ANY OF THE RESTAURANT AREA, IS ANY OF THAT FACTORED INTO THE PEAK TRIP OR JUST BASICALLY BASED ON THE THEORETICAL NUMBER OF

CAMPSITES? >> SO THAT TRIP GENERATION WAS BASED ON 150RV CAMPSITES IN COMBINATION WITH A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT SPACE. OKAY.

SO IT DID INCLUDE THE RESTAURANT, THEN. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> AND QUESTIONS, MR. MATOVINA.

>> NO QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO

ADD, JERRY? >> I WAS JUST REMINDED GOING BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT RESIDENTIAL, IT IS STILL GOING TO BE RURAL SILVICULTURE FOR THE REMAINING AREA, SO JUST FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, IF THERE WAS NOT A MITIGATION BANK THAT WAS ALREADY ENCUMBERING THE LAND, THE HIGHEST DENSITY YOU COULD HAVE OF RESIDENTIAL IS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER 100 ACRES.

>> IS IT ROORL SILVICULTURE OR ARE YOU GOING TO OR? >> THE ROANG IS GOING BACK TO OR BUT THE PORTION THAT'S NOT THE CAMPGROUND IS GOING TO STAY RURAL SILVICULTURE AS THE LAND

USE DESIGNATION. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU FOR THAT

CLARIFICATION. >> SURE. >> ONE SPEAKER CARD.

>> PLEASE. >> MR. MCGUIRE, IF YOU WILL COME UP.

THE CHAIR OFFERS YOU THREE MINUTES TO TALK. PLEASE GIVE US YOUR FULL NAME

AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS GARY MCGUIRE I LIVE AT 1645 ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD WHICH IS THE VERY END OF THE ST. MARKS POND ON THE NORTH OF SIDE, AND I'M ALL FOR THE CAMPGROUND. THAT SOUNDS FANTASTIC. I HAVE NOT GOTTEN DETAILS POINT BUT MY CONCERNS ARE WITH THE TRAFFIC THAT WE GENERATED IN THE AREA DOWN OUR ROAD.

IT IS A DEAD END ROAD. IT DOESN'T GO ANY FURTHER THAN MY HOUSE.

AND WE GET A NUMBER OF PEOPLE COME DOWN THAT ROAD THINKING THAT THEY CAN GET TO THE MALL OR 16. I'VE HAD AN UBER DRIVER SHOW UP IN MY YARD TO GO DOWN THERE.

SOME CONSIDERATION FOR POSSIBLY SIGNS SAYING THIS IS A PRIVATE ROAD, DEAD END ROAD, YOU CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER, YOU CANNOT GET TO THE MALL WOULD BE WELCOMED BY OUR PEOPLE DOWN AT THE OTHER END. AND THE WILDLIFE, ANOTHER COMMENT WAS JUST YESTERDAY WE SAW A FLORIDA PANTHER CROSS THROUGH OUR FRONT YARD SO THERE IS WILDLIFE IN THE AREA, OF COURSE, BUT I THINK MY HOUSE IS THREE MILES FROM INTERNATIONAL GOLF SO WE'RE FAR REMOVED FROM WHERE THIS IS PLANNED TO BE, BUT I SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A GOOD PROGRAM TO HAVE OUT THERE.

MY CONCERN IS THAT ADDITIONAL TRAFFICS, AND IF THERE IS SOME CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO MAKE SIGNS FOR ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD TO INFORM PEOPLE. THEY HAVE A TOUGH TIME TURNING AROUND, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE IN AN RV TRYING TO GET OUT OF THERE AND TRYING TO GET OVER TO THE MALL. THEY'VE GONE THROUGH MY YARD BEFORE, AND I'VE HAD TO STOP THEM, AND NEIGHBORS HAVE HAD TO WARN PEOPLE, YOU CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER THAN THIS.

SO I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. AND I AM ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE WANDERED DOWN THAT ROAD AND TRIED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO TURN AROUND WITHOUT GOING INTO ANYBODY'S YARD.

THANK YOU. >> NO MORE PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS HERE.

>> NO. >> DO WE HAVE ANY ELECTRONICALLY ON THE INTERNET?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.

IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD AGAIN AND MAYBE ADDRESS THE ONE QUESTION.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOU HAVE A SEPARATE ENTRANCE OFF OF INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AND

[01:00:03]

YOU DO NOT GO DOWN ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD. >> YES.

THAT'S CORRECT. OUR ENTRANCE WOULD BE DIRECTLY FROM INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY, AND AS I MENTIONED THERE WILL BE SOME TURN LANES THAT WILL ALSO DIRECT TRAFFIC INTO THAT MAIN ENTRANCE. IN TERMS OF THE EXISTING ISSUE WITH PEOPLE COMING DOWN ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD, I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE WE CAN WORK WITH RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITTING OR IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF SUGGESTION MAYBE THE INCROCK MAKE OF SIGNAGE -- COUNTY CAN MAKE OF SIGNAGE, IF IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST WE CAN LOOK AT THAT.

>> OKAY. SIR, JUST FOR YOUR EDIFICATION ON THIS THING, SO THIS

CAMPGROUND DOESN'T HAVE ANY CONNECTION TO ST. MARKS PARKWAY. >> NO, IT DOES NOT.

I'VE SEEN THE SIGNS. IT DOES NOT. BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT PEOPLE LEAVING THERE AND WANT TO GO TO THE OUTLET MALL. GOOGLE EARTH SHOWS THAT YOU GO DOWN OUR ROAD. IT DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THAT THE EASEMENT FOR THE WELL FIELD FOR THE CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE NOT A REAL ROAD. IT LOOKS LIKE A CONTINUATION OF THE --

STOP BEFORE THEY GO DOWN THERE. >> SO 20 THE APPLICANT SORT OF GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY TO HELP ADDRESS THAT, YOU CAN ALSO TALK TO THE FOLKS AT THE COUNTY AND THEY MIGHT ABLE TO HELP YOU AS WELL GET THAT SIGNAGE GOING THERE. OKAY?

ANY OTHER COMMENT ON THAT? MS. OS VIDA? >> NO.

>> MR. CHAIR, MAY I COMMENT? >> YES. >> WE WILL CERTAINLY -- I WILL CERTAINLY CHECK WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS AND TALK ABOUT SIGNAGE THAT MIGHT BE CAN BE PLACED ON ST. MARKS POND BOULEVARD WITH RESPECT TO THAT ISSUE. I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT ISSUE COME UP BEFORE. SO I CAN CHECK ON THAT. THE OTHER THING IS THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE BY ONE OF OUR AGENCY MEMBERS CONCERNING THE INTENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD ACTUALLY HAPPEN ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, WHATEVER COMES IN ON THE OR PROPERTY OR WHATEVER COMES IN ON THE CR PROPERTY, THE COMMERCIAL RURAL PROPERTY IS GOING TO GO THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW. IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW.

SO YOUR STAFF IS GOING TO SEE IT. IT'S ALL GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO IT MAY NOT BE COMING BACK TO THIS AGENCY AS LONG AS THEY'RE MEETING OUR CODE BE RIGHT BACK WILL BE GOING THROUGH TO CONSTRUCTION, THE NORMAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW, AND IN ADDITION THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT NOT -- ABOUT INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY IN RESPECT TO IT BEING A MICE-LOOKING PRETTY ROAD. IT IS A SCENIC HIGHWAY UNDER OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, COUNTY LOCAL SCENIC HIGHWAY, AND THERE ARE SCENIC HIGHWAY STANDARDS THAT THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO

MEET IF THEY ARE IMPACTING THAT. >> GREAT. THANK YU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. OKAY. DONE WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY, THEN. THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? OR MOTION.

THIS IS FOR NUMBER 3. NUMBER 4 WE'LL DO SEPARATE AND WE'LL HAVE TO DECLARE AN

EX PARTE ON THAT ONE. SO BILL? >> I WANT TO MAKE A MOWING

COVERING FIRST 3 AND THEN 4 AS FAR AS EX PARTE, I HAVE NONE. >> SO WE'LL GET TO THAT ON NUMBER 4. IF YOU WANT NUKE A MOTION FOR NUMBER 3 FIRST, PLEASE DO.

>> SURE. >> SINCE THIS HAS ALREADY PASSED ANIMAL THE FIRST TIME BY THE RPZA AS WELL AS BY THE COUNTY COMMISSION, MY MOTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO ADAPT COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT 2019-07 ST. MARKS CAMPGROUND BASED ON THREE FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. WAINRIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE SPEAK UP.

SEEING NONE, WE WILL RENDER A VOTE ON ITEM NUMBER 3. MOTION TO APPROVE.

GOING DOWN THE LIST, DR. MCCORMICK. >> APPROVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS.

>> YES. >> MR. ALAIMO. >> YES.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS 7-0. BILL, IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION ON 4, WHEN WE DO THAT AND WE GO THROUGH THE ROLL CALL, I'LL ASK IF ANYONE HAS ANETICS EXISTING RESTAUA

TO DECLARE. BILL. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REZONING 2019-24 ST. MARKS REZONING AND REQUEST REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1,122.4 ACRES OF

[01:05:11]

>> SEC. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE SPEAK UP.

OTHERWISE WE'LL GO THEREON THROUGH ROLL CALL. AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED TO DECLARE AN EXPATRIATE PART A ON THIS ITEM. NUMBER 4, MOTION TO APPROVE.

BILL. >> APPROVE. NO EX PARTE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> YES. AND I HAVE NO EX-PARTE

COMMUNICATION TO REPORT. >> THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> YES. NO EX-PARTE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES FOR

THE VOTE AND NO EX PARTE. MS. PERKINS. >> YES, NO EX PARTE.

>> THANK YOU. MR. ALAIMO. >> YES WITH MOW EX PARTE.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> AND YES WITH NO EX PARTE. >> ALL RIGHT.

ANOTHER UNANIMOUS ONE, GUYS. WE'RE ON A ROLL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[Item 5]

ITEM NUMBER 5. MEGAN, HOW ARE YOU? >> I'M DOING GOOD.

GOOD AFTERNOON, AGENCY MEMBERS, MEGAN KUEHNE PRESENTING ON EADGED I'M NUMBER OF 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMOUNT 2024 FOR 65 RACETRACK ROAD. THIS IS A TRANSMITTAL HEARING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2024 RACETRACK ROAD. A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND 14.3 ACRES ON FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH A TEXT LIMITATION OF 90,000 SOFTWAR FEET TO COMMUNITY COMMERCE, WITH A TECHS LIMATION OF 1,070 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS LOCATED OFF OF RACETRACK ROAD AND EAST OF ST. JOHNS PARKWAY. IT'S CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH A TEXTED LIMITATION OF 90,000 WITH A TACKS LIMENTTATION OF 170,000 SQUARE FEET. THERE WILL AB I COMPANION MODIFICATION TO THE 4566 RACETRACK ROAD PUD TO BE HEARD CONCURRENT WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMEND. THE PROPOSAL IS TO INCREASE THE OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM THE 90,000 SQUARE FEET TO 170,000 SQUARE FEET.

AND THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR. THIS IS THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWING AN COMMERCIAL. THIS IS THE PROPOSED SHOWING AGAIN AS COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.

CURRENTLY ZONED PLANNED YOU UNIT DEVELOPMENT. AS FAR AS TRANSPORTATION, IT'S ESTIMATED TO GENERATE SWFN 3 ADDITIONAL NEW EXTERNAL PMP PEAK OUR TRIPS.

THE PROBLEM IS SUBJECT TO CON QUIRNS REVIEW AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS.

RACETRACK ROAD IS DIRECTLY ACCESS LISTENING CURRENTLILY OPERATING A 65.86% OF THE APPROVED PEEK OF OUR AND 95 FNT 8S% OF THE APPROVED PEAK HOUR SERVICE COMMITTED BICE TOTAL COMMITTED MACK PEAK OUR TRACK OF. THE STUL PROPOSAL FOR DEFT WILL BE EXAMINED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR REVIEW OF THE SITE ACCESS NEED.

A DETAILED SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS ESTIMATED TO GENERATE 300 OR MORE P.M. PEAK HOURS. AS FAR AS SCHOOL NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPT FROM CONCURRENCY PURSUANT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 1105 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WATER OF AND SEWER JFTA PROVIDED WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY LETTER STATING THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAPACITY. SOLID WASTE APPLICATION ESTIMATES 9,350-POUND OF SOLID WASTE PER DAY BASED ON THAT 170,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN FIVE MILES OF A PRIMARY FIRE STATION, INCREDIBLE WATER SOURCE. AS FAR AS PLANNING & SEENGS REVIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY A125 THE APPLICANT SHALL ADJUST NEED FOR AMEND AND DEMONSTRATE HOW THE AMENDMENT DISCOURAGES SPRAWL ASK DUTIES NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT RESOURCES.

THE PROPERTY IS CLOSE PROXIMITY WITH THE EXISTING AREA BOUNDARY TO THE EAST WHERE THERE'S COMMUNITY EXECIAL, INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL, AND TO THE WEST WHRS THERE'S MICKED IT'S.

IT'S LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 500 SQUARE FEET FROM AN INTERSECTION OF TWO MAJOR ROADS.

AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF A GROWING AREA IN THE PROCESS OF TRANSITIONING FROM RURAL TO SUBURBAN AND REQUIRES NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO SUPPORT EXISTING AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL POPULATIONS. WHILE MUCH OF THE SURROUNDING AREA CONSISTENT OF THE ARGUAL

[01:10:04]

THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC BENEFITS.

THE PROJECT PRESERVES THE MAJORITY OF WETLAND. THE LAND IS GENTLY TO RESIDENTIAL B, RESIDENTIAL C AND MIXED USE WHICH PROVIDE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL GROWTH RESULTING IN AN ORDERLY GROWTH PATTERN AND THE PROJECT IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO MARILYN MINOR COLLECTOR ROADWAYS AND I-95 AND STATE ROAD 9B THAT PROVIDES GOOD TRAVELING OPPORTUNITIES. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE COMPATIBILITY MAP, THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES IS CURRENTLY SNEAND 4560 RACETRACK ROAD WHICH ALLOWS CURRENTLY FOR A 90,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL PARCEL NUMBER 1 IS CURRENTLY ZONED OPEN RURAL AND IS A JEA EASEMENT.

PARCEL NUMBER 2 IS PARKWAY PLACE PUD WHICH ALLOWS 130,000 STARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL OFFICE.

PAR SHELL NUMBER 3 IS ANOTHER PUD. IT IS THE A CROSSING WHICH IS APPROVED FOR 400 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AND 250,000 SCWAWR FEET OF RETAIL AND OFFICE.

PARCEL NUMBER 4 IS ZONED OPEN RURAL AND IS USED FOR TIMBERLAND AND MINING.

AND PARCEL NUMBER 5 IS THE BARTRAM PARK YOU PUD WHICH IS A HAVE HAD PRO FOR 646 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. HERE'S A COMPATIBILITY CHART. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE A LEGISLATIVE IN MAICH. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AIR POLICY MAKING DECISION TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE GROWTH PEARCHT ST. JOHNS COUNTY. A DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMP PLAN AND STATE LAW AND APPROVAL OR DEFINITELY AN AMENDMENT MUST NOT BE ARBITRATOR OR CAPRICIOUS. TYPES OF INFORMATION, EVIDENCE AND DOCUMENTATION THAT MAY BE SCRD IS BROADER THAN THE COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REQUIRED FOR FOR A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING. TRANSMITTAL ARE REQUIRED TO FUTURE LAND USE FOR PROPERTIES OVER TEN AREAS, IN SIZE AS WELL AS AMENDMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES.

A RECOMMENDATION TO TRANSMIT IS REQUIRED FROM THE AGENCY TO THE BOARD WHO WILL TAKE FINAL ACTION. TRANSMITTAL MEANS AN AMENDMENT WILL BE SENT TO THE STATE, REGIONAL AND ADJACENT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR A 30-DAY REVIEW AND POSTPONEMENT PERIOD.

WUNTS REVIEW AND COMMENTS ARE COMPLETED ADOPTION HEARINGS WILL BE SCHEDULED.

THERE WAS A NORTHWEST SECTOR COMMUNITY MEETING HELD ON MAY 5, 2020.

THE MEETING WAS HELD ROW MOTEL WITH THE COMMUNICATION MEDIA TECHNOLOGY.

IN ADDITION TO STAFF, AND THE APPLICANT'S TEAM ONE RESIDENTS WAS IN ATTENDANCE.

THE RESIDENT'S QUESTION WAS INFORMATIONAL AND DID NOT APPEAR TO BE OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT.

STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PHONE CALLS OR CORRESPONDENCE. IF THE AGENCY FIEPPEDZ THE PROJECT MEI THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY A125 STAFF DOES NOT OBJECT TO TRANSMIT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BASE ONED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO STAFF AND OTHER EVIDENCE AND MATERIALS RECEIVED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE ON THE

PHONE LINE AND I'LL STAND BY FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT GO AHEAD AND JUMP ON. >> YES.

THIS IS RICK WELCH WITH, AND IS. SCWIK AREN'T 0060 SKINNER LAKE DRIVE, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.

AND I THINK MIGGAN HAS COVERED MOST OF IT. MAYBE JUST A COUPLE OTHER POINTS TO ADD. WE'RE ABOUT 8/10 OF A MILE TO THE WEST OF THE DER BAN PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT AND THEN WE'RE JUST EAST OBVIOUSLY OF ST. JOHNS PARKWAY.

WE'RE IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT -- I FORGOT THE NAME OF IT ALREADY.

YOU BUT A SIMILAR TYPE DEVELOPMENT JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE POWER LINE.

AND SO IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

THERE'S A BORROW PIT TO THE SOUTH. THE MAIN THING DRIVING THIS IS THIS PROPERTY HAD BEEN ON THE MARKET FOR THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, AND FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMERCIAL REALTOR COMMUNITY WAS THAT THE 90,000 SQUARE FEET WAS LIMITING GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, AND THAT WAS DRIVEN SOMEWHAT WY BY THE THE FACT THAT IT THANK WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED THERE IT WAS THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE A NAWRL OF OUT PARCELS IN THE FRONT WITH A SMALL STRIP CENTER IN THE BACK. WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS PROVIDE A HILL MORE FLEXIBILITY TO GOIPT THAT 170,000 SQUARE FOOT YOU HOWARD FOREMAN NEED A GOOD PART OF THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE IN STORAGE OR AN ELEMENT LIKE THAT THAT HAS A LOW PARNLG RATIO REQUIREMENT.

DIDN'T PARKING RATIO REQUIREMENT. E IT'S LIKELY TO BE SOMEWHERE SOUTH OF 170 AND PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT SOMEWHAT MORE THAN THE 90 BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TOH REALLY WHAT THE MARKET IS LOOKING FOR. AND SO WITH THAT I'LL JUST BE

[01:15:05]

AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU ONE FIRST.

SO THE FLUME ALLOWS UP TO 12,000 SQUARE FOOT OF DEVELOPABLE BUILDING PER ACRE.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. AND THAT'S HOW WE CAME UP WITH

THE SWFNT ACTUALLY. >> ALL 170 ACTUALLY. >> LET ME GO THROUGH THE LIST AND SEE IF ANYONE ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS. DR. MCCORMICK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DR. MCCORMICK MUST BE NAPPING. I HEAR HEAVY BREATHING IN THE

BACKGROUND. >> SORRY. MUTED.

NO QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. >> ALL RIGHT. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> I HAVE JUST ONE QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT. FURTHER DOWN IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS THAT WASN'T MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION TODAY, THERE'S MENTION OF A POTENTIAL SHOPPING CENTER BUILDING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, AND THAT'S ALONG THE POWER LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHERE THERE'S ALSO THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE BUFFER TO 10 FEET.

IS THAT ALSO PART OF THIS 170,000 SCWAWR FEET THAT IS REQUESTED?

>> YES. THAT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL.

AND IT WAS REALLY A YOU ASSUMING IF THERE WAS A LARGER SINGLE STRIP CENTER, IF YOU WILL, THAT KIND OF BACKED UP TO THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AND TO THE POWER LINE.

IT WAS KIND OF SQUARING UP THE PROPERTY ASSUMING YOU BASICALLY HAD LIKE A GROCERY STORE ANCHOR AND THEN SOME WING TYPE BUILDINGS ON EITHER SIDE. BUT WE LEFT THAT IN ONLY BECAUSE

IT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL. WE DIDN'T CHANGE THAT. >> OKAY.

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

YOU WERE JUST DISCUSSING THAT LITTLE SQUARE DOWN IN THE LOWER LEFT-HAND CORNER, SOUTHWEST CORNER. IS THAT CORRECT? WHAT IS THAT FOR?

>> THAT'S ACTUALLY JUST THE WAY THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD. THERE WOULD BE REALLY NO PRACTICAL USE FOR THAT LITTLE& SQUARE THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE POWER LINE.

>> THANK YOU. >> I DO NOT KNOW ANY QUESTIONS HIEFS.

MS. PERKINS, ANY QUESTIONS? >> NONE. >> THANK YOU.

MR. ALAIMO. >> NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU.

MR. MATOVINA, ANY WEST FOR THE R THE APPLICANTSOME. >> NO, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, RICH. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

DO WE HAVE ANY AUDITORIUM? NO PUBLIC IS IN THE AUDITORIUM. NO COMMENTS IN THE AUDITORIUM.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ONLINE? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> ALL RIGHT. THEN WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY. THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS OR

A MOTION, PLEASE. >> IF THERE ARE NO DISCUSSION, I WILL OFFER A MOTION.

>> PLEASE DO. >> I'D OFFER A MOTION TO TRANSMIT COMP PLAN 2020-04, 4560

RACETRACK ROAD BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT 1 THROUGH 4. >> ALL RIGHT.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? BILL, YOU HAVEN'T JUMPED TO BE A SECOND YET.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> ANYBODY OUT THERE?

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OF THE POURED MEMBERS ? WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECESS. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO RECESS.

AT THE POINT RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROV AND THEN WE'RE ON HOLD.

[Item 6]

[01:20:52]

>> THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY THE INTERSECTION& OF I-95 AND COUNTY ROAD 210 WEST OFF OF RUSSELL SAMPSON OR EVA EARL ROAD. IT IS PROCEED DOMINANTLY LOCATED IN A MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A SMALL PORTION OF IT LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL C AND IT IS ENTIRELY OPEN RURAL ZONING. AND LASTLY AN AERIAL MAP OF THE CURRENT SITE.

IT IS A REQUEST TO REZONE 26 AREAS FORMER DISTRICT A I MAXIMUMCH 147 SCINL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THERE IS NO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPPED AND IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MIXED USE CORRIDOR SURROUNDING I-95. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP WHICH IS UP ON THE SCREEN NOW SHOWING THE CONFIGURATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A FEW ITEMS WORTH POINTING OUT ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HANDER CORNER OF THE SMAP A CENTRALIZED BASHING AND AMENITY CENTER AND THEN TO THE NORTHERN POINT OF THE PROPERTY THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING ACCESS TO THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE NORTH OF THE PROJECT. THIS PUD REQUEST, ALL OF WHICH ARE INTENDED TO BE ABLE TO ESSENTIALLY MAKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS EXACT AS EXACT. THE FIRST IS TO ALLOW THE SETBACK TO BE REDUCED 50% ON DESIGNATED CORNER LOTS. THE SECOND IS TO REQUEST TO ALLOW FRONT YARD SETBACKS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 20 FEET AWAY FROM THE FACE OF THE GARAGE IN COMPARISON TO THE SIDEWALK. AND THE THIRD IS A REQUEST TO ALLOW MINIMUM SEPARATION OF TEN FEET BETWEEN STRUCTURES TO BE MEASURED FROM OUTER WALL TO OUTER WALL.

FOR STAFF ANALYSIS THE PROPOSED PUD APPEARS TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF HOUSING INVENTORY IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THE MIXED USE DESIGNATION IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE USE AND A THE GENERAL AREA IS ADJACENT TO NUMEROUS RESIDENTIAL NOOSHT AND PUDS. STAFF DOES NOTE AS I MENTIONED OF BEFORE THERE ARE A FEW SINGLE FAMILIES THAT ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED PUD AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE P CA CAN'T WILL REQUIRED ALL BUFFERING AND ACCESS TO THESE LOTS. THEY DEVELOPMENT -- FURTHER ANALYSIS, THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DENITY ALLOWED UNRESIDENTIAL C AND MIXED USE. THE PROJECT PROVIDES FOR ALL REQUIRED UPLAND BUFFERS AND PRESERVES APPROXIMATELY 1 ERROR WETLANDS AND I AM AM ALSO IMPACTS BOTANICA 2 ACRES OF WETLANDS. STAFF DOES NOT OBJECT TO THE WAIVERS AND FINDS THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH SIMILAR IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED FOR RESIDENTIAL PUDS.

FOR PUBLIC INPUT WE DID HOLD A NORTHWEST SECTOR MEETING. THE APPLICANT HELD A NORTHWEST SECTOR MEETING ON APRIL 28 AND THERE WERE SIX MEMBERS OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY WHO PARTICIPATED. THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS POSED REGARDING THE GENERAL NATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT BUT ALSO CONCERNS WITH TRAFFIC AND STORM WATER AS IT RELATES TO THE SURROUNDING WETLANDS. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NOW TWO PHONE CALLS, ONE PHONE CALL INQUIRING ABOUT THE STATUS AND A SECOND PHONE CALL WHICH I RECEIVED TODAY AGAIN INQUIRING ABOUT STORM WATER AND THE ASSOCIATED WETLANDS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.

I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OTHER CORRESPONDENCE OR OBJECTIONS RELATING TO THE APPLICATION.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND -- SUPPORTS A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR BROOK SIDE PRESERVE FINDS THE REQUEST COMPATIBLE WITH MIBLGDZ USE FUTURE LAND USE AND SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMP PLAN AND THE LDC PROVIDED NINE FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. OF COURSE, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS, AND THE APPLICANT

DOUG BURNETT IS ALSO HERE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS ITEM WILL REQUIRE AN

[01:25:02]

>> NO. >> DR. HILSENBECK. >> NO.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS NO.

MS. PERKINS. >> NO. >> MR. ALAIMO.

>> NO. >> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> NO.

>> THANK YOU. MR. BURNETT. HOW ARE YOU?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. DOUG BURNETT FOR THE APPLICANT ST. JOHNS LAW GROUP MAIN STREET HERE IN ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED BY A NUMBER OF FOLKS. IT'S LARGELY DEVELOPED AS THEIR HOMES, AND YOU LOOK AT AN AERIAL. AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH TOO MUCH HERE TO REPEAT WHAT JACOB WENT OVER BUT TO GIVE YOU I'M ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU CAN SEE ROUGHLY OUR BOUNDARY OF THE SITE, AND YOU CAN SEE HALF A DOZEN OR SO HOUSES THAT ALREADY EXIST THERE WITH THEIR ADDRESSES. CAN SEE AN INCREDIBLE GREAT ACCESS THAT'S ACTUALLY FOR THIS SITE. IT WINDS UP BEING USED FOR THIS SITE WHICH IS THE NORTH PART OF THE ROUND ABOUT AT RUSSELL SAMPSON ROAD. IT WOULD BE A DIRECT CONNECTION THERE ALMOST RIGHT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS FOLLOWING A SIMILAR TRAIL.

YOU CAN SEE HERE OUR MDP MAP WHICH JACOB WENT OVER. TO PUT A LITTLE COLOR TO IT, HELP TO EXPLAIN SOME THINGS RELATED TO THE SITE. IF YOU LOOK DOWN ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THIS PAGE OF OUR MDP MAP, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN DOWN THERE ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT, AND THAT DIAGONAL WE'RE NOT TOUCHING AT ALL.

THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT THERE. IT'S PRESERVATION OF WETLANDS THAT ARE IN THAT AREA AS WELL.

WE DID THIGH IN, THOUGH, WITH PUTTING OUR COMMUNITY CENTER IN THAT LOCATION IN GENERAL, MAKE IT CONVENIENT TO ALL THE FUTURE RESIDENTS, ALSO GIVES IT A NICE PRESERVE AREA IN THE BACK THAT IT WOULD BE OVERLOOKING. AND YOU CAN SEE THE THREE PONDS ON THE SITE TO CONTROL OUR STORM WATER. WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT WE WON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH STORM WATER ON THE SITE. AGAIN, IT'S LARGELY CLEARED. WE HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH STORM WATER IN GENERAL ON THE SITE. AND SO WE WILL MAINTAIN OUR PREIMPOSED DISCHARGE STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS. WE'LL MEET THOSE AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL. WE DO -- WE'VE DONE ALL OF OUR WORK RELATED TO INVESTIGATING THE SITE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL USING CARTER ENVIRONMENTAL. WE'VE GOT ROD CHAM WHO IS OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER. SO THOSE FOLKS ARE ON THE TEAM AS WELL AND, OF COURSE, THIS PROJECT AND MY CLIENT FOR THIS IS KB HOME WHO YOU OBVIOUSLY KNOW BUT ALSO RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD FROM THIS LOCATION THEY DID HER KNOWLEDGE OAKS WHICH IS A GREAT -- HERITAGES OAKS WHICH IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE FINE WORK THAT KB CAN AND DOES DO ON SITES.

WITH THAT I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THAT'S IT.

ONE THING. LET ME SKIP FORWARD HERE. WE DID GET A STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR SUPPORT, AND I THINK IN PART IF YOU LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 3, YOU SEE THAT THIS SITE IS IN A MIXED USE DISTRICT. IT'S BEYOND THAT THOUGH.

IT'S ACTUALLY, IF YOU GO TO THE ACTUAL COMP PLAN MAP THAT THE COUNTY HAS, THE COUNTY HAS DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARIES. IT'S THE HARD RED LINE THAT CIRCLES AREAS OF WHERE THEY WANT-TO-DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR. WE'RE CLEARLY WELL WITHIN THAT LOCATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY. THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. YOU CAN SEE THE HARD RED LINE GOING AROUND. YOU CAN SEE IT AGAIN HERE. AND BROOK SIDE PRESERVE IS CLEARLY WITHIN IT. AN INTERESTING THING WELL, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, DOUG? DEVELOPMENT AREA BROIRNSD DEPICT THE OVERALL FUTURE LAND USE OF THE COUNTY.

THE COUNTY SHALL CONTINUE TO DEV WIN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARIES AS DESIGNATED IN 2025 FUTURE LAND USE MAP. I JUST POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE IT IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THIS PUD APPLICATION NOT ONLY HAS LAND USE, BUT IT'S ALSO WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY. YOU HAVE THAT OFTENTIMES BUT OFTENTIMES YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT BEFORE YOU. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE YOU DO HAVE IT SO I WANTED TO POINT ON IT YOU THE BECAUSE IT IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THIS OVERALL BECAUSE IT'S A SITE WHERE WE'RE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDER. ALMOST EVERYWHERE YOU YOU SEE WHO SAYS WE GO CONSTRUCTED YOU CAN GET UP TO 13 UNITS AN ACRE, AND SO WE THINK WE'RE VERY WELL SUITED TO BE IN THIS LOCATION AS CLOSE AS IT IS TO THE EXCHANGE. AND WITH THAT I'LL BE HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> ALL RIGHT.

LET'S GO THROUGH THE ROLL CALL WITH QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> YEAH, MY ONLY QUESTION, DOUG, IS YOU MENTIONED SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, AND JUST LETTING PEOPLE KNOW, THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE CONSIDERING BUYING THERE,

[01:30:05]

>> I'M NOT SURE. I'LL HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

WITH COVID BEING WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT IS AT THIS STAGE, I DON'T HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OF KB WITH ME HERE TODAY BUT I'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I'LL MAKE SURE TO INCORPORATE THAT IN THE PRESENTATION TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT IT'S NECESSARILY BRANDED OR LABELED AS A AFFORDABLE HOUSING. A LOT OF THE TIMES YOU'RE TRYING TO GET A DENSITY INCREASE TO CLAIM THE BRAND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND USING THAT AS A TOOL TO INCREASE YOUR DENSITY.

HERE, BECAUSE WE CAN DO 13 UNITS AN ACRE IN THE MIXED USE SECTION, THAT PORTION OF IT OR THE STAFF RECORD SAYS WE COULD EVEN GET UP TO 210 UNITS IF IT WAS ALL RESIDENTIAL C, BUT WITH MIXED USE, I MAY HAVE MISSPOKEN. THE PUD TEXT OUTLINES THAT YOU COULD GET UP TO 210 UNITS IF IT WAS ALL RESIDENTIAL C. OBVIOUSLY IF 13 UNITS AN ACRE INSTEAD OF SIX UNITS YOU COULD GET WELL OVER 400 UNITS ON THIS SITE. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO THAT.

WE JUST SIMPLY DON'T NEED IT. SO OFTENTIMES, THOUGH, YOU'RE USING THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO GET THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY. WE DON'T NEED IT UNDER THIS CIRCUMSTANCE.

ON THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE, YOU'RE CORRECT. THE NEAREST SCHOOL FOR K THROUGH 8 IS LIBERTY PINES ACADEMY. WE WILL BE PAYING A PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE TO THEEL SCHOOL BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH THIS SITE, 147 UNITS. IT'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER THAT GETS PAID THE DAY THE SHOVEL GETS PUT IN THE GROUND TO BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON THIS SITE. SO THE SCHOOL BOARD WILL HAVE THE MAIN WELL IN ADVANCE BEFORE ALL THE STUDENTS SHOW UP. BUT, YEAH, THE EXPOARD SCHOS ITS CHALLENGES TWHIERS BUT WE WILL BE PAYING A PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE, AND IT'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER PER UNIT.

>> THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR. >> DR. HILSENBECK, QUESTIONS?

>> YES, I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND SOME QUESTIONS. DOUG, THIS BOARD WAS ASKED TWO WEEKS AGO TO APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT ON 71 ACRES TO THE NORTH AND NORTHWEST OF WHERE YOU ARE, NOT THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND BASED -- THERE WAS NOW MARKET DEMAND WHAT FROM 43-FOOT -- I GUESS MY COMMENT IS THAT YOU'RE SHOOTING FOR A DIFFERENT MARKET HERE THAN WHAT THEY WERE, BUT IT'S ON 43 LOTS. BUT THEN MY SECOND COMMENT, YOU DO NOT REALLY HAVE TO ANSWER THE FIRST -- IT WAS MORE OF A COMMENT -- I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WITH THE 43-BY-100-FOOT LOTS, 4300 SQUARE FEET, IT WAS STATED IN THE APPLICATION IN & ON THE CHART THAT WAS BRIEFLY SHOWED IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A 25% MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE.

SO 25% OF 4300 IS 1,075 SQUARE FEET THAT THESE HOUSES WOULD BE, BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE GARAGES. SO EVEN IF IT'S A 12-BY-20-FOOT GARAGE OR A ONE-CAR GARAGE, THAT'S 240 SQUARE FEET, THAT BRINGS TE HOUSE SIZE DOWN TO 835 SQUARE FEET PER HOUSE.

AND SO THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO ADD UP TO ME UNLESS ALL THESE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE TWO-STORY HOUSES. THAT MIGHT BE WHAT YA'LL ARE PLANNING HERE.

I DON'T KNOW. AND YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T HAVE A KB HOMES REPRESENTATIVE HERE WITH YOU. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

>> THAT'S AN INTERESTING ONE. I'M NOT SURE WHY IT'S IN HERE. I CAN TELL YOU THAT CHART THAT IS IN OUR PUD TEXT HAS BEEN COPIED FROM THE MDP MAP, SO I BELIEVE THOSE TWO WOULD BE CONSISTENT. I'M NOT SURE ON LOT COVERAGE WHY WE WOULD -- THOSE NUMBERS AS YOU ARE ARTICULATING THEM, I THINK -- I DON'T QUESTION THE MATH.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE INTENDED AS 25% LOT COVERAGE. I WOULD THINK THAT IT WOULD HAVE

TO BE HIGHER THAN THAT. >> OKAY. JUST WONDERING ABOUT THAT.

[01:35:04]

AND I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WETLAND ON THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER.

I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO CONSERVE THE MAJORITY OF THAT ALTHOUGH 1.82 ACRES WETLAND ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED SO NEARLY 2 ACRES. THAT WETLAND DOWN IN THAT SOUTHEAST CORNER APPEARS TO DRAIN NORTH UP TO WHAT'S OWLD CALLED THE GORED ISLAND CONSERVATION AREA, AND THEN IT'S TOWARD THE NORTH AND WEST AND FORMS PARTICIPATE THE HEADWATERS OF -- AND SAMPSON CREEK, SO I WAS REALLY HOPING THAT THAT COULD NOT BE IMPACTED AT ALL, ANY OF THE WETLANDS ON SITE BUT I DID WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. THEN MY LAST COMMENT REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY THAT BILL MCCORMICK MENTIONED. THEY'LL BE GIVING THAT FORMALLY OF .68 STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD, YET YOU PROJECT THAT THERE WILL BE 100 NEW STUDENTS FROM THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, AND IT'S ZONED RIGHT NOW FOR BARTRAM TRAIL HIGH SCHOOL.

I LOOKED UP BARTRAM TRAIL HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY IS AND FOUND IN FEBRUARY 56, 20 ARTICLE ON THE STAWG 2020 -- DR. HILSENBECK, ARE YOU STILL THERE? YOUR PHONE WAS GOING IN AND OUT

IN THAT LAST PART, BUT THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT -- >> EXCUSE ME.

THAT'S THE FIFTH TIME I'VE DROPPED THE CALL, SO I DON'T KNOW.

I KNEW IT WAS GOING TO DROP RIGHT DURING A COMMENT. IF I COULD CONTINUE, SO BY 2023 THERE WILL BE 1500 STUDENTS. OH THE 100 STUDENTS THAT YOUR DEVELOPMENT IS GENERATING IS GOING TO ADD TO THAT BURDEN. I ALSO READ IN THAT SAME ARTICLE THAT EVEN WITH THE NEW HIGH SCHOOL HHH THAT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THAT THE STUDENTS FROM THIS AREA WOULD NOT BE DIRECTED TO THAT NEW HIGH SCHOOL AND THEY MIGHT HAVE TO WAIT FOR HIGH SCHOOL III.

I ASSUME THAT'S THE WAY IT'S SAID, WHICH WON'T BE READY UNTIL THE 23-24 SCHOOL YEAR.

SO I JUST WANTED TO GO THROUGH SOME PRETTY QUICK MATH HERE THAT THE NEW HIGH SCHOOL HHH -- WITH NEARLY 60,000 APPROVED PERMITTED AND PLATTED LOTS ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW AT ST. JOHNS COUNTY, IF YOU TAKE THOSE 60,000 HOMES TIMES .68 STUDENTS, THAT'S 40,800 NEW STUDENTS THAT THIS COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH, JUST WE'RE TALKING HIGH SCHOOL HERE, AND IF EACH SCHOOL WAS WILT TO ACCOMMODATE 3,000 STUDENTS, AND THAT'S A FAIRLY LARGE HIGH SCHOOL, THAT'S 13.6 NEW HIGH SCHOOL THAT IS WOULD HAVE TO BE BUILT. SO LET'S JUST SAY WE ROUND THAT UP TO 14 NEW HIGH SCHOOLS TIMES LET'S SAY $60 MILLION PER HIGH SCHOOL.

THAT'S $840 MILLION, AND THAT'S JUST FOR HIGH SCHOOLS. THAT'S NOT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, MIDDLE SCHOOLS OR ANYTHING. THAT'S NEARLY $1 BILLION IN HIGH SCHOOLS THAT THIS BE COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH JUST TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, PROJECTED GROWTH, SO I WANTED TO POINT THOSE FIGURES OUT, NOT DIRECT IT AT YOU PERSONALLY, DOUG, BUT THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH 100 NEW STUDENTS IS PART OF THE OVERALL ISSUE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT STATED AND ON THE RECORD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO RESPOND TO SOME PARTS OF THIS, PLEASE? >> YES.

>> AND MR. HILSENBECK, I LOOKED AT THE BUILDING LOT COVERAGE IN OUR PUD TEXT.

[01:40:01]

I THINK WE'VE GOT TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND WE'LL LOOK AT THOSE CALCULATIONS TO SEE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER IS, BUT THE NUMBER THAT WAS IN OUR TEXT IS THE BUILDING COVERAGE IS 25%. THEN IT SAYS 4.6 ACRES SO IT'S REALLY LOOKING AT THE LOT COVERAGE -- IT'S NOT LOOKING AT IT ON A LOT COVERAGE BASIS.

IT'S LOOKING AT IT ON AN OVERALL SITE PLAN BASIS AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.

WE'LL MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION BEFORE THE BOARD OF BOARD Y COMMISSIONERS.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> . >> YES, SIR.

ON THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE, HERE'S WHAT I WOULD, I GUESS, ADVOCATE FOR AND HELP TO EXPLAIN WHY I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT ACTION TO TAKE IN APPROVING THIS.

IF YOU SAY THAT BECAUSE OF MARKET DEMAND WE'RE GOING TO GET THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE MOVING TO OUR COUNTY BUYING AND BUILDING HOMES HERE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED OR NOT A 147 HOMES THAT ON EXISTING LOTS, LOTS OF RECORD THAT ARE HERE IN THE COUNTY NOW THAT DO NOT HAVE A PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE MITIGATION AGREEMENT WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEN THE REVENUE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COMES IN AS ALL 147 OF THOSE LOTS ARE PURCHASED, AND THEY PAY IMPACT FEES. AND ON THAT 147 LOTS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GETS ABOUT $700,000.

I THINK MY MATH IS CORRECT ON THAT. I'LL DO THE PRECISE MATH BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I'LL TELL YOU TO MAKE SURE I COVER THIS ISSUE THOROUGHLY IN CASE YOUR WATCHING, BY THE WAY, FOR THAT MEETING.

BUT I THINK THAT GETS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT $700,000 OVER THE LIFE OF THE TIME THAT THOSE HOUSES ARE BUILT. SO HEATS SAY IT'S FIVE YEARS. WHEREAS WITH THIS PROJECT, THESE 147 HOUSES ARE GOING TO HAVE A PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE MITIGATION AGREEMENT.

IF YOU SAY THE GOING RIOT RATE RIGHT NOW IS SOMEWHERE OVER $10,000 PER UNIT, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS GOING TO GET $147,0. IF WE JUST SAY $1.5 MILLION FOR ROUND FIGURES BRAS IT'S ACTUALLY MORE THAN $10,000 PER LOT THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD GET UNDER THE CURRENT FAIR SHARE METHODOLOGY, THAT $1.5 MILLION GETS PAID BEFORE THE FIRST SHOVEL GOES IN THE GROUND FOR THESE 147 LOTS. AND SO TIME VALUE OF MONEY, ONE WAY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GETS ABOUT $700,000 OVER TIME, THE OTHER WAY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GETS $1.5 MILLION UP FRONT.

THERE'S AN $800,000 DELTA THERE AND THAT $800,000 DELTA GETS PAID IMMEDIATELY.

SO THESE 147 LOTS ARE ACTUALLY TO THE SCHOOL BOARD'S BENEFIT OF ROUGHLY $800,000 COMPARED TO JUST SELLING 147 LOTS THAT ARE ALREADY APPROVED THAT DON'T HAVE A SCHOOL CONCURRENCY AGREEMENT.

AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME DEMANDOVER OVER TIME. SO I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU VERY RESPECTFULLY THIS IS A BETTER WAY OF DOING BUSINESS, AND BY HAVING NEW GROWTH GO INTO A NEW DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS, YOU WIND UP GENERATING FEES TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT WOULDN'T OTHERWISE

BE THERE. >> APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. MR. WAINRIGHT, QUESTION?

>> NO. >> I HAVE ONE. WHAT'S THE PRICE POINT FOR THESE

HOMES? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER TO YOU.

I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FOLLOW THE LATEST -- EXCUSE ME. >>

>> WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE EXPECTED? >> I'M NOT SURE OF THE ANSWER TO THAT ONE. IT'S A STANDARD KB PRODUCT. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN THAT 300

TO $350,000 RANGE, I THINK. >> IS THAT AFFORDABLE OR WORKFORCE HOUSING?

>> THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT THIS THAT'S AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT CAME

ABOUT. >> I THOUGHT YOU HAD MENTIONED IT.

>> NO, SIR. THAT WAS ACTUALLY A QUESTION THAT WAS -- THAT CAME IN FROM ONE OF THE MEMBERS ABOUT THE PROJECT IN GENERAL AND WERE WE ASKING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

AND HOW THAT INTERPLAYED WITH THIS BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZES. >> THE LEALT REALITY IS THE LOTS ARE 43 FEET WIDE WITH A TEN FOOT COMBINED YARD SETBACK SO THAT'S A HOUSE WITH 33 FEET WHICH IS FAIRLY NARROW AND THE LOT DEPTH IS 100 FEET AND PENDING SETBACKS AND GARAGES AND ALL THAT FUN STUFF, THOSE ARE FAIRLY SMALL HOMES AND ASSUMELY FAIRLY LOW PRICE POINTS.

>> THERE'S ACTUALLY A PRETTY GOOD DEMAND FOR IT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM KB HOMES.

IT'S NOT AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCT THAT IS BEING MARKETED THAT WAY OR ANYTHING LONG THOSE LINS. IF YOU'RE USING THE AFFORDABLE HOW LONG CONTEXT IT'S ALMOST ALWAYS IN RESIDENTIAL B LAND USE WHERE YOU GET TWO UNITING A ACRE AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GET DENSITY

[01:45:03]

AGAIN, IT'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY AS WELL. >> GOT IT.

BUT THIS DENSITY IS ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN TYPICAL WORKFORCE HOUSING DENSITIES.

14 PER ACRE, WHATEVER YOU SAID. >> EXCUSE ME. NO.

THIS IS NOWHERE NEAR THAT. UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MIXED USE, YOU'RE ALLOWED 13 UNITS AN ACRE ON THIS LAND. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO THAT. IT'S AN AN AN APARTMENT COMPLX

COULD BE ON THIS LAND. >> UP NEXT, MS. PERKINS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> NONE. >> MR. ALAIMO. >> NO QUESTIONS.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> NO QUESTIONS. >> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, SIR. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? >> NO.

>> NONE IN THE BUILDING. DO WE HAVE ANY ONLINE? I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE ONE.

HELLO? HELLO? >> YES.

>> ARE YOU HERE TO HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER 6 OH OUR AGENDA?

BROOK SIDE PRESERVE. >> 32140 DIVISION ROAD WHICH IS IN AVON LAUK BE OHIO AND I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE BROOKSIDE PRESERVE PUD AND THE IMPACT IT COULD HAVE ON AN ADJACENT PARCEL THAT IS OWNED BY A MEMBER OF MY FAMILY. EYE MY LAST NAME IS FRAZER.

I'LL CALL TILL FRAZIER. THE STRAP NUMBER IS (026)260-0010.

AND I TALKED WITH JACOB WITH THIS B. THIS EARLIER TODAY. THIS IS A 7-ACRE PARCEL THAT'S LOCATED BETWEENS THE PROPOSED PUD AND I-95 AND I'M CALLING BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONCERN REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY. SPECIFICALLY WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE STORM WATER THAT NORMALLY FLOWS ONTO THE LAND TO BE DEVELOPED WILL BE PREVENTED FROM FLOWING TON AND OVER THE SAME LAND AND WILL BE REDIRECTED TO THE EAST AND TO THE NORTH OVER THE FRAZIER PARCEL AND OTHER PARCELS. SEVERAL MONTHS AGO AN OVER OFFER WAS MADE TO PURCHASE THIS SEVEN ACRE PARCEL. THE DEAL DID NOT GO THROUGH BUT THERE IS VERY REAL CONCERN THAT THE VALUE OF THE PARCEL COULD BE GREATLY DMIRCHED DUE TO SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF SORT WAWRP THAT NOW FLOW THROUGH THE PUD PROPERTIES WILL BE FORCED TO FLOW THROUGH THE LAND BETWEEN THE PUD AND I'M 95. I UNDERSTAND THAT IS THANK THIS IS A REZONING HEARING BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING & ZONING AGENCY TAKE THIS CONCERN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN RECOMMENDING HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROPOSAL, PROPOSED PUD. IF IT IS POSSIBLE THAT YOU COULD HAVE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL THAT WILL REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO DEMONSTRATE HOW THIS STORM WATER WILL IMPACT ABUTTING PROPERTIES BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER DEVELOPMENT, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED.

THAT'S ALL MY COMMENTS. BACK TO YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT RESPOND TO THAT, AND IF NOT WE'LL HAVE THE STAFF ADDRESS IT.

>> YES, SIR. MR. KOPPENHAFER, I'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THAT.

PART OF OUR TEAM ALSO, AND MISSED THIS IN MY PRESENTATION, IS THE GOOD FOLKS AT KIMLEY-HORN WHO ARE THE ENGINEERS ON THIS PROJECT. I THINK THAT'S OUR MDP MAP IN THE PACKET THERE REFLECTS THAT AS WELL. THEY'RE VERY FAMILIR WITH THE COUNTY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS OF COUNTY, STORM WATER.

THEY DID DO HERITAGE OAKS DOWN THE STREET AS AN EXAMPLE. FOR KB HOME.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A TOP TIER ENGINEERING FIRM. THEY WILL CERTAINLY MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THE COUNTY'S REQUIREMENTS. THEY WILL MAKE SURE THAT OUR PRE-DEVELOPMENT AND POST DEVELOPMENT DISCHARGE IS CONTROLLED AND WE MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF NOT JUST THE COUNTY BUT ALSO THE ST. JOHNS WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.

OBVIOUSLY HERE IN THE ZONING HEARING YOU DO NOT LOOK AT ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, BUT WE'LL CERTAIN HAVE THOSE AS PART OF OUR CONSTRUCTION PLANS.

YOUR STAFF WITH PAY ATTENTION TO THAT AND REVIEW IT CLOSELY, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO MEET ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS. NO PROBLEM. KB IS USED TO THAT.

>> FOR THE CALLER WHO I THINK YOU SAID YOU WERE FROM OHIO, THE RULES HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY -- I'M PARAPHRASING -- BASICALLY REQUIRE ANY DEVELOPED PIECE OF PROPERTY TO RESPECT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE NEIGHBORING BROUGHT, AND THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SHED ADDITIONAL WATER FLOW INTO THOSE PROPERTIES. THEY'RE ALL CONTAINED WITHIN THE PARCEL BEING DEVELOPED.

[01:50:04]

I HOPE THAT HELPS AS WELL. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE? >> NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. DONE WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY. ANY THOUGHTS, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

BEFORE HE STEPS DOWN? JUST SPEAK UP. >> YEAH, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> YES, SIR. >> YEAH, ROY ALAIMO. I JUST HAD A QUESTION.

I WAS LOOKING OVER THE STAFF REPORT, AND I DID SEE THAT IT SAID IN THE PENDING COMMENTS STAFF IS WAITING ON A REVISED OWNER ARE AUTHORIZATION FORM. ION IF STAFF HAS RECEIVED THAT.

I GUESS IT WILL BE PROVIDED BOFF THE HEARING BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.

>> I CAN ADDRESS THAT, MR. ALAIMO. WE WILL HAVE THAT BUTTONED UP BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE HAD AN INDIVIDUAL, ONE OF THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATIONS AGAIN, WE HAVE PERHAPS AS MANY AS TEN OWNERS' AUTHORIZATIONS ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE SOME OF THE PROPERTIES HAVE MULTIPLE OWNERS, BUT WE HAVE ONE APPLICANT THAT SIGNED THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, BUT IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT FOR ESTATE PLANNING PURPOSES SHE HAS PUT HER PROPERTY NO A TRUST AND SHE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY THAT IT'S ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST, AND SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING THAT. WE WOULD HAVE HAD IT SOONER BUT OBVIOUSLY WITH COVID-19 IT'S AFFECTED A NUMBER OF THINGS, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IT'S AFFECTED.

THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATIONS, THE COUNTY EQUIRES TO BE NOTARIZED, SO WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT BUNTED UP, THOUGH, BEFORE THE, BUTTONED UP, THOUGH, BEFORE THE BOARD HEARING.

>> I UNDERSTAND. THANKS, DOUG. >> YES, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? >> I HAVE A COMMENT, BUT NOT FOR

DOUG. >> PLEASE. I'M ALL EARS.

I CAN'T WAIT. >> DON'T GET OVER EXCITED. LET'S SEE.

IT'S A HOUSING PROJECT. THE TRAFFIC LOOKS GOOD. THE WAIVERS LOOK OKAY.

THE NORTHWEST SECTOR DOESN'T HAVE AN OBJECTION. THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, I WILL SAY FOR MYSELF I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. IT'S EXTRAORDINARILY COMPLEX AND I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND IT. I'M OKAY WITH THIS PROJECT.

IT'S GOING TO FIT IN THE PRICE RANGE THAT HELPS PEOPLE, NOT NECESSARILY OF LOW INCOME BUT MODERATE RANGE INCOME TO FIND HOUSING IN THE COUNTY, AND I SUPPORT THIS.

>> ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU SUPPORT IT ENOUGH TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> OH. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO THAT.

THE LAST TIME I DIDN'T GET A SECOND. >> I THINK YOU MURDER OF A FEW.

>> I'D OFFER A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD 2019-15 BROOKSIDE PRESERVE

SUBJECT TO NINE FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> ALL RIGHT.

DR. MCCORMICK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SECOND THAT? >> NO, I'LL LET SOMEBODY ELSE DO

IT. I WILL SECOND IT. >> MR. ALAIMO WILL SECOND IT.

ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE PEAK SPEAK UP.

OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO GO THEREON THE ROLL CALL AS A VOTE. AT THE TOP, DR. MCCORMICK.

>> NO. DID HE MAKE A MOTION? HE DID, RIGHT?

>> MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> AND HE GOT A SECOND. SAY NO.

>> ALL RIGHT. DR. HILSENBECK. >> NO.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES.

MS. PERKINS. >> YES. >> MR. ALAIMO.

>> YES. >> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> YES.

>> MOTION CARRIES 5-2. THANK YOU, SIR. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, OUR OWN

[Items 7 & 8 (Part 1 of 2)]

MR. SMITH. >> HOW YOU DOING? >> HOW ARE YOU?

>> GOOD. FOR THE RECORD, JOE SEAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND AGENDA ITEM 7 AND 8. IT'S A -- IT'S THE ADOPTION HEARING FOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND AMENDMENTS, HAPPENED DEVELOP CODE AMENDMENTS THAT WILL CREATE A WORKFORCE HOUSE ZONING DISTRICT STIEWLD FOR FINAL A DOFNTION BCC JULY 7TH. SIMPLY, WHAT THE REQUEST, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS DO THEY REFORMAT THE DENSITY CHART WITHIN THE POLICY AND PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL DENSITY IN SEVERAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCENTIVIZING

[01:55:05]

STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO CREATE A ZONING DISTRICT TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF WORKFORCE HOUSING IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY THROUGH THE CREATION OF FLEXIBLE DESIGN STANDARDS AND DENSITY INCREASES. IT WAS A COLLABORATION OF COMMISSIONER AND VARIOUS STAKEHOLDER RESULT. A MORE REFINE PROM WHO TO PRODUCE -- THAT FELL WITHIN THE FLORIDA STATUTE DEFINITION OF AFFORDABLE. THIS IS KIND OF REDUNDANT.

I WILL MOVE THROUGH THIS. SO TO SUM TRIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, IT ALLOWS ADDITIONAL DENSITY WITHIN RESIDENTIAL B FUTURE LAND USE FROM TWO TO SIX DWELLING UNITS PER AREA,. IT ALLOWS A CURRENT MAXIMUM DENIES WI WITHIN DESCRERKT C AND G FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WITHOUT THE NEED TO REZONE THE A PUD.

IT PLUS THE INCLUDED WORKFORCE HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE POLICIES AND DEFINES THE TERM.

AS I MENTIONED EARLIER WELL FORMATS THE DENSITY TABLE AND POLICY A -- THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IMPLEMENTS DENSITY BONES WINS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNED AMEND BEMENT, CREATES A ZONING DISTRICT WITH NEW SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ALSO ALLOWS FOR VARIOUS HOUSING TYPES SUCH AS YOU DUPLEX, TOWN HOLES WITH MULTI-FAMILY OR SINGLE THE PEOPLE, AND ALSO PROVIDE FOR SEET DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT PROMOTE FOOCIALTS. SO THIS WENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BACK IN APRIL FOR TRANSMITTAL. THERE WERE SOME CHANGES STAFF HAD NOTICED THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE, AND AT THE QUALIFY OTHER SMALLER DEVELOPERS THAT WANTED TO BE INCLUDED IN THIS, WE INCLUDED THE RESIDENTIAL D RAND LAND USE TOAL HOW A MAXIMUM LAND DENSITY OF 13 UNITS PER ACRE. ALSO THERE WILL DID DENSITY BONUS.

THE ZONING DESIGNATION ALREADY GETS THAT MAXIMUM DENSITY ALLOWANCE.

ALSO THERE'S A POLICY THAT REQUIRES ANYTHING OVER 10 ACRES TO REZONE TO PUD.

WE HAVE ADMITTED THAT FROM THE WORKFORCE HOUSING REZONING DISTRICT.

SO THE NEW ZONING DISTRICTY REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED THAT A DEVELOPER OR BUILDER DEDICATE 40% OF OVERALL UNITS AS WORKFORCE UNITS. NOW, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE WORKS FORCE UNITS WILL BE SOLD AT A MAXIMUM SALES PRICE POINT OF $210,000 OR BELOW.

I'M GO AND EXPLAIN THAT NUMBER HERE IN A MINUTE. IT MUST BE OWNER OCCUPIED UPON INITIAL TRANSFER OF TITLE AND REQUIRES LANDOWNERS TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 24 MONTHS OR IT REVERTS BACK THE TO ORIGINAL ZONING DESIGNATION. I'LL COME BACK TO THIS TABLE IF YOU NEED FURTHER EXPLANATION TO THE 210 PRICE POINT. SO HOW WE CAME UP WITH THE PRISON POINT WAS WE LOOKED AT THE MEDIAN ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME OR AMI:IN ST. JOBS COUNTY IN THE JACKVILLE METRO AREA AND IT IS CURRENTLY $73,300 PER MOUSE HOUSEHOLD THAT'S FOR FAMILY HOUSEHOLD. HUD DEFINES AFFORDABLE AS FALLING WITHIN FOUR DIFFERENT INCOME BRACKETS EXTREMELY LOW, VERY LOW, LOW AND MODERATE. THE MODERATE INCOME BREAK THE ARE FAMILIES MEANING BETWEEN $58,000 AND ROCKSLY 87,000 AIDS YEAR.

WHAT THAT DOES IS IT CAPTURES MOST OF THE UPCOMING PROFESSIONAL, FIREFIGHTERS, POLICE OFFICERS, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. SO THAT WAS OUR TARGET ALL ALON.

SO WE USED THE 30% METHOD, AND WHERE W GOT THAT FROM IS HUD DEFINES COST YOU ARE ABOUT DENIED FAMILIES AS THOSE PAYING MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR ANNUAL INCOME ON THEIR MORTGAGE.

THEREFORE, A FAMILY MAKING 1 UN. HUNDRED% OF AMI OR $73,000 ROUGHLY A YEAR COULD AFFORD A HOME WITH A PRICE POINT OF APPROXIMATELY $244,000, AND THAT'S USING THE 30% HUD DEFINE COST AFFORDABILITY. SO INITIALLY STAFF AGREES THAT THE INITIAL PRICE POINT OF 210 WOULD BE ATTAINABLE TO THESE FAMILIES THAT HAVE BEEN PRICED OUT OF THE MARKET.

I'LL GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE NOW. WE'VE LOOKED AT THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

WE GAINED DATA FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER THE LAST FIVE YEARS INDICATING THE NUMBER OF NEW CONSTRUCTION HOME SALES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND KIND OF THREW THEM INTO HOSE HUD DEFINED INCOME CATEGORIES, AND SO WE SAW A TREND AND A MAJORITY HOMES BEING BUILT ABOVE THE MODERATE INCOME BREAK THE $294,000 OR MORE. WE SAW A DECLINING TREND IN THE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME BREAK THE, AND EVEN FURTHER AT THE LOW INCOME BREAK THE, AND IT WENT STALEMATE. THERE'S NOT MUCH BEING PRODUCED WHICH IS HOW WE GOT TO OUR 210 PRICE POINT INITIALLY. I THINK THE 210 PRICE POINT IF I DID THE MATH RIGHT IS ROUGHLY 88 FIRST IAMI WHICH CAPTURES A HOEFT THE FIREFIGHTERS AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.

SO THE NEW STANDERS IN -- REDUCES LOT SIZY AND WIDTH WAS REDUCES THE SET K-12 BAS, PERMITS THE MULTIPLE HOME TYPES, ADDS ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND, OF COURSE, YOU HAVE THE DENSITY BONUS THAT BE BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE LDC. AND WHAT DID THUS, THESE

[02:00:08]

SO KIND OF IN CONCLUSION, THE DEVELOPERS WOULD DONATE 40% OF THEIR OVERALL UNITS TO WORKFORCE HOUSING WITH A PRICE POINT NO MORE THAN $210,000. THE MAJORITIES OF ADDITIONAL DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND THIS WOULD ALLOW THE FREE MARKET TO PRODUCE SUSTAINABLE HOUSING FOR THOSE MAKING APPROXIMATELY 80%, 80 TO 100% OF AMI OR THE UPPER LOWER OR UPPER MODERATE INCOME BREAK THE AS REDOOND BY HUD. -- DEFINED PIE HAWD.

APRIL 7 WITH THIS A RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH CHANGES TO INCLUDE THE STAFF SUGGESTIONS OF INCLUDING THE RESIDENTIAL D FUTURE LAND USE TO ALLOW 13 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

THEY WERE TRANSMITTED TO STATE AND REGIONAL AGENCIES FOR REVIEW ON APRIL 15TH.

WE RECEIVED MOST OF OUR COMMENTS BACK FROM ALL THE STATE REGIONAL AGENCIES.

SOME OF THEM WE HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM THEM. I'M SURE IT'S DUTY TO COVID VIRUS AND WE HAVE HEARD OF A FEW EXCUSES BUT DEO, STATE -- WE'VE REVVED NO COMMENTS BACK FROM THEM WHATSOEVER. SO HERE'S TWO MOTIONS UP HERE, ONE FOR THE LEC AND ONE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL AS THE INDIVIDUAL

SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE.

A DEVELOPER CAN USE ALL THE DENSITY BONUS, ALL THESE BONUSES IF THEY TAKE 40% OF THE HOUSING

UNITS JUST BY ACCOUNT? >> THEY CAN'T USE ALL. WE OMITTED THE OPTIONAL DENSITY BONUSES LIKE WETLAND AND UPND PRESERVATION. THAT'S NOT APPLICABLE TO THE SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICT, SO THEY CAN ONLY -- IF THEY REZONE TO THIS NEW WORKFORCE HOUSING STOANG DISTRICT THEY AUTISMLY GET THE MAX ZONING, THE MAXIMUM DENSITY FOR THAT LAND USE.

THE ONLY ONE THAT'S INCREASED IS THE RESIDENTIAL B. IT GOES FROM A MAXIMUM OF TWO

CURRENT TO SIX. >> SO A DEVELOPER WITH 100-ACRE PARCEL WHO IS THINKING ABOUT THIS, 40% OF THOSE UNITS COULD FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY AND THAT WHOLE 100-ACRE PARCEL, THE OTHER 60%, THE BALANCE WOULD BE ALSO TO THAT DENSITY LEVEL AS WELL BUT COULD FALL OUTSIDE THE PRICE

POINT. CORRECT? >> YEAH, CORRECT.

>> OR THE DEVELOPER COULD JUST SAY THE WHOLE 100% IS THIS WORKFORCE HOUSING.

>> THEY POTENTIALLY COULD DO THAT. >> ALLOWANCE.

>> BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO MEET THE LOT SIZES AND THEY WOULD STILL BE LIMITED TO

DEVELOPMENTCH A CERTAIN SIZE. >> AND IT'S NOT JUST FEE SIMPLE. IT'S A MULTI-FAMILY PRODUCT

THERE AS WELL. >> IT COULD BE TOWNHOMES, COULD BE MULTI-FAMILY, COULD BE

COMPLEXES OR SINGLE FAMILY. >> BUT RENTALS ESSENTIALLY AND S. WHAT I'M GETTING AT.

IT COULD BE ALL RENTALS THERE. >> NO, THERE'S A DEED RESTRICTION FROM THE BUILDER.

THE BUILDER OR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO THE INITIAL HOMEOWNER.

SO THE WAY WE'VE WORDED IT IS THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO BE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTED WHEN THEY PURCHASE THE PROPERTY UPON THE INITIAL STALE P. ONCE THAT INITIAL SALE TAKES PLACE, THE COVENANT NO LONGER APPLIES. SO THEY COULD POTENTIALLY SELL

IT WITHIN A YEAR OR TWO. >> AND THE VALUE COULD GO UP AND YOU CAN'T PENALIZE THEM FOR IT.

>> POTENTIALLY, YEAH. >> I UNDERSTAND IT BETTER. ALL RIGHT.

QUESTIONS FROM THE MEMBERS? LET'S GO THROUGH THE LIST. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> . DR. MCCORMICK, ANY QUESTIONS? >> ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. SORRY, I'M TALKING TO MYSELF EV HERE.

DURING -- I DO HAVE A QUESTION. DURING THE COMMISSION DISCUSSIONS, WAS THERE ANY MOVEMENT TOWARDS OR DISCUSSION OF INCREASING THAT PERCENTAGE OF BEYOND 40% IN TERMS OF

AFFORDABLE HOUSING? >> YES. ACTUALLY, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION. I THINK IT WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY COMMISSIONER WALDRON HAD MENTIONED HOWEVER WE DIDN'T GET CONSENSUS ON THAT AS OF IMREEPT DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH 50%.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE WOULD HAVE AN OPTION OF MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGES IF WE SO WISHED TO MAKE THE CHANGE IN TERMS OF THE PERCENTAGE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> BUT TO WHAT EXTENT, I GUESS GUESS --

>> BILL, ARE YOU STILL THERE? >> AMENDMENT OVERALL. >> CAN YOU BREET THAT, BILL?

YOU CUT OUT. >> THE QUESTION I'M GETTING AT IF WE WERE TO MAKE A CHANGE FROM

[02:05:01]

>> CORRECT, BUT I THINK STAFF IS TELLING YOU THAT THEY WOULD PROMOTE THE 40% AND NOT SOME

MORE ARBITRARY NUMBER THAT YOU'RE THINKING OF. >> 50% IS NOT AN ARBITRARY NUMBER. I DISAGREE WITH THAT. HOWEVER -- THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT AND THEN I'LL WAIT TO SEE WHO WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE. I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THE MOTION AS IT STANDS, BUT THERE'S PROBABLY OTHER PEOPLE THAT WANT TO MAKE COMMENTS FIRST.

>> LET'S LET THEM DO THAT. DR. HILSENBECK, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE SEVERAL COMMENTS AND MAYBE A COUPLE QUESTIONS, AND -- I'M NOT GOING TO DO IT ON PURPOSE. NUMBER ONE, I THINK THE ANALYSIS OF THE NEED AND THE SITUATION AND THE INCOME THRESHOLD ARE WELL DONE BY THE COUNTY STAFF

AND THE COMMITTEES THAT WORKED ON THIS. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

DR. HILSENBECK WEEK CAN I INTERRUPT YOU FOR A WEEKEND. DR. HILSENBECK, CAN YOU -- YOUR PHONE'S AWFUL. THERE'S A LOT OF STATIC ON IT. CAN YOU JUST HANG UP AND CALL

BACK AND I'LL GET YOU FURTHER DOWN THE LIST HERE? >> YES.

I WILL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> YES, MR. SEALY, I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE INCOME LEVELS, NORMALLY THROUGH A PERSON'S CAREER THEIR INCOME LEVEL INCREASES AND INFLATION ADDS AN INITIAL INCREMENT TO THAT. THESE INCOME LEVELS HERE

PROBABLY DON'T ACCOUNT FOR THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE

ANNUALLY, YEAH. THE INCOME LEVELS. >> MY CONCERN IS THAT ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ADDS TO THE ADMINISTERING THIS, AND THE CONCERN WERE THE ADMINISTRATION COMES INCREASED LIKELIHOOD PROBABILITY OF INTRUSION AND EVEN FRAUD.

NEVERTHELESS, I STILL THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS.

>> AND THIS IS JUST COOFN A RUN, THIS IS A FIRST RUN. IF WE RUN INTO ISSUES WE CAN AMEND THIS AND PUT MORE PREIVELGT MEASURES IN THE CODE IF -- PROTECTIVE MEASURES IN THE

CODE IF NEED BE. >> THANK YOU. >> I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS HAPPENING, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORT WORKING ON IT.

MS. PERKINS. >> NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. >> MR. ALAIMO.

>> YES. NO, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT. I THINK WE ALL SEE THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR A FANTASTIC JOB ON THIS.

>> MR. MATOVINA. >> YEAH, I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS. AND THIS IS WONDERFUL TO SEE, FIRST OFF. STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB. AND IT'S EASY TO SWOOP IN AT THE LAST MINUTE AND PICK THESE THINGS APART AND PERHAPS SOME OF MY SUGGESTIONS MIGHT BE TAKEN UP WHEN WE REVISIT THIS IN THE FUTURE, BUT THE BIGGEST ISSUE I HAVE IS SECTION 5.11.03. B.5 SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET THE 40% REQUIREMENT ON A PRO RATA BASIS AS YOU GO FORWARD.

SO IF YOU GO INTO IN TO PERMIT TEN LOTS, YOU HAVE FOUR OF THEM HAVE TO BE -- MEET THE CRITERIAE ONES THAT ARE TARGETED FOR THE LOWER PRICE RANGES. HAVE I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO MORE THAN FOR AND I THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAMSTRING SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTSWHAT D ONE MODEL HOME THAT IS NOT ON A 40% LOT, YOU CAN'T GET A PERMIT FOR ALL OF THEM, THEN, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT MEETING THE 40% RATIO. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER RESTRICTIONS ALREADY IN THERE AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS BEING DMOAFERL IS GOING TO SIT ON 40% OF HIS LOTS AND FIGURE I JUST WON'T BUILD ON THOSE OR SELL THEM.

WE DON'T MAKE THAT MUCH MONEY IN DEVELOPMENT, AT LEAST I DON'T WE TALKED EARLIER ABOUT BLOCK COVERAGE. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A 3500 SQUARE FOOT LOT WITH A 40% LOT

[02:10:06]

AND THEN WHAT WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WHETHER OR NOT THE $200,000 AND JUST BASED ON SOME CHANGE IN THE CPI IF SOMEBODY COMES IN THREE YEARS FROM NOW TO DO ONE OF THESE. SO THOSE ARE JUST MY SUGGESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> THANK YOU. GOING BACK TO DR. HILSENBECK. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. IS THIS BETTER? >> MUCH BETTER.

>> GOOD. THANK. WHAT I WAS STARTING TO SAY IS THAT I ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCALLY SUPPORT THE NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT I HAD SEVERAL COMMENTS. THIS I BROUGHT UP A MONTH OR SO AGO WHEN I FIRST REVIEWED THIS.

I HAD MENTIONED THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS NOT BE GIVEN A BLANKET APPROVAL FOR COUNTY-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION BUT THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT IN SEVERAL ZONES OR ZIP CODES OR AREAS FIRST TO SEE HOW IT WORKS, AND APPARENTLY THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE COMMENTS.

A COUPLE OF MY COMMENTS WERE PUT INTO THE AGENDA ITEM. THE SECOND THING IS THAT THE NEW ZONING IS GOING TO ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR REZONING TO A PUD FOR AFFORDABLE OR WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR SINGLE FAMILY, COMPLEX, TOWNHOME, MULTI-FAMILY. I JUST THINK THAT'S TOO SWEEPING IN MY OPINION AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT THE ONLY ONE THAT REALLY GETS AN INCREASE IN DENSITY IS RESIDENTIAL B FROM TWO UNITS TO SIX UNITS,ELING DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

THE OTHER THREE RESIDENTIAL C, RESIDENTIAL BD AND MIXED USE, THEIR DENIES DID I DOES NOT CHANGE -- DENSITY DOES NOT CHANGE. SO I THINK WHAT THIS DOES IS ELIMINATES REZONING FOR ALL OF THOSE EVEN THOUGH ONLY ONE IS GETTING AN INCREASE IN DENSITY AND THIS JUST SEEMS LIKE A GIVEAWAY TO ME, THAT THE DENSITY STAYS THE SAME BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO REZONE. I DON'T SEE THAT AS A BIG WIN FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

ALSO, IT'S STATED THAT CONSTRUCTION IS SUPPOSED TO BEGIN WITHIN 24 MONTHS OF APPROVAL WHAT WE APPROVED BEFORE WAS 12 MONTHS SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE 24 24 MONTHS CAME F.

I ALSO QUESTION AGAIN THE 40% THRESHOLD LIMITATION. I SUGGESTED 50%, BUT IT SAID THE COUNTY COMMISSION COULD NOT REACH CONCURRENCE OR CONSENSUS, EXCUSE ME, ON THAT.

SO WITHOUT STATING IN SUPPORT WHY THEY WOULDN'T DO THIS OR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPER WOULD NOT DO THAT, I'M CURIOUS, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, AND THIS IS ON ITEM 8 BUT WE'RE TAKING THESE TOGETHER, THESE AGREEMENTS ARE GUARANTEES WITH A DEVELOPER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPER EXPIRE AFTER TEN YEARS. THAT'S ON PAGE 29 OF I-8. SO I'M JUST WONDERING, SO MAYBE YOU HAD A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. THESE AGREEMENTS EXPIRE AFTER TEN YEARS? THEN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? IS THAT BECAUSE THE $210,000 LEVEL OF NOOCIALT AFFORDABS ANTICIPATED TO CHANGE? IF THAT'S TRUE, WHY DON'T WE BUILD IN A SLIDING SCALE RIGHT NOW TO LOOK AT PEOPLE'S INCOME AND ANTICIPATED HOUSING COSTS DOWN THE ROAD SO JUST HAVING THESE AGREEMENTS EXPIRE, ESPECIALLY ONCE THEY'RE POTENTIALLY GRANDFATHERED IN AND COSTS ARE ALREADY -- AND BUILDINGS ARE ALREADY THERE ON THE GROUND. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT MAY NOT HAVE AN ANSWER AND ONE OTHER COMMENT. I WONDERED WHAT THE COST PER UNIT THAT ARE BUILT RIGHT NOW AT A DENSITY OF 13 UNITS PER ACRE ARE. ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS APPROVED MINIMUM LOT SIZES AS SMALL AS 1400 SQUARE FEET SO IF YOU'RE HAVING 13 UNITS PER ACRE I WONDER WHAT THE AVERAGE COST IS RIGHT NOW. I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S MUCH ABOVE 210 OR 215 OR 220,000DOLLARS SO THERE REALLY A NEED FOR THIS IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALREADY HAVE

[02:15:06]

>> JOE, DID YOU WANT TO ANSWER THOSE IN. >> I'LL START FROM THE LAST ONE.

I'VE GOT SIX. IF YOU GUYS COUNTED MORE, LET ME KNOW.

THE ACTIVE REC COMPONENT AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT IS ONLY REQUIRED FOR PUDS.

THIS IS A SIMPLE STRAIGHT REZONING. OUR ZONING CATEGORY IS NOW IN THE STRAIGHT REZONING YOU'RE NOT RIDER TO PROVIDE ACTIVE REC ROOM SPACE.

YOU'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A PERIMETER BUFFER. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO COME IN AND RED ZONE 100 ACRES TO RS-3 THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT, EITHER.

NOW, REGARDING THE PRICE POINT, I'M NOT IN THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS.

I WOULDN'T FEEL DISH WOULDN'T FEEL SAFE ANSWERING THAT QUESTION.

WE HAVE ZOM SOMEONE FROM DR HORTON HERE THAT MAYBE COULD PRESERVE PERSPECTIVE ON THAT.

I COULD ALSO DO RESEARCH AND ASK AROUND. 10%.

AND DR. HILSENBECK, I APOLOGIZE BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT TEN-YEAR AGREEMENT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.

THERE'S NO DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THESE PROPERTIES. THE INITIAL AGREEMENT IS JUST FROM THE DEVELOPER AND THE INITIAL HOME BUYER. ONCE THE PURCHASE IS DONE AND COMPLETE, THAT RESTRICTED COVENANT IS NO LONGER IN PLACE SO THERE'S NO DENY-YEAR DEED RESTRICTION -- TEN-YEAR DEED RESTRICTION IF I HEARD YOU RIGHT.

>> JOE, IF I COULD HAVE YOU HOLD ON. >> MIKE ROSHSON, DR. HILSENBECK, I THINK YOU'RE READING THE AFFORDABLE SECTION OF OUR CODE ARTICLE 5. XX WHATEVER IT IS.

THAT'S CONSIDERED WHEN IT IS CRUEL AFFORDABLE AND GOING THROUGH OUR HOUSING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A VOANG DISTRICT, AND IT WILL HAVE -- REZONING SCHOOL DISTRICT AND IT WILL HAVE ITS OWN CRITERIA AS YOU SAW. EVERYTHING IS IN THERE.

SO THAT TEN-YEAR IS NOT APPLICABLE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> WAS THAT IT? >> NOW, THE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 24 MONTHS, THAT'S THE SECOND QUESTION I RECEIVED. THAT'S BEEN IN THIS DRAFT AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER SINCE ITS INCEPTION. AND THE SEVERAL ZONES I DON'T RECALL THAT. I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LISTEN TO THAT BUT I CAN CLAWL THESE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS DR. HILSENBECK INTO THE STAFF REPORT AND THEN BRING THEM TO THE BOARD AND THE END OF THE PRESENTATION I'LL MAKE SURE THAT I'LL PZ HAVEZA COMMENTS AND

UGHTS SUGGESTIONS ARE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD. >> GREAT.

I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. IF I WAS CONFUSED ON ONE OR TWO OF THOSE ISSUES.

>> OKAY. JOE, WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU OOH ON ICE EAR HERE AND SEE WHAT THE

PUBLIC HACKER SPEAKER WANTS TO ADD TO IT. >> IF YOU CAN CAN GO COME UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AGAIN AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. AND YOUR ADDRESS.

>> NUP BOB PORT WERE DR HORTON 4220 RACETRACK ROAD. JOE HAD MENTIONED WE WENT THROUGH A SERIES OF MEETINGS THAT STARTED I THINK A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO WITH STAFF WITH INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES. I WAS ONE OF THE HOMEBUILDERS THERE AND WITH COMMISSIONER WALLEDON AND I WANTED TO ANSWER A FEW OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT I HEARD.

WHAT WE STARTED WITH WAS TO TRY TOY FIGURE OUT WHY WE CAN'T HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY, TO TRY TO LOOK AT WHAT THE PROBLEMS WERE AND HOW WE MIGHT ADDRESS THEM.

WE PAY A AN AVERAGE OF $1,500 A HOUSE IMPACT FEE WHERE IN DUVAL IT'S MORE LIKE $2,500 SO WE START OFF MORE THAN 10 BEHIND ON IMPACT FEES. THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ST. JOHNS IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTIES. SO WHAT HAPPENS FROM THOSE COUPLE OF ITEMS IS THAT WE END UP $15,000 OR $20,000 PER LOT MORE EXPENSIVE TO TRY AND PUT LOTS ON THE GROUND AND MAKES IT WAY HARDER TO GET THE PRICES DOWN

[02:20:02]

IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT, THEY HAVE TO PICK ANOTHER SPOT IN ANOTHER COUNTY TO DO IT SO WE ARE TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING WE CAN AFFORD TO DO. THE 40% IS AN ARBITRARY NUMBERS.

THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. COMMISSIONER WALDRON HAD ASKED FOR A HIGHER NUMBER, I HAD ASKED FOR A LOWER NUMBER. WOULDN'T BACK AND FORTH TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WORKED, AND I COMMITTED HIM TO THAT IF WE GET THIS THING PASSED WEEK I'M GOING TO DO A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WORKS. THE 24 MONTHS IS BECAUSE BY THE TIME WE DO A REZONING, DO A DESIGN AND GET THE ENGINEERING DONE, IT FREQUENTLY TAKES OVER A YEAR SO THIS JUST GAVE US -- BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY GREETD. THAT WAS SORT OF THE REASONING BEHIND THAT. THE QUESTION THE OWNER OCCUPANCY, WE HAVE TO BROOF THAT NOW FOR A LOT OF THE LOANS THAT WE DO, THE MORTGAGES PEOPLE DO. THEY SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT THAT THEY WILL BE OWNER OCCUPANTS. SO WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS WHEN WE RECORD A PLAT, THERE WILL BE A RESTRICTION THAT THE FIRST PERSON THAT BUYS MUST BE AN OWNER-OCCUPANT UP TO 210.

AFTER THAT YOU CAN SELL IT TO WHOEVER YOU WANT TO. MR. MATOVINA HAD ASKED ABOUT THE PRO RATA. WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT DOING IS WHEN YOU FILE YOUR FIRST PLAT, 40% OF THE LOTS IN THAT PLAT WILL BE RESTRICT, AND THEN BEFORE YOU GET NIGH CLEARANCE SHEETS WE'LL GET THAT DEED RESTRICTION IN PLACE SO THAT WE KNOW IT HAPPENS.

AND IT'S CUMULATIVE. SO THE IDEA WE CAN'T SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO IT IN THE LAST

PHASE. >> YOU HAVE LESS THAN A HALF A MINUTE, BUT WE UNDERSTAND YOU'VE

GOT SOME GROUND TO COVER. >> THAT'S IT. I JUST WANTED TO TRY AND ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I WENT TO ALL OF THOSE MEETINGS AND IF THERE'S A QUESTION IN THE BACKGROUND ABOUT WHY WE DO THE GOT WHERE WE

ARE, I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS IT.& >> IF YOU CAN STAY THERE, YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE I THINK THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD OR THE MEMBERS HERE TO SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOUR ON IT, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT. EXCUSE ME. DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR BOB? HE'S OBVIOUSLY WITH DMENTR HORTON AND HE'S GOT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE BUT IN TERMS OF THE PRACTICALITY. SOME OF THIS STUFF I PERSONALLY SEEING AS STUFF THAT'S GOT TO GET WORKED THROUGH THE DETAILS. THE AFFIDAVIT DAVE SIGNED, IS THAT GOOD FOR 24 HOURS OR A MONTH OR A YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? SO LIKE WHEN DOES IT FLIP OVER AND BECOME A RENTAL OR SOMETHING.

>> WHEN YOU CLOSE THE HOUSE, YOU HAVE TO BE WILLING TO OWNER OCCUPY, BUT IF YOU'RE IN THE NAVY AND YOU GET TRANSFERRED A MONTH LATER, THE RESTRICTION IS GONE.

YOU CAN RENT IT TO ANYBODY, YOU CAN SELL IT TO ANYBODY. THE IDEA IS THAT WE GET THEM IN THERE. BUT IF I'M SELLING HOUSES FOR $200,000 AND YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO TRY AND FLIP YOURS WHILE I'M STILL IN THERE SELLING, YOU'RE REALLY NOT GOING TO ACCOMPLISH MUCH. AND WE DID LOOK -- JIM DAVIDSON WAS PART OF THAT GROUP, AND HE HAD HAD SOME PEOPLE GO BACK AND LOOK AT A AFFORDABLE SPOTS, BUT WHEN WE FOUND WAS THAT FROM THE INITIAL SALE, THERE WERE SOME DONE OUT IN MIRABELLA I THINK BY KB YEARS AGO AND THEY TRACKED RESALES AND HER WERE GOING UP AT THE SAME SORT OF RATE THAT RESALES WERE IN OTHER PLACES, SO THEY STARTED LESS EXPENSIVE, THEY STAYED LESS EXPENSIVELY. REALISTICALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO BUILD TO GET DOWN TO THE 210 IT WILL BE MOSTLY TOWNHOMES, AND WE WILL NOT BE BUILDING PALACES. WE'LL BE BUILDING SOMETHING THAT IS NICE BUT SAFE, THAT'S AFFORDABLE. WE HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT'S SOLD TODAY THAT'S IN THAT PRICE RANGE. WE DID A PROJECT CALLED PALISADES AT DURBIN.

IT'S OVER ON 2209, KIND OF THE NORTH END OF WHEN 209. AVERAGE SALES PRICE IN THERE WAS JUST OVER $200,000 AND THE REASON THAT WORKED IT WAS RELATIVELY HIGH DENSITY BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THE DURBIN CREEK SO WE WERE VESTED FOR A LOT OF THE OPEN SPACE.

PEOPLE COULD USE THE EXISTING FACILITIES OFF-SITE SO WE'RE ABLE TO GET BETTER DENSITY AND KEEP THE PRICE DOWN. IF I TRIED TO DO THAT IN STANDARD ZONING TODAY I WOULDN'T

BE ABLE TO PRODUCE IT. >> DOES ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR BOB HERE

JUST SPEAK UP. >> THIS IS RICHARD. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WAS VERY

INFORMATIVE. THANK YOU. >> IS THERE IN ANOTHER ONE?

WAS THAT YOU, BILL? >> THIS IS GREG MATOVINA. BOB, THE PROVISION -- I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE PROVISION ABOUT THE 40% AND THE CLEARANCE SHEETS, BUT I THINK

[02:25:01]

GET A PERMIT. >> THANK YOU, GREG. I'LL GET WITH JIM AND WE'LL WORK THAT OUT. WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE AND ESSENTIALLY AGREED.

FOR ONE THING IT'S WAY TOO MUCH FOR, WORK FOR THE STAFF TO LOOK AT EVERY SINGLE CLEARANCE SHEET SO OUR IDEAL WAS WE WOULD DO IT A PLAT AT A TIME, A SUBDIVISION AT A TIME.

THAT SUBDIVISION GETS STAMPED APPROVED, AND THEN THE STAFF DOESN'T HAVE TO LOOK AT EVERY SINGLE ONE. SO I'LL GET WITH JOE AND WE'LL FIX THAT.

>> OKAY. >> ANY MORE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR BOB PORTER?

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

>> APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS HERE? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS ONLINE? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS ONLINE FROM THE BACK THERE? NO.

I SEE A NO. ALL RIGHT. THEN WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY

FOR COMMENTS OR A MOTION. >> I'D OFFER A MOTION. >> MR. CHAIR -- GO AHEAD.

>> GO AHEAD, GREG. WE'RE GOING TO GET A LITTLE VARIETY.

GREG, GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> I WOULD OFFER A MOTION TO APPROVE COMP AMD 2020-01 BASED

ON THE THREE FINDINGS OF FACT PRESENTED BY STAFF. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SEC. TO CLARIFY THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 7 AND ONLY 7.

>> CORRECT. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, SPEAK UP. IF NOT, I WILL RICHARD A VOTE VIA THE ROLL CALL.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> APPROVE. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> ABSTAIN. >> HOW DO I TREAT AN ABSTAIN? DR. HILSENBECK, HOW ABOUT A YES OR A NO? THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT ON MY FORM HERE.

>> YES. >> IF YOU'LL GO THROUGH THE REST OF THE ROLL CALL, I'LL FIND OUT

FOR YOU. >> THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

MS. PERKINS. >> YES. >> I HEARD A YES.

MR. ALAIMO. >> YES. >> AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE'RE GOING TO SAY THAT CARRIES AT LEAST 6-1. IF NOT IT'S 7-0. WE'LL GET ALICE TO CLARIFY THAT

LATER. ITEM NUMBER 8. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR ITEM NUMBER 8 TO THE LAND DEVMENTD CODE BASED ON THESE MODIFICATIONS BEING CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA LAW AND THE

ST. JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM MR. WAINRIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE SPEAK UP. OTHERWISE, WE WILL VOTE. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> APPROVE. >> DR. HILSENBECK. P.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ABSTAIN BUT IF I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO, I'LL VOTE YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. MS. PERNG.

>> YES. -- PERKINS WHY. >> YES.

>> MR. ALAIMO. >> YES. >> AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> YES. >> THAT MORGUES AREAS CARRIES EITHER 6-1 OR 7-0.

ALICE IS STILL ON THE PHONE BUT IT CARRIES. UP NEXT, STAFF REPORTS.

[Reports]

>> MR. CHAIR, IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD, PLEASE GO AHEAD.

THANK YOU. ONE NOTE FOR THE AGENCY AND THE PUBLIC OUT THERE IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, BUILDING SERVICES HAS BEEN UNDER GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR A WHILE, FOR I THINK 12 YEARS NOW.

[02:30:01]

LIKE I SAID, YOU SHOULDN'T NOTICE A DIFFERENCE WHEN IT COMES TO IF YOU NEED SUPPORT FROM BUILDING SERVICES OR UNDERSTANDING HOW THE WORK FLOW GOES.

IT SHOULDN'T CHANGE. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. THERESA, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO

HAD? >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO SAY WE'VE EXPERIENCED QUITE A FEW TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES TODAY, SO I APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP AS THE CHAIR IN GOVERNING US THROUGH THIS AND GUIDING US THROUGH IT, AND I APPRECIATE THE AGENCY MEMBERS BEING PATIENT, AND I GREATLY APPRECIATE MIS AND GTV FOR GETTING US BACK ONLINE AND MAKING THIS ALL WORK. AND I'M VERY HOPEFUL WE CAN GET ALL BACK TO SOMEWHAT OF A NOAFERL SITUATION IN THE FUTURE BUT I DO APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU ALL.

>> I CAN SPEAK FOR THE OTHER MEMBERS. YOU GUYS ARE DOING A GREAT JOB HERE, SO IS THE MIS FOLKS AND ALL THAT TECHNOLOGY I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO USE.

BUT I DO APPRECIATE THAT. AGENCY REPORTS? ANYONE? NEXT MEETING IS IN A COUPLE WEEKS. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY THINGS ARE

ON THE AGENDA? >> FOR JUNE 4 AND THERE'S TWO ITEMS ON THAT AGENDA RIGHT NOW.

>> TWO? >> YES. >> BONUS AFTERNOON.

ALL RIGHT. EVERYONE HAVE A -- DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE

[Items 7 & 8 (Part 2 of 2)]

MEMBERSHIPSOME. >> MR. CHAIR, IF WE COULD JUST GIVE OCA A LITTLE BIT MORE TO MAKE SURE WE CAN SHORE THIS UP PROPERLY IF WE CAN GIVE A MINUTE OR TWO FOR ALICE TO RETURN.

>> SURE. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> WE'VE GOT A HOLIDAY WEEKEND COMING UP. DON'T FORGET WHAT MEMORIAL DAY IS ALL ABOUT WHILE YOU'RE OUT

THERE GETTING SUNBURNT AND EATING BARBECUE. >> GOOD POINT.

>> WE ARE GOING TO WAIT FOR MS. ALICE TO GET OFF THE PHONE AND TELL US WHAT AN ABSTAINED FALLS UNDER, IF IT FALLS UNDER ANYTHING. OF COURSE, IF MARKET WAS HERE, AND I'M DOING THIS TO KILL TIME, WE WE HEAR ABOUT IT AFTER A FIVE-MINUTE DIATRIBE. ABSTAIN. THAT'S A GREEK WORD FOR BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, LATIN DERIVATIVE. WHAT'S WHAT PETER TOLD ME, ANYWAYS.

HE SAID PATRICK TALKS TOO MUCH. DID ANYONE ELSE GET THESE GREAT LITTLE SPRAYERS FROM DOUG?

IS THERE FOR MOUTHWASH? >> MR. CHAIR, COULDEE WE RECESS BRIEFLY?

>> WE CAN RECESS, YES, MA'AM. WE'RE GOING TO RECESS. DON'T GO AWAY.

SHE'LL JUST BE A >> MR. CHAIR, WHAT WE WILL RECOMMEND IS AT THIS POINT WE WILL RECONSIDER ITEM 7. THAT WAS THE ONE THAT HAD THE ABSTAINING MEMBER.

>> BOTH 7 AND 8 DID. >> BOTH 7 AND 8, RECONSIDER THOSE FOR A VOTE, BUT BEFORE THE VOTING TAKES PLACE ON EACH, IF ANY MEMBER WHO CHOOSES TO ABSTAIN OR RECUSE MUST STATE THE NATURE OF THE CONFLICT THAT IS CREATING THAT ABSTENTION OR RECUSAL, AND THEN YOU MAY

PROCEED TO VOTE. >> AND THAT PERSON CAN DO THAT BRIEFLY.

>> CAN DO THAT BRIEFLY. WE WILL FOLLOW UP WITH THE FORM THAT WE HAVE THE FORM PROVIDED, AND IT'S READ OUT AT THE NEXT MEETING, AND THEN ALSO THIS -- IF THE RECUSAL STANDS, IT IS NEITHER AN AFFIRMATION OR A DENIAL. IT WOULD BE A 6-0.

IT DOESN'T COUNT EITHER WAY. >> GREAT. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. RICHARD, NOW YOU'RE MY FAVORITE PERSON KEEPING US HERE.

ALL RIGHT. >> SORRY. >> WE'RE GOING TO DO VOTES NUMBER 7 AND 8 OVER AGAIN. AND I'LL TAKE AN ABSTAIN WITH A DISCUSSION -- OR WITH A DESCRIPTION OF A REASON AND A VOTE YES OR NO PREFERABLY. MR. MATOVINA, DMIEND MAKING THEG

THE SAME MOTIONSSOME. >> I PUT MY BOOK AWAY ALREADY, MR. CHAIRMAN.

[02:35:11]

JUST SAY MOTION TO APPROVE AS NOTED IN THE BOOK. >> OKAY.

MOTION TO APPROVE AS NOTED IN THE BOOK FOR ITEM NUMBER 7. >> ALL RIGHT.

AND BILL, DO YOU WANT TO SECOND THAT? >> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> WE'VE GOT ROY SECONDING IT. >> DID I SAY I'D SECOND IT? >> YOU DID ORIGINALLY.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM GREG, A SECOND FROM ROY.

GOING DOWN THE LIST, THIS IS FOR ITEM NUMBER 7, MOTION TO APPROVE.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> APPROVE. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> I HAVE NO REASON TO RECUSE MYSELF, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ABSTAIN ON THIS AND MY TWO QUICK REASONS ARE THAT I REALLY WAS HOPING THIS WOULD BE TRIED OUT IN A CERTAIN AREA OR AREAS OF THE COUNTY, SMALLER AREAS THAN JUST THE COUNTYWIDE APPROVAL, ACCORDING TO SOME SPECIAL ZONES OR ZIP CODES OR WHATEVER. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE OPEN SPACE AND RECREATIONAL COMPONENT OF A DEVELOPMENT IS A REQUIREMENT OF A REZONING FOR A PUD. THAT WAS STATED AT THE LAST MEETING AND IT WAS IN THE AGENDA ITEM, SO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I STILL DID NOT GET AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION FOR THE REMAINING 60% OR SO OF THE HOMEOWNERS AND HOMES IN A WORKFORCE HOUSING DESIGNATED COMMUNITY IF THERE WOULD ALSO BE NO OPEN SPACE OR RECREATIONAL COMPONENT REQUIRED IN THE COMMUNITY FOR THOSE HOMEOWNERS AND FOR ALL HOMEOWNERS. I JUST DIDN'T GET A CLEAR RESPONSE. SO THAT'S MY REASONING, AND IT WILL ALSO BE MY REASONING ON

ITEM NUMBER 8. >> MIKE. >> MR. CHAIR, THANKS.

MIKE ROBERTSON. DR. HILSENBECK, THAT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT REQUIRE RECREATION AS A PUD WOULD, SO IT WOULD BE JUST AS OF OUR OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS, RS3, SR1, OPEN RURAL.

IT DOESN'T REQUIRE IF YOU'RE PUTTING RESIDENTIAL IT WOULD NOT REQUIRE RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE AS WOULD A PUD, AS A PUD REZONING WOULD. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER RECOMMENDS A IMPROVEMENT MS. PERKINS.

>> YES. >> MR. ALAIMO. >> YES.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT.

I'M GUESSING 6-0. ITEM NUMBER 8, GREG, MIND FINANCIAL LITERACY SAME MOTION.

>> RECOMMEND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR ITEM NUMBER 8 BASED ON THEM BEING CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA LAW AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> THANK YOU. ARCHIE. >> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. WHO WAS SECONDING IT? >> ROY.

>> MEGAN DID IT. I DON'T KNOW. >> ALL RIGHT.

GOING THROUGH THE RIS, DR. MCCORMICK. >> APPROVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> ABSTAIN >> MR. WAINRIGHT.

>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

>> DR. HILSENBECK, WOULD YOU STATE YOUR CONFLICT AGAIN, PLEASE.

THIS IS A SEPARATE ITEM. >> OKAY. I STATED AT THE END OF MY REASONING ON ITEM 7 THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE THE SAME FOR ITEM 8, AND THAT WAS NUMBER ONE, I WAS HOPING THIS WOULD BE TRIED OUT IN CERTAIN SMALLER AREAS OF THE COUNTY FIRST TO SEE HOW IT WORKED RATHER THAN A COUNTYWIDE BLANKET A PROOL, AND SECONDLY -- APPROVAL, AND SECONDLY, SINCE IT'S BEEN CLARIFIED NOW THAT THIS WORKFORCE HOUSING DESIGNATION WOULD NOT INCLUDE ANY OPEN SPACE OR RECREATIONAL AREAS FOR ANY OF THE RESIDENTS, I DEFINITELY DON'T LIKE THAT ASPECT OF IT. I THINK ALL THESE KINDS OF DEVELOPMENTS NEED SOME KIND OF RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE COMPONENT. SO THOSE ARE MY REASONS FOR

ABSTAINING. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

ARCHIE, YOU HAD SAID YES. >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> MIKE KOPPENHAFER RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. MS. PERNG. PERKINS.

MS. PERKINS, DO YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL? >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. MR. ALAIMO. >> YES.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> YES. >> MOTION CARRIES 6-0.

[02:40:06]

THE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE MEMBERS? ANYTHING ELSE FROM STAFF?

ALL RIGHT. I'LL HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> SO MOVED. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. APPRECIATE IT.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.