[Call to Order]
[00:00:06]
>>> THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF AUGUST THE 5TH, THE MEETING IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER.
WOULD YOU ALL PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS PETE DAVIS, I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. MINUTES FOR TONIGHTS MINUTES WILL BE TAKEN BY CHRISTINE BLANCHETT, THE RECORDING SECRETARY FROM THE CLERK OF THE COURT'S OFFICE. THANK YOU, CHRISTINE, FOR BEING HERE. OTHER STAFF PRESENT, WE HAVE JAMIE HOVDA ALREADY BEEN LET'S START WITH OUR PLANNING STAFF FIRST.
WE'VE GOT BETH CARSON BACK THERE WHO IS THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, WE HAVE GIVENY BRYLA WHO IS THE ZONING CHIEF AND ALSO DODIE SELIG WHO IS THE CHIEF PLANNER. FROM LEGAL STAFF WE HAVE JAMIE HOVDA AND I SEE SOMEBODY ELSE THERE BUT I DON'T -- OKAY. WELCOME. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY ELSE FROM STAFF. NO? WE ALSO THANK DEPUTIES ASH AND BARNWELL FROM THE CLAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR PROVIDING SECURITY TONIGHT.
MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT VICE CHAIRMAN BO NORTON, COMMISSIONER RALPH PUCKHABER, COMMISSIONER MARY BRIDGEMAN ON MY LEFT IS COMMISSIONER -- WHAT IS YOUR NAME AGAIN? MICHAEL BOURRE AND OUR SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TONIGHT IS PAUL BEMENT, WHO REPRESENTS CLAY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD.
LATE ARRIVAL IS COURTNEY GRIM HEAD OF LEGAL DEPARTMENT. CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION IS A CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CLAY COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
MOST OF THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE BCC. THE BCC WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY AT THEIR REGULAR MEETING THE SECOND TUESDAY FROM TODAY OR FOURTH TUESDAY FROM TODAY. BCC MEETING STARTS AT 4:00 P.M.
ZONING AND LAND USE MATTERS STARTING AT 5:00 P.M. PLEASE CHECK THE BCC AGENDA FOR ITEMS ON THE CLAY COUNTY WEBSITE, FOR ANY ITEMS YOU'RE INTERESTED IN WILL SHOW UP THERE. IF THERE'S AN ITEM ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA THAT YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMENT CARDS WHICH CAN BE FOUND IN THE ENTRY VESTIBULE AND GIVE IT TO MS. BLANCHETT. THAT'S THIS LITTLE WHITE CARD. ALSO IF ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS ON HERE YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT, JUST NOTE IT ON THE CARD AS FAR AS WHAT NUMBER IT IS. ALSO THERE'S A SECTION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CARD WHERE YOU CAN EITHER SAY YOU WANT TO SPEAK OR NOT SPEAK, BUT YOU CAN VOTE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU SUPPORT THE AGENDA ITEM OR YOU DO NOT.
AT THIS TIME PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT OR VIBRATE. IF YOU NEED TO TAKE A CALL DURING THE MEETING, PLEASE STEP OUTSIDE. IF YOU NEED TO LEAVE DURING THE MEETING, PLEASE DO SO QUIETLY.
[1. Approval of Minutes]
THE FIRST ITEM FOR ACTION TONIGHT IS BY THE COMMISSION IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE -- LET'S SEE, THIS IS AUGUST -- THIS IS AUGUST, SO SEPTEMBER --JULY MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. DO I HEAR A MOTION?
>> MOVE APPROVAL. >> AND SECOND?
>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY
[Public Comment]
AYE. >> AYE. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AT THIS TIME ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, BUT PERTINENT TO THE BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
I HAVE ONE CARD FROM LISA HOBBE R. THIS IS THETHE COMMENT.
YOU'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT OR IS IT JUST OPEN COMMENT?
>> IT'S A COMMENT AND HOPEFULLY MAYBE YOU GUYS CAN MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ME. I LIVE ON DOCTORS LAKE DRIVE AND AS YOU KNOW --
>> EXCUSE ME, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME ANDED ADDRESS.
>> LISA HOBBER 3261 DOCTORS LANE >> OKAY.
>> AS YOU KNOW, WITH ALL OF THE INCREASED CONSTRUCTION --
[00:05:03]
>> CAN YOU PULL THE MIC UP A LITTLE BIT? WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME --
>> WITH ALL THE INCREASED CONSTRUCTION ON ALL THE ROADWAYS DOCTORS LAKE DRIVE HAS JUST BEEN OVERLOADED WITH TRAFFIC AND IT'S GETTING HORRIBLY DANGEROUS. I'VE BEEN IN THE CAR WITH FOUR OF MY GRANDCHILDREN AND SOMEONE COMING HEAD-ON. I'VE HAD THAT SAME INCIDENT WITH A DIFFERENT -- MEMBERS OF MY FAMILY HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME EXACT THING. THIS IS GETTING VERY DANGEROUS.
WE'VE GOT PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ROAD THAT ARE TRAVELING IT, THEY'RE TRAVELING AT HIGH RATES OF SPEED BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO WORK. I UNDERSTAND THIS, BUT WE HAVE JUST AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF INCIDENCES, YOU KNOW, JUST THE OTHER DAY WE HAD FOUR MAILBOXES TAKEN OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND SPEED IS GETTING BAD. I WAS JUST TALKING TO THE OFFICERS OVER HERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE GO ABOUT GETTING A RED LIGHT OR SOME FLASHING LIGHTS.
I KNOW ORANGE PARK HAS SPEED LIGHTS, YOU KNOW, SAYING HOW FAST YOU'RE GOING.
IT'S JUST GETTING ABSOLUTELY INSANELY DANGEROUS. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN I CAN'T EVEN PULL OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY. AND IF I DO PULL OUT, IF I CAN'T EVEN SEE A CAR COMING, IT WILL BE TWO, THREE HOUSES DOWN AND I PULL OUT, I'M RUN OFF THE ROAD AND HAVING TO PULL OVER JUST TO AVOID GETTING HIT. THIS IS JUST OVER THE TOP AND I CAN'T IMAGINE IT EVEN GETTING ANY WORSE. SO I'M ASKING THAT YOU GUYS MAKE SOME KIND OF RECOMMENDATIONS, WHETHER IT BE, YOU KNOW, RED LIGHT INVESTIGATION, ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO HELP US BECAUSE MY GRANDKIDS ARE IMPORTANT AND ALL THE OTHER KIDS THAT ARE ON THIS ROAD AND IF YOU ARE DRIVING IT AND YOU WOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
WHEN I WAS DRIVING ON THE WAY HERE, SEEING THE TRAFFIC COMING DOWN THE ROAD, WHICH IS 4:00, THERE WAS NOT ONE CAR LENGTH IN BETWEEN EACH CAR.
NOW -- AND WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS ÚAMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW FLY DOWN THE ROAD AND IT'S A RACETRACK, AND I'VE COMPLAINED TO THE 'S OFFICE AND ASK THEM PLEASE COME.
YOU CAN SIT IN MY DRIVEWAY. WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO, BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING AND IT'S JUST ABSOLUTELY GETTING OUT OF HAND AND WE NEED SOME HELP.
WE REALLY NEED SOME HELP. SO I'M ASKING WHATEVER YOU GUYS CAN PROPOSE TO DO, PLEASE, I'M ASKING YOU PLEASE BEFORE SOMEBODY REALLY GETS HURT.
WE HAVE HAD SOME FATALITIES ON THE ROAD. THERE'S NO DOUBT.
WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF INCIDENCES THAT PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THEMSELVES SO THAT IT'S NOT REPORTED, WHETHER IT'S DRUNK DRIVING OR WHATEVER, I'M NOT SURE, BUT ANYWAY, IF YOU CAN ASSIST US, I'D -- SURE.
>> THIS IS ON DOCTORS LAKE DRIVE.
>> DOCTORS LAKE DRIVE, YES, SIR. >> OKAY.
>> IT RUNS PARALLEL TO 17 AND BLANDING. SO A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE ARE USING THAT AS A SHORTCUT, BUT IT'S -- IT'S GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S OUT -- BECAUSE MOST OF -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S OUR ROAD THAT WE LIVE ON AND ANOTHER THING THAT -- THAT MAY BE A PROBLEM AND MAYBE YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION IS THERE WAS ONE DEATH FROM SOMEBODY LOST CONTROL AND IT'S ALL LIT UP IN THE WOODS AND EVERYTHING AND ALL KINDS OF BRIGHT COLORS AND STUFF LIKE THAT THAT ARE ALWAYS -- AND THAT IS A DISTRACTION AND I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE MISSING THEIR LOVED ONE, BUT FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA AND KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT THAT IS, I THINK THAT IS A HINDRANCE. I JUST DON'T WANT MORE PEOPLE HURT. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE. BEEN THERE 20 YEARS, SO I APPRECIATE ANY HELP Y'ALL CAN GIVE.
>> MICHAEL? >> WE DON'T NORMALLY RESPOND BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT IN THIS ONE INSTANCESINCE I BELIEVE YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE FIRST ONE, FIRST OFF, I WILL TELL YOU THAT THIS BODY DOES NOT DEAL WITH TRAFFIC OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THOSE ARE SEPARATE DEPARTMENTS. I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO TO THE BCC MEETING AND SHARE YOUR CONCERNS WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
THEY ARE THE ONES WHO CAN TAKE THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT AND TAKE ACTION THAT MIGHT BE NECESSARY. BUT UNFORTUNATELY THIS BODY DOESN'T -- DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY, YOU KNOW, OR RECOMMENDATION POWERS TO BE ABLE TO -- TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT CONCERN. BUT THANK YOU FOR SHARING IT WITH US.
>> YOU WOULD BE IN DISTRICT 3 IS YOUR DISTRICT.
[00:10:06]
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS ANYTHING FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
OKAY. WE ALWAYS WELCOME THE PUBLIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AS CITIZENS PARTICIPATE IN THE BACKBONE OF THE DEMOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT. YOUR PRESENCE HERE IS IMPORTANT AND APPRECIATED. ALL THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS.
RESIDENTS OF CLAY COUNTY APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SERVE TWO- YEAR TERMS AND MUST REAPPLY IF WE WISH TO CONTINUE.
THE COMMISSION'S DUTIES ARE OUTLINED IN SECTION 163 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES.
APPLICATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES AND REZONING. THE COMMISSION'S DECISIONS ARE ADVISORY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THE PROCESS FOR THE MEETING WILL BE EACH ITEM ON THE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA WILL BE PRESENTED BY A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING ZONING STAFF.
AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION STAFF WILL INDICATE WHETHER THEY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED LAND USE, ZONING OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE. NEXT, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
FOLLOWING THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO OFFER THEIR VIEWS. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, YOU WILL NEED TO FILL OUT A COMMENT CARD, GIVE IT TO MS. BLANCHETT AND TAKE THE OATH WHICH MS. BLANCHETT WILL ADMINISTER MOMENTARILY TO ALL WHO WISH TO SPEAK DURING THE HEARING. IF YOU ARE NOT SURE IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE OATH. YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. THE LIGHTS ON THE PODIUM WILL HELP YOU KEEP TRACK OF TIME. YOUR TIME IS FOR STATING VIEWS, NOT ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AFTER STAFF, THE APPLICANT AND PUBLIC HAVE ALL HAD THEIR CHANCE TO STATE THEIR VIEWS, THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC. AT THAT TIME THE COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE MATTER, IF NECESSARY, AND RENDER A DECISION. OKAY. AGAIN, THANK YOU AND WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROCESS.
OKAY. BEFORE WE START, MS. BLANCHETT WILL GIVE EVERYBODY THE OATH. SO IF ANYBODY -- THOSE THAT WISH TO SPEAK TONIGHT, WOULD
YOU PLEASE STAND. >> AND THAT'S FOR ANY ITEM, APPLICANT OR ANYBODY, PUBLIC COMMENT, APPLICANT. AND IF YOU WOULD MOVE TO THE CENTER OF THE ROOM, PLEASE, JUST SO THEY CAN SEE YOU ON CAMERA. WILL YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU
[1. First Public Hearing to consider PUD 25-0003. (District 1, Sgromolo) (J. Bryla)]
>> ALL RIGHT. OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARINGS IS TO CONSIDER PUD 25- 0003, MS. BRYLA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. EXCUSE ME. GOOD EVENING.
AGAIN, JENNY BRYL A HER TO PRESENT PUD 25-0003. THIS IS FOR A TWO- ACRE PARCEL IN COMMISSIONER SGROMOLO'S COMMISSIONER ON COUNTY ROAD 220.
THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE CURRENT ZONING FROM AR TO PCD OR COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR A STAND- ALONE SURGICAL CARE CENTER IN ADDITION TO SOME PROFESSIONAL OFFICES.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS JUST WEST OF KANOVA ROAD ON 220 AND FLEMMING ISLAND.
THIS PROPERTY HAS A CROSS POINT CHURCH TO THE WESTWEST IT AND ORANGE PARK MEDICAL PLANS TO BUILD A STAND- ALONE EMERGENCY CENTER ON THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST. STAFF SENT NOTICE TO THE 14 OWNERS WITHIN THE 350- FOOT BUFFER AND TO DATE I HAVE RECEIVED NO COMMENT FOR OR AGAINST. THE SLIDE ON THE LEFT SHOWS THE EXISTING AR ZONING AND THE SLIDE ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THE PCD ZONING. THERE IS RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ACROSS 220 TO THE NORTH AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH.
THERE ARE TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS BEING IMPLEMENTED ALONG 220 CURRENTLY.
THIS IS -- THERE IS MY SLIDE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PCD AIR PLAN COMMERCIAL
[00:15:06]
DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO A PS- 3 WHICH IS A SIMILAR ZONING ALONG THE CORRIDOR BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW SOME PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IN ADDITION TO THE MEDICAL OFFICE, OR THE SURGICAL CENTER, AND THE PS- 3 DOES NOT ALLOW FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE OFFICE BUILDING WOULD BE UP ADJACENT TO 220 AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL BUILDING IN THE REAR.
CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ENHANCED LANDSCAPING AND PUBLIC GROUND STANDARDS IN ORDER TO MEET THE CRITERIA OF THE PDS.
AFTER THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED IT CAME TO STAFF'S ATTENTION THAT THE RURAL FRINGE LAND USE ON THIS PROPERTY CAN ONLY ACCOMMODATE PRIVATE SERVICES AND NOT PLANNED COMMERCIAL USES. AS A RESULT, THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED A LAND USE AMENDMENT YESTERDAY TO CHANGE THE RURAL FRINGE TO A COMMERCIAL LAND USE, CONSISTENT WITH SIMILAR REQUESTS ALONG 220. CONSISTENT WITH POLICY 1.4.
8 IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THIS REQUEST WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN INFILL COMMERCIAL REQUEST AND THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED, AS I SAID, FOR THIS CHANGE. SO AS YOU STATED THAT SOME OF THESE APPLICATIONS WILL BE HEARD BY THE BCC LATER THIS MONTH, THIS WILL HAVE TO GO WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUEST IN SEPTEMBER.
SEPTEMBER. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
>> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE ONE BUT I WANT TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> OKAY. >> SO BASED ON THE ANALYSIS AND THE STAFF REPORT, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE SURROUNDING USES, THEREFORE, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD 25- 0003 TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR THE 2. 3 ACRES FROM AR TO PCD, CONDITIONED ON THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMERCIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM RURAL FRINGE TO COMMERCIAL. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT
HAVE. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A PUD OR A
PCD? >> IT IS A PUD CATEGORY, SO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY, BUT IN OUR ZONING CODE WE HAVE SPECIFICITY TOWARDS PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS, THAT THEY HAVE DIFFERENT CRITERIA, AS OPPOSED TO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> NOW, THE APPLICANT -- THE APPLICATION THAT I READ, IT'S MORE THAN JUST DOCTORS OFFICES AND A SURGICAL CENTER. THERE WAS SOME INDICATION OF A BOUTIQUE AND A COFFEE SHOP.
>> I THINK THE APPLICANTS CAN SPEAK TO THAT. WE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE APPLICATION AND THEY WERE LIMITED TO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
ALL RIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS ROBERT WHITE, I'M WITH TAYLOR AND WHITE, 9556 HISTORIC KINGS ROAD SOUTH, SUITE 102, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. WE ARE PROPOSING A PCD FOR THIS PROPERTY AT 1853 COUNTY ROAD 220 AS MS. BRYLA SAID. TO THE WEST OF US IS THE CHURCH, TO THE EAST OF US IS THE ORANGE PARK MEDICAL CENTER. WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS AN OUTPATIENT SURGICAL CENTER WITH DOCTORS OFFICES IN THE FRONT BUILDING. THE BUILDING -- THAT'S THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.
THE 8,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, REFERRING TO THE PLAN, IS FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICES LIKE ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, LAWYERS, ATTORNEYS, AND WITHIN THAT WE DID AND HAVE ASKED FOR LIKE BOUTIQUE SHOPS. THESE ARE SMALL SPECIALTY SHOPS. NOT A LOT OF LARGE RETAIL COFFEE SHOPS, STUFF LIKE THAT. THESE ARE LOW-IMPACT- TRAFFIC USES THAT WE ARE ASKING
[00:20:04]
FOR IN THIS REZONING. YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN YOU WILL SEE ON THE REAR -- AND I'M GOING TO REFER TO WHAT MS. BRYLA SAID ABOUT ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. THE BUFFER ALONG THE REAR IS AGAINST THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. THAT BUFFER REQUIRED TREES PLANTED AT EVERY 30 FEET. AT 10 FEET HIGH AT THE TIME OF PLANNING.OUR ENHANCEMENT IS TO LOWER THAT SPACING TO 20 FEET, SEPARATION BETWEEN THOSE TREES AT 10 FEET. SO WE APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT FROM STAFF AND THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WE'D LOVE TO HAVE YOUR SUPPORT ALSO. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?
WE DON'T HAVE ANY AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS FOR THIS ITEM.
DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK CONCERNING THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMISSION. >> MR. CHAIR, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST ONE IS FOR STAFF. I SAW SOMETHING IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT REALLY BOTHERED ME AND I'D LIKE TO GET AN EXPLANATION ON IT. IT WASN'T ACTUALLY IN THE STAFF REPORT, I THINK IT WAS ON THE COVER LETTER. THAT STAFF HAS DEEMED THE 1989 FLEMMING ISLAND PLAN NO LONGER A RELEVANT DOCUMENT. BASED ON WHAT?
>> SO THAT PHRASEOLOGY WAS BECAUSE THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THAT DOCUMENT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO THOSE THINGS THAT ARE THE BULK OF THE PLAN, SUCH AS THE INDUSTRIAL LAND USE AND A GREAT MAJORITY OF THE PLAN ARE NO LONGER RELEVANT.
>> OKAY. I MIGHT DISAGREE WITH THAT
>> BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF ITEMS COME THROUGH THIS -- THIS COMMISSION, THIS COMMITTEE, WHERE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE MADE THAT WERE IN DIRECT OPPOSITION TO WHAT WAS IN THAT PLAN.
YOU KNOW, I WAS HERE, WASN'T ON THIS BOARD, BUT I WAS IN THIS COUNTY, I THINK PETE WAS AS WELL, WHEN THAT PLAN WAS WORKED OUT AND THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SUPPOSED TO BE RESIDENTIAL. I THINK IT WAS -- YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT IT GOT APPROVED, BUT THAT THE HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM THAT WENT THERE WENT ON A PARCEL THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER THE PLAN RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ANY COMMERCIAL IN THAT STRETCH OF 220 AND SO FAR WE'VE DONE THE HOSPITAL, NOW WE HAVE THIS ONE, THE NEXT ONE AND WE HAD THE ONE THAT WAS A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN, IT WAS ACTUALLY JUST OUTSIDE OF FLEMMING ISLAND, BUT JUST PAST WHITEY'S WHERE THEY NOW HAVE AN INSURANCE OFFICE. ALL OF THAT WAS RESIDENTIAL AND EVERY TIME ONE OF THESE HAS GOING TO HAPPEN IS WE'RE JUST - GOING TO KEEP CHEWING UP 220 WHERE IT'S ALL COMMERCIAL WHERE THE INTENTION WAS FOR IT TO BE RESIDENTIAL.
TO EVERYONE ELSE, YOU KNOW, THE ARGUMENT WILL BE MADE THAT RESIDENTIAL ISN'T A FIT.
WELL, IT MUST BE, THE OTHER SIDE OF 220 HAS RESIDENTIAL, AND THESE LOTS ARE PERFECT FOR LIKE APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND HIGHER- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, BUT NOT FOR COMMERCIAL.
THAT'S JUST A POINT THAT I WANT TO MAKE THAT I DON'T, AS A COMMISSIONER ON THIS PANEL, FIND THAT PLAN TO BE NO LONGER RELEVANT.
I THINK IT IS RELEVANT. IT'S GOING TO BE RELEVANT UNTIL EVERY PARCEL ON FLEMMING ISLAND THAT WAS COVERED BY THAT PLAN IS BUILT OUT.
I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION, IF I MAY, FOR THE APPLICANT. WOULD THAT BE OKAY?
>> SURE. >> CAN YOU COME BACK UP FOR A MINUTE? YOU JUST HEARD MY COMMENT.
>> SURE. >> IF THIS WAS TO BE APPROVED, I REALLY HAVE A STRONG ISSUE WITH THE IDEA OF PUTTING ANY RETAIL IN THERE. THAT'S BETWEEN A CHURCH AND WHAT WILL BE AN EMERGENCY ROOM.
I DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT LOCATION FOR RETAIL. IT WOULD BE THE ONLY RETAIL ON THAT WHOLE STRETCH OF 220. SO HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT US REMOVING THE RETAIL
COMPONENT? >> I WILL LET DARMA SPEAK TO
[00:25:02]
YOU. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, SINCE THERE'S NO ONE HERE FROM THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UNLESS THERE IS -- THERE IS IN THE BACK? I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY IT
WAS -- THEY VOTED 6- 0 IN DENIAL. >> HEY, GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.
1889 COUNTY ROAD 220, FLEMMING ISLAND. I AM THE FLEMMING ISLAND CITIZEN
ADVISORY CHAIR. >> CAN YOU PLEASE ELABORATE WHY THE CAC VOTED 6- 0 IN DENIAL?
>> I SURE CAN, YEAH. SOME OF THE BOARD HAD A REAL ISSUE, AGAIN, WITH THE RETAIL VERBIAGE OF THE APPLICATION. A LARGE PORTION OF THE BOARD HAD ISSUE WITH THIS BEING COMMERCIAL AT ALL.
REZONING ISN'T NECESSARILY THE THE ISSUE, IT SEEMED LIKE WE WERE PRETTY AMENABLE TO REZONING AND THERE WAS JUST SEEMINGLY NO COMPROMISE ON WHAT WAS
GOING TO BE PUT THERE. >> WAS IT THE BOARD WAS OKAY WITH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, LESS THE RETAIL?
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A MORE FAVORABLE VOTE IF THE RETAIL WASN'T THERE, BUT I WOULD NOT SAY THAT THE BOARD WAS COMPLETELY OKAY WITH IT. IT JUST WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN 6-0.
BOURRE. >> MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU. I WOULD AGREE WITH A PORTION OF WHAT COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER SAID. TO REMOVE THE 1983 PLAN IN ITS ENTIRETY, YOU KNOW, THAT OBVIOUSLY GIVES ME SOME PAUSE, BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND THAT WAS DID STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, DID IT ACTUALLY INCLUDE THE RETAIL, OR WAS IT JUST FOR THE PROFESSIONAL
THAT'S -- IT'S FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
WHEN WE SPOKE LAST THE APPLICANT WANTED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE ARCHITECTS AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL OFFICES THERE.
WE DIDN'T REALLY SPEAK ON THE RETAIL COMPONENT.
>> OKAY. OKAY. SO I WILL -- AGAIN, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER FROM THE STANDPOINT OF I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE RETAIL IN THAT AREA.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WAS THE INTENT OR THE PLAN. IF THE APPLICANT IS AGREEABLE THAT THAT BE REMOVED AND WE ONLY STIPULATE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO SUPPORT THIS.
>> MR. CHAIR, TO MR. BOURRE'S POINT, WOULD PROFESSIONAL OFFICES INCLUDE DOCTORS AND DENTISTS? THAT'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC IN AND OUT ALL THE TIME. I THINK PROFESSIONAL OFFICES I THINK IN TERMS OF LIKE THE GENTLEMAN SAID, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, THAT KIND OF
>> LAWYERS. BUT NOT -- NOT A MEDICAL -- IT'S ALREADY GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF MEDICAL, RIGHT? THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC JUST OFF OF THAT. I AGREE, I JUST WANT TO REEMPHASIZE I THINK THE
RETAIL IS A BAD IDEA. >> OKAY.
LET ME PUT MY HAT IN THE RING ON THIS THING. OF COURSE, WHEN I READ THIS APPLICATION NEEDLESS TO SAY MY DANDER÷÷DANDER COME UP, IT JUST WENT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THE IDEA THAT THE FLEMMING ISLAND PLAN IS NO LONGER RELEVANT IS REALLY AN INSULT TO THE MANY PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON FLEMMING ISLAND THAT WORKED HARD FOR OVER 40 YEARS TO DEVELOP THAT AND TO THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO ROLL THAT INTO THE CLAY COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND JUST ERASE IT AND FORGET ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT THESE PEOPLE WORKED TO GET IS NOT -- IS NOT RIGHT. I TOTALLY -- YOU KNOW, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS KIND OF PUT US IN A BOX HERE. WE RECOMMENDED NOT TO APPROVE THAT ORANGE PARK HOSPITAL, WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING TO CALL IT, EMERGENCY CENTER, YOU NAME T BUT THEY APPROVED IT ANYWAY. TO YOUR POINT WE'VE GOT PS- 1 ON THE OTHER SIDE WITH A CHURCH.
SO IT IS TECHNICALLY INFILL, BUT I WILL -- ANY OTHER TIME I WOULD FIGHT THIS THING TOOTH AND NAIL. YEARS WORKING ON THIS PLAN AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT IT IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED AS JUST EXCESS PAPER. SO I'M OF THE SAME OPINION BECAUSE IT IS INFILL AND
[00:30:07]
BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN BOXED IN WITH A PS- 3 ON ONE SIDE AND PS- 1 ON THE OTHER THAT I WILL SUPPORT IT AS LONG AS THE COMMERCIAL ASPECTS, ANY COMMERCIAL ASPECTS, ARE REMOVED. STRICTLY OFFICES, PROFESSIONAL, THAT SORT OF THING. AND THE FEAR IS REAL.I MEAN, THERE ARE OTHER PARCELLS JUST TO THAT WEST THAT ARE PRIME FOR PICKING OFF, THE ONE AFTER THE CHURCH IS ANOTHER HOUSE THAT I'M SURE THEY'RE WATCHING THIS MEETING NOW WITH GREAT ANXIOUSNESS. OKAY, OPPORTUNITY HERE TO COME IN FOR COMMERCIAL. IT'S NEVER BEEN COMMERCIAL. THERE HAVE BEEN PLANNED FOR A COMMERCIAL. I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THE MAP IN THE DOCUMENT OF THE FLEMMING ISLAND PLAN. IF PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE A IF THEY COULDN'T READ IT WELL ENOUGH OR WHATEVER ELSE, I BROUGHT THE ORIGINAL WITH ME TONIGHT. IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS, IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR OVER 40 YEARS AND WE'VE DRUG IT IN AND OUT OF COURT, DRUG IT IN AND OUT OF MEETINGS AND IT'S BEEN OUR CORNERSTONE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FLEMMING ISLAND AND WE'D LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY AND KEEP IT GOING.
SO IF ANYBODY HAS ANY IDEAS OF MAKING COMMERCIAL ON 220, I'M NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY, AND THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT A THREAT. I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S A REAL SLAP IN THE FACE FOR EVERY PEOPLE÷÷ THAT WORKED SOSO HARD FLEMMING ISLAND TO KEEP THIS AA COMMUNITY TO LIVE IN. AND WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR -- I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO, YOU KNOW, REMOVE ANY COMMERCIAL IDEAS FROM THAT PLAN. WHAT DID YOU SAY, MARK?
>> I WAS GOING TO JUST -- I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION, IF I COULD, MR. CHAIR. WITH STAFF'S CLARIFICATION THAT THERE WILL NOT BE ANY SPECIALTY SHOPS OR RETAIL, BUT IT WILL BE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE SPACE, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL OF STAFF'S
REPORT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. ANYBODY SECOND?
>> SECOND. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRIDGEMAN.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> I HAVE A --
>> DISCUSSION. I JUST WANT TO GO ON THE RECORD -- I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS. I THINK THE MOTION -- EVERYTHING YOU SAID, PETE, I AGREE WITH. THEY'VE LIT RATTY ERALLY PUT US IN A BOX HERE. THIS IS MORE OF A AT THIS POINT JUST TO REGISTER MY DISPLEASURE WITH WHAT'S GOING ON ALONG 220 BECAUSE, AS HE SAID, EVERYTHING BETWEEN SWIMMING PIN CREEK AND THAT CHURCH, THEY ARE ALL CHAMPING AT THE BIT TO TURN THOSE PARCELLS COMMERCIAL. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RESIDENTIAL. IT WAS PLANNED MANY DECADES AGO THAT THEY WOULD REMAIN COMMERCIAL AND I WOULD HOPE THAT ANYBODY ELSE THAT COMES IN HERE WITH SOMEONE TO TURN THAT TO COMMERCIAL WOULD -- THAT THAT PLAN WOULD BE TROTTED OUT AND THE EMPHASIS THAT THAT'S SUPPOSED -- THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ALL RESIDENTIAL BASICALLY BETWEEN THE SHOPPING AREA DOWN THERE BY 17 UNTIL YOU GOT OFF AND IT'S NOT WORKING OUT THAT WAY. SO I JUST WANT TO GET THAT ON THE
YES. >> I ALSO WOULD LIKE TOGET ON THE RECORD THAT THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE SHOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO GO BACK AND REVISIT THIS PRIOR TO US VOTING, BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT.
>> OKAY. IS THERE MAYBE AN AMENDMENT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE TO THE MOTION OR SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH IT?
>> MOVE FORWARD. >> I WANTED TO SEE IF BO IF HE
WAS GOING TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT. >>
SORRY. >> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO THINK HARD ABOUT THIS ONE.
I'M TORN BECAUSE THE PARCEL IS IN A BOX AND THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR PLANNING AND IT'S A PROBLEM FOR THE COUNTY AND IT WASN'T ANYTHING OF THEIR DOING, IT WASN'T ANYTHING OF OUR DOING. I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM, BUT -- MY APPREHENSION ON THIS IS IF I VOTE YES THAT MEANS I'M AGREEING WITH THE IDEOLOGY, BUT IF I VOTE NO -- MY CONCERN IS IF I SUPPORT IT, THINGS HAVE A TENDENCY TO CHANGE FROM THE TIME IT LEAVES HERE UNTIL IT
[00:35:01]
SHOWS UP ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' AGENDA AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THIS RETAIL COMES BACK TO LIFE AS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE PART OF THEIR THING. SO IF IT PASSES THAT MEANS THAT WE'VE ENDORSED T EVEN THOUGH WE STATED COMMERCIAL NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF IT.I THINK FOR THAT REASON I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS AS WELL.
SO WITH THAT I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE. FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ALL OPPOSED SAY AYE. >> AYE.
AYE. >> OKAY. ONE, TWO, THREE --
FOUR NO'S AND TWO AYES. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
GOOD LUCK AT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION TO THEM THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT YOU'RE GOING TO REMOVE THE COMMERCIAL ASPECTS.
>> THE RETAIL ASPECTS. >> THE RETAIL ASPECTS.
EXCUSE ME. >> I WOULD ALSO ADVISE THAT THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAVE A MEETING BEFOREHAND AND SHOW
>> THEY OUGHT TO NOTICE THEIR MEETING.
>> THEY HAVE TO POST IT AND EVERYTHING.
>> COMMISSIONER, IN MY STAFF REPORT IT'S CONDITIONED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE APPROVAL, WHICH WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE CAC.
THEY JUST SUBMITTED THAT YESTERDAY. SO THEY WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE FIRST OF -- THE END OF AUGUST.
>> OKAY. GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY.
THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. IS IT STILL WITHDRAWN?
>> THE APPLICANT IS RECONFIGURING AND WILL COME
[2. First Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0008 (J. Bryla)]
BACK. >> OKAY. AND ADDING AGENDA ITEM.
>> -- >> THAT WAS NUMBER 3, NUMBER 2
[3. Public Hearing to consider COMP 25-0009 and ZON 25-0010 (District 5, Comm Burke) (J. Bryla)]
[4. First Public Hearing to consider COMP 25-0004 (District 5, Comm Burke) (D. Selig)]
WAS THE KAYAK LAUNCH SO THE COUNTY HAS WITHDRAWN THAT REQUEST.>> AND NUMBER 3 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN SO WE WILL GO TO NUMBER 4.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER COMP PLAN 25-0004. MS. SELIG? , YOU ARE ON THE STAGE.
>> OKAY. SORRY FOR THE DELAY. THIS ITEM COMP 25- 0004 THIS WILL BE HEARD BY THE BOARD ON AUGUST 26TH FOR ANYONE WHO WISHES TO FOLLOW FORWARD. THE APPLICANT IS KATHLEEN L ERCHLTS NIHAN 3207 -- THIS IS IN -- IT'S COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 2.
IT IS A SINGLE PARCEL BUT A LITTLE OVER HALF AN ACRE PORTION OF THAT PARCEL. THE LAND USE CHANGE WOULD BE FROM BRANAN FIELD PRIMARY CONSERVATION NETWORK TO BRANAN FIELD MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY.
ON THE LEFT IS AERIAL AND ON THE RIGHT WE HAVE THE PARCEL MAP SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THE PORTION OF THE PARCEL IS THAT'S BEING CONTEMPLATED FOR CHANGE.
THE YELLOW PORTION -- I WILL TALK ABOUT IT FROM THE AERIAL SIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE KIND OF WHITE AREA THAT'S UNDERNEATH THE YELLOW HATCHED PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICATION STEMS FROM THE FACT IT WAS A BOARDWALK -- NOT A BOARDWALK -- A BULK HEAD BUILT BACK IN 2008, ACTUALLY, AND THEN REBUILT NOT TOO LONG AGO, I THINK IN '21, THE NEW PERMIT WAS PULLED. IN PART OFOF WORK IS LEVELING AND CLEARING BEHIND THAT AREA.
SO AT THIS TIME THE AREA THAT'S CONTEMPLATED FOR CHANGE IS FAIRLY LEVEL, IT'S BEEN SEEDED, BUT IT NO LONGER HAS DRAINAGE AND CONSERVATION VALUE
[00:40:06]
ESSENTIALLY. SO MAINTAINING THAT OVER THIS AREA, IT IS NOT PRACTICAL AND REALLY APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME. WE DON'T NORMALLY RECOMMEND TO MOVE -- REMOVE PCN, BUT IN THIS CASE IT'S NO LONGER A WILD SITE, IF YOU WILL. SO GOING FORWARD YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT THE GREEN ISIS PCN, THE BROWN IS THE URBAN CORE 10 AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED TO THE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY WHICH IS A BRANAN FIELD DESIGNATION AND THAT IS THE ZONING WHICH ALL FIELD IS UNDER PUD. THERE WERE SIGNS PLACED OUT ON THE PROPERTY AND THE MAP ON THE RIGHT SHOWS ALL THE PARCELLS THAT WERE MAILED MEETING NOTIFICATION. AND STAFF HAS GONE THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS, I BELIEVE, HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS.SIR. >> SO MY WHOLE THING WITH THIS ONE THAT KIND OF HINGED ON THE FACT, WHEN WAS THIS LAND PUT INTO CONSERVATION? WHEN THE BRANAN FIELD MASTER PLAN WAS ADOPTED? CAN ANYBODY TELL ME WHAT YEAR THAT WAS? DO YOU KNOW?
>> I BELIEVE SO. >> SO AFTER IT WAS IN CONSERVATION SOMEBODY BUILT THE BULK HEAD ON THIS PROPERTY '08?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ONE PRIOR TO THAT. THERE MIGHT HAVE
BEEN. >> EVEN IF THERE WAS -- DOES THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT OR WHOEVER ISSUES PERMITS FOR THESE BULK HEADS, DO THEY NOT CHECK TO SEE IF IT'S IN CONSERVATION LAND? I MEAN, THAT'S MY -- I'M LOOKING FOR THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS ON THIS.
I MEAN, IF THERE WAS A BULK HEAD AND FILL PUT IN THERE AFTER IT WAS DESIGNATED CONSERVATION LAND, SOMEBODY MADE A BIG MISTAKE SOMEWHERE.
THAT'S MY COMMENT AND POINT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THAT, BUT --
>> I DO HAVE ALONG THE SAME LINES, IS THIS NOT THE SAME PARCEL THAT WE --
>> I THOUGHT INDIVIDUAL HAD DONE WORK ON THE PLOT WITHOUT A PERMIT?
>> THERE WAS A PERMIT FOR THE BULK HEAD WORK. THERE WAS NOT -- I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT STATE AGENCY, RIGHT? SO OUR STAFF DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT, SO IT'S -- FROM WHAT I CAN SEE IN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WHICH ISSUES THESE PERMITS, THERE WAS A PERMIT ISSUES.
THERE WERE SOME ISSUES, BUT THEY WERE RESOLVED, SO THE BULKHEAD
IS INSTALLED -- >> WHY DOES IT NO LONGER HAVE DRAINAGE OR CONSERVATION
VALUE? >> IT'S NOW PROBABLY HIGHER THAN THE WETLAND. THAT'S A GUESS. BUT IT IS -- IT'S FLAT NOW AND THERE IS A BULKHEAD WHICH AT SOME POINT IN THE PASTPAST THERE WASN'T. TYPICALLY CONSERVATION VALUE COMES FROM THE TREES ON THE SITE AND THE FLOW OF THE WATER, IT ALLOWS THE RIVER -- BUT ALSO FOR THE WETLANDS LAND TO FLOW TO DRAIN DOWN TO THE RIVER MORE EASILY.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I DO HAVE CARDS ON THIS ONE AND WE WILL START WITH LISTEN IT IS GAH N? GAIN? PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
OH, I'M SORRY, I GOT OUT OF ORDER.
>> OKAY. >> ONE OF MY COHORTS HERE REMINDED ME I'M STEPPING ON TOES.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? PLEASE.
PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING. KATHLEEN LINEHAN 3207 WATER NECESSARY DRIVE. MY FATHER AND OUR FAMILY HAS LIVED AT THE PROPERTY FOR OVER 15 YEARS. OUR FAMILY HOME. AS OUR FAMILY HAS GROWN OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE ARE ANTICIPATING WANTING TO BUILD A HOME NEXT DOOR TO BE CLOSE TO OUR FATHER.
>> I WOULDN'T MIND HEARING THE APPLICANT EXPLAIN HOW THEY GOT A BULKHEAD PUT IN ON CONSERVATION LAND.
>> THAT WAS MY FATHER. IT HAS SINCE BEEN CLEARED UP WITH THE EPA TO THE BEST OF
[00:45:07]
MY KNOWLEDGE.KNOWLEDGE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY
>> AGAIN, MS. GAN N. >> THANK YOU.
LISTEN GANN, 3397 WILDERNESS CIRCLE. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I DO FULLY SUPPORT A HOMEOWNER'S RIGHTS TO USE THE PROPERTY THAT THEY PAID FOR, THAT THEY OWN AND CURRENTLY CONTINUE TO PAY TAXES ON IN A WAY THAT THEY DESIRE, EXCEPT WHEN THOSE DESIRES, NUMBER ONE, GO AGAINST THE LAWS WE ARE ALL GOVERNED TO ABIDE BY, NUMBER TWO, HARM OUR DELICATE ECOSYSTEM AND PRECIOUS ENVIRONMENT, AND NUMBER THREE, THE WELL- BEING OF NEARBY NEIGHBORS AND THEIR PROPERTY. MY FEELINGS ARE MR. LINEHAN'S APPLICATION FOR THE REZONING OF THE WETLANDS FALLS UNDER ALL THREE OF THESE EXCEPTIONS.
WE WERE HERE BEFORE THIS BOARD TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO WHEN HE DID ILLEGALLY INSTALL AN UNPERMITTED BULKHEAD, YOUR ATTORNEY EVEN QUESTIONED WHETHER THEY HAD THE RIGHT -- YOU ALL HAD THE RIGHT TO MAKE HIM REMOVE IT AT THAT TIME. MR. LINEHAN'S ONLY QUESTION ONCE CAUGHT WAS HOW MUCH IS THE FINE? WE APPARENTLY ARE ALL IN HIS WAY AND HE WANTS TO CONTINUE DOING WHATEVER HE WANTS AND AS A NEIGHBOR I BELIEVE HE VIOLATED OUR TRUST AND WAS UNTRUTHFUL BACK THEN AND I DON'T SEE THAT ANYTHING IS DIFFERENT TODAY. BACK THEN HE HAD NEIGHBORS TELL US THAT THERE WAS ONLY ONE LOT OF A HOUSE HE WANTED TO BUILD ON, UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD POSTED ON THE HOA WEBSITE HOW THEY, TOO, WERE PROMISED THAT THEY COULD HAVE A LOT UP THERE AS WELL.
WHEN THE WETLANDS ARE CLEARED AS THE WHITE PART INDICATED, THAT WAS CLEAR CUTTED. IT WAS TREES AND CONSERVATION BEFORE THE BULKHEAD WAS PUT IN AND I'M VERY SORRY IF HE HAS BUYER'S REMORSE FOR PURCHASING THE PROPERTY THAT HE DID BACK IN 2008 THAT IS RESTRICTED BY THE WETLANDS. HE KNEW WHAT THOSE ISSUES WERE AND TO ME THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED. HE PURCHASED TWO PARCELS, NEITHER OF WHICH, I BELIEVE, HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO THE ROADWAY.
HE CURRENTLY COMES IN AND OUT OVER A SMALL SWATH OF HIS NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY AS WELL. HE'S TORN UP THE WETLANDS AND THE UTILITIES EASEMENT BY GOING BACK AND FORTH OVER IT WITH SOME SORT OF GREAT BIG VERY LOUD FOUR-WHEELER- TYPE MACHINE THAT WE CAN ALL HEAR THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I HAVE PICTURES OF THAT IF YOU WANT TO SEE HOW DEEP HE HAS CUT INTO THAT AREA. HIS LOT OF THE WETLANDS IS THE PRIMARY SPILLWAY FOR WHAT COMES OVER BLACK CREEK AS IT PUDDLES IN THERE IT TRICKLES THROUGH PIPES THAT GO UNDER WHICH WILL EARNS DRIVE AND COMES INTO THE BACKYARD OF OUR PROPERTIES ALONG THAT WEST SIDE OF WILDERNESS CIRCLE AND WE HAVE WETLANDS AS WELL. SO OUR CONCERN AT MY RESIDENCE AND THOSE OF HOUSE ALL ALONG THAT SIDE IS THAT WHEN HIS WETLANDS ARE DESTROYED BY THE HOME BUILDING, THEN WE WILL BE FLOODED AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
I WOULD RESPECTFULLY VOTE NO TO THE REZONING.
>> THANK YOU, MS. GANN. I HAVE CHASE THOMPSON.
>> I'M CHASE THOMPSON I LIVE AT 3389 A COUPLE DOORS DOWN FROM MS.
>> I LIVE AT 389 WILDERNESS CIRCLE A COUPLE DOORS DOWN FROM MS. LYNN. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE WETLAND FLOODING MY HOUSE, I'M 21, I WORKED REALLY HARD TO LIVE THERE. NO ONE ELSE PAYS THAT MORTGAGE AND THEN THE WETLANDS, IT'S GOING TO FLOOD. I DON'T KNOW. AND THEN HIS SIDE OF THE WETLAND MAGICALLY DOESN'T HOLD WATER THIS MONTH, THERE'S JUST -- SOMETHING HAS CHANGED. THERE'S NOT WATER ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET ANYMORE.
SO I DON'T KNOW. KIND OF WEIRD. AND, YEAH, OUR ROAD IS TORE UP FROM THAT SIDE-BY- SIDE WHERE HE'S COMING IN AND OUT ON THE ROAD. Y'ALL PAINTED SOME LINES THAT LOOK HORRIBLE ON OUR ROAD BUT THE WORST PART OF OUR ROAD IS WHERE Y'ALL JUST BUILT A HOUSE A COUPLE DOORS DOWN FROM HIM AND, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW, OUR ROAD IS GOING TO GET MORE TORE UP AND EVERYTHING AND OUR HOUSES MIGHT FLOOD.
BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, MR. THOMPSON.
[00:50:06]
NEXT ONE I HAVE IS OLIN MCFARREN JR. NOT SPEAKING? OH, I SEE. I'VE GOT IT. FOR THE RECORD MR. FARREN IS AGAINST THE ZONING. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IF NOT I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE APPLICANT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WISH TO TELL US? IDENTIFIED BE IT A WETLANDS SURVEY. WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF MESSING WITH THE REMAINING WETLANDS IDENTIFIE ON THE PROPERTY AND IT'S A SMALL PORTION OF THE LAND THAT WE WOULD BE BUILDING A SINGLE- FAMILY HOME ON.>> SO YOU DON'T NEED TO RESPOND TO THE GROUP, YOU JUST TALK WITH THE COMMISSIONERS. SO THE QUESTION I HAVE IS WAS THERE A WETLAND MITIGATION SURVEY DONE ON THIS PARCEL?
>> SO THE UPLANDS FROM THAT SURVEY SHOWS THAT THERE WAS A SEPARATE WETLAND AREA AND A BUILDABLE UPLAND AREA? THIS IS ORIGINAL?
THIS ISN'T FILL? >> I CAN'T SPEAK TO
]. >> OKAY. AND THIS IS OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS AN IMPACT TO THE WETLANDS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PERMITTING AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO BUY
WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS. >> I'M
AWARE. >> IN ORDER TO -- SO THERE WOULD BE STATE FINES IF THERE WAS AN IMPACT TO THOSE WETLANDS THAT HADN'T BEEN IDENTIFIED, SURVEYED AND THEN PROPERLY -- BUT, AGAIN, THAT'S KIND OF OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE DO HERE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF
>> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, MA'AM. I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMISSION. COMMISSION. >> I WILL START, IF I MAY.
I HAVE A CONCERN. I KNOW THAT'S ODD COMING FROM ME.
I WOULD JUST LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION FROM STAFF. I'D LIKE TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF THIS HAS BEEN LOOKED AT BY THE DEP, IF THEY'VE ISSUED ANY KIND OF AN IMPACT STUDY FOR THIS -- FOR THIS RESIDENTIAL HOME.
IF THE PERMITS WERE -- WHEN WERE THE PERMITS OBTAINED FOR THE BULKHEAD AND HOW DID THAT KIND OF PLAY IN THE TIMELINE? IF THERE'S BEEN FILL BROUGHT ON TO THE PROPERTY.
BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNITY CONCERN, AND I UNDERSTAND IT, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, NUMBER ONE, WE ARE NOT FLOODING OUT NEIGHBORS.
>> RIGHT. >> AND WHEN WE LOOK AT DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME IN HERE, EVEN THOUGH, AGAIN, WE DON'T DEAL WITH TRAFFIC AND WE DON'T DEAL WITH WATER, WE DEAL WITH LAND USE AND ZONING, WE WILL ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ENGINEER THAT'S PRESENT HAS ACCOUNTED FOR WATER CONTAINMENT, STORM WATER CONTAINMENT, AND THAT THEY'RE STORING THAT PROPERLY IN AND THE OUTFLOW IS SUFFICIENT THAT THEY WON'T FLOOD THEIR NEIGHBORS. AND SO I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE US NOT VOTE ON THIS, BUT MOVE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING AND GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION FROM STAFF BEFORE WE MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON THIS. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
>> BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, I'D LIKE THE INPUT FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE BECAUSE IT DOES INVOLVE HOUSING, WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE A SCHOOL
CONCURRENCY. >> YES, WE USE SCHOOL -- WHAT'S CALLED A STUDENT GENERATION RATE, IT HELPS US DETERMINE HOW MANY STUDENTS A PARTICULAR HOUSEHOLD WILL GENERATE OR DWELLING TYPE.
IN THIS SITUATION IT'S ONE HOME, IT WOULD GENERATE ABOUT A HALF A STUDENT, A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF. SO IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, ALTHOUGH IT IS -- THERE IS A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, GROWTH, RIGHT NOW THERE IS CAPACITY SO THEY WOULD HAVE CONCURRENCY.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER
PUCKHABER. >> I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT COMMISSIONER BOURRE SAID. HE'S LOOKING, I THINK, FOR A WAY TO SHOW THAT THIS IS OKAY, BUT I WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO SEE A MORE DETAILED TIMELINE BECAUSE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME ON THE SURFACE IS SOMEBODY DID SOMETHING THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO DO AND WHEN THEY GOT CAUGHT, THEY PAID FINES OR THEY DID SOMETHING TO GET OUT OF IT. THIS SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN FILLED. THERE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN A BULKHEAD BUILT IN CONSERVATION LAND PROPERTY. SO I, TOO, WOULD LIKE TO SEE A TIMELINE, BUT MORE DETAILED, I THINK, THAN WHAT MIKE IS LOOKING FOR. I'D LIKE TO SEE WHEN HE WAS CITED, WHEN THE FINES WERE PAID, WHAT THE FINES -- THE WHOLE THING, BECAUSE THE WAY IT STANDS TODAY, THIS LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO PUT
[00:55:04]
SOMETHING OVER ON THE COUNTY BY JUST DOING IT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS IT, DO IT AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS LATER KIND OF THING.SO IF WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT I'M A NO.
>> THE ONE CLARITY, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS ACCORDING TO THE STAFF REPORT THERE WAS A PERMIT ISSUED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN 2008. I'M CURIOUS WHY. I THINK IT'S -- THE QUESTION, YOU KNOW -- AND I DON'T KNOW -- I KNOW THAT'S KIND OF OUTSIDE OF WHAT -- WE'RE NOT THE DEP, BUT IF WE CAN GET A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ON THE TIMELINE AND, YOU KNOW, JUST CONFIRM THAT THAT PERMIT WAS ISSUED AND WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. I DON'T KNOW IF -- THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME DOCUMENTATION. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ABLE TO GET OUR HANDS ON THAT OR NOT, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE SOME MORE
>> SO DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING OR THE MEETING THEREAFTER? I'M SORRY?
>> JUST ONE MORE THING FOR STAFF. IF THIS -- IN THIS PLAN IF THEY DECIDE TO CONTINU WITH THIS, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE PLANNED INGRESS AND EGRESS IS BECAUSE I LOOK AT THIS AND I'M WONDERING HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET IN AND OUT OF THAT AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THE HOUSE TO THE -- RIGHT NEXT TO IT, WHERE IS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS ON THIS
ROAD? >> THERE IS AN EASEMENT FOR
INGRESS AND EGRESS. >> I MEAN, IT'S NOT
EVIDENT IN THE AERIAL. >> NO, IT PROBABLY ISN'T, BUT IT IS THERE. THIS PIECE OF IT WOULD CONNECT TO HUSBAND EASEMENT.
HE WILL NEED TO DO THAT IN ORDER TO DEVELOP CERTAINLY, BUT THE EASEMENT
>> ANY MORE DISCUSSION? WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION?
>> I WILL MOVE CONTINUANCE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR TP -- CONTINUANCE I'M ASSUMING THE NEXT MEETING OR SOON THEREAFTER DEPENDING IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT INFORMATION TIMELY ENOUGH.
>> MR. CHAIR, I'M GOING TO SECOND THAT MOTION. I'M NOT SURE THAT ANYTHING WILL TURN MY OPINION ON THIS BUT I WOULD LIKE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS TO GET THAT INFORMATION BEFORE THEY MAKE A VOTE.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION, SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO BE REFRESHED AS TO THE DATE THAT THIS COMMISSION HEARD THIS -- HEARD AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PROPERTY BEFORE BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT WE HAD BEFORE US AND WHAT OUR DECISION
WAS. >> I'M ASSUMING WE COULD PULL THAT OUT AS WE CREATE A TIMELINE HERE AS FAR AS WHAT HAPPENED WHEN.
>> BUT I'D LIKE A CHANCE TO DO THAT BEFORE WE CONSIDER THIS AGAIN.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHEN WE CONSIDERED IT SO I CAN LOOK IT UP ONLINE, LOOK AT THE MINUTES AND SEE WHAT OUR DECISION WAS. WHAT WAS BEFORE US AND WHAT WE
>> I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK THAT UP AND THEN I PRESUME, COURTNEY, I PRESUME IT'S ALL RIGHT TO JUST THEN EMAIL THE APPLICATION AND THE PREVIOUS STUFF.
YEAH. OKAY. I CAN SEND IT TO EACH
OF YOU. >> OKAY. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
ALL RIGHT. CALL FOR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION
AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES 5,
6. >> I NEED -- I'M SORRY. POINT OF ORDER.
THAT MOTION HAS TO HAVE A DATE IN IT. CONTINUED UNTIL --
>> OKAY. SO IT WOULD BE THE SEPTEMBER --
>> WHAT'S OUR NEXT -- >> LET'S SEE, WHAT IS IT, SEPTEMBER 2ND MEETING OR SOON
THEREAFTER. >> AS SOON THEREAFTER AS
POSSIBLE. >> OKAY. WE WILL AMEND THAT MOTION TO INCLUDE THE DATE SO SEPTEMBER 2ND OR SOON THEREAFTER.
ALL RIGHT. >> I'M GOOD -- AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION I'M GOOD WITH THE MODIFICATION.
>> OKAY. >> YEAH, I'M GOOD, TOO.
>> DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING? OKAY.
SO KEEP YOUR EYE PEELED ON THE AGENDA AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE EVERYTHING PUT TOGETHER FOR THE SEPTEMBER 2ND MEETING. ALL RIGHT.
[5. First Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0018. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (D. Selig)]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS NUMBER 5 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZON 25-0018. MS.SELIG. >> ALL RIGHT. THIS ICE EM WILL ALSO BE HEARD BY THE BOARD ON AUGUST 26TH. THIS IS -- ACTUALLY THREE
[01:00:03]
PARCELLS, THEY ARE ALL IN THE SPRINGS DISTRICT, COMMISSIONER BURKE. THE APPLICANT IS L ANO WIMB ERCHLTS RLY BEHIND ABC REALTY WHO OWNS ONE OF THE PARCELLS. THE FIRST PARCEL THAT SMALLEST ONE CURRENTLY ONLY HAS ZONING ON IT AND THAT'S THE BA-2. THE SECOND PARCEL IN THE LIST HAS TWO ZONING DISTRICTS ON IF, BA-2 AND BB- 3 AND THE THIRD PARCEL ACTUALLY HAS THREE ZONING DISTRICTS ON IT, ONE OF THEM IS BA AND THE OTHER TWO PORTIONS ARE BA- 2 AND BB.SO IT'S A PATCHWORK OF VARIOUS DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL ZONINGS.
THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, SELL IT AND THAT'S BEST DONE BY CONSOLIDATING ZONING UNDER ONE. SO THE PROPERTY IS AT THE CORNER -- NORTHWEST CORNER OF RUSSELL AND HIGHWAY 17, OUTLINED IN YELLOW ON THE LEFT IN THE AERIAL AND IN RED ON THE LOCATION MAP. IT HAS FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL AS DOES ALL OF THE PARCELLS ALONG THAT CORRIDOR ON BOTH SIDES.
ALL OF THE GRAY ARE VARIOUS BB COMMERCIAL- TYPE ZONINGS, ON THE LEFT WE'VE GOT THE EXISTING PATCHES AND THEN ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED CHANGE.
LET'S SEE IF I CAN POINT OUT THE -- WE'RE NOT WORKING. WRONG WAY.
THERE WE GO. SO THIS IS THE SINGULAR PARCEL THAT HAS THE -- WHAT WAS IT -- BA- 2, I THINK, ON IT. THE SECOND PARCEL INCORPORATES THIS AREA HERE AND THIS, AND THEN THE THIRD PARCEL IS IT EXISTING BA AND THIS PIECE AND THIS PIECE. THERE WERE SIGNS PLACED OUT ON THE PROPERTY AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE MAP SHOWING ALL THE PARCELS THAT RECEIVED THE MAILING NOTICE. THE SPRING CAC HEARD THIS ON JULY 9TH AND THEY VOTED 5- 0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION AND STAFF WENT THROUGH THE CRITERIA AND ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
>> THE APPLICANT. >> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MY NAME IS JOHN MAHONEY WITH DACOY ENGINEERING, 714 NORTH ORANGE AVENUE, GREEN COVE SPRINGS, 32043. I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE LANA WIMBERLEY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
>> GIVE YOUR ADDRESS. >> 2031 SALT MYRTLE
LANE, FLEMMING ISLAND, 32203. >> SO WE THINK THAT THIS PIECE -- BRINGING EVERYTHING TOGETHER IS THE BIG ADVANTAGE HERE OF HAVING ONE ZONING FOR -- IT TOTALS ALL THOSE PARCELS TOTAL UP TO BE ABOUT 9. 19 ACRES AND TO HAVE ONE NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING FOR -- THIS IS -- WELL, WE THINK IT'S IN THE PERFECT SPOT AT THIS MAJOR INTERSECTION WHERE PEOPLE CAN MAKE RIGHT HAND IN THE EVENING AND I THINK LEFT-HAND TURNS FROM RUSSELL ROAD INTO THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT BASED ON THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS OF 209, BUT I THINK -- BUT WE DO THINK IN THE EVENING WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING HOME FROM WORK THIS WOULD BE A PERFECT SITE FOR A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
>> OKAY. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? IS YOUR PLAN TO GET -- ONCE THE ZONING IS DONE TO SELL THE PROPERTY OR ARE YOU GOING TO DEVELOP IT OR
UNDECIDED? >> TO SELL THE PROPERTY.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAHONEY.
>> THANK YOU. >> WITH THAT I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES ANYBODY -- I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS ITEM. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION.
>> MR. CHAIR, IF IT'S OKAY I WILL MAKE THE MOTION.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO
APPROVE? >> I'M GOING TO MOVE THE STAFF
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? CALL FOR A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[01:05:01]
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MAHONEY. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
[6. First Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0016. (District 4, Comm. Condon) (D. Selig)]
>> ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM -- FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZON 25- 0016 .
>> SORRY. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM WILL ALSO BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON AUGUST 26TH. THE APPLICANTS ARE KELLY AND TONY MOLTEN, I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T SEE THAT RIGHT.
PROPERTY IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 214 AND THIS IS DOWN THE KEYSTONE HEIGHTS AREA.
COMMISSIONER CONDON'S DISTRICT 4. IT IS ONE PARCEL, THE DESIGNATION FROM THE ZONING WOULD CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RB TO AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AR. WE HAVE THE AERIAL ON THE LEFT AND THE PARCEL ON THE RIGHT. YOU CAN SEE THE DEPRESSION AREA IN THAT PARCEL. IT LOOKS TO BE MOSTLY JUST PASTURE LAND, BUT MAYBE IT WAS -- I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THE HISTORY, BUT I'M GOING TO GUESS THERE MAY HAVE BEEN WATER IN THAT.
IT'S OBVIOUSLY A DRY DEPRESSION AT THIS POINT. THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A RESIDENCE THERE AND RESTORE THAT -- OR FOR THE FIRST TIME TURN IT INTO A POND AND POTENTIALLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO LIKE AN HEIRS LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR FAMILY.
BECAUSE THE PROPERTY -- THE PARCEL OWNER WANTS TO DO A POND, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THE ZONING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR BECAUSE THAT WILL ALLOW THEM TO DO A PRIVATE POND, STOCK POND.
SO THE EXISTING ZONING IS ON THE LEFT AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PARCEL FRONTING ON 214, HOWEVER, ON THE RIGHT WE HAVE THE PROPOSED ZONING, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, WHICH IS ALL AR. THERE WAS A SIGN POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AND MAILERS WENT TO ALL THE PROPERTIES IN THE PALE GREEN ON THE RIGHT. AND STAFF WENT THROUGH THE CRITERIA HERE AGAIN AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ITEM.
>> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
>> I JUST -- I WANT TO CLARIFY ABOUT THE POND.
>> SURE. >> IF THAT'S DUG OUT AND THERE'S SPOIL REMOVED FROM THE POND AND IT'S MOVED OFFSITE, IT DOESN'T MAKE IT A BORROW PIT, IT'S STILL CONSIDERED A PRIVATE POND?
>> IF IT MEETS THE PRIVATE POND, STOCK POND DEFINITION IN OUR CODE, THEN CERTAINLY IT COULDN'T BE ENLARGED OR DEEPENED SIGNIFICANTLY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. >> RIGHT.
YEAH. >> HOW MUCH LARGER CAN IT BE?
>> RIGHT. >> YOU KNOW? YOU CAN TURN THIS INTO A SAND MINE IS WHAT I'M WONDERING.
>> NO. >> SO THE POND WOULD BASICALLY HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE SIZE THAT IT IS OR THE DEPRESSION. MY GUESS IS WHEN THOSE LAKES WERE HIGHER THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN WATER IN THAT HOLE.
>> THAT WAS MY GUESS, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
>> BUT WHATEVER THEY DIG OUT CAN'T BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S THERE.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'VE GOT A COUPLE. IS THERE WATER AND SEWER AVAILABLE TO THAT PARCEL OUT THERE? IS IT ALL WELLS AND SEPTIC?
>> I THINK IT'S WE WILL AND SEPTIC.
>> THAT'S PROBABLY ALL WELL AND SEPTIC OUT THERE.
>> UNDER THE HEIRS PROGRAM HOW MANY -- HOW MANY HOMES COULD BE BUILT UNDER THIS? IS IT SO MANY PER ACRE?
>> I DIDN'T CALCULATE THAT. I DON'T KNOW.
>> IT'S A PRETTY BIG LOT. IT'S 39 ACRES. I MEAN --
>> IF THE GUY HAS GOT 50 KIDS, IT WOULD BE CROWDED.
>> NO, YOU CAN'T, YOU KNOW, CREATE A SUBDIVISION OUT OF UMPTEEN HEIRS'
LOTS. >> ALL RIGHT. MR. APPLICANT?
TELL US YOUR STORY. >> THE PROPOSED FLAT JUST FOUR
[01:10:01]
HOUSES. >> CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS,
>> KELLY MOULTON, 1082 SOUTHEAST AVENUE STARK, FLORIDA. I JUST WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR MY MAMA, TWO DAUGHTERS, MYSELF AND MY WIFE OUT THERE.
AS FAR AS THE POND, IT'S GOING TO BE SMALLER BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO LINE IT WITH CLAY SO IT WILL HOLD WATER. NOTHING WILL BE COMING OUT OF IT. IT'S 100% SAND. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR 60 YEARS.
THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT.
>> THAT WAS REALLY MY MAIN CONCERN BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE -- AT LEAST ONE BIG ISSUE WITH SOMEBODY COMING IN TO DO A POND FOR HOUSES, TURNED IT INTO A BIG SAND MINE.
>> THAT WAS MY CONCERN WITH THAT. THE OTHER ONE IS I KNOW YOU SAY THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO EVENTUALLY HEIRS THAT OUT.
FRANKLY IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO OUR DISCUSSION HERE, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE AR ZONING SO WHAT YOU DO IN THE FUTURE, GOOD LUCK.
I'M A FAN OF AR ZONING. A LOT LESS HOOPS TO JUMP THROUGH FOR
SURE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU,
YOU. >> WITH THAT I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK.
>> I WILL JUST -- WELL, GO AHEAD.
>> I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. >> GO
>> I WILL WAIT FOR DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD.
>> OKAY. I'M GOING TO MOVE THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS ONE.
>> I WILL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
DISCUSSION. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY TO ME ASSUMING THAT THIS -- AND I HAD -- I ACTUALLY WROTE IT DOWN, THAT WAS THE SAME QUESTION I HAD WAS ABOUT THE BORROW PIT AND THAT'S BEEN ADDRESSED. WITH THAT BEING SAID TO ME THIS IS THE AMERICAN DREAM, YOU KNOW, WHO DOESN'T WANT TO BUILD FOR THEIR FAMILY AND HAVE THEIR MOM AND THEIR KIDS AND THEIR FATHER -- YOU KNOW, JUST TO BE ABLE TO BUILD AND HAVE YOUR LOVED ONES AROUND YOU.
I KNEW WE DON'T GET EMOTIONAL IN THIS, THIS IS ALL BUSINESS BUT I LOVE THIS CONCEPT SO I OBVIOUSLY WILL SUPPORT IT.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >>
AYE. >> AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD LUCK.
[7. First Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0017 (setback) (D. Selig)]
>> ITEM 7 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN, IT INVOLVES SENATE BILL 108. IS IT STILL WITHDRAWN?
>> IT IS STILL WITHDRAWN, YES. >> OKAY.
AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT SENATE BILL 108, YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK IT
>> SOMETHING TO DO WITH HURRICANES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT. >> 180, YEAH.
>> 180? I THOUGHT IT WAS 108. I'M
SORRY. >> YEAH, AND SOMEBODY GIVE ME A QUICK EXPLANATION AS TO WHY
THAT AFFECTS THIS. >> IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO, I THINK, WITH THE BUILDING INDUSTRY.
>> IT'S A VERY LONG BILL. >> IT'S THE ONE THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T PUT REGULATIONS ON THEM AFTER A STORM OR SOMETHING. IS IT THAT ONE?
>> I -- YEAH. >> SO ALL WE WERE DOING WAS LOOKING AT CHANGING SETBACKS SO ALL THAT FALLS UNDER THAT LAW?
>> IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED LAW. IT'S VERY LONG. IT HAS -- STAFF HASN'T REALLY FINISHED REVIEWING AND ASCERTAINING REALLY ALL THE DETAILS AND
>> I JUST UNDERSTOOD -- I KNOW ABOUT -- I KNOW ABOUT THAT, BUT I THOUGHT IT HAD A TIME LIMIT ON, TOO, THAT WE COULD AT SOME POINT READDRESS THIS IN THE FUTURE. OKAY.
>> OKAY. I APPRECIATE STAFF WANTING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE WE & DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DO THINGS NICE.
ITEM NUMBER 8 HAS BEEN CONTINUED.
>> WE ARE REQUESTING CONTINUANCE.
>> STILL CONTINUED? >> YES, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO VOTE TO CONTINUE THIS TO THE NEXT -- TO THE OCTOBER MEETING,
ACTUALLY. >> OKAY. WELL, THAT ENDS OUR AGENDA.
>> WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT. >> WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT ONE?
>> THE PUBLIC HEARING AND -- >> I WILL MAKE THE
[8. First Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0021 (cul-de-sacs) (D. Selig)]
MOTION. >> HE HAS TO OPEN IT UP FIRST.
>> ITEM 8 IS SUBJECT TO CONTINUANCE, DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON IT.
SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MAKE THE MOTION TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO THE OCTOBER 7TH
MEETING. >> OR SOON THEREAFTER.
>> OR SOON THEREAFTER. THANK YOU, RALPH.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY
>> OPPOSED SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT? I DON'T SEE ANYBODY. OKAY.
ANY OLD BUSINESS/NEW BUSINESS? NONE. SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS FOR THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING, AND NOBODY
[01:15:02]
WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING. SO I WILL CLOSE THAT. MOTION TOADJOURN. >> I WILL MAKE THE MOTION.
THOSE IN FAVOR. WE'RE ADJOURNED. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.