[1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL / DETERMINATION OF QUORUM]
          [3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
          [00:01:41]
          >> SOME OF THE CONVERSATION WE HAD -- WASN'T QUITE AS UP TO THE POINT. 
          LET ME SEE HERE, HANG ON JUST A SECOND. I'M SORRY. 
          WE HAVE SUCH AN ASTUTE -- DOWN HERE IN THE OTHER END OF THE TABLE THAT I WOULD YIELD TO HIS EDITING, LET ME SEE HER, IT WAS ABOUT -- NO, I'M GOOD. IT WAS MINOR SO. 
          >> NO OTHER COMMENTS, WE WILL HAVE A VOTE. >> ARE YOU OKAY? 
          >> I'M GOOD. >> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? WE PASSED TWO MINUTES, YAY! WE DON'T ALWAYS PASS MINUTES. I LIKE TO SAY THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY IS IN TALLAHASSEE TONIGHT, AND SO THE HONORABLE HARRISON POOL IS HERE TO ASSIST S WITH ANY LEGAL MATTERS AND ISSUES WE MAY  HAVE TONIGHT. SO WELCOME, WE ARE GLAD TO HAVE 
          YOU. >> GOOD TO BE HAD. [LAUGHTER] 
          [4.1 PAB CASE 2022-001 - ZONING CHANGE - ABANDON 1985 ESTABLISHED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY'S WATERFRONT LOTS A-D - ORDINANCE 2022-__AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH TO FORMALLY ABANDON THE WATERFRONT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION 788 AND DESCRIBED AS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO: P.U.D. 0485 ESTABLISHED ON NOVEMBER 5, 1985 AND REVOKING ALL SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO CONFORM TO THE UNDERLYING FUTURE LAND USE MAP CATEGORY OF INDUSTRIAL WATERFRONT (IW) AND EXISTING I-W ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 11.0 ACRES OF LAND; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE]
          >> THE FIRST ITEM AND WILL GET RIGHT TO IT IS NEW BUSINESS, PAB CASE 2022 Ã001. 
          ZONING CHANGE TO ABANDON 1985 ESTABLISHED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITIES WATERFRONT LOTS A THROUGH D. I WILL TURN THIS OVER TO THE STAFF DIRECTOR FOR LITTLE 
          COMMENTARY AND HISTORY. AND RECOMMENDATIONS. >> GOOD EVENING, CONSERVATION DIRECTOR. TONIGHT WE WILL REVIEW AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO REMOVE AN OUTDATED PUD IN 1985 THAT WAS ESTABLISHED. 
          ESTABLISH CRITERIA AND ALLOWANCES FOR CERTAIN USES THAT THE CITY WANTED TO SEE ALONG HIS PUBLIC PROPERTY AND FOR THE WATERFRONT. MUCH OF WHICH HAS NOT ACTUALLY BEEN CONSTRUCTED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE WATERWAY CAFC) RESTAURANT LOCATED THERE TODAY. 
          THIS EVENING I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS VERY CLEAR, IT WOULD NOT REMOVE ANY CURRENT ALLOWANCE OR ANY FUTURE RECONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE AREA. A LOT OF WHAT IS DEFINED WITHIN THIS PUD AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS PROVIDED AS BACKUP MATERIAL FOR YOUR REVIEW THIS 
          [00:05:01]
EVENING, HAS BEEN OVERCOME WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF OUR NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ADOPTED IN 2006. THE USE OF PROCESS, CONDITIONAL USE TYPE OF PROCESS NO LONGER EXISTS WITHIN OUR CODE, WE HAVE USES -- OF WHICH THE USES PROVIDED FOR WITHIN THE PUD WOULD STILL REMAIN ALOUD TODAY. AND ANY OF THE ZONING DESIGN STANDARDS, SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, WOULD STILL BE ACHIEVABLE ON THE PROPERTY AS IT EXISTS TODAY. 
          AND ARE DEPICTED WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDUSTRIAL PWATERFRONT LAND USE AND ZONING CATEGORIES. THIS PROCESS REALLY IS AN EFFORT TO CLEAN UP SOME THINGS WITHIN THE CURRENT BOOKS SO ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, NO QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO RELY ON THIS. I KNOW THE TIME OF WORK FOR THE CITY THE CITY HAS TAKEN SUBSTANTIAL ACTION TO MAKE CHANGES AND HAVE A WATERFRONT PLAN FOR THESE PROPERTIES. 
          WE REALLY DON'T EVEN RESPOND TO THE OLDER WATERFRONT PUD FROM 1985 OR ANY OF THE SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS. THIS EFFORT REALLY IS GENUINELY JUST TRYING TO REMOVE THAT FROM THE BOOKS, IF YOU WILL. SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT AND THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT, 
          FOR THE FUTURE OF THE WATERFRONT. >> ONE MORE QUESTION THAT I UNDERSTAND FROM PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS THAT THIS PUD WAS PASSED A RESOLUTION AND BY ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD BE PUT IN QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ENFORCEABLE. 
          >> GIVEN THE TIMING OF IT, WAS LOOKING AT SOME OF THE HISTORY, JUST FIRST APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 85 AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA WOULD HAVE WANTED TO REFLECT IN JULY OF THE YEAR. 
          THE PROCESSES BY WHICH THE CITY ALLOWED FOR THIS TYPE OF CHANGE WOULD SHIFTED AFTER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ACT WHICH REQUIRES THAT THIS WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE BOARD AND HAVING TWO READINGS. WHAT WE ARE TEMPTED TO DO IS CORRECT THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND HOW IT IS REMOVED SO THAT THERE IS A REMOVAL BY ORDINANCE VERSUS THE RESOLUTION BY WHICH 
          IT WAS ESTABLISHED. >> KELLY, WITH THIS REMOVAL OF THIS, WOULD THAT BE ANY BENEFIT FROM THE CRA STANDPOINT? WE SEEM TO BE REVITALIZING CRA AND WONDER IF IT WOULD GET IN THE WAY MAYBE SOME DECISIONS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE IN THE FUTURE. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT DOES. IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT COULD CONTINUE TO BE ON OUR BOOKS AND NOT REALLY POSE A PROBLEM IT'S REALLY OUTDATED AND BECAUSE YOU HAVE SO MANY OF THOSE USES ALREADY ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT. IT HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED FOR THE MOST PART WITH THE ONLY EXCEPTION BEING THE RESTAURANT THAT DUCA DEVELOPED FOLLOWING IT. AND THIS IS THE ABILITY TO BE IN PLACE THERE. 
          >> THIS PLOT OF LAND IS ALL CURRENT CRA. >> YES, ABSOLUTELY IT IS. 
          IT WOULD NOT HAVE AN EFFECT ON FUTURE ACTION WITH THE CRA IT WOULD CONTINUE TO MAKE PLANS FOR THE AREA AND WE WITNESSED THE COMMISSION, THE ADVISORY BOARDS TAKE ACTION ON THE PLANS 
          FOR THE WATERFRONT. >> THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE ALL, OR ANY PRIVATE OWNED? 
          >> THEY ARE CITY OWNED. >> ALL THE PROPERTIES. >> APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES OF THE CITY ON WATERFRONT PROPERTIES. WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE IS LOTS A THROUGH D EXTENDING CURBSIDE DOWN PAST BEECH STREET -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> YES? >> THERE ARE NO LEASES EXECUTED OR CURRENTLY IN EFFECT? 
          >> THERE ARE CURRENTLY LEASE AGREEMENTS WITHIN THE PROPERTIES THAT EXIST THAT WE 
          ARE DISCUSSING TODAY. >> AND TALK ABOUT THE LEASES TO THE DEVELOPERS FOR THE PUD. 
          LEASES FOR THE -- >> SOME WERE NEVER ACTUALLY PUT INTO EFFECT. 
          AND NOW -- >> THEY SAID NOTHING WAS HAPPENING WE DIDN'T GET OUT OF 
          THE GROUND, I DIDN'T SEE THAT THEY RESOLVED ANYTHING. >> THEY DIDN'T. 
          AND FOR EXAMPLE THE HAMPTON INN PROPERTY WHICH IS REFERENCED IN ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS, THERE IS NO PARTNERSHIP OR ANY RELIANCE ON THE CITY WITH ANY TYPE OF LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THAT 
          PROPERTY TO HAVE EVERYTHING IT HAS IN PLACE. >> YES? 
          >> MADAM CHAIR, WHEN I READ THROUGH THIS, YOU CAN TELL THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF CHANGES AS TIME WENT ON. FOR WHATEVER REASONS. PI GUESS THE FIRST, I THINK THE 
          [00:10:10]
CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD ABOUT THIS. 
          IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME THIS WAS BACK IN THE 80S SO IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW NORMALLY I GUESS, WE BRING UP OR HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT. AND -- 
          >> YOU BEEN HERE LONG TIME! >> AND YOUR POINT MR. BENNETT, ABOUT ARE THERE ANY LEASES STILL OUTSTANDING OR THINGS LIKE THAT, I JUST, IT SORT OF STRUCK ME THAT WITH THE ISSUES THAT ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW, CERTAINLY THEY ONE AT BRETZ WITH ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE, CERTAINLY THE, NOT THAT THE SEAFOOD BUILDING IS PART OF THIS PROGRAM, PART OF THIS BUT IT IS, THERE ARE SOME THINGS GOING ON IN THE AREA THAT FOR US, TOO JUST, HERE IT THE FIRST TIME AND SAY OKAY NO PROBLEM, LET'S JUST GET RID OF IT. WITHOUT EVEN REALLY HAVING SOME REAL, I WANT TO "IN DEPTH" BUT CERTAINLY SOME REAL CONVERSATION ABOUT IT FROM 
          STAFF OR FROM MAY BE OTHERS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN IT. >> IS WAITING AROUND 30 US WITH SOMETHING HAPPEN. USUALLY THEY DEVELOP AND DEVELOP. 
          TO HAVE THE SITTING AROUND BEING FORGOTTEN ON THINK IS SO UNUSUAL. 
          NOTHING WILL HAPPEN AND NO ONE WAS TO HAVE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT TODAY ANYWAY. 
          >> THAT'S TRUE. >> SO LET'S GET RID OF IT AND MOVE ON. 
          >> DOESN'T LOOK STRANGE THAT IS ALL OF A SUDDEN, WITH EVERYTHING ELSE GOING ON, WITH THE WATERFRONT THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN WE GET THIS RECOMMENDATION TO DO AWAY WITH 
          THIS PUD? [INAUDIBLE] >> I CAN ANSWER THAT. 
          HAVE A CITY COMMISSIONER THAT HAS BEEN ASKING FOR SOME TIME FOR THIS TO GET HANDLED. 
          BECAUSE WE WORK ON THE CHANGES TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE LAST QUARTER OF THE YEAR, I ASKED THE DIRECTOR TO PUSH THIS OUT TO THIS YEAR, TO THIS MEETING. 
          SO THAT WE CAN FOCUS ON THE THINGS THAT WE HAD IN FRONT OF US THAT WERE HIGHER PRIORITY. 
          WHICH WAS CLEANING UP THE LDC AND TRYING TO GET WORK DONE ON THE VISION DOCUMENT. 
          SO I AM THE REASON IT IS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. >> THE IMPLICATION WAS THAT IT 
          IS NOT IMPORTANT, CORRECT? >> THAT'S WHAT WE KEEP BEING TOLD. 
          [LAUGHTER] >> WHAT'S GOING ON NOW? >> THAT'S WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD. AND I HAVE TO YOU KNOW, JUST -- WE ALIGN OUR STAFF AND LEGAL TO 
          TELL US WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT -- >> NOT PERTINENT TO ANYONE WANTS TO SEE. NO ONE WANTS TO SEE THE HOTEL, RETAIL, UNDERGROUND PARKING. 
          ALTHOUGH MAYBE THAT IS SOMETHING WE COULD CONSIDER. >> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE 
          HAPPEN? >> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A GOOD EXPLANATION OF THIS. 
          SORT OF PUT TOGETHER, I READ THROUGH ALL OF THESE ATTACHMENTS. 
          AND IT IS ACTUALLY PRETTY INTERESTING READING TO SEAL THIS. 
          BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO DELAY A DECISION BY A MONTH, MAYBE COME BACK TO THIS NEXT MONTH, AFTER YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO HAVE, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TREVOR HARRISON, WE LOVE YOU BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF TAMMY COULD BE HERE. 
          I JUST THINK THAT IT NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED TO US, IN THE TOTALITY OF THE PROJECT. 
          >> LET ME SUGGEST THIS. WE HAVE SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE THAT I THINK MAYBE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN, TO WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS. WHY DON'T WE HEAR PUBLIC 
          COMMENT. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >> WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT TO MOVE ON IT TONIGHT OR WHETHER WE WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE IT TO A TIME CERTAIN 
          IN THE FUTURE. WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? >> YES. 
          >> OKAY SO, WE ARE LITTLE CASUAL WITH OUR SPEAKERS. SO IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM ORDERLY. WE NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, THREE MINUTES AND WE WOULD BE 
          HAPPY TO HEAR FROM YOU. >> CAN WE GO TO PAGE 20? ALAN MILLS -- ALSO WITH THE 
          [00:15:02]
          MARINE ADVISORY BOARD. >> WHICH DOCUMENT WAS IT IN? >> PACKAGE FOR THIS. 
          GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THIS PACKAGE 2022 Ã22 AND THEN GO DOWN TO THE CONTRACT WITH -- 
          >> PAGE 20 ON THE DOCUMENT ITSELF. >> YES. 
          >> THERE IS NO PAGE 20 ON THE DOCUMENT. PAGE 20 OUR MEETING MINUTES 
          FROM JANUARY 17 -- >> THE AGENDA TO THIS ITEM 4.1, PAGE 20, THE OLD CONTRACT. 
          >> LET'S SEE WHAT SHE CAN GET TO. >> DID YOU GET THE PAGE NUMBER 
          OFF OF THE -- >> I GOT OFF THE AGENDA ONLINE. >> KEEP GOING DOWN. 
          >> IT WAS BEYOND THIS. >> PAGE 20 ON THE PACKAGE. [INAUDIBLE] 
          IT SHOULD BE ON -- >> I WILL LOAD THE NEXT DOCUMENT. 
          THIS ONE. THAT WAS JUST A SINGLE PAGE. >> DO A SEARCH. 
          >> NO BECAUSE THEIR SEPARATE DOCUMENTS. >> IT'S GOING TO BE 956. 
          >> THE THIRD ONE DOWN, TOWARD THE TOP. THE THIRD ONE, THE FOURTH 
          RATHER. THERE YOU GO. >> AM LOOKING FOR CONTRACT. 
          >> YOU'VE GOT IT. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT PAGE THAT IS? 
          >> THE PAGE NUMBER ON THE PDF. >> WHAT IS IT? >> WHAT IS THE PDF PAGE NUMBER? 
          CAN YOU TELL, KELLY? >> I CAN. GIVE ME JUST A MOMENT. 
          >> I GOT PAGE 20 OFF IT. DID YOU PULL IT OFF OF THE PAGE? 
          >> I DID NOT PULL OFF THE PACKAGE. >> THE PDF HAD THE SAME PAGE 
          NUMBER. >>. >> WHAT IT IS STATING -- 
          >> IS GOING TO TAKE A BIT TO LOAD BECAUSE IS GOING TO LOAD EVERYTHING IN THE PACKET. 
          >> I KNOW TOOK A WHILE FOR ME. YOU SHOULD READ A LOT BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT. 
          >> PACKET 3.7. >> THAT IS SLOW. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS MY MACHINE. 
          >> A LOT OF DATA IN THERE. I DON'T LIKE IT WENT TO GETS INTO A COMMISSION LEVEL PACKET. 
          IT WAS WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT. >> YES. >> SORRY. 
          >> GO UP SOME MORE JUST A LITTLE BIT. >> OKAY. 
          >> A BIT MORE TO ZOOM IN? >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER ROBERTS, SECOND BY MR. ALBERT AND A RESOLUTION 956, THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. 
          [00:20:09]
THE PARKING. THEY SAID RIGHT HERE HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS COULD BE RELATED WITH RESOLUTION 956. WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY CHANGE THIS RESOLUTION AND IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE, THAT THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH PARKING THE COMMISSIONERS ALMOST 40 YEARS AGO. THE PROBLEM WE ARE HAVING DOWNTOWN WITH PARKING, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION OF UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AREA BE DESIGNED FOR PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF A PARK. 
          THAT'S WHAT THIS RESOLUTION IS. NOT ONLY THE LAND PART OF IT, THAT INCLUDED, THEY HAVE AT THE END, THERE'S A PARKING AREA FOR THE CASINO BOAT, THERE WAS ONE HERE AS WELL. 
          PARKING FOR THE MARIA, THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO MOVE THE BOAT RAMP SOUTH AND THEY SAID NO, NEED TO KEEP THE BOAT RAMP WORDS EXISTING AREAS. AND THEY HAVE AN HERETO IF YOU LOOK, WHERE THAT IS RIGHT THERE, ALL OF THAT SITE IS WHERE WE PUT ALL OF THE DREDGING MATERIAL, BACK THEN -- AND THEN, AFTER THAT WAS MOVED IT IS DESIGNATED AS PARKING. 
          IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THIS THERE'S A DRAWING WITH PARKING, IT IS NOT DESIGNED -- THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, IT IS DESIGNED FOR PARKING. AND RIGHT HERE THEY SELL THREE LOTS RIGHT THERE THAT'S WHERE THE THREE LOTS OFFER COMMERCIAL FISHING. 
          I MADE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE OF MINUTES AGO. 
          THERE WERE I GUESS THE SEAFOOD AND ALL, THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM DOWNTOWN FOR AMPLE PARKING THAT THEY WOULD JUST UTILIZE IT AND PLENTY OF ROOM IN PARKING LOT C AND D AND ALONG THE BULKHEAD FOR A RIVERFRONT PARKING AREA. THE PARK.AVE A GREAT SUNSET PARKING AREA, WE HAVE GREAT AREA FOR PARKING AND WE DEFINITELY HAVE A PROBLEM DOWNTOWN FOR PARKING. 
          IF WE CAN UTILIZE THIS AREA, WHICH WAS FORESEEN BEFORE OUR COMMISSIONERS BEFORE US, THE PARKING THIS WAY BEFORE WE GOT HOTELS AND ALL DOWNTOWN UP AT MAIN STREET AND EVERYTHING. 
          OUR POPULATION HAS DOUBLED SINCE 86. I RECOMMEND YOU LOOK AT THIS. 
          WE NEED MORE PARKING AND WHAT THEY DID DO BACK THEN, THEY WERE SMART ENOUGH TO SEE THAT WE NEED A PARK FOR PARKING FOR DOWNTOWN AREAS. PEOPLE DON'T COME DOWNTOWN TO A PARK TO COME DOWNTOWN TO SEE THE SUNSET, THEY COME TO THE SHOPS AND THEN AT THE BEACH. 
          >> YES SIR? >> THIS WAS COMMISSIONER ROBERTS THAT MADE THE -- 
          >> YES. >> THERE ARE SOME MINUTES FROM JANUARY 17, 1989. 
          IN THIS DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER ROBERTS STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW HIS 
          SUGGESTION THAT THE PARK BE USED FOR PARKING. >> BUT IT WAS VOTED ON IF YOU 
          LOOK DOWN THERE, FOUR ÃONE. >> IT WAS THE SAME VOTE -- >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT PAGE WAS BUT IT WAS THE SAME THING AND YOU CAN READ IT. IT WAS VOTED. 
          FOUR ÃONE FOR THE RESOLUTION AND -- >>. 
          I THINK THE MESSAGE REALLY IS, PARKING IS GOT TO BE A SIGNIFICANT ELEMENT OF CONSIDERATION WE START LOOKING AT WHAT WE WILL DO WITH BASICALLY EVERYTHING. 
          >> AND BETWEEN FRONT STREET AND THE BULKHEAD.> YES. >> WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          WE HAVE A LOT OF PARKS, A LOT OF ROOM AT CENTRAL PARK FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. 
          WHAT WE DON'T HAVE DOWNTOWN WE ARE LOSING FROM TIDES AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS PARKING AREAS. WE REALLY NEED TO UTILIZE THAT FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. 
          DOWNTOWN MERCHANTS, RESTAURANTS, MARINA DRIVING ON BUSINESS, TALKING ABOUT UPPING THE RENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE YOU NEED TO HAVE MORE PARKING SO PEOPLE CAN GET DOWN HERE. 
          PARKING IS A BIG ISSUE DOWNTOWN.ON'T HAVE ROOM FOR PARKING GARAGE. 
          WHICH THAT WAS ONE. >> IS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THE PROPOSALS GOING IN DOWN 
          THERE. >> IT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH THIS RESOLUTION. 
          [00:25:02]
          >> AND HIS UNDERGROUND PARKING TOO. IN ANY CASE, ALL YOUR STUFF DIDN'T HAPPEN AND THAT'S ALL PART OF THE PUD WHICH IS WHAT WE WERE ADDRESSING TONIGHT. 
          DOING AWAY WITH THE PUD. >> MY CONCERN IS THE PUD IS ALMOST, IT IS OUT OF THE REALM OF PROBABILITIES FROM THE STANDPOINT, WHOOPS SO FAR BEYOND THAT 35 YEARS, EVEN 
          WHAT'S THERE TODAY DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WHAT THEY PUT IN. >> CORRECT. 
          >> AT THE GRIP TO GO FORWARD AND MOVE FORWARD AND SAY OKAY LET'S GET AN ACCEPTABLE -- 
          >> WHAT WAS THERE IN 85 IS STILL THERE TODAY. THE MARINA IS ALL DONE THE BATH HOUSES TO LIVE THE BOAT RAMP IS STILL THERE ATLANTIC SEAFOOD IS STILL THERE FROM WAY BACK BEFORE THE 80S. I MEAN IT WAS THERE SINCE HEIDI PETERSON HAD APPEARED DOWNTOWN IS THE SAME EXCEPT FOR THE PARKING. IF YOU LOOKED ON THEIR, YOU HAVE THE FESTIVAL COMPANY CARS A SOFTBALL TEAM PARKS IN THAT PLACE. 
          >> THANK YOU. NEXT? NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. 
          >> YES. GOOD EVENING. >> KEVIN MCCARTHY, 1701 QUINCE DRIVE NASSAU COUNTY, FLORIDA. [LAUGHTER] SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU FIRST THOUGHT ABOUT THIS I WAS KIND OF SHOCKED. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHEN I WATCHED GOVERNMENT TRY TO DISPOSE OF THE LAW OR ORDINANCE THAT THEY WROTE MANY YEARS AGO, USUALLY WE JUST KEEP ADDING TO IT. 
          MY SUSPICION IS I THINK THAT THIS, IT LOOKS LIKE IF YOU DO AWAY WITH THIS RESOLUTION, IT WILL OPEN UP FOR ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DONE ON THE WATERFRONT. 
          AND OUR CONCERN AS WAS MENTIONED, THE PARKING IS AN ISSUE DEFINITELY REALLY IS. 
          AND WE WATCHED AND AND LISTENED TO THE CITY COMMISSION TALK ABOUT SOMEDAY TURNING PARKING LOTS INTO PARKS AND THOSE OF YOU, WE PRETTY MUCH OPPOSED TO THAT AND MOST PEOPLE THAT I SPOKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NECESSARY ON THE WATERFRONT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE QUESTION IS THIS EVENING. WHY WE ARE CLEARING THE DECKS AT THIS POINT AND WAS THE 
          FUTURE, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN. >> I'M GOING TO LET MS. GIBSON 
          ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> IT WAS REQUESTED THAT STAFF GO AHEAD AND CLEAN THIS UP TO AVOID ANY PERCEPTION THAT WE MAY BE FOLLOWING IT IN THE FUTURE. 
          AND FOR PROPOSALS, COMMUNITY INPUT, IDEAS FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS AREA TO REALLY BE OPEN SO THAT IT CAN ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF WHETHER THAT SPACE, DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE, PARKING, PARK SPACE, WHAT EVER THAT MIGHT BE. THERE IS NO KNOWN END GOAL 
          EXCEPT TO CLEAN IT UP. >> IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. IT IS ABSOLUTE -- OBSOLETE, MANY THINGS WERE NOT COMPLETED OUR BIG CONCERN IS THAT WE MAP TO FIGHT THE BATTLE OF PARKING DOWNTOWN ON THE WATERFRONT. THAT'S REALLY THE BIG CONCERN. SO THAT IS WHY WE CAME. 
          >> ALL RIGHT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT, YOU ARE IN THE BUSINESS THAT REQUIRES PEOPLE TO GET TO THE BUSINESS AND ALSO PEOPLE IN BOOKS SAY I NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET TO MY BOAT. 
          REGIONAL LOGISTICS ANYWAY. IT IS NOT A DEAD SUBJECT BUT I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE IS CLEAR THE DECK SO GO FORWARD WE ARE WORKING PRETTY MUCH WITH AN OPEN SLATE. 
          >> IF YOU LOOK VERY CAREFULLY ON ALL THE SUPPORTING INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH, MUCH OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARDS BACK IN THE DAY WERE VERY CONCERNED WITH THE PARKING. IT WAS SPOKEN ABOUT OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THESE CONVERSATIONS AND THESE DOCUMENTS. AND MUCH OF IT DID TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT THE MARINA, I THINK IT HAS 129 SPONSOR SHOULD BE 129 PARKING SPACES THE RESTAURANT SHOULD REQUIRE 200 PARKING SPACES. I THINK THEY WERE 30 PARKING SPACES FOR EMPLOYEES. THEY WERE TALKING THAT THEY HAVE NUMBERS, FIRM NUMBERS AND 
          [00:30:03]
IT WAS MENTIONED SOME ORDINANCES THAT THEY WERE COMPLYING WITH BY DOING THAT. 
          AND I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH FERNANDINA NO LONGER REQUIRES NEW BUSINESSES TO PROVIDE PARKING ON-SITE FOR THE BUSINESSES. THE RESTAURANTS HAVE BEEN ADDED WITHOUT PARKING, I KNOW THAT 35 YEARS AGO, WHEN MY FAMILY DEVELOPED THE RESTAURANT WE WERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON-SITE PARKING, ON OUR PROPERTY BEFORE WE COULD PUT ADDITIONS ON. AND WE WENT TO THE LIMIT OF WHAT WE COULD DO BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ON-SITE PARKING. THAT'S NOT HAPPENING DOWNTOWN NOW AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHY. NO BUSINESSES COULD AFFORD TO BUILD GIANT PARKING SPACES NEXT TO THE LITTLE TINY RESTAURANT. SO IT ALSO IS PROBABLY THE REASON WHY THE CITY COULD NOT TAKE AWAY PARKING ON THE WATERFRONT. TAKE AWAY THOSE 120 PARKING SPACES. TAKE AWAY THOSE 200 PARKING SPACES FOR RESTAURANT, SIMPLY BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE HAS TO COMPLY. IT IS A REAL CONCERN OF OURS. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT FOR QUITE SOME TIME. >> THANK YOU. 
          MS. GIBSON. DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT? WHICH MAY BE I THINK TO HIS POINT? 
          >> SURE. THE CITY AS I UNDERSTAND IT HAS NEVER HAD A PARKING REQUIREMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. THE PHILOSOPHY BEING THAT WHERE YOU REQUIRE PARKING, AND TO THAT MAY LIBERALLY FORCE SS, DEMOLITION OF YOUR HISTORIC RESOURCES AND STRUCTURES THAT MAKE UP THE DOWNTOWN AND THE FABRIC THAT WE SEE TODAY. AND SO, RIGHTFULLY, AND WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE AND THEY MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO NOT REQUIRE PARKING WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THAT IS WHY WE HAVE NOT TODAY. 
          >> AND I WONDERED WHY, SOME OF THIS INFORMATION, THEY WERE COMPLYING WITH REGULATION AND THE NUMBERS THEY WERE USING A THINK WERE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH RESTAURANTS AND YET THE PARKING SPACES. THEY MAY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT REQUIRED WITHIN THE CITY BUT WOULD FOLLOW, I DON'T KNOW I DIDN'T DO THE RESEARCH. 
          >> WITHIN THE AREA THERE WERE REQUIREMENTS AND WITHIN THE IW ZONING DISTRICT THERE WERE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICULAR USES TO HAVE PARKING. WE ALSO HAVE AN OVERLAY. 
          WE ALSO HAVE -- WILL GO INTO GREATER DETAILS ABOUT PARKING SPECIFICITY FOR THE AREA. 
          AND WE COULD DRIVE A LOT OF THE DECISION-MAKING FOR THE PROPERTY LONG-TERM AND POTENTIALLY TO LOCATE NOW BECAUSE OF THE PARKING DEMAND THAT MAY NOT COINCIDE WITH WHAT 
          YOU WANT LONG-TERM FOR THE AREA. >> TONIGHT YOU WILL VOTE WITH YOU KEEP THIS OR NOT AND PERHAPS SHOULD HAVE IF YOU SO DESIRE, A REQUEST TO TRY AND MAINTAIN THE PARKING STATUS QUO. PERHAPS. 
          >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. 
          WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK NEXT? MR. 
          [APPLAUSE] >> I DO APPRECIATE THAT. -- A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT MEANING NOW SO FROM THAT BUT I'M UP HERE REAL QUICK. THE AXIS OF PUBLIC SPACES PROBABLY MY CONCERN AND JUST GETTING UP TO SPEED. I HATE COMING WHEN I'M NOT REALLY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON. TRY TO REDO THE WHOLE PACKET IS MUCH AS I CAN. BUT TO ME WHEN I LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT GETS ON THE DOCKET, MOVING FORWARD IS KIND OF LIKE A CHESS GAME. KIND OF MOVING UPON RIGHT NOW I THINK IN THE PUZZLE. AND I'M KIND OF CURIOUS ON WHAT AND WHY. 
          YOU KNOW IT IS OUT THERE AS WELL. I WAS REALLY CONFIDENT WHEN I HEARD -- SAY THE NEED TO BE MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION BECAUSE I JUST CAN'T, I READ ALL THE DOCUMENTS ARE JUST KIND OF HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHY AND REALLY, FOR ACCESS TO THE AREA FROM EITHER TRAILER PERSPECTIVE OR KAYAK OR -- WHEN SOMETHING IS BEING REPURPOSED FOR ME, I JUST HAVE CONCERN I LIKE TO KNOW WHY. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. 
          >> ANNETTE ACOSTA 22 S. SECOND STREET. I HAVE NOT READ THROUGH ALL OF THE STUFF I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT IS EXISTING NOW AND WHAT YOU 
          [00:35:04]
          ALL ARE VOTING TO CHANGE? HOW IS IT GOING TO AFFECT US? >> WE WILL LET MS. GIBSON 
          ANSWER THAT ONE. >> WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED OF THE BOARD, IS TO LOOK AT SOME OLD DOCUMENTS OF THE CITY, THE PLANS THAT WOULD LIKE TO REPORT OVER THE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES. 
          OVER TIME, MUCH OF IT NEVER GOT CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE THIS IS FROM 1985. 
          THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO DEFINE WHAT IT WOULD BE.UCH OF IT NEVER CAME TO PASS AND AFTER I WAS SAY, 10 OR 20 YEARS, THE THINKING HAD SHIFTED ON WHAT WAS DESIRED FOR THIS AREA. 
          REALLY MORE IN LINE WITH LESS DEVELOPMENT, LESS STRUCTURE, PRESERVATION OF VIEWS, ACCESS, AT LEAST IN THE TIME OF WORK FOR THE CITY, ALWAYS BALANCING PARKING NEEDS FOR THE MARINA AND MARINA CUSTOMERS. WHATEVER WAS THERE, THE COMMUNITY VERY CLEARLY SPOKE GOING BACK TO LATE 90S AND EARLY 2000 ABOUT BEING ABLE TO MAINTAIN USE OF THE WATERFRONT AND IT BE A PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. THIS PLAN IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THAT. 
          IT'S OUTDATED, PHILOSOPHY BY WHICH WAS CENTER FOR THE PLAN AND SPEAKING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAVING LARGER STRUCTURES THAT WOULD HAVE A RANGE OF USES. 
          IT'S NOT THERE THIS ACTION BE REQUESTED IS TO LIMIT THE FROM BEING EVEN CONSIDERED OR ANYTHING THAT WE MIGHT MOVE FORWARD AS A COMMUNITY. WE DO NEED MORE. 
          [INAUDIBLE] >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? 
          >> HI EVERYONE, TO GIVE LET ME SPEAK. MY NAME IS -- 406 BEECH STREET. 
          I REALLY JUST HAD ONE QUESTION. I LOVE THE POINT EVERYBODY BROUGHT UP ABOUT MS. GIBSON, YOU BROUGHT UP THAT IT HAD BEEN REQUESTED THAT WE CLEAN THIS UP. 
          CAN YOU LET US KNOW WHO REQUESTED THAT AND WHY? >> THE CITY MANAGER DIRECTED 
          THAT WE TAKE ACTION TOREMOVE THIS. >> OKAY THAT WAS MY ONLY 
          QUESTION. THANK YOU . >> ANYBODY ELSE? WE ARE GOING TO CLOSE A FLORIDA PUBLIC COMMENT. AND MORE CONVERSATION WITH THE BOARD. I THINK THERE IS A SUGGESTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. 
          >> I ECHO MANY OF THE COMMENTS THAT I'VE HEARD HERE TONIGHT AND ACTUALLY REFLECTS SOME OF MY INITIAL QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WHEN I FIRST WAS READING THIS. AS THE FIRST TIME OF HEARING IT. I THINK THAT THE, I WILL CALL THE OPTICS OF THIS APPEARING OUT OF NOWHERE, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS MERIT TO SORT OF RETIRE AN OLD PLAN THAT WAS NEVER FULLY IMPLEMENTED. IT MAKES SENSE. BUT I THINK THAT PERHAPS, WE NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE DISCUSSION THAT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A, SHIFTING FROM ONE HAND TO THE OTHER. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME CLARITY AND MAYBE SOME REASSURANCE, REASSURANCE THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE TAKING OFF IN ORDER TO DO 
          SOMETHING ELSE, WHICH I'M NOT AWARE OF. >> WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO 
          YOU? HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROCEED? >> I WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH FIRST OF ALL, A DELAY. AND US CONSIDERING IT TONIGHT. DO YOU JUST AT THE NEXT MEETING, IT COULD BE. I THINK IT'S A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD DISCUSSION THAT CAN BE HAD AND WE CAN SORT OF GET IT SIMPLIFIED BECAUSE IT'S A LOT OF DOCUMENTS AND -- 
          >> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE FROM STAFF, TO MAKE IT MORE EASY FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND? I THINK THAT WE CAN MOVE IT OU , WE NEED TO GET TO THE VISION STUFF SO I THINK WE WOULD MOVE 
          IT OUT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS. >> THAT WOULD BE -- >> APRIL OR MAY. 
          [00:40:04]
THE QUESTION I HAVE, IF WE MOVE IT OUT THEN WHAT DO YOU WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN, WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DO YOU NEED, DO YOU WANT A WORKSHOP? DO YOU WANT MORE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STAFF? WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE MOVED IT OUT? 
          >> OKAY. I DON'T THINK THAT, IF IT IS GOOD TODAY I THINK IT WILL BE GOOD IN TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS. IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE WITH 30 YEARS. 30 YEARS AT LEAST, 40 YEARS. I THINK TO SLOW IT DOWN AND LET US TAKE A LOOK AT IT, MAYBE A WORKSHOP MIGHT BE HELPFUL. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE WHOLE PICTURE. I THINK A PICTURE OF THE HISTORY, WHAT HAPPENED, WE CAN GO BACK AND FORTH WITH WHY IT DIDN'T HAPPEN BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND THEN WHY ARE WE 
          WANTING TO, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT WHEN YOU UNDO A PUD? >> WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW. 
          >> YOU CANCEL THE PUD. >> YES BUT SO, WE HAVE A LOT TO DO TONIGHT AND YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO -- I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE EITHER WORKSHOP OR PUSH IT OFF UNTIL SAY APRIL OR MAY WHERE STAFF HAS A CHANCE TO PUT TOGETHER JUST A SUMMARY OF THIS, VERY SIMPLE THAT SAYS YOU KNOW, HERE IT IS. HERE IS WHY WE WANT TO DO THIS AND THERE IS -- ARE SURE US I DON'T TO COME BACK AND FIND OUT THAT THE IS A LEASE OUT THERE NO ONE IS THINKING ABOUT AND 
          THEN WE HAVE TO REDO ALL THIS STUFF. >> JUST UNDERSTAND THAT IT AWAY 
          FROM OTHER THINGS. >> AND I THINK IT WILL TAKE THAT LONG. 
          I JUST THINK IT NEEDS TO HAVE SOME TIME. [INAUDIBLE] 1985 UNTIL 1990 WAS A BIG DEVELOPMENT PERIOD. APPARENTLY THEY SAW ADVANTAGE TO HAVING SOME LEASES ON THE PROPERTY AND BUILD ALL THESE USES THAT THEY SUGGESTED. 
          BY 1989 THE FINANCIAL MARKETS HAD FALLEN APART. NO ONE IS GOING TO FINANCE ANYTHING REMOTELY ON THIS PROJECT. SO IT'S JUST LANGUAGE, OKAY? AND DEVELOP THE LANGUAGE AND DEVELOPMENT UNDER PLAN, WE DO IT. 
          WE ARE 30, 40 YEARS LATER, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. KEEPING AROUND THERE'S NO REASON TO KEEP THAT. AND NOW WHAT THEY WOULD DO TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES, YOU MIGHT WANT TO TURN THIS INTO THE WATERFRONT WHICH CERTAINLY ALLOWS PARKING. 
          IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, WHAT WE ARE DOING IS PROBABLY THE BEST THING WE CAN DO BECAUSE IT'S BEEN -- THE CITY IS LOOKING TO HAVE. WHY IT HAPPENS OR NOT, [INAUDIBLE] I CERTAINLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REASONS ARE I JUST KNOW THAT BY 1989, 1990 COULDN'T GO ANYWHERE BECAUSE -- THAT'S WHY THIS PROBABLY NEVER MOVE FORWARD AND PROBABLY OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE INVOLVED THAT CAN ENLIGHTEN ME ON THAT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REASON AT ALL TO DELAY THIS FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS FOR ANOTHER TIME PERIOD. 
          IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO DO THAT. -- 
          >> OKAY, GOT IT. >> I THINK THERE'S ANY CONCERN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT I THINK A DELAY WILL BE GOOD. I THINK WE HAD TO DO MAYBE THREE OR FOUR MONTHS BUT LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE THAT ADDRESSES THE OLD PLAN. 
          WE'RE NOT REINVENTING OR REROUTING OR WHATEVER BUT IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO? 
          >> I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WHAT REPLACES IT TODAY, IS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COLD, PERIOD. 
          THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND -- [LAUGHTER] >> WITH IW AND SOME CONCERNS WITH THIS WHAT ARE WE REFERRING TO? WE ARE STRIPPING ALL THIS AWAY, SOME OF THE USES I HAVE CIRCLED HERE FROM IW AND COMMERCIAL FISHING, MAINTENANCE OF BOTH, MARINE SUPPLY, GASOLINE SALES, BUILDINGS INCLUDING MUSEUMS A MARINA, MARINE RECREATION, PARKING LOTS AND PARKS, PEERS, DOCS, PUBLIC RECREATION BUILDINGS, RESTAURANTS, RETAIL 
          [00:45:10]
STORES. THERE ARE SOME OTHER SPECIALTY STORES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SOME OF THE THINGS ARE NOTICEABLY NOT THERE, SOME OF THE LARGER SCALES SUCH AS HOTELS, LODGING ESTABLISHMENTS. THERE WAS REALLY MY UNDERSTANDING OF ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR THIS THAT YOU HAD A DEVELOPMENT GROUP THAT WANTED TO COME IN AND DEVELOP A WATERFRONT. AND THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN DO ON EXISTING CODE WAS THROUGH PUD WITH A CAN BASICALLY WRITE THEIR OWN RULES WITH IT. AND SO THAT'S WHERE HE GOT THIS PLAN, YOU HAVE RETAIL SHOP HERE YOU HAVE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT ARE RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL AND HOTELS AND THAT IS WHAT THEY PLANNED FOR. SO ULTIMATELY RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSION RESCINDS THIS PUD, WE REVERT TO WHAT IS THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT FROM 2006 THAT IS THE IW. IT GETS RID OF A LOT OF THESE EXTRA SORT OF EXTRAVAGANT BUILDUP, BLOCK THE VIEW USES THAT WERE ENVISIONED BACK IN 
          THE EARLY 80S. >> WHAT THE RESULT IS THAT YOU REVERT TO THE DISTRICT AND IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE THERE NOW. NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GRAND 
          SCHEME OF WHAT THE PUD ENVISIONED IN THE 80S. >> OKAY. 
          MR. -- >> I TEND TO AGREE WITH MARK IN THE SENSE OF MOVING FORWARD. 
          TWO SPEAKERS COME UP AND TALK ABOUT PARKING AND IT WAS IMPORTANT. 
          JUST FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE IN 1985 DAVID -- MOST REMEMBER, THERE WAS LITTER HE PUT OUT IF THE WATERFRONT WAS GOING TO BE DONE AS ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED, TOHIS THAT'S WHERE THE NUMBERS CAME FROM. I WILL TELL YOU, IS DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT TODAY IN TERMS OF REALITY. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT IN THE SENSE THAT THERE WAS A POINT IN TIME WHERE WE HAD 500+ PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT THAT INCLUDED HOTELS ETC. YOU'RE NOT WRONG. 
          I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE HERE AND SAY THEY DON'T BELIEVE WHAT I SAID IS A TRUE STATEMENT AND THAT WAS IN THE EARLY PLAN. BUT I AGREE WITH MARK THAT I THINK IT'S AT THIS POINT WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSIONS BASED ON, WHAT WE WILL DO WITH IT DOWNTOWN. 
          [INAUDIBLE] >> WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT. >> MADAM CHAIR, I'M JUST NOT 
          COMFORTABLE VOTING. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS. WHETHER IT IS, OR TABLE IT FOR A MONTH OR TWO MONTHS. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY READ IT, MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT. I GET A SENSE FROM SOME OF THE COMMENTS, THIS IS A SURPRISE, THIS IS THERE AND I THINK THAT THE OPTICS OF THIS IS THAT IT'S A SURPRISE. 
          WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHEN IT'S A SURPRISE, WE GO, WHAT? WHY ARE WE DOING IT NOW? AND I JUST THINK THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE ANY DOUBT THAT THIS IS 
          WHAT IT IS, THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE -- >> LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION TO MS. GIBSON. IF WE WERE TO TABLE THIS AND MOVE IT OUT WHAT WOULD BE REASONABLE TIME FOR YOUR STAFF TO SPEND TIME DOING RESEARCH ON THIS? 
          I MEAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE OUT APRIL OR MAY? >> APRIL WOULD BE FINE. 
          >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THE DISCUSSION, OR I GUESS IT IS REALLY THE PAB 2022 Ã001 ZONING CHANGE, THAT IT BE TABLED TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE PAB AT THE FIRST OF APRIL 2022 MEETING. 
          >> ACTUALLY, WE SHOULD CONTINUE WOULD NOT TABLE IT. >> CONTINUE IT. 
          >> CONTINUE TO THE APRIL MEETING. IS THERE A SECOND? 
          >> SECOND. >> LET'S HAVE A VOTE ON THIS. 
          >> MOTION FAILS. IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION. 
          [INAUDIBLE] THE PATIENT HAS ALL THE STUFF ON IT. . 
          [00:50:08]
THE CITY ATTORNEY ALSO SUGGESTED WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. 
          I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2022 Ã001. THAT THE ZONING CHANGE BE ABANDONED AS DESCRIBED, PROVED AND PAB CASE 2022 Ã001 IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE. [INAUDIBLE] TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME. 
          >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> ARE ANOTHER VOTE, MADAM SECRETARY. 
          WILL MOVE ON TO CITY COMMISSION. PROBABLY IN MARCH. 
          >> SECOND MEETING IN MARCH. >> SECOND MEETING IN MARCH. YOU'LL HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN NOW AND THEN TO COME INTO THE CITY COMMISSION ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS OR CONCERNS AND HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. OKAY, NOW WE ARE ON TO OLD 
          [5.1 VISION 2045 STATEMENT - Review and Discuss Themes 1 - 3]
BUSINESS. WE HAVE A VISION 2045 DISCUSSION ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE. I AM GOING TO AGAIN, TURN THIS OVER TO MRS. GIBSON, TO WALK US 
          THROUGH THIS. >> OKAY. AS BIT OF AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE'RE DOING, HOW THIS ALL DIRECTLY RELATES TO VARIOUS PROCESSES AND DOCUMENTS IN THE CITY. WE HAD A CONVERSATION YESTERDAY AND TALKED ABOUT, HOW DOES THIS FIT INTO OTHER DOCUMENTS? HOW DOES IT FIT INTO THE LARGER SCHEME OF THINGS?ND THAT REMINDED ME THAT I CREATED THIS GRAPHIC BACK IN 2019 THAT KIND OF TALKED ABOUT WHAT A COMMUNITY VISION WOULD DO AND HOW IT SHAPES GROWTH IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          I AM GOING TO KINDA START WITH THAT THIS EVENING AND THEN FROM THERE WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE THEMES THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT AND SEE HOW FAR WE CAN GET WITH THAT CONVERSATION. AND SOME OF THE DETAILS PROVIDED IN THE VISION DOCUMENT ITSELF. YOUR COMMUNITY VISION ITSELF AND WE'VE CALLED AT THIS POINT, AND AGAIN THIS GRAPHIC IS FROM 2019, I DID NOT UPDATE IT. IT HAS REALLY BEEN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. OFTEN THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT WHY WE CREATING THESE MISSION, VISION STATEMENT OR SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF ALREADY CONTAINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WE DO. WE HAVE GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IN THE PLANNING DOCUMENT. BUT THIS VISION TAKES IT TO AN EVEN HIGHER LEVEL IF YOU WILL THAT 30,000 PERSPECTIVE, TO THINK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF VARIOUS EXTERNAL EFFECT AS WELL AS INTERNAL EFFECTS, WILL SHAPE US OVER THE NEXT 25 YEARS. IT IS INFORMED BY OUR CITIZENS, IT IS INFORMED POTENTIALLY FROM BEST PRACTICES FROM FLORIDA STATUTES, FROM THE STATE STATUTE, THEY GIVE US GUIDANCE. AND THEN OF COURSE IT GOES TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR DECISION-MAKING. ULTIMATELY, YOU NEED A PLANNING CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT, IT MANAGES THE INPUT, THE PRACTICES AND STATUTES AND THE DECISION-MAKING THAT OCCURS FROM THE COMMISSION TO INFORM THE VISION DOCUMENT ITSELF AND THE VOICE OF OUR COMMUNITY. 
          FROM THAT VISION DOCUMENT, THE 30,000, WE HAVE CLEAR INTENTION OF WHAT IS DESIRED, WITH THE END GOAL SHOULD LOOK LIKE. APRIL 20, 1945. AND THAT INFORMS WHAT ACTIONS WE NEED TO TAKE FROM A REGULATION SIDE OF THINGS. FROM AN INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPITOL FINANCING SIDE OF THINGS AND PROBLEMATIC SIDE OF THINGS. 
          YOU WILL SEE A LOT AS WE GET INTO THESE THEMES AND PROJECTS, IT'S REALLY FOCUSED AROUND THOSE THREE AREAS. REGULATION, FINANCING AND CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND PROGRAMS. BUT ON THE REGULATION SIDE OF THINGS, YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF WAYS THAT IT GETS IMPLEMENTED, POLICY BEING ONE OF THEM. AND THE REAL DRIVER THERE DIVING IN FROM THE LARGER VISION INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITSELF, NOT MORE THAN 10,000 FOOT LEVEL IF YOU WILL. WE ARE THINKING WHAT ARE THE EXACT POLICIES THAT ARE GOING TO SHAPE US AND GET US TOWARDS THE END GOAL IN 2045? THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES SET 
          [00:55:04]
CLEAR OBJECTIVES, POLICY STATEMENTS AND LARGER GOALS WITHIN THE ELEMENTS THAT WE'VE CREATED AND ESTABLISHED OUR CHAPTERS WITH THE PLAN DOCUMENT ITSELF. 
          GIVES US A CLEAR POLICY DIRECTION. IF WE'VE GOT THAT AT THE 10,000 FOOT LEVEL, NOW WE GET INTO 5000 AND 1000, REALLY GET INTO THE DETAILS OF HOW DOES IT LOOK, HAS IT REALLY GET US TOWARDS OUR END GOAL? AND WE HAVE THOSE RESULTS AND REGULATIONS, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BEING ONE OF THEM COMING IN MUNICIPAL CODE BEING ANOTHER. THIS IS HOW WE WANT THE ZONING DISTRICTS TO ACT AND DIRECT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY THIS IS THE DENSITY WE WANT TO SEE. 
          THESE ARE THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND CHARACTER DEFINING CRITERIA REQUIREMENTS THAT WE WANT TO ESTABLISH SO THAT WHEN REDEVELOPMENT OCCURS WE LARGELY ARE REDEVELOPMENT AT THIS POINT, IT WILL LOOK AND FEEL A CERTAIN WAY. AND WE ARE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT, IT SETS A PROCESS AND PROCEDURE FOR HOW DEVELOPMENT IS REVIEWED, HOW DEVELOPMENT IS APPROVED, DETERMINES HOW -- ARE PUSHED TOGETHER AND FORMED TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY VISION AND MAKE SURE THERE REALLY IS TAKING PLACE IN A MANNER THAT HAS BEEN DESIRED. 
          OTHER CORRESPONDING DOCUMENTS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT WITHIN ACHIEVING WHAT ULTIMATELY IS THAT LARGER VISION. AND ONE OF THEM BEING THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. THAT WILL SET FORTH BIG PICTURE PROJECTS THAT WE WANT TO PLAN FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS AND INCREMENTALLY WORK TOWARDS. WERE FUND, THIS IS USUALLY LARGER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. THESE ARE BIG PICTURE PROJECTS LIKE THE WATERFRONT OR BIG NEW IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE RECREATION CENTERS OR SHIFTS IN HOW YOU MIGHT FUND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. ANOTHER SOMETHING THAT CAME UP WITH OUR EXERCISES OVER THE PAST YEAR. THAT WILL HELP TO DIRECT AND DEMONSTRAED COMMITMENT TOWARD ACHIEVING THE LARGER VISION. AND THEN ALSO YOU HAVE AN OPERATIONAL FUNDING, THE ANNUAL BUDGET. AND AS WE GET FURTHER DOWN INTO THE NITTY-GRITTY HERE, HOW WE MAKE SURE WE ARE BEING MAINTAINING HER ASSETS, HOW WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO HAVE ROBUST PROGRAMMING, OR PROCESSES PROPERLY FUNDED AND SO YOU HAVE A LEVEL OF SERVICE, CUSTOMER SERVICE AND EXPECTATIONS ARE BEING MET. 
          ON AN ANNUAL OPERATIONAL TYPE OF STRUCTURE. ALL THAT LEADING INTO A LOT OF WHAT WE'VE CONTINUED TO HEAR AND AGAIN THIS IS THE -- GRAPHIC, GOAL DRIVEN GROWTH BEING PROACTIVE AND EFFICIENT. CONTINUE TO BE A VIBRANT SMALL TOWN COMMUNITY THAT IS SAFE WILL BE A LOT OF ACCOUNTABILITY. AGAIN A LARGER VISION DOCUMENT AND EACH -- [INAUDIBLE] SOMETHING REALLY BALANCED WITH RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE HERE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE. 
          I WANT TO START WITH THE FRAMEWORK TO GET US BACK TO, WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT VISION? AND THEN WE WILL GET INTO THE VISION DOCUMENT ITSELF TO TALK ABOUT THE THREE THEMES THIS EVENING. TOO MANY TABS OPEN HERE. 
          HERE WE GO. THE FIRST THEME, AND I WILL GO THROUGH THEM WOMAN I GET ALL OF THEM WILL ONLY TALK ABOUT TWO ANOTHER BOARD DESIRES TALKING ABOUT THE FIRST TWO. 
          WITHIN THE VISION DOCUMENT ITSELF, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE ARE ESTABLISHED THEMES. 
          THIS IS A NICE GRAPHIC FOR US. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCY IS THE FIRST AND THE SECOND WE WILL TALK ABOUT IS LIVABILITY. THERE ARE THREE ADDITIONAL THEMES TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE, UTILITIES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PRESERVATION OF CHARACTER. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE IN SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS. 
          IN LOOKING AT THE THEME, THE FIRST TWO, THE FIRST TWO ARE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, RESILIENCY AND PRESERVATION OF CHARACTER. THERE IS A LARGER GOAL. 
          FROM THE LARGER GOALS, WE HAVE ESTABLISHED PROJECTS AND DIRECTION AND IT MAY FEED INTO COMP PLAN CHANGES, IT MAY BE CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT CHANGES, PROGRAM CHANGES, BUT THEY ARE ALL UNDER THESE PRIMARY GOALS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED WITHIN EACH OF THE THEMES AND THAT 
          [01:00:03]
MIGHT BE A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR US TO REALLY FOCUS ON, DO THE GOALS SUPPORT THE BOARDS VISION IF YOU WILL, FOR WHAT WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH. AT THAT LARGER THEME, THEN WE 
          CAN GET INTO PROJECTS AFTERWARDS AND HOW IT LOOKS. >> OKAY. 
          ANY COMMENTS? >> THANK YU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          >> THE FIRST ONE IS ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY RESILIENCY AND THERE ARE FIVE GOALS. HOW DOES THE BOARD WANT TO PROCEED? DO YOU WANT TO WALK THROUGH EACH GOAL INDIVIDUALLY AND THIS DOCUMENT FURTHER DOWN THAT ACTUALLY, THE ONE THAT LOOKS LIKE THE BIGGER GRID. IS THAT THE ONE YOU WANT TO WORK OFF OF? AS A GROUP? DOES IT MAKE MORE SENSE? 
          >> I THINK SO. I THINK IT'S A WAY TO GO THROUGH. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. >> THE FIRST GOAL, AND THE WAY THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS STRUCTURED, SO YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE BY THE AND DATE AND TIME FRAMES ARE ESTABLISHED. WHETHER IT'S URGENT OR QUICK THINGS WE CAN ACT ON RIGHT AWAY. THINGS THAT ARE SHORT-TERM, MIDTERM 6015 YEARS AND LONGER 
          TERM, 16 TO 25 TIMEFRAME. >> CAN YOU ENLARGE THAT? CAN YOU MAKE A FULL SCREEN SO 
          HE CAN GET RID OF THE THING ON THE LEFT THERE? >> I CAN. 
          LET ME GO BACK. I WAS FACT CHECKING EARLIER ON THE DUBLIN POPULATION SINCE 1980 I WASN'T SURE WAS TRUE BUT IT IS. I THINK THIS SHOULD ALLOW US TO VIEW IT NICER. THERE WE GO. STILL SMALL BUT. 
          >> THANK YOU. THE FIRST ITEM IS PROTECTED INCREASE -- THERE IS ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX. THERE ARE SEVERAL CROSS YOUR OTHER COMMENTS FROM YOUR HOMEWORK ON THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON? 
          >> GO AHEAD. >> I GUESS, A LETTER THIS IS CREATING ADOPTING CREATING, INTERDEPARTMENTAL TREE UNIT CREATING THE PLAN, I GUESS AS WE GO FORWARD, LOOKING AT ALL OF THIS, THESE ARE THE ASPIRATIONAL DIRECTION THAT SORT OF FIT UNDERNEATH PROTECT AND INCREASE THE CITIES TREE CANOPY, RIGHT? IT IS ASPIRATIONAL. 
          WE REALLY DO NOT NEED TO BE GETTING INTO THE WEEDS ABOUT HOW MUCH THIS WILL COST. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? >> WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA. >> I AGREE. 
          >> AT SOME POINT IN TIME. >> IT IS CONSIDERATION PART OF ALL THE DISCUSSIONS. 
          >> AND WHERE WE HAVE THE DOCUMENT WHERE WE THINK FUNDING WOULD COME FROM, RIGHT? BECAUSE THERE IS A PAGE IN HERE THAT TALKS ABOUT WHERE POTENTIAL FUNDING WOULD COME FROM WHETHER IT COMES FROM IMPACT FEES OR TAX, GRANTS, STATE MONEY, FEDERAL MONEY. 
          >> LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE HAVE IT SOMEWHERE IN THE DOCUMENT WHERE WE BEGIN TO IDENTIFY WHERE FUNDING SOURCES MIGHT COME FROM. PARTICULARLY THING FOR SOME OF 
          THE BIGGER ONES. RIGHT KELLY? >> YES THERE IS.> WE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THREE YEARS. WE HIRE AN ARBORIST, WE STARTED 
          THE PROCESS ALREADY. IT'S NOT LIKE BRAND-NEW.>> I LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS. 
          I LIKE TO BE A LITTLE MORE AGGRESSIVE IN TERMS OF THE ULTIMATE GOAL. 
          SOMETHING YOU WANT TO WAIT 16 YEARS. I WOULD RATHER SEE IN A 5 TO 10 
          [01:05:01]
          YEAR WINDOW. >> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE MOVED? 
          >> I THINK IN THE LONG TERM MOVING IT BACK. QUESTIONING TO INCREASE THE TREE CANOPY BY SEVEN PERCENT? > YES I WOULD PUT THAT MORBID MIDTERM. 
          >> YOU WANT TO MOVE IT TO INCREASE THE TREE CANOPY BY SEVEN PERCENT IN 15 YEARS? 
          >> YES. >> I KNOW THAT TREE COMMITTEE DID SOME ANALYSIS THAT INFORMED 
          THIS. DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT? >> THROUGH THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT FINANCIALLY AND SPACE WISE WHAT WAS REALISTICALLY POSSIBLE, FINANCIALLY, SPACE AND STAFF, AVAILABLE INCREASE IN THE TREE CANOPY BY FIVE PERCENT BY 2024 WAS OVER MILLION DOLLARS. PER YEAR AND WOULD REQUIRE OVER 5000 TREES TO BE PLANTED WHICH ESSENTIALLY WOULD RESULT IN THE REMOVAL OF SOMETHING LIKE -- SEVEN PERCENT IN 10 YEARS, WHILE NOT NECESSARILY ENTIRELY IMPOSSIBLE THERE IS AN EXPONENTIAL COST INCREASE WITH THAT AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT WE SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE SPACE TO REALLY INCREASE THE CANOPY, THE COMMITTEE REALIZED THE MORE IMPORTANT PARTS OF THAT WILL BE NOT ONLY TO PRESERVE OUR MATURE CANOPY BUT FOCUS ON REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS. BECAUSE SO MUCH OF THE CANOPY IS MATURE IT'S NOT GOING TO EXPAND ANYMORE IS GOING TO DECLINE. 
          AND WE NEED TO PREPARE FOR THAT DECLINE AND PLANT IN A WAY THAT WE WON'T REDUCE THE CANOPY. 
          WITH THE AGING TREES. >> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS INCREASED TREE CANOPY BY SEVEN PERCENT OF 20 IS ACTUALLY A MORE ACHIEVABLE GOAL BOTH FINANCIALLY AS WELL AS -- 
          >> THAT'S A GOOD INPUT. I THINK THAT HAS TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS. 
          >> AND SO THE TREE COMMITTEE HAS DONE A HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK SO MUCH OF THEIR ANALYSIS IS WHAT'S INFORMED THIS PARTICULAR GOAL THAT WE DO NOT CREATE UNREALISTIC GOALS AND 
          EXPECTATIONS. >> ALL RIGHT I WILL RESEND MY -- [LAUGHTER] THE DATA AND THE COST I WILL PUT IT THIS WAY, THE AVAILABILITY OF SPACE AND SO 
          FORTH ACCOMPLISH THE TASK. >> YES. >> OKAY? 
          >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON PROTECT AND INCREASED TREE CANOPY? 
          >> JUST ONE QUESTION. BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW, MAYBE JUST, DO KIND OF SEE THE TREE CANOPY ANAGEMENT AS BEING -- WHAT HE THINK THAT WE COULD GET GRANTS WERE 
          CHARITABLE DONATIONS OVER TIME. >> THE CITY ABILITY TO INCREASE HIS CANOPY LONG TERM, IT CANNOT BE VIEWED AS A EXCLUSIVELY CITY-BASED ACTIVITY. IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS EMBRACED. THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND THERE'S A REAL CULTURAL SHIFT IN HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WANT TO MAINTAIN THE FACILITY AND HEALTH AND TREES ON THEIR PROPERTY. WE DO HAVE THEM LONG-TERM. IT DEPENDS ON OUR PARTNERS COMMUNITYWIDE AND INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS AND DEVELOPERS TO MAINTAIN THE CANOPY THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE. IT CANNOT BE JUST THE CITY EFFORTS TO PUT TREES IN THE 
          GROUND THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO HAVE THAT. >> HAS TO BE A PARTNERSHIP. 
          OKAY. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENT ON THE TREES? THE CITY WILL INCREASE ACREAGE OF LAND DEDICATED TO CONSERVATION. 
          ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? >> MY QUESTION IS, IF WE ARE SAYING THAT THE CITY IS, I GUESS WORKING WITH COMMAS AT THE NORTH FLORIDA LAND TRUST? THAT IS SORT OF OUR PARTNER IN ACCOMPLISHING THIS GOAL OF, ACCORDING TO LAND FOR CONSERVATION. 
          I THINK I HEARD OR I READ HOW MUCH OF THE AVAILABLE LAND IS ALREADY IN CONSERVATION IS THAT COMMON TO HEAR 50 PERCENT? THAT'S NOT RIGHT, IS IT? 50 PERCENT? 
          [01:10:06]
          >> WITH BOTH YOUR CONSERVATION AND RECREATIONAL LAND, THAT IS THE MAP DISTRICT APPLIED ON A 
          MAP. IT IS CLOSE TO 42 PERCENT. >> OKAY. 
          >> COMMISSIONER ROSS DID A PRESENTATION AT A WORKSHOP RECENTLY I THINK. 
          WHERE HE TALKED ABOUT COMBINING, LOOKING AT RECREATION AND CONSERVATION TOGETHER AND IT IS A BIG CHUNK OF EXISTING PROPERTY. PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU ADD IN 
          RECREATION. >> RIGHT. AND I GUESS THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE WORK NOT EVEN A CONCERN, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ADDING MORE TO THAT, LET'S SAY IF IT IS 42 PERCENT AND THEN WE SAID OKAY WE WANT TO MAKE IT EVENTUALLY 50 PERCENT OR COULD BE EVEN HIGHER, WHO KNOWS! BUT THEN AT WHAT POINT, BECAUSE THE REVENUE OR THE INCOME OF THE CITY RECEIVES IS FROM PROPERTY TAXES. FROM THOSE OF US WHO OWN, FROM BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS WHO PAY PROPERTY TAXES. AND SO, WHEN YOU BUY PROPERTY AND IT BECOMES RECREATIONAL OR CONSERVATION, THE TAXES ZERO, RIGHT? OKAY SO THEN, THAT MEANS THERE IS LESS PROPERTY THAT THE CITY CAN GET TAXES ON. 
          >> YES BUT TOURISM IS ANOTHER THING. YOUR OTHER TYPES OF PROPERTIES BENEFIT FROM IT AND THEREFORE, THEIR VALUES GO UP. THERE IS AN OFFSET. 
          >> OKAY. MAYBE. I'M NOT CONVINCED OF THAT. 
          >> ON THING AND WE CAME HERE -- MAYBE THE PARK OR SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT COME HERE TO DO NOTHING BUT WALK UP AND DOWN THE BEACH AND OTHER PLACES, AND BIRDS AND OTHER 
          THINGS GO ALONG WITH IT. THAT'S A POPULAR -- >> WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT IS RECREATION TO ME. AND SO, SO THEY COME AND STAY AT HOTELS. 
          AND SO THAT IS REVENUE BUT I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE TDC REVENUE, IT'S ONLY GOING 
          TOWARDS A FEW THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO SUPPORT. >> THE WHOLE CITY BENEFITS. 
          >> UNDERSTAND THAT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT MY CONCERN IS, WHAT IMPACT IS CONTINUALLY ADDING LAND THAT IS GOING OFF OF THE TAX ROLLS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL WHO LIVES 
          HERE. >> QUALITY OF LIFE. >> IT IS QUALITY OF LIFE. 
          IF YOUR PROPERTY TAXES HAVE TO KEEP GOING UP TO SUPPORT THE CITY BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING SO MUCH LAND KNOWN CONSERVATION, THAT GIVES US ZERO MONEY. IS THIS TOURISM OR OTHER 
          BUSINESSES, IS THAT OFFSET ENOUGH? >> WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND TO 
          CHANGE HERE? >> AND I WOULD ADD, WHAT I SEE IN REAL ESTATE, THOUGH CITIES THAT HAVE AREAS OF RECREATION, PARKS, BEACH ACCESS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS TEND TO HAVE 
          HIGHER VALUES THAN THE CITIES THAT DON'T HAVE IT. >> IS GOOD AND BAD. 
          >> WELL -- >> WE YOU TALK ABOUT FORMAL HOUSING, WHICH WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, IT'S BAD. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AGAIN, THE LIVABILITY OF BEING ABLE FOR PEOPLE TO STAY IN THIS COMMUNITY, BECAUSE BECOME SO EXPENSIVE, YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO 
          LIVE HERE, THAT IS A LIVABILITY ISSUE. >> IS A PROBLEM WITH HOMEOWNERS 
          IN THE CITY? >> MAY NOT BE NOW BUT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE. 
          >> WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 2045. >> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE DIFFERENT ON THIS LINE? THIS TALKED ABOUT CREATING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A -- WHICH THE COUNTY WOULD IMPLEMENT, ESTABLISH MORE GOALS, CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND INCENTIVES, LONG-TERM SUSTAINABLE FUNDING STRATEGIES AND PARCELS IDENTIFIED FOR A PROGRAM. 
          [01:15:06]
          >> IT SAYS INCREASE ACREAGE BUT THERE IS NO AMOUNT OF WHAT, DO YOU WANT TO PUT AN AMOUNT ON 
          THEIR? >> I DON'T THINK THAT'S FEASIBLE TO DO THAT. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW EITHER. I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW TO QUANTIFY. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD QUANTIFY THAT. >> IS JUST A CONCERN. 
          >> HOW VALUABLE THE PROPERTY IS TO THE OVERALL -- IF THEY ARE SUPPORTING SURROUNDING AREAS. 
          >> WHO WILL MAKE THAT DECISION? >> WHOEVER HAS THE MONEY TO BUY IT. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE STATEMENT BUT IF YOU LOOK AT A VISION OR GOAL, PARTICULARLY A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD IT WAS MORE HOW DO YOU DO AND HAVE A MUCH CLOSER RELATIONSHIP FOR THE COUNTY, ICS GROWING IN TERMS OF ACRES OVER TIME ON THE ISLAND 
          IS QUITE A BIT OF MONEY. >> THROUGH ANNEXATION. >> THE DYNAMICS OF THE ISLAND WILL CHANGE OVER TIME AND I THINK RIGHT NOW WE DON'T WANT TO DO LUCITE, I GOT AN ASSET AND I WANT TO KEEP IT PROTECTED AND I WANT TO ENHANCE IT. I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO STOP PLANNING RIGHT NOW BUT HOW WE GET TO AFFORDABILITY KIND OF GETS INTO THE PLAN WHICH IS IN THE 15 YEAR PLUS, I JUST THINK THINGS WILL CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. 
          >> I AM GOOD WITH THAT. >> OKAY. NOW WE CAN MOVE ON, MY FAVORITE 
          SUBJECT. SERIOUSLY! >>. 
          [INAUDIBLE] >> GENERALLY. >> UNDER THE DID THE WHOLE 
          THING ABOUT -- >> THERE ARE STILL SOME ON FLETCHER. 
          >> CENTER STREET AND EAST AND WEST OF 14TH STREET. >> -- HAS STILL GOT SOME. 
          >> TRUST THE CITY. >> SOME IN THE CITY. >> SUMMONED THE CITY. 
          >> NOT A LOT.OT A TREMENDOUS NUMBER. IT IS ENOUGH THAT IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT. AND THEN ALSO HAS AN EFFECT ON THE CITIES ABILITY TO GROW WHERE WE ARE PROVIDING FOR THE SERVICE AND GIVING THOSE PROPERTIES OFF, HAS 
          ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS WELL. >>. >> E. COLI, WE STILL SEE THAT, WE STILL SEE ALLIGATOR CREEK, WE STILL SEE IT AROUND SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE TO STRIVE TO PLAN, TO SYSTEMATICALLY GET RID OF SEPTIC TANKS ON THE ISLAND. 
          IT ALSO HELPS DRIVE SOME ANNEXATION ISSUES. >> THE FORCE, THE ISSUE FOR EXAMPLE THE AREAS -- HOW TO GET THOSE PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY TO AGREE TO -- 
          >> INCENTIVE PROGRAMS. INCENTIVE PROGRAMS. >> THERE WOULD HAVE AN 
          INCENTIVE PROGRAM THAT YOU DON'T PAY CITY TAXES -- >> THE STATE OF FLORIDA, $100 MILLION FOR THREE COUNTIES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STATE. LAKE, CITRUS, SPECIFICALLY TO GET PEOPLE OFF THE SEPTIC AND ONTO SEWER. THERE PROGRAMS IN DUVAL COUNTY EVERY YEAR PARTICULARLY LONG THE TROUT RIVER, TO GET PEOPLE OFF OF SEPTIC AND ONTO SEWER AND ITS HUGE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE, IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND WE ARE ON AN ISLAND. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY SEPTIC TANKS ON AN ISLAND. AND SO THE QUESTION IS, HOW MUCH DOES A CITY WANT TO PUT 
          ENERGY INTO THIS? >> I LOVE THE AREAS ARE CITY WATER, ARE THEY NOT? IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY THEY HAVE ACCESS TO CITY WATER, YOU HAVE TWO GO ON SEPTIC OR 
          SOMETHING. >> TO GO ON SEWER YOU MEAN? >> YES. 
          I HAVE NO IDEA.> TO MY KNOWLEDGE IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN ENFORCE RIGHT NOW. 
          THERE IS WHERE YOU HAVE EXTENSION ALREADY OCCURRED IN THE AREA YOU CAN FORCE CONNECTIONS, TO INVOLUNTARY ANNEXATIONS, IT BECOMES A TIME CONSTRAINT, IT CAN ALSO BECOME 
          [01:20:01]
A LEGAL BATTLE WHEN YOU GO THAT ROUTE VERSUS TRYING TO BUY PEOPLE OUT OF THE PERCEIVED TAX INCREASES AND OFTEN IT IS A PERCEIVED TAX INCREASE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU CAN BREAK EVEN BY COMING INTO THE CITY. THE INCENTIVE OPTION IS A MUCH BETTER APPROACH FROM MY 
          UNDERSTANDING IT ALSO THE TIMING. >> THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE I THINK OF AN ASPIRATIONAL GOAL. THAT THE CITY OUGHT TO HAVE AND THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE IT TOO. 
          BUT IT IS A WAY FOR US TO SAY THIS IS A BIG ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE AND WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO FUND PROGRAMS AND OPPORTUNITIES, ALSO TO HELP US DRIVE ANNEXATION AND YOU KNOW I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THESE NUMBERS. WE JUST NEED TO FIGURE OUT YOU KNOW, IMPLEMENTATION PLANS, OPPORTUNITIES OF WHERE WE CAN GET SOME FUNDING.> ON THE LANGUAGE OF THIS, IT SAYS THE GOAL, THERE WILL BE NO SEPTIC TANKS BY CITY SEWER SERVICES. 
          THAT IS THE GOAL TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY 2045. IN OUR LONG-TERM SAYS 80 PERCENT REDUCTION, IS THAT CONSISTENT? OR SHOULD BE 100 PERCENT? 
          >> I DON'T KNOW -- >> IN ANNEXATION, THEY TYPICALLY ARE ONLY ASKING FOR 
          WATER, OR WATER AND SEWER? >> IT DEPENDS. SOME ARE JUST SEWER. 
          >> SUMMER ASKING FOR WATER, DO YOU REQUIRE SEWER ALONG WITH THAT? 
          >> NO. >> MAYBE WE OUGHT TO. >> I THINK THAT IS AN ISSUE, A 
          STATE ISSUE. >> BUT WE SHOULDN'T BE WITH SOMETHING WE ARE AGAINST. 
          >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. BY NOT PROVIDING IT WITH WATER, TRYING TO FOLLOW THE TRAIN OF THOUGHT HERE. BY DENYING SOMEBODY CONNECTION TO CITY WATER SYSTEM, AND REQUIRING THEM TO CONNECT, THE COST INCREASES A GREAT DEAL. TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO THE CUSTOMER. IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION AT THE SAME TIME. 
          AND MOST PROPERTY OWNERS JUST ARE NOT IN THE POSITION WHERE -- 
          >> IS NOT DEPENDING ON HOW FAR OUT THE SEWER LINES EXTENDED ALREADY? 
          >> AND JUST WHERE THEY ARE CLOSER TO BE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. 
          >> CAN WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT SEWER LINES BECOME WITHIN 100 FEET THEY -- THEY MUST 
          CONNECT. >> POSSIBLY. >> THAT COULD BE PART OF THE 
          IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT GOING FROM SEPTIC TO SEWER, SOME OF THE HOUSES, NOT ALL, HAVE SEPTIC IN THE BACK. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT SEWER RUN TO GET AROUND BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ATTACH WHERE THE PIPE WAS INTO BASICALLY, THE START OF THE SEPTIC TANK. SO THERE IS REALLY TWO MAJOR COSTS. 
          THE CITY HAS COST TO PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN UP TO OR NEAR THE HOUSE. 
          THE HOMEOWNER HAS THE COST OF CONNECTING TO THE STRUCTURE THAT IS THERE. 
          SO I STILL THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH IT BECAUSE IT IS WORTHY OF THAT BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH SOME, HOW IS IT AFFORDABLE FOR THE CITY AND INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER? 
          >> THE CITY DOESN'T -- SUMMER IN THE BACK, SOME ARE IN THE FRONT. 
          [INAUDIBLE] SAYING IT BUT NOT HAVING ANYTHING -- >> YOU CANNOT PUT A SEPTIC TANK 
          IN NEW CONSTRUCTION INSIDE CITY LIMITS. >> THAT IS CORRECT. 
          >> WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS HISTORICAL STRUCTURES. >> RIGHT. 
          >> DOING A LOT OF -- INSTEAD OF PROVIDING WATER OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS SO THAT THEY CAN BUILD, AND YET, THERE'S NOTHING THERE TO MAKE THEM AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, HOOK UP TO SEWER OR PROVIDE MAYBE SOME ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO PROVIDE THE SEWER AS THEY -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          [01:25:06]
          >> I THINK IT IS A WORTHY FACTOR IN CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF -- 
          >> HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO CHANGE THAT? WE TALK ABOUT INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR SEPTIC, PROVIDE FOR THE EXTENSION OF SEWER LINES, PRIORITIZE. 
          >> I'M OKAY WITH THE WAY IT IS. MARK HAS A GOOD POINT. >> I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT TEETH TO THIS THING.THERE WOULD STILL BE SEWER EVERYWHERE WERE SEPTIC. 
          >> SHOULD THE GOAL BE THAT THERE WILL BE NO SEPTIC TANKS WITH THE GOAL ACTUALLY BEING THAT THE 2045, THERE WILL BE AN 80 PERCENT REDUCTION IN SEPTIC TANKS? 
          >> THAT MAY BE A REDUCTION -- >> OR ANNEX PROPERTIES THAT -- >> I THINK 80 PERCENT REDUCTION IN FERNANDINA BEACH IS ALSO NOT WITHIN THE CITY, NOT WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. 
          WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, NOT NECESSARILY IN THE CITY LIMITS. >> RIGHT. 
          IT'S WITHIN -- >> WE CAN MAKE THIS, WE CAN CHANGE YOU KNOW BECAUSE TO ME, WHEN YOU SAY NO IT MEANS ZERO. AND I WANT TO MAKE, IF IT'S A GOAL THEN IT SHOULD BE A 
          REASONABLE GOAL AND ATTAINABLE GOAL. >> IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT OUR FUTURE, WE WANT TO SEE 80 PERCENT REDUCTION, THEN WE SHOULD SAY THERE WILL BE AN 80 
          PERCENT REDUCTION OF SEPTIC TANKS IN THE CITY BY TONY 45. >> KEEP IN MIND THE LAST GOAL IS 2040. THERE ARE STILL FIVE YEARS REMAINING TO GET FROM 80 TO 
          100. >> OKAY. >> THE PROPERTY SEEKING WATER WILL ALSO PROVIDE SOME, EITHER DOLLARS OR PLAN FOR FUTURE CONNECTIVITY TO SEWAGE. 
          SEWER LINES.ND THAT WILL BE SOMETHING WE COULD WORK ON. IN THE FUTURE. 
          >> A CHANGE THE RULES. >> PRETTY MUCH IN ANNEXATION IT SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY JUST WANT THE SERVICE AND THEY WILL CUT ALL THE TREES DOWN AND DO ALL THE OTHER THINGS IN THE COUNTY THAT WE ARE AGAINST, WE ARE HELPING FOSTER THAT -- YOU KNOW, WE 
          NEED TO FIX THE CHILD. [LAUGHTER] >> OKAY. 
          IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, WE WILL START REFURBISHING EXISTING STRUCTURES. OR WHATEVER. 
          IT CAN BE MINOR OR MAJOR. LET ME TAKE AN EXAMPLE. THE PROPERTY BECAME AVAILABLE OVER -- PARKSIDE, THERE ARE A FEW DOWN THERE WITH SEPTIC TANKS AND THEY WANT TO DO A MAJOR REVAMP OF THE STRUCTURE. COULD THE CITY OR WITH THE CITY REQUIRE THEM TO GO ON CITY SEWAGE IN ORDER TO DO THE BUILDING RECONSTRUCTION?> NO. 
          BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE NOT CITY LINES. >> BUT IF THEY WERE? 
          >> IF THEY AREN'T SEWER IS AVAILABLE -- >> SO WE WOULD CAPTURE SOME OF 
          THAT. >> AND YOU'VE ALREADY HAD THAT. >> IF THEY ARE NOT THE CITY AND 
          REDEVELOPING, -- >> ASKING FOR WATER SERVICES. THE QUESTION IS, CAN WE REQUIRE 
          SEWER AS WELL. >> NO, NOT AT PRESENT. IT IS A VALID POINT. 
          PERHAPS YOU SHOULD EXAMINE CHANGING WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL COLD. 
          >> SO THAT WE COULD DO THAT. >> I'M TRYING TO HAVE SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT RULES ON THE ANNEXED PROPERTY. SOME LEGAL ISSUES WITH DOING THAT, IF YOU DON'T KEEP THINKING OF IT IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN AND YET, AGAIN, WE ARE FOSTERING BAD BEHAVIOR. 
          >> BAD BEHAVIOR. >> RECAPTURED SEVERAL CHANGES THAT WE CAN SEE AND MAYBE SOME ACTIONS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE ON THIS. WE WOULD LEAVE IT TO KELLY TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF WORDSMITHING,  IS THAT OKAY? CAN WE MOVE ON? 
          >> YES. >> OKAY THE NEXT PAGE IS THE CITY WATERFRONT BEACHES AND 
          [01:30:02]
WETLANDS WILL BE RESILIENT TO THE. [INAUDIBLE] WE TALKED ABOUT EXPANDING THE UPLIFT COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE. WHICH IS ACTUALLY, A PAB FUNCTION, RIGHT? A PROJECT FOR US FOR 2022. DEVELOP HABITAT BEACH 
          CONVERSATION PLAN WHAT DOES IT MEAN BY FUNDING? >> IS FEDERALLY FUNDED GRANT 
          PROJECT. IT IS WITH NASSAU COUNTY. >> OKAY AND SO THERE IS MONEY 
          AVAILABLE TO DO THIS NOW. >> YES IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS. >> OKAY. 
          AND THAT IS ON YOUR LIST OF THINGS TO DO ALREADY, GOT IT. THIS CONTINUES TALKING ABOUT EXPANDING THE BEACH HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN. THERE IS NOTHING LONG-TERM ABOUT THE COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE, THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT FOR THAT? 
          >> I THINK ONCE YOU EXTEND THAT YOU MIGHT SEE THE EFFECT OF WHAT DEVELOPMENT OCCURS RESULTING FROM IT AND MAKE SOME SHIFTS OVER TIME. OR MAY LEAVE IT AS IT HAS BEEN. 
          >> SO WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS WE HAVE ABOUT THIS SECTION? >> DO THESE PLANS, ARE THERE WAYS TO MEASURE CCESS OF THIS RESILIECY THAT WE ARE STUDYING OR BUILDING AND BY IMPLEMENTING THESE UPLAND PROTECTION ZONES ON THE BEACH HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN? IS THERE WAYS, HOW WOULD YOU KNOW OTHER THAN, I GUESS YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIVER OR OCEAN FLOODING ON THE STREETS, LITTLE FLOOD, IS THAT HOW YOU KNOW THAT IT'S WORKED? CITY WATERFRONT, BEACHES AND WETLANDS WOULD BE RESILIENT TO THE IMPACTS OF HUMANS AND 
          CLIMATE CHANGE. HOW WILL WE KNOW THAT? >> WHEN WE EVACUATE. 
          [LAUGHTER] >> IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. >> THERE ALWAYS STUDYING SO IT 
          DEPENDS ON PARTICIPATION OF MORE THAN JUST US. >> YOU BUT I WOULD THINK THAT IF WE IMPLEMENT AN UPLAND PROTECTIONS ACT, THINGS WILL CHANGE. 
          SOMETHING DIFFERENT HAPPENS AND I THINK TO THE POINT, IS IT A MEASURABLE ACTIVITY. 
          >> TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE MORE RESILIENT. >> WERE GOING TO SAY WE'RE 
          GOING TO ACCOMPLISH. >> HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE CHANGES WE MAKE WILL ACTUALLY DO THESE, THEY WILL IMPROVE THIS? I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          >> IS A LONG-RANGE THING. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO QUANTIFY THIS IN FIVE YEARS. 
          >> BUT I THINK IN ORDER TO HAVE AN UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE PLAN. 
          >> I THINK THAT YOU CAN. >> AND DEVELOP THE HABITAT BEACH CONSERVATION PLAN, YOU HAVE TO HAVE ELEMENTS IN THOSE PLANS THAT TELL YOU YOU ARE DOING IT. 
          >> RIGHT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT EXPECTING SOME BIG SATELLITE IN THE SKY TO TELL US WHAT WE ARE DOING BETTER. BUT THERE'S SOMETHING HERE LOCALLY THAT WE ARE GOING TO 
          MEASURE TO TELL US WHAT WE ARE DOING BETTER. >> AND IT GETS BACK TO LEFT TO SAY THE FLOODING DOWN HERE ON THE STREETS, FRONT STREET DURING A HEAVY RAIN, WHAT IS IT 
          ON THE KING TIDES?>> YES THINGS LIKE THAT. THOSE AREAS. 
          SO, WHEN WE EXPECT ONE OF THE, AT LEAST? PLANS TO ACCOMPLISH THOSE 
          GOALS, IS THAT YOU DON'T SEE THE FLOODING THERE. >> IT GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC ON THAT TOPIC ABOUT FLOODING. THIS WAS REALLY TRYING TO DO 
          THE WATERFRONT COASTLINE AREA IF YOU WILL. >> MORE THE BEACHES. 
          >> THIS WILL BE TRYING TO ADDRESS WHAT WE CAN REASONABLY CONTROL. 
          >> BECAUSE IF LIKE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO CURE WORLD HUNGER AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WILL CURE 
          WORLD HUNGER BY THIS GOAL. >> IMMEASURABLE ONE, THE RESILIENCY STRUCTURE -- 
          [01:35:03]
TECHNICALLY THAT WOULD ELIMINATE STATISTICALLY, 100 YEAR -- 
          >> THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE ADDRESSING HERE. THE UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTION 
          ZONE IS NOT TO DO WITH THE WATERFRONT. >> AMUSING AS A POINT OF REFERENCE. AS A WAY OF MEASURING SOMETHING. 
          >> RIGHT AND THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE BUT QUESTION IS, WILL MAKE CHANGES TO THE UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE, WILL COUNTER MEASUREMENT ARE WE GOING TO PUT IN THOSE CHANGES? 
          MAYBE THAT'S THE QUESTION. >> TO MAKE IT SO THAT WE ARE RESILIENT TO THE IMPACTS OF 
          HUMANS AND CLIMATE CHANGE. HOW DO WE DO THAT? >> WHAT KIND OF CHANGES WOULD 
          WE MAKE TO THE UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTIONS ACT? >> THERE REALLY IS EXPANDING THE AREA. IT IS CURRENTLY DEFINED AS COASTAL CONSTRUCTION -- EXPANDING IT TO WHAT END SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE THE JUSTIFICATION FOR EXPANDING IT. 
          RIGHT NOW IT IS INTENDED TO PROTECT THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY AND FUNCTIONS AROUND THE DUNES JUST BEYOND THE PROTECTION OF DEP. AND EXPANDING IT OUT, LET'S SAY AS AN EXAMPLE, TO THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE GREENWAY, WHAT MEASURABLE EFFECT WOULD THAT HAVE? ESPECIALLY FOR USE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EXISTING LANGUAGE PROTECTING THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY THAT EXISTS OUT THERE. 
          AVOIDING EXCESS FILL, AVOIDING GRADING IN A WAY THAT IMPACTS STORMWATER AND LOW WATER 
          NEGATIVELY, >> PROTECT TORTOISES. >> KEEP IN MIND THAT UPLAND AREA, YOU HAVE LIMITATIONS ON DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES TO THE PROTECTIONS. 
          >> IS A SOMETHING WE END UP -- AS IF SOMEHOW IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT. 
          >> ABSOLUTELY, IT'S ALREADY THERE. NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAKING 
          IT LONGER. >> YES THAT, BUT IS THAT MAY BE THE RESULT, THE FACT THAT WE 
          GET INTO A DOCUMENTED FUNCTION CODE? >> IS ALREADY CODE. 
          BUT WE WANT TO MAKE IT BIGGER. >> IS 1000 FEET FROM THE WATER. 1500 FEET. 
          >> THAT GETS YOU LIKE BEYOND FIRST AVENUE. >> I THINK THIS POINT IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT YOU ACCOMPLISHED A SPECIFIC TASK, BUT HOW DOES IT RELATE BACK TO YOUR ABILITY TO BE MORE RESILIENT TO THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE. HOW IS THIS SPECIFIC AND IS A GREAT QUESTION. WHAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH, WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AS A GROUP IN THE PAST AS WELL, WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE ON WAYS WE CAN ADDRESS IT BUT THERE MIGHT BE OTHERS. THE POINT IS WELL TAKEN. I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS LIKE THE ONE THING WE DO TO ACCOMPLISH THAT BUT IT CERTAINLY WILL HELP US GET 
          THERE. >> MAYBE WHAT WE NEED TO PUT INTO MAYBE -- YOU KNOW THAT WE WOULD DEVELOP A HABITAT BEACH CONSERVATION PLAN THAT INCLUDES MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES AND 
          CRITERIA. >> I LIKE THAT. >> AND THAT ALLOWS YOU TO WORK IT INTO THE PLAN AND SO THE SAME THING WE WOULD EXPAND THE UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE AND INCLUDE YOU KNOW, MEASURABLE CRITERIA. THE QUESTION, WHAT IS THE REASON YOU EXPAND THE UPLAND PROTECTION CODE? YOU WOULD WANT TO PROTECT 
          PROPERTY, YOU WANT TO REDUCE FLOODING, YOU WANT TO CHECK FOR >> PROTECT ANIMALS. 
          >> WANT TO MAINTAIN THE MARITIME FOREST WHATEVER. I GUESS THAT YOU COULD FIGURE OUT A  WAY ON A SITE PLAN BY SITE PLAN BASIS. HOW WILL YOU ACCOMPLISH THAT, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT GETS DOWN TO AN INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN. 
          >> SO LET'S SAY YOU ARE ON FIRST AVENUE. SOUTH FLETCHER RIDES ON TOP OF A SAND DUNE. AND IF YOU LOOK ON EITHER SIDE OF SOUTH FLETCHER, IT'S WHERE 
          [01:40:03]
THE PRIMARY DUNE IS, YOU HAVE SOUTH FLETCHER, YOU HOW IT SITS ON THE PRIMARY DUNE AND THEN IT GOES SORT OF OTHER DUNES ALL THE WAY TO THE GREENWAY. AND SO, YOU SAY ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD A HOUSE AND THEY SAY YOU CAN'T TAKE THAT DUNE DOWN, YOU 
          CANNOT TAKE IT UP OR -- >> RIGHT. >> SO, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE WHOLE THING WHERE WE JUST PASSED OUR ELEMENT THAT SAYS YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE PERSONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND YOU CAN DEVELOP YOUR PROPERTY HAS YOU FISH. 
          >> COULD YOU TENDED TO SAY, OPTIMIZE THE WHOLE TASK? >> OPTIMIZE WHAT WHOLE TASK? 
          >> YOU DISLIKE THE FLORIDA FRONT BEACHES AND WETLANDS. WILL BE OPTIMALLY DEVELOPED OR MINIMIZE IMPACT TO CLIMATE CHANGE. I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING TO HAVE AND WHAT WE ARE HUNG UP ON THE WORDS, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE, SOME WAY OF KEEPING THE THOUGHT BUT NOT PUT SOME MEASUREMENT. MAYBE WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING 
          WAS NOT BAD. >> RESILIENCE IMPACT HUMANS AND CLIMATE CHANGE. 
          IT IS JUST SO, LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THOUGH ABOUT THESE UPLAND COASTAL PROTECTIONS AND THE BEACH HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN THAT HAVE TO INCLUDE MEASURABLE GOALS. 
          >> RIGHT. >> I SAY MEASURABLE CRITERIA. THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED TO WHATEVER DEVELOPMENT YOU WOULD HAVE MEASURABLE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. 
          >> THE THING IS JUST TOO BROAD. >> ARE WE, CAN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH THAT? 
          >> WERE NOT CHANGING THE STATEMENT. >> THE NEXT ONE IS THE CITY WILL BE RESILIENT TO THE IMPACT STORM SURGE, SEE RISE. WE TALK ABOUT THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN BUILDING, STRENGTH OF BUILDING REQUIREMENTS AND DECREASED 
          MAXIMUM -- >> I STILL HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. 
          IT IS CURRENTLY 65 PERCENT. IN INTERFERES WITH A LOT OF YOUR OTHER GOALS. 
          DWELLING UNITS, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT. FOR THE MOST PART. 
          PEOPLE ARE RETIRING, THEY DON'T WANT TO BE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR WHICH YOU GOT TO CREATE HEIGHTS RATHER THAN, 65 PERCENT SEEM TO BE WORKING I CAN TELL YOU IF YOU TRY TO DO ANYTHING WITH 65 PERCENT, IT IS CHALLENGING AS IT IS. VERY CHALLENGING TO STAY WITHIN THE 65 PERCENT. 45 PERCENT, WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE SUGGESTING, I THINK IT IS A BIG MISTAKE. AND I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR THAT. 
          IT CREATES TOO MANY ISSUES. >> WHAT DO YOU THINK? DO YOU THINK IT IS, DETRIMENTAL 
          TO 45 PERCENT? >> I THINK WE WILL HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.T DOES HAVE THIS EFFECT AND CONSIDERING WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY BEYOND THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. IT ELIMINATES OUR ABILITY IN SOME CASES TO HAVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS HE MIGHT UTILIZE TO OFFSET YOUR INCOME. 
          LOGO WE HAVE LOTS WOULD HAVE LARGE LOTS -- THERE GETTING DOWN TO 45 BY 50, WHEN YOU TAKE OVER HALF OF THAT LOT OUT OF THE FOOTPRINT, THAT CREATES PROBLEMS AND SO ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS I HAVE TRIED TO PUT IN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ON IT AND 65 PERCENT, IT IS VERY VERY 
          [01:45:06]
DIFFICULT. ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT FOR EXAMPLE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE ACCESSORY DWELLINGS WAS BROUGHT INTO THE CITY AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HOUSING WITHIN THE CITY. 
          YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WANT TO BEHIND THE HOUSE, THE FAC'ADE O SOMETHING ELSE. SO IT CAN BE VERY PROBLEMATIC AND AGAIN, WE ARE A RETIREMENT COMMUNITY. YOU'RE FORCING EVERYONE TO HAVE ELEVATORS OR SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE RETIRED PEOPLE LIKE TO LIVE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, THEY DON'T GO TO THE SECOND FLOOR, THIRD FLOOR OR WHATEVER. SO I'M JUST TELLING YOU IT'S GOING TO CREATE MASSIVE HEADACHES AND BUILDING AND OTHER THINGS. 
          >> IS UNREASONABLE TO THINK WE WOULD ACTUALLY GET IT FAST. >> I WOULD HOPE IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE I THINK THE CONSEQUENCES, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES DOING THAT WILL BE 
          PHENOMENAL. HOW CAN THAT HAPPEN? >> DO WE WANT TO TAKE THIS OFF 
          OR LEAVE IT ON AND STILL STUDY IT? >> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE 45 PERCENT OUT AND STUDY THE 65 PERCENT OR SOMETHING. WE WENT FROM 74 PERCENT TO 65 
          PERCENT? >> IT IS 60. RIGHT NOW IT IS 60. 
          >> 60 PERCENT? HOW DID I GET 65? I MADE THAT UP, I'M GOOD AT 
          THIS. >> WE DID MAKE THAT CHANGE WAS 75. 
          >> HE WENT TO 60. >> OKAY. THERE YOU ARE. 
          >> I WILL JUST TELL YOU IF YOU SIT DOWN AND LOOK AT ANY HOUSE, TAKE THE SURVEY OUT AND MEASURE 
          THE DRIVEWAYS AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IMPERMEABLE. >> YOU HAVE TO PUT TREES IN 
          THERE. >> BY THE TIME YOU PUT ALL OF THE STUFF AND TRY TO DO THE 
          ADDITIONAL, IT BECOMES A PROBLEM. >> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IT OUT. 
          >> I WOULD AGREE TO THAT. >> SAID THAT WE WOULD TAKE THAT ONE OUT. 
          >> STRIKE. >> WE WILL STRIKE THAT ONE. FOR NOW. 
          IT IS JUST NOT -- IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT REALISTICALLY WE WILL BE ABLE TO GET PAST. 
          AND THERE IS NO REASON TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT. >> WE TALK ABOUT STRENGTHENING THE BUILDING REQUIREMENTS, ARE WE -- IS THAT BIG, LITTLE? WHAT AR WE TALKING ABOUT FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN WHO NOW, THEY WANT TO REMODEL AND THE CITY SAYS, NO, YOU CANNOT REMOTELY HAVE TO PUT YOUR HOUSE UP ON STILTS.ND NOW IT'S YOU KNOW -- 
          >> DOES NOT HAPPEN TODAY? >> YEAH. >> SO WE'RE SAYING WE WOULD 
          JUST MAKE IT MORE STRINGENT? >> YOU COULD ADD REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU REQUIRE THAT IT BE MORE OUTSIDE OF THE SPECIAL HAZARD AREA RIGHT NOW WE ARE AT 2.4 PERCENT. 
          WERE 2.4 FEET BEYOND THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. YOU COULD INCREASE THAT SO THAT YOU ARE ANOTHER SIX INCHES OR I'M JUST MAKING THIS UP. TO BE FOR THE OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. YOU COULD STRENGTHEN THE BUILDING REQUIREMENTS TO REQUIRE A CONCRETE BLOCK CONSTRUCTION WITHIN CERTAIN ZONES. 
          WE'LL USED TO SEE MIAMI-DADE BUILDING CODE. THAT IS ANOTHER AREA RIGHT NOW WE DON'T REQUIRE ANY BLOCK CONSTRUCTION IN ANY OF OUR AREAS. 
          REALLY MINIMUM BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT THAT WE ARE OPERATING UNDER. 
          AND THERE MAY BE OTHER SHOPPING OR TYPE OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO REQUIRE A NEW 
          CONSTRUCTION OR RENOVATIONS. >> I WILL MAKE SURE THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IS MAYBE GREATER ELEVATION THAN SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE WE HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. 
          >> WE HAVE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS. >> I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT ABOUT SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT SOME AREAS ON THE ISLAND, POTENTIAL FOR CONTAMINATION. 
          >> GOT IT. >> IF YOU GOING TO HAVE OIL STORAGE OR SOMETHING, MAYBE THEY NEED TO BE UP HIGHER AND CONTAINED. SO IF THERE IS A FLOOD, THAT 
          [01:50:03]
          KIND OF STUFF. >> WE HAVE ADDRESSED THAT. AND ACCOMPLISH THAT ALREADY. 
          IT IS AT A HIGHER STANDARD. >> THAT MEANS HOURS EXCEEDS THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. 
          OUR BUILDING STANDARDS EXCEED MORE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL -- FLOODPLAIN. 
          >> FEMA IS TIRED OF REBUILDING HOUSES AND FLOOD ZONES. AND I THINK SOMETIMES ACTUALLY BUYING OUTHOUSES, ARE THEY NOT? O THEY DON'T HAVE TO KEEP DOING IT. 
          >> I'VE HEARD THAT TOO. >> FLOOD INSURANCE DOUBLED LAST YEAR. 
          >> EVEN MY WENT UP AND I'M IN A -- ZONE. >> I AM STILL. 
          >> I THINK THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE CAN LEAVE ON HERE IN TERMS OF, IT IS THE LEVEL TO WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOME OF THESE. BUT IT IS WORTH THE RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS TO SAY AT WHAT LEVEL DID WE WANT TO DO ANY OF THESE THINGS? MOVE SOME OF THESE THINGS FORWARD AND MAKE THINGS MORE RESILIENT. 
          >> THAT COULD BENEFIT EVERYONE. >> RIGHT. >> ARE GOOD WITH ALL THAT? 
          >> WE JUST LOOKED AT THE SHORT TERM. WE GOT SOME SHORT-TERM AND MIDTERM ONES. THAT I THINK WE OUGHT TO TALK ABOUT A LITTLE. 
          >> WHAT IS THIS ADAPTATION ACTION THEORY? >> FOLLOWING, THIS MAY BE SOMETHING WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS IN HERE. AND IT IS UPDATING THE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND SEA LEVEL RISE CLIMATE CHANGE. FOLLOWING ANALYSIS IT PROVIDES US WITH UPDATED VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT. WE MAY WANT TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY THAT QUALIFY UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE REFERENCE ADAPTATION ACTION AREA. AND THEN WITHIN THAT, HE MAY HAVE EVEN STRICTER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENT, CHANGES THAT ARE ALLOWED. 
          YOU MAY PRIORITIZE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE AREAS TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE VULNERABILITIES THAT ARE THERE. THINKING OF POTENTIALLY WITH F DOT ALONG ATLANTIC WHERE THERE'S A FLOODING ISSUE R EVEN YOU KNOW ESCAMBIA WHERE THERE IS FLOODING, OR ADJUSTING IN SOME MANNER. MAYBE INCLUDING ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS, OUTREACH AND EDUCATION TO THOSE IN THE AREA ABOUT THE RISKS THERE AND ENCOURAGING THEM TO BUY FLOOD 
          INSURANCE. >> SO AND ADAPTATION AREA IS DEFINED BY THE STATE FOR -- OKAY. AND THEN BASED ON THAT DEFINITION, THEN THERE MAY BE THINGS THAT WE WOULD DO EITHER BY STATUTE OR LDC OR SOME COULD BE EDUCATION. 
          >> YES. >> HOW WOULD YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE IN A ADAPTATION AREA? 
          >> THIS WOULD GIVE THE CITY THE ABILITY TO ESTABLISH THIS TYPE OF AREA. 
          ALMOST LIKE AN OVERLAY. AND THEN YOU WOULD DECIDE WHAT TYPE OF ACTION YOU WANT TO TAKE AS A COMMUNITY. BUT THE FIRST THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TO TELL YOU THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO IMPACT THAT COMMUNITY. 
          AND THEN THAT GIVES YOU BASIS BEHIND WHY YOU WOULD CREATE AN ADAPTATION ACTION AREA TO HELP 
          AND ADAPT TO THE VULNERABILITIES OVER TIME. >> IS AT SOMETHING, YOU ARE TO FERNANDINA AND YOU, YOUR REALTOR OR WHOEVER IT IS, TAKES YOU TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND YOU SAY I LOVE IT! WANT TO BUY IT, WHAT POINT WOULD YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU ARE 
          AN ADAPTATION ACTION AREA. >> YOU CAN HAVE A DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT. 
          WHAT POINT DO YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU ARE IN A CERTAIN ZONE. IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THE DUE 
          DILIGENCE OF THE REAL ESTATE AGENT AND PROSPECTIVE BUYER. >> IS A SOMETHING THAT WOULD 
          SHOW UP IN A TITLE SEARCH? >> PROBABLY NOT. >> MARK JUST FOUND SOME -- IT 
          SAYS FERNANDINA BEACH DID THE FIRST CPA ENACTMENT IN 2011. >> IT IS A CALL TO PROTECTION 
          [01:55:15]
          IT TALKS ABOUT ADAPTATION AREAS. >> ONE OF THE FIRST COMMUNITIES TO RECOGNIZES ON SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON AND MIGHT BE A DOCUMENT BEING REFERENCED THERE. I'VE SEEN THAT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS WHERE FERNANDINA BEACH HAS HELD THAT YOU WERE THE FIRST TO ESTABLISH BEFORE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS FULLY 
          -- >> WOULD IT BE SIMILAR TO IF THERE IS SAY A ZONING CHANGE, THE CITY SENDS OUT A NOTICE TO EVERYONE IN THE 300 OR 500 FEET, TO SAY, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW YOU'RE GETTING READY TO BE PUT UNDER THIS. NEED TO COME TO MEETING AND 
          HEAR ABOUT IT. >> IF THE CITY WAS GOING TO ESTABLISH THESE WE WOULD NEED TO DO ROBUST, SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO THOSE AREAS.T MAY BE THROUGH SEVERAL DIFFERENT MEETINGS. WE HAVE ONE AREA THAT YOU JUST ESTABLISH WITHIN ONE MEETING AND THEN THE COMMUNITY THAT LIVES THERE. AND IN A SEPARATE MEETING, REQUEST THAT PEOPLE COME AND LEARN ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THEM AND THEIR PROPERTY. 
          COULD THAT MEAN ADDITIONAL TAXES TO BE PUT ON? OR ASSESSMENTS? 
          >> NO. >> MAYBE IF THERE'S AN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT THAT 
          WOULD ONLY BENEFIT CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS. >> THEN YOU CAN DO AN 
          ASSESSMENT. >> OKAY.>> BUT IT WOULD BE WELL-INFORMED. 
          >> TRANSPARENCY IS REALLY IMPORTANT. >> HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE RESILIENCY OFFICER ISSUE? EVERY HUNDRED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY ABOUT CREATING 
          THIS POSITION OR TAGGING SOMEBODY WITH THIS? >> NO. 
          I THINK THIS IS CONFUSING. IT IS PROBABLY SOMETHING WE SAID RESEARCH. 
          AND THEN YOU CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO DO IT. 
          IT IS SORT OF A 1 TO 5 YEAR PLAN. >> LIKE THE IDEA OF A JOINT ENTITY, THE PARTNERSHIP CONCEPT. I LIKE THAT PART, DEFINITELY! BUT IT IS YOU SAYING, WE, AS FAR AS ANOTHER SAID HE DOES NOT HAVE A CHIEF RESILIENCY OFFICER. ALTHOUGH I WOULD SUSPECT IN A PINCH, YOU WOULD PROBABLY, THE CHIEF, THE HEAD ENGINEER, CHARLIE WOULD PROBABLY BE THAT PERSON. 
          >> PROBABLY. >> SOMETHING WE CAN CERTAINLY RESEARCH. 
          >> CANNOT DO IT IN ISOLATION. >> NO. I THINK YOU HAD A GOOD POINT. 
          THE FACT YOU REALLY HAVE TO INTEGRATE THAT WITH THE COUNTY. IT JUST CANNOT BE JUST US. 
          THAT'S A GOOD POINT. >> DO YOU WANT STRONGER LANGUAGE IN? 
          >> I THINK IT IS GOOD BECAUSE YOU CAN'T -- >> OKAY! 
          ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS LIST? >> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE LAST PARCEL FOR DOWNTOWN. 
          WATERFRONT PARK AND MORE THAN HALF OF THE WATERFRONT PARK. >> THERE IS NUMBER WATERFRONT 
          PARK BASED ON -- >> JUST LAND. IT'S STRUCTURE IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT. MY POINT IS, DO YOU FIX THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE WATER CROSSING FRONT STREET AND GOING TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND WHATEVER. 
          I DON'T THINK IT CAN WAIT THAT TIME PERIOD OF THING IS TO BE A 1 TO 5 YEAR WINDOW. 
          HAD TO BUY THE LAND, GET OUT AND DO IT AND FIX THE RESILIENCY ALL THE WAY UP. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT ABOUT THIS BUILD DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT PARK. 
          I THINK WATERFRONT PARK IS OFF THE TABLE. >> LET'S FIND A DIFFERENT NAME FOR IT. IT WILL BE GRASS AND MAYBE A BOARDWALK. 
          [02:00:01]
          AND PARKING. >> SO WILL BE THE NORTHERN HALF OF THE DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT 
          RESILIENCY PLAN. >> I LIKE THAT. >> AND TAKE OUT -- 
          >> I LIKE THAT.>> I THINK THAT IT WOULD ALSO TAKE OUT ANOTHER WORD AND IT BECOMES 
          PART OF RESILIENCY. >> ACQUIRED THE LAST PARCEL -- >> THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO 
          THE SAME THING WITH THE SUPPORT STRUCTURES ALONG THAT. >> SHOULDN'T SAY WATERFRONT 
          PARK. >> RESILIENCY. >> WANT TO MOVE OVER TO THE SHORT-TERM? AND IS IT ACQUIRE OR INCORPORATE? 
          >> I THINK IT'S BOTH. OR AND OR. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. 
          >> PROBABLY ACQUIRE AND/OR INCORPORATE. >> JUST INCLUDE THAT BECAUSE I 
          REALLY TRY TO ACQUIRE IT AND IT DIDN'T WORK. >> I MEAN -- 
          >> ACQUIRE IS AN ACTION. NOT INCLUDED PROBABLY. AND MAYBE NOT THE LAST PART BUT 
          ALL OF THE PARCELS. >> IT TENDS TO GO AROUND -- >> ACQUIRE PARCELS, ACQUIRE 
          REMAINING PARCELS. >> INCLUDE, I WOULD TAKE OUT ACQUIRE. 
          >> OKAY, INCLUDE. >> THERE MAY BE MULTIPLE PARCELS. 
          >> AND OR WHAT? >> INCLUDE ALL PARCELS IN THE DOWNTOWN.> WATERFRONT 
          RESILIENCY PROJECT. >> KIND OF THE SAME THING WITH THE NORTHERN HALF. 
          WE WOULD JUST SAY THAT YOU WOULD COMPLETE THE NORTHERN HALF, THE NORTH SECTION OF THE 
          DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT RESILIENCY PROJECT. >> I LIKE THAT. 
          >> OKAY THAT IS IT FOR ONE. >> I GOT AGO. >> OKAY. 
          IT IS 7 O'CLOCK AND WE HAVE TWO. -- HAS TO LEAVE. 
          WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM. REALLY HAVE THREE ITEMS. >> LET'S DO IT QUICK. 
          >> WE HAVE MORE THAN THREE, WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS. FOUR. 
          FOUR GOALS. >> PRESERVATION OF CHARACTER. >> ALL HISTORIC PROPERTIES ELIGIBLE FOR DESIGNATION WILL BE DESIGNATED AND IN GOOD PHYSICAL CONDITION. 
          RESTORE -- CAN WE PUT SOMETHING IN HERE ABOUT ADDING THE BUILDING TO THE NATIONAL, APPLY 
          FOR REGISTERED STATUS? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> COULD WE ADD THAT TO THE, 
          CAN WE ADD IT TO START THE PROCESS 021? >> GOOD IDEA. 
          >> IT WOULD BE TO OBTAIN NATIONAL REGISTERED STATUS FOR THE CENTER BUILDING. 
          WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. WE TALK ABOUT OBTAINING IT -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> A MASTER PLAN IS, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE -- COLUMN -- >> IT SHOULD. 
          >> SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY STATED? >> TO INCLUDE COLUMN BEARING. 
          >> TALK ABOUT WHERE TREES, OAK TREES NEED TO BE PLANTED IS -- >> I THINK YOU'VE ALREADY DONE 
          THAT RECENTLY. >> RECENTLY? BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME BEAUTIFUL 
          [02:05:01]
TREES FALLING BY THE WAYSIDE JUST OLD AGE. IT'S BEAUTIFUL OUT THERE. 
          >> 77 TREES ON THE GOLF COURSE. THAT WHAT I HEARD TODAY? >> 77? 
          >> TO BE PLANTED AT THE GOLF COURSE? A BIG NUMBER. 
          >> A LOT OF AREA THERE. >> THERE IS. >> THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT ADDING AND THEN THEY ALSO FINALLY, THE GOLF COURSE ADVISORY MEETING, THEY TALKED ABOUT THE PARCEL OF LAND ALMOST 4 AND FIVE WHICH PLACES THE PARKWAY. 
          WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE. THERE'S A TON OF DEAD PINE TREES IN THERE. 
          AND IT CAN BE REALLY CLEANED OUT AND CAN BE QUITE A NICE DROVER OF NEW PLANTING IN 
          THERE. >> SHORT. >> THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO 
          REALLY MAKE A BIG IMPROVEMENT TO THAT CURB. >> UNDER THE SHORT-TERM WITH THIS GOAL, WHERE WE TALK ABOUT WORK WITH NASSAU COUNTY TO ADOPT AD VALOREM TAXES FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES, IS AT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THAT? OR DOES THAT NEED TO BE -- 
          >> I'M SORRY, WHERE ARE WE? >> THE FIRST ONE. >> SHORT-TERM. 
          >> SORRY. >> SHORT-TERM, MAYBE WE DUPLICATE THAT AND SAY SHOULD ALSO BE UNDER THE SECOND GOAL, WHICH IS RETAINED ARCHITECTURAL CHARM BY ENCOURAGE BUILDING PRESERVATION. WHAT THAT DOES IS, A HOMEOWNER WHO IS PRESERVING ONE OF THESE 
          HISTORIC HOMES, AND REDUCING THE AD VALOREM TAX. >> THESE AD VALOREM TAX 
          INCENTIVES ARE ONLY FOR BUSINESSES. >> IS THAT A QUESTION? 
          >> NO, IT'S A STATEMENT.> IT IS? >> BECAUSE THE CITY HAS REALLY GIVEN IT TO THEM. IT'S ONLY FOR HISTORIC BUILDINGS OR HOUSING BUSINESSES 
          THAT HAVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. >> AND ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY -- 
          >> ONLY FOR CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION. RENOVATION. 
          SO THERE'S A SERIES OF AD VALOREM TAX INCENTIVES FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR THE STATE. SOME ARE SPECIFIC TO BUSINESSES AND ONGOING. 
          SO LIKE MANY OF THE BUSINESSES ON CENTER STREET OR HISTORIC BUSINESSES, THE BUILDING OWNER GETS A 50 PERCENT REDUCTION IN THEIR AD VALOREM TAX. AS LONG AS THEY ARE KEEPING THE BUSINESS IN THE BUILDING BASICALLY 40 HOURS A WEEK, 52 WEEKS A YEAR. 
          >> DOES THAT NEED TO BE STATED THAT THIS IS FOR BUSINESS? >> NO BECAUSE THEY ARE ALSO TAX INCENTIVES FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES FOR RENOVATIONS. IT'S LIKE THERE IS A LAUNDRY 
          LIST. >> THAT ALREADY EXIST. >> THAT ALREADY EXIST. 
          THE REASON I KNOW ABOUT THIS, IS MAIN STREET HAS WORKED WITH NASSAU COUNTY TO TRY TO GET THEM TO INCLUDE, TO DO IT FOR CENTER STREET. AND FRANKLY NO APPETITE. 
          THE LAST TIME WE DID THE ANALYSIS ON IT IT WAS ABOUT $85,000 A YEAR IN TAXES THAT WILL BE REDUCED. AND WHAT I WAS TOLD BY COUNTY COMMISSIONER WAS, WHERE WERE 
          GOING TO MAKE UP $85,000? >> WILDLIFE. >> WHAT? 
          >> WILDLIFE. TWIN RIVERS. >> A TRIBUTARY. 
          SO, THE COUNTY IS ACTUALLY, WAS DOING ANALYSIS AND A SURVEY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES. 
          SO WE THOUGHT THAT WAS TO GOT THAT FINISHED I THINK IT MIGHT'VE GOTTEN WITH COVID MAYBE IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO READDRESS THIS AS PART OF A BIGGER PROJECT WITH THEM AND WHAT TAX INCENTIVES THEY WANT COUNTYWIDE. AND NOT JUST IN DOWNTOWN 
          FERNANDINA. >> SHOULD BE NOT GOAL OR IN THE GOAL RIGHT BELOW IT? 
          ABOUT ENCOURAGING BUILDING PRESERVATION? >> LIVING IT COULD BE EITHER ONE. THEY BOTH KIND OF THE SAME, I MEAN THEY'RE BOTH SIMILAR. 
          >> WE CAN -- >> CHAPTER 1 TO 2. >> IT DOESN'T MAKE A 
          DIFFERENCE. >> I KNOW A LOT ABOUT THAT ONE. VOLUNTEERING WITH MAIN STREET. 
          >> I GUESS THE SAME THING IS FOR MIDTERM THE FIRST GOAL OBTAINED HYSTERIC DESIGNATION OF ELIGIBILITY BETWEEN 2020 JANUARY 20, 1935. WITH ALSO FALL BACK DOWN INTO THE SECOND GOAL? AND THEN HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR 2035 TO 45. 
          [02:10:02]
WE REALLY TALKING ABOUT ENCOURAGING BUILDING PRESERVATION, ADAPTIVE REUSE 
          INSTEAD OF DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION. >> RESTARTED THAT AND 2018/19. 
          >> RECENTLY OR DESIGNATED IN THE MIX HISTORIC STRUCTURES, IS NOT PART OF, 
          >> YOU CAN COLLAPSE THOSE GOALS TOGETHER. YOU CAN COLLAPSE THOSE TWO 
          GOALS AND MOVE THEM ALL TOGETHER. >> WE LOOK AT THAT MAYBE, IF 
          THAT'S POSSIBLE? >> YEAH. AH. 
          ARE WE READY TO GO TO THE NEXT, THE THIRD ONE? >> ALL CONSTRUCTION WILL REINFORCE THE DOWNTOWN CHARM. RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOODS UNIQUE CHARACTER. 
          >> WE REALLY WANT TO CREATE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND WHAT ARE THEY 
          CALLED? NSU OR SOMETHING? >> UNDER SHORT-TERM, RIGHT 
          THERE. SHORT-TERM. >> WHAT DOES THAT DO FOR YOU? 
          >> IT CREATES A TINY HISTORIC DISTRICT. >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE 
          WAY TO THINK ABOUT IS HALF A DOZEN HISTORIC DISTRICTS. >> YOU MAY HAVE AN OVERLY OF WHAT WAS DEVELOPED UNDER FROM BEING ERODED. IF YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THIS VERY LARGE LOTS AND DEVELOPS SMALL HOMES ON THAT, THERE MAY BE A SETBACK FOR THAT WAY THEN WHAT STANDARDS REQUIRE. POTENTIALLY, AND YOU COULD EITHER DEMO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND BUILD BACK WORD TO A VERY LARGE ADDITION OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THIS ONE AREA. 
          THESE ARE SOMETHING WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS COMMUNITY BUY-IN FOR BEFORE ESTABLISHING IT. BUT IT IS SOMETHING LIKE A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER AND STYLE OF THE SMALLER, THE LARGE LOTS WITH 
          SMALL HOMES ON IT. JUST AS AN EXAMPLE. >> OR -- VERSUS MANSIONS. 
          >> SOUND LIKE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. >> IT IS SOMETHING TO EXPLORE. 
          MAYBE INSTEAD OF CREATE, WE COULD USE THE WORD EXPLORE. >> YEAH. 
          >> THE USE OF NEIGHBORED CONSERVATIONS. BECAUSE IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME THAT WE WOULD GET, I MEAN, THEY ARE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORDS. [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> 18 YEARS AGO. [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S WHAT IT WAS! 
          >> YES. >> AND LULUS BAR AND GRILL. >> ANYTHING ELSE AFTER THIS? 
          >> IT TALKS ABOUT, I MISSED THE LAST PART OF THE CITIES GOAL SESSION WHERE THEY TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WAS THIS PART OF WHAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT? 
          IN ORDER TO HELP WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING? >> NO. 
          >> NO? SO I'M NOT SURE I'M KEEN ON THIS. 
          >> ON WHAT? >> REVISE THE STANDARDS TO INCENTIVIZE CREATION WORKFORCE HOUSING WITH THOSE CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. 
          I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MEANS. >> IT'S AN AREA POPULAR IN THE 
          CITY -- >> THEY ARE NOT POD. >> IT WASN'T? 
          >> NO. >> IT WAS DEVELOPED AS A PUD. >> IT WAS RESIDENTIAL. 
          >> REALLY? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> MARK IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO 
          [02:15:09]
VIOLATE ORDINANCES ONE WOULD BE HIGH. BECAUSE WE HAVE THE COST OF LAND BEING WHAT IT IS. AND I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO DECIDE, WILL WE SIT THERE AND SAY WE WILL HOLD THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. IN TURN TO MANAGE THE 
          POPULATION LEVEL BY LAW OF AVAILABILITY. >> WE DON'T GET MANY PROPOSALS 
          FOR PUD ANYWAY? >> WRITE THE REQUIREMENT -- >> ALSO LET ME JUST SAY THAT AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING IS MORE ROBUSTLY ADDRESSED IN THREE. 
          >> IS A NEED TO BE IN HERE? >> NO, NOT NECESSARILY. >> IT DEMONSTRATES THAT THERE 
          IS OVERLAP AND HOW YOU OBTAIN -- >> OKAY. 
          >> WHAT ABOUT THE REVISED PUD STANDARD TO STRENGTHEN ARCHITECTURAL GUIDANCE FOR 
          RESIDENTIAL DESIGN? IT SOUNDS LIKE AN HOA. >> YOU'RE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE 
          STANDARDS, YOU GET TO WRITE THAT CRITERIA. >> OKAY. 
          I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. >> MAYBE IT'S AGAIN, AN ISSUE OF EXPLORE AND POSSIBLY REVISE. 
          >> I THINK EXPLORE IS A GOOD WORD. >> MAYBE WANT TO DO IS ACTUALLY EXPLORE THESE THINGS. BEFORE WE JUST SAY WE WILL REVISE THEM. 
          >> WE CAN CHANGE REVISE TO EXPLORE AND SOMETHING THAT STILL LEAVES US PLENTY OF 
          LEEWAY AND OPPORTUNITY TO DO THINGS. >> WITHOUT CREATING A PROBLEM. 
          >> YES, THIS MAKES YOU FEEL LIKE YOU PUT YOUR LINE IN THE SAND. 
          HE SAYS WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THESE. AS OPPOSED TO SAYING LET'S 
          EXPLORE CHANGING THESE. >> WISH TO KEEP THE ASPIRATIONAL. 
          >> YEAH, NO IT DOES. >> OKAY. I'M GOOD WITH THAT. 
          ON THE MIDTERM OF THIS ONE, IT SAYS DEVELOP CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR 14 SADLER, SOUTH FLETCHER AND MAIN BEACH.HAT HAPPENED TO NORTH FLETCHER? 
          SHOULDN'T THAT BE IN THERE? >> NOT IF YOU TURN LEFT. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> HOW DO WE FORGET ABOUT THEM. [LAUGHTER] >> WHAT IS CORRIDOR 
          REDEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN THEN? >> MAY LOOK LIKE THOSE ARE 
          FEDERAL HIGHWAYS, RIGHT? >> NOT FLETCHER THAT IS A1A. >> IT IS NOT PART OF THAT. 
          >> WHEN YOU SEE DEVELOP A CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT STRATEGY, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? 
          >> IT MEANS THEY WILL TAKE FOR EXAMPLE, ALL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE BETWEEN EIGHTH STREET AND -- THAT IS A PLACE WE LOVE COMMERCIAL. WE HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL NODES 
          AROUND. >> THIS WAS EVEN MORE ROBUSTLY SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO EXAMINING THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS TO DETERMINE IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE IN YOUR FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE THE DEVELOPMENT OR TO SWAY THE DEVELOPMENT IN CERTAIN AREAS ALONG THE CORRIDOR. 
          IT MIGHT BE APPLYING DESIGN CHANGES TO THE ROADWAY ITSELF TO BE MORE SENSITIVE TO THE AREAS WITHIN. WHETHER THAT'S RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL. 
          >> IF IT'S A STATE ROAD, HOW CAN WE HAVE ANY INFLUENCE? >> LOTS OF INFLUENCE. 
          >> THERE ESSENTIAL AREAS THAT YOU CAN CREATE ALL OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT GO TO THAT. 
          >> HAD HIS MAIN BEACH FIT INTO THAT? >> BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE 
          CORRIDOR, IF YOU TAKE THE WHOLE BLOCK, A COMMERCIAL -- >> WE HAVE WHAT? SOUTH FLETCHER AND SADLER IS ANOTHER ONE. THEY ARE ALREADY IN PLACE. 
          [02:20:03]
THAT'S WHY THEY WOULD BE IN HERE. YOU MIGHT WANT TO IMPROVE -- 
          >> RIGHT. >> IF IT IS IN THE SECTION WHICH SAYS, THAT ALL CONSTRUCTION WILL REINFORCE THE CITIES SMALL TOWN CHARM AND RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOODS 
          UNIQUE CHARACTER. SO. >> I'M STILL -- 
          >> THE MAIN BEACHES, THINK ABOUT MAIN BEACH. THERE'S COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON BASICALLY THREE OF THE FOUR CORNERS. THAT EMPTY LOT ON THE ONE CORNER HAS BEEN CONTROVERSIAL OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO COMBINE THE LOT, THEY WANT TO DO DIFFERENT THINGS ON IT. WE HAVE NOT LET THEM. 
          AND SO, MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE AT MAIN BEACH? SO HOW WOULD YOU MAYBE DO AN OVERLAY THAT ALLOWS YOU TO DRIVE OR MOVE TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO SEE ON ALL FOUR OF THOSE CORNERS AND MAKE IT MORE COHESIVE. 
          SO THAT IS ONE WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT. >> IT POINTS OUT THOSE ARE 
          IMPORTANT AREAS WHERE YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THE SMALL TOWN. >> OKAY AS LONG AS WE KEEP THAT, TOWARDS KEEPING IT IN THE SMALL TOWN CHARM AND RESPECTING ITS UNIQUE CHARACTER. 
          >> AND YOU KNOW, MAIN BEACH DOES HAVE A UNIQUE CHARACTER. >> I THINK IT DOES. 
          MOST OF IT IS BUSINESS DISTRICT. YOU KNOW, UNTIL YOU GET TO A CERTAIN POINT, WHICH IS WHAT FROM THERE ON DOWN YOU HAVE UNIQUE CHARM BUT THE REST OF IT 
          -- >> BUT YOU CAN DO THINGS LIKE TRAFFIC CALMING AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE CORRIDOR THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO YOU KNOW SO THERE'S JUST, JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALL COMMERCIAL AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU KNOW A STRIP MALL, YOU STILL CAN DO THINGS TO IMPROVE 
          IT AND THAT IS WHAT THIS WOULD BE FOCUSED ON. >> A COUPLE OF YEARS AGOTHEY 
          WANTED TO READ IT ON THE ROAD FOR PARKING . >> THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS YOU CAN DO IN THIS. AND SO, MAYBE THIS ALSO BECOMES ANOTHER EXPLORE AND DEVELOP. 
          >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD. >> IF WE COULD ADD THE WORD EXPLORE TO THOSE, INCLUDING THE STANDARDS AND MAYBE THE PUD STANDARDS FOR MINIMUM, IF YOU DID THAT, THE WORD EXPLORE. 
          >> JUST GENERALLY. >> YEAH COMMENT DOWN. >> JUST TAKING IT DOWN A NOTCH. 
          >> WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE AND DEVELOP. >> ALWAYS DIFFERENT ADJECTIVES. 
          >> LET'S LOOK AT THE LAST ONE. FERNANDINA BEACH IS INNATE EQUITABLE TITANATE -- I'M 
          SORRY. >> I'M SORRY. ONE THING THAT I LIKE TO ASK, IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE IN ONE OF THESE. AND IT WAS MENTIONED IN SOMETHING ELSE, SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO US. 
          I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT, ANYTHING IT COULD BE UNDER THE SMALL TOWN CHARM BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SAID HERE, THAT FERNANDINA WILL PROTECT AND MAINTAIN PARKS AND CITY-OWNED RIGHTS-OF-WAY. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THIS MIGHT GO INTO THIS BUT AS PART OF THE 
          PRESERVATION OF CHARACTER. >> OKAY. >> AND PARTICULARLY, THE 
          CITY-OWNED RIGHTS-OF-WAY, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS, RIGHT? >> THE END OF THE STREET. 
          >> YES I DO. >> THAT'S WHY THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. 
          >> SO -- >> WHERE DO YOU THINK THAT MIGHT GO IF WE'RE GOING TO ADD 
          SOMETHING ABOUT THAT? >> THIS IS A BAD PLACE BECAUSE IT SAYS ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          THAT WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO ADD THAT. >> OKAY. 
          >> BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GIVE IT AWAY. >> DO YOU WANTTO ADD THAT UNDER 
          SHORT-TERM OR -- >> OKAY . >> JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU HAVE A LOT OF PROTECTION IN PLACE ALREADY. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE WOULD 
          [02:25:05]
STRENGTHEN THAT ANYMORE. YOU'RE GOING TO A REFERENDUM, GENERAL ELECTION, TO MAKE THAT CHANGE WITH IT FOR SALE -- WITH RIGHTS-OF-WAY IT'S ALREADY CAPTURED REALLY CLEARLY WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE DO NOT DO THAT AND I SAID THAT BECAUSE MR. BENNETT AND I WORKED ON THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN IN 2011, SCENARIO I FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THOSE RIGHTS-OF-WAY. 
          YOU MAY NEED THAT IN THE FUTURE SOMETHING YOU CANNOT PERCEIVE RIGHT NOW. 
          MAKING SURE WE ALWAYS HAVE THAT IN PLACE. >> AND AXIS FOR CERTAIN AREAS. 
          >> ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE ARE READY HAVE ADEQUATE OR IS WORTH ADDING? 
          >> WE HAVE A LOT OF COURAGE RIGHT NOW. THEY ADDRESSED THAT VERY SPECIFICALLY. IF WE ADD IT AND I THINK IT IS WORTH SPEAKING TO BUT I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW WE WOULD SAY WE DID SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY DONE. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. >> I WILL CONTINUE TO PROTECT. >> YES, CONTINUE. 
          THAT WOULD BE GOOD, THANK YOU. 
          THEN? READY TO GO TO THE NEXT ONE? THIS IS THE LAST ONE FOR TONIGHT. THE FERNANDINA BEACH WILL BE AN EQUITABLE AND TIGHTKNIT COMMUNITY THROUGH ITS BUILD, ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY PROGRAMS. HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU MANAGE THAT ONE? AND HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU MEASURE? HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU'VE ACCOMPLISHED THAT IN 2045? 
          >> HOW DO YOU DEVELOP A TIGHTKNIT COMMUNITY, HOW DO YOU DO THAT? 
          WE CAN'T -- >> IT'S A FEELING. IT IS HARD TO QUANTIFIABLE 
          STANDARD ON IT. >> IT JUST SEEMS WEIRD TO ME, I DON'T KNOW. 
          >> SO IT NEEDS TO BE SOMEPLACE ELSE? BECAUSE I THINK THESE GOALS 
          WE'VE IDENTIFIED ARE IMPORTANT. >> I THINK THAT YOU CAN COME UP WITH ANOTHER WORD THEN 
          TIGHTKNIT. IT NEEDS TO BE -- >> DON'T LIKE TIGHTKNIT. 
          >> EQUITABLE IS GOOD BUT IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WE CAN USE BESIDES TIGHTKNIT? 
          >> DO YOU WANT TO SAY DIVERSE, WELCOMING AND AFFIRMING? HAT'S WHAT YOU ARE REALLY ALL 
          TALKING ABOUT. >> EQUITABLE? >> YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 
          CITIZENS THAT ARE ALREADY HERE. >> TALKING ABOUT PRESERVATION OF CHARACTER. 
          >> RIGHT. >> 2045 THERE WILL BE PROBABLY TWICE AS MANY WHAT IS HERE NOW. 
          >> AND NOT EVERYONE WILL BE TIGHTKNIT. >> IT WON'T BE TIGHTKNIT. 
          BUT IT WILL BE AN INTERESTING, DIVERSE AND THAT I THINK HAS BEEN REALLY THE INTERESTING PART OF THIS COMMUNITY. HIS HOW DIVERSE IT IS. [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> WE CAN CHANGE IT TO DIVERSE. [INAUDIBLE] >> I WOULD LIKE THAT THE DOCUMENT, THE DOCUMENTS TO TRANSLATE INTO SPANISH, BE AT LEAST STARTED IN. 
          I THINK THE REQUIREMENT SHOULD BE NOW AND THEN THE YOU KNOW, CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION FOR, I MEAN IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO DO IT. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD NOT WAIT. 
          >> I'M GOOD WITH THAT. [INAUDIBLE] >> DOESN'T THE CITY ALREADY 
          [02:30:33]
HAVE, IN THE COUNTY, BOTH HAVE RECYCLING DAYS. IS THAT NOT THE SAME THING IS 
          COMMUNITY CLEANUP? >> NO. >> THERE ARE GROUPS THAT DO CLEANUP, THAT LITERALLY COME TO YOUR PROPERTY AND CLEANED UP? > THIS WILL BE CLEANING UP THE CREEK OR CLEANING UP. THIS WOULD BE LIKE GETTING TIRES OUT OF -- TIRES OUT OF 
          THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> OR WOULD'VE SEEN IN OTHER COMMUNITIES, AMNESTY DAY. 
          YOU DO LIKE A BIG DUMPSTER WITHIN THE MIDDLE OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          NO QUESTIONS ASKED, THROW YOUR STUFF IN THERE. WE WILL HAUL IT AWAY FOR YOU. 
          THAT WAY IT HELPS TO CLEAN UP INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF PROPERTIES. 
          THERE MAY BE JUNK LYING AROUND. >> WHERE ARE WE AT? >> SHORT-TERM. 
          ANYONE IN PARTICULAR? >> NO. >> ARE WE DONE? 
          >> CLOSE TO DONE. >> DEVELOPED REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE PEDESTRIAN SPACES THAT PROMOTE SOCIALIZATION AND GATHERINGS. IS THAT LIKE A LDC THING? 
          >> IT COULD BE. >> IT WAS MORE FOCUSED ON COMMERCIAL OR SUBDIVISIONS AND PUDS? I DON'T SEE HOW IT APPLIES TO INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL. 
          >> BUT IT COULD BE ON A SUBDIVISION. >> RIGHT, A SUBDIVISION.T 
          WOULD APPLY TO SUBDIVISION, PUD, COMMERCIAL. >> SHOULD IT SAY THAT? 
          SUBDIVISION, PUD AND WHAT? >> COMMERCIAL. >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ANY 
          NEW CONSTRUCTION? >> AND SHOULD THAT ACTUALLY BE IN THE PREVIOUS ONE? 
          WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT NEW CONSTRUCTION? >> NO, I THINK IT'S HERE 
          BECAUSE IT TALKS ABOUT WANTING TO CREATE A COMMUNITY. >> WE TOOK OUT THE WORD 
          TIGHTKNIT. >> WHAT WORD WE HAVE NOW? >> DIVERSE. 
          >> OKAY. >> UNIVERSAL DESIGN STANDARDS TO ENSURE EQUITABLE ACCESS. 
          WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >> THERE IS ACCESS FOR ONE OF THE PREVIOUS COMMISSIONERS, 
          THERE WAS ACCESS FOR SIDEWALKS AND PUD AND -- >> OKAY. 
          >> WHEREVER YOU GO. >> I THINK OUR SECRETARY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. 
          >> WANT TO CLARIFY UNIVERSAL DESIGN IS ACTUALLY A STANDARD THAT ARCHITECTS AND DESIGNERS CAN USE. PROMOTES A SET OF FOLLOWING ADA GUIDELINES, IT'S MORE OF INCORPORATING ACCESSIBLE FEATURES INTO THE CONSTRUCTION SO AS NOT TO CALL OUT SPECIFICALLY. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A RAMP OFF TO ONE SIDE AND STARES AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE. YOU MIGHT HAVE THIS UNIQUE LAYOUT WHERE STAIRS SERVE INTERTWINED WITH THERAMP . AND THINGS LIKE THAT.T'S ABOUT UNIVERSAL DESIGN, ITSELF 
          IT IS AN IDEA AND IT IS JUST LIKE ADA. >> THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          >> THANK YOU! >> THAT'S A VERY GOOD LESSON. >> I LIKE THAT. 
          >> I DO TOO. >> ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.E GOT THROUGH! IT'S SAID WE HAVE THE CLAP. KRISTA GOES TO DO THREE, FOUR AND FIVE NEXT MEETING. 
          [6.1 Election of PAB Chair and Vice Chair]
          OKAY, WE ONE BIT OF BOARD BUSINESS. >> HATE THAT MR. STEVENSON HAD 
          [02:35:06]
TO LEAVE US. BUT EVERY FEBRUARY, WE ELECT A NEW PAB CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. 
          >> WOULD YOU MAYBE WANT TO WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE MORE MEMBERSHIP PRESENT? 
          >> IS THAT OKAY? >> I THINK SO WE CAN JUST DO THIS AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          >> IS UP TO YOU. >>. [INAUDIBLE] THAT WOULD BE ME! 
          [LAUGHTER] >> I LIKE THAT. >> WHATEVER IS, JUST WANT TO KEEP OURSELVES NICE AND TIDY. THAT'S FINE. AND THEN CAN WE PUT IT AT THE 
          BEGINNING OF THE NEXT MEETING? >> WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING THIS MONTH RIGHT? 
          >> THE 23RD. >> THE 21ST. >> 23RD. 
          >> 23RD. >> WE WILL DO IT ON THE 23RD. WILL WE DO IT THEN? 
          WE CAN MAKE THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM. >> YES. 
          STILL STAYING IN FEBRUARY. >> OKAY. >> STILL IN THE MONTH. 
          >> THE ONLY THING ON THAT AGENDA WILL BE THREE, FOUR AND FIVE. 
          >> AND BOARD BUSINESS. >> AND BOARD BUSINESS. >> I THINK THREE, FOUR AND FIVE BUT WE SHOULD BRING IT CAREFULLY. AGAIN -- [LAUGHTER] YOU KNOW 
          THE LAST ONE WAS A LITTLE SOFT. AND THEY ARE HARD. >> SOFTY SAY?> SOFT. 
          A SOFT GOAL. >> EASY GOAL. >> MORE TOUCHY-FEELY. 
          >> WE DO HAVE SOME THAT ARE -- >> NO, THE VERY LAST ONE. IT WAS TOUCHY-FEELY. 
          [7. STAFF REPORT]
          >> WE ALSO HAVE STAFF REPORT. IS THERE ANY STAFF REPORT TONIGHT? 
          [8. PUBLIC COMMENT]
NO? AND PUBLIC COMMENT. YES MA'AM? 
          OKAY. >>. [INAUDIBLE] SEVERAL THINGS CONCERN ME. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE TREES. 
          ANOTHER PLUME WAS A BIG THING AND THEY CALL THE TREES DOWN I THINK YOU ARE CAUGHT ON PRESERVING WAS THERE AND NOT LETTING THEM CUT THEM DOWN. THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT ON SATHER WHERE THEY TOOK DOWN A BUNCH OF HUGE TREES AND IT WAS SO MINUTE IT WAS EASY FOR THEM TO -- I THINK HE REFOCUSED THERE AND TALK ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          -- THEY PUT ALL OF THOSE AND WHERE THEY ARE JAMMED UP LIKE THAT. 
          I THINK YOU NEED SOMEONE THAT SAYS YOU CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE IT OFFSETS EVERYTHING BECAUSE THAT'S MORE SUBDIVISION THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN THE COMMUNITY FEEL. 
          IF I HAVE AN ISSUE AND IT AFFECTS JUST ME, NOBODY ELSE REALLY IS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. 
          IT'S LIKE THE VERY FIRST SLIDE, INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. THEN THEY SIT THERE AND VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE, NOT WHAT WE WANT, WHAT THEY WANT. TONIGHT, THERE WAS TO APPEAR BESIDE THE ATTORNEY AND WANTED TO PUSH THAT THING THROUGH AND YELL VOTED AND PUSHED IT THROUGH SO YOU ARE VOTING YOUR CONSCIENCE OR VOTING WHAT WE WANT? THE COMMUNITY FEELING, THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE COMING. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE SAY, THE PEOPLE SITTING UP HERE VOTING THEIR CONSCIENCE. NOT WHAT WE WANT. 
          THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> LET ME MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE TREES. 
          WE DID CHANGE THE TREE ORDINANCE THIS PAST YEAR AND WE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED THE FINES. WE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES SO THAT AT LEAST FOR SUBDIVISIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, GOING IN THAT THERE IS MORE RIGOR AND CONTROL AND REVIEW AROUND THE TREE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND HOW IT SUPPLEMENTED. 
          SO WHO DID WORK VERY HARD TO TRY TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE THAT CAME UP OVER SOME DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THAT HAPPENED OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO. AND THEN, WE TALK ABOUT, YOU MUST BE TOLD ABOUT -- THOSE WHEN AND AS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. 
          AND SO, THOSE ARE ALLOWABLE WITHIN OUR ACTIVITIES AND WITHIN THE RULES. 
          I MEAN IF YOU'RE SAYING YOU DON'T WANT THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ANYMORE THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER WE LIVE IN A VERY PRODEVELOPMENT STATE. AND WE OFTEN LOSE CONTROL OVER SOME OF OUR ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT THAT OTHER STATES MIGHT BE ABLE TO OR OTHER CITIES MIGHT HAVE 
          [02:40:01]
MORE CONTROL OVER. [INAUDIBLE] THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE, THROUGH TALLAHASSEE. AND WE JUST HAD TO ADD THAT PERSONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS TO OUR 
          COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> RIGHT. >> WAS A NEW LAW THAT JUST CAME IN THIS PAST YEAR. AND THEN, THERE IS A PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF THE LEGISLATURE TODAY IN TALLAHASSEE THAT SAYS, ANYTIME WE DO IN ORDINANCE OR MAKE ANY KIND OF CHANGE, WE HAVE TO GET A BUSINESS IMPACT STUDY TO SEE HOW IT IMPACTS BUSINESSES. 
          >> DID THAT PASS? >> NOT YET! >> THE BUSINESS CAN SUE THE CITY IF THEY THINK WE HAVE IMPACTED THEM. SO THAT IS VERY -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> THIS LIVABILITY, THEY CHOSE TO LET ME HAVE TO SUFFER WITH THAT AT 75 DECIBELS WHICH IS 60 MY BEDROOM WHICH IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO SLEEP. AND SO I WAS SACRIFICED AND WE 
          BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. >> I KNOW YOU HAVE. >> I'M HOPING THIS THING PASSES SO THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW THE BUSINESS IMPACTS THOSE AROUND IT AND SAY OKAY YEAH LET'S DO THAT.> SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO ON IN TALLAHASSEE THAT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON A LOCAL MUNICIPALITY ABILITY TO CONTROL THEIR LAWS AND IS JUST THE NATURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN TALLAHASSEE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. 
          THAT MAKES IT DIFFICULT. I SAT IN ALL THESE MEETINGS AND SAW THE PROBLEMS THAT I THINK WE STILL HAVE WITH NOISE ORDINANCE. IT NEEDS TO BE -- 
          >> THE CITY ATTORNEY SENT ME A LETTER BECAUSE I WAS TOLD TO CALL ONE AT THAT IT WAS TOO LOUD AND IT'S LOUD EVERY NIGHT. BUT SOMETIMES IT IS LOUDER THAN THAT. 
          AND IT WAS NEVER OUT OF COMPLIANCE WHICH I HAVE -- ECONOMIC AND MEASUREMENT AND DO CITATION BUT SHE SAYS I SHOULDN'T CALL THE POLICE ASKED HIM THE CHECK BECAUSE -- 
          >> THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE. BUT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO CALL 
          THE POLICE WHEN YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. >> I THINK SO TOO. 
          >> OUR TAY THAT I VOTED ABOUT THIS REDUCTION BECAUSE AFTER MY ANALYSIS AND MY TALKING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, SHE WAS A HERE TONIGHT, BUT TALKING WITH STAFF, I'VE BEEN VERY MUCH ASSURED THAT ANYTHING THAT WAS IN THAT IS COVERED IN TODAY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. 
          AND SO WE WERE NOT REALLY LOSING ANYTHING BY GETTING RID OF IT. 
          WE WERE ACTUALLY MAKING THINGS SIMPLER AND EASIER. AND THAT'S WHY I VOTED, THAT'S 
          WHY I VOTED TO PASS IT ON. >> AND WE GOT RID OF ALL THE USES. 
          LIKE THE RETAIL, HOTEL. AND BY GOING BACK TO THE INDUSTRIAL, IT ACTUALLY PROTECTS PARKING BECAUSE IT'S AN ALLOWABLE USE IN THE DISTRICT SO BASICALLY TURNING IT BACK BEFORE THIS REDEVELOPMENT IDEA CAME ABOUT BACK IN THE 80S. 
          >> BUT IT WILL FOR GOVERNOR CITY COMMISSION AND SO, IF YOU STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT IT, YOU SHOULD GO TO THE CITY COMMISSION. BUT I FELT COMFORTABLE THAT WE WERE DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND MY ISSUE WAS JUST THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD 
          IT. >> I JUST WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT. 
          I WAS HOPING I COULD LEARN MORE. >> I WAS HOPING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO DO THE SAME TYPE OF ANALYSIS. I THINK I WOULD'VE COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION, I JUST FELT LIKE THE OPTICS OF IT BEING JUST SORT OF PLOPPED DOWN ON US WAS JUST A LITTLE TOO FAST. BUT IT PASSED SO IT WILL GO TO THE CITY COMMISSION. 
          >> NO GOOD CAN COME OUT OF THAT. >> THE OPEN SPACES AND THE 
          GREEN AREAS. >> THAT WOULD NOT BE THERE. YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT, IF THEY DID EVERYTHING THEY WERE PROPOSING, UNDERGROUND PARKING AND HOTELS AND, I DON'T EVEN 
          KNOW IF THEY HAVE THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS BACK THEN. >> THEY DID NOT. 
          >> WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. WE ARE THANKFUL YOU CAME AND STAYED THROUGH THE BITTER END. 
          >> WE LIKE HEARING FROM YOU. [INAUDIBLE] >> THERE IS A TREE CAN SERVICE A GROUP THAT I THINK ARE ALWAYS TAKING
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.