[00:00:01]
[1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL / DETERMINATION OF QUORUM]
TODAY IS OCTOBER THE 11TH, 2023.WE'RE MEETING IN CITY HALL COMMISSION CHAMBERS IN FERNANDINA BEACH.
MADAM SECRETARY, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A QUORUM.
MEMBER BOYLAN WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? OKAY. ITEM THREE.
OUR MINUTES ARE NOT READY, BUT THEY WILL BE IN NOVEMBER, SO WE'LL GO OVER THEM IN NOVEMBER.
IS THERE ANY OLD BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD?
[4. OLD BUSINESS]
DAPHNE ANYTHING? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU.LET ME JUST MAKE ONE, ONE COMMENT, PLEASE.
WE HAD TALKED LAST TIME ABOUT UPDATE ON, LIKE, ABBREVIATIONS AND SO FORTH.
THERE IS A FEBRUARY 21ST, 2023 UPDATE ON ALL THE ACRONYMS, DEFINITIONS, ET CETERA.
IT'S IN THE FRONT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
[5.1 PAB 2023-0049 - TERESA PRINCE, AGENT FOR D&H HOMES LLC, 1912 DRURY ROAD + 1888 DRURY ROAD]
ALL RIGHT. UNDER NEW BUSINESS 5.1 PAB CASE 2023-0049.OKAY. THIS IS APPLICATION 2023-0049 THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION.
ASSIGNMENT OF A FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
CATEGORY OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND ZONING DISTRICT OF R-2.
THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED AT 1912 AND 1888 DRURY ROAD.
THESE PARCELS ARE CURRENTLY VACANT AND TOTAL APPROXIMATELY 0.94 ACRES OF LAND.
THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT HERE IS 50FT, AND THIS IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY ALONG THE EASTERN SIDES OF THE PROPERTY, AND THE REQUESTED ACTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, ASSIGNMENT OF THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FLUM CATEGORY AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-2 ZONING DISTRICT FOLLOWING THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT THIS APPLICATION WILL MOVE FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION, AND THIS WILL GO IN THE FORM OF THREE SEPARATE ORDINANCES AT A PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S ANTICIPATED FOR NOVEMBER 21ST, 2023.
AND I AM OPEN FOR QUESTIONS IF ANYONE HAS ANY.
IS ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. RIGHT.
BUT IF YOU JUST COME UP AND JUST INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
GOOD EVENING, TERESA PRINCE WITH THOMASSETII AND PRINCE 303 AT CENTER STREET.
I JUST MOVED SUITE 203, SO NOW I KNOW MY ADDRESS.
IS THERE IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MS. PRINCE REPRESENTING THIS CASE? OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] I WOULD LIKE TO JUST DISCLOSE ONE THING.
I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH MR. PRINCE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION.
A COUPLE OF THINGS I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION ON.
SURE. AS AS WELL AS I DID TOO, AS WELL.
VERY GOOD. AND I DO HAVE A QUICK PRESENTATION TO JUST HIGHLIGHT A FEW ITEMS. DID YOU TELL ME HOW TO DO THIS ALREADY? OKAY. IT'S NOT WORKING.
[00:05:01]
OKAY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'LL PULL IT UP.WHAT I WAS GOING TO POINT OUT TO THE BOARD.
AND SINCE THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, IT COULD BE UNNECESSARY.
WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS DEVELOPED, IT WAS COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY.
IT IS A SECONDARY ACCESS AND A, QUOTE, EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR AMELIA OAKS.
SO THAT'S NOW IT'S OWNED BY THE CITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT THAT TRACT IS BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THAT, AND THE COUNTY WAS IN CHARGE OF HOW IT WAS OPENED OR WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD BE OPENED WHEN AMELIA OAKS WAS DEVELOPED.
SO THAT'S WHY IT SITS AS IT STANDS NOW AND ISN'T ANY FURTHER IMPROVED.
WE OBVIOUSLY FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT YOU SEE THAT ON BOTH SIDES WHEN YOU GET TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD, YOU ALSO HAVE R-2 AND THE SAME.
YOU HAVE THE ZONING AND THE SAME MEDIUM DENSITY FLUM.
AND THERE WAS THE TRACT THAT I JUST SPOKE ABOUT BEFORE THE PRESENTATION WAS UP.
AND THAT WAS ALL I WANTED TO CLARIFY WAS JUST TO SHOW YOU THAT I DO BELIEVE I AGREE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND RELY ON THAT, THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT THERE NOW.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
IS IS IS NOT YOUR INTENT TO INCLUDE THIS ROADWAY THIS CITY RIGHT OF WAY INTO THIS THESE PARCELS THOUGH IS THAT CORRECT? IT SHOULD BE. YES.
OF COURSE. ANY PROPERTY OWNER, DEVELOPER OR NOT WOULD LOVE TO INCLUDE IT.
I BELIEVE THE CITY WAS EVEN APPROACHED ABOUT VACATING IT.
AND YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES NOT HAS A POLICY AGAINST DOING THAT.
WE WILL NOT HAVE OWNERSHIP OF IT.
WE MAY HAVE TO IMPROVE IT TO A LEVEL TO GET ACCESS TO THE PARCELS.
WHEN WE GO THROUGH TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO GET SOME RELIEF FROM THE STANDARDS, TO SAVE TREES OR DO WHATEVER, BECAUSE IT IS RIGHT NOW JUST A SECONDARY ACCESS AND WE WOULD BE PURSUING THAT.
IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE A CITY RIGHT OF WAY.
LET'S SEE I HAD A QUICK QUESTION.
I THINK THAT IT'S IT'S WORTH MENTIONING ABOUT THE HOW THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOGNIZED THE DISCREPANCY ON THE LOT, AND MAYBE THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT BECAUSE THAT MAY COME UP AS IT GOES FORWARD.
CORRECT. AND THANK YOU CHAIR ROBAS.
YES. ORIGINALLY THIS HAD A COMMERCIAL FLUM DESIGNATION AND WE APPLIED TO CORRECT THAT DESIGNATION.
MY CLIENT DID. AND WHEN WHEN MY CLIENT APPLIED, COUNTY STAFF RESPONDED AND SAID THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A MAPPING ERROR, THEY WOULD PROCESS THE APPLICATION WITH OUR CONSENT WITHOUT ANY FEES, WHICH AS YOU KNOW, SAVED WAS GREAT.
AND AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER MAPPING AREAS THAT WILL NEED TO BE CORRECTED.
THEY SENT LETTERS TO EVERYONE AND WE WERE THE ONLY ONE THAT RESPONDED.
WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S MAP, WHICH EVERYBODY RELIES ON, STILL SHOWED IT AS A COMMERCIAL, BUT YOU CAN SEE NOW THESE WERE PULLED DIRECTLY FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S MAP.
NOW IT HAS BEEN SENT UPDATED, AND I SAW THAT STAFF PUT THAT INFORMATION IN THE PACKET AS WELL.
WHEN THE PACKET CAME OUT FRIDAY SHOWING THAT IT HAD BEEN SENT TO THE STATE AND UPDATED.
SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
BUT YES, IT WAS A MAPPING ERROR.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. PRINCE OR STAFF FROM THE BOARD CONCERNING THIS AGENDA ITEM? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
MAKE A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2023-0049 TO THE CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION ASSIGNMENT OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MDR LAND USE CATEGORY AND A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-2 ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1912 AND 1888 DRURY ROAD BE APPROVED AND THAT PAB CASE 2023-0049 AS PRESENTED, IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
[00:10:08]
PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME.HEARING NONE. THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
ALL RIGHT. ITEM 5.2 PAB CASE 2023-0050.
[5.2 PAB 2023-0050 - TERESA PRINCE, AGENT FOR DARIUS PROPERTY, LTD, SOUTH 15TH STREET AND 1520 SOUTH 14TH STREET]
DAPHNE. YES.THIS IS ANOTHER APPLICATION FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, LAND USE AND ZONING.
THIS INVOLVES THREE PARCELS OF LAND THAT ARE OFF OF SOUTH 14TH STREET AND SOUTH 15TH STREET, ONE OF WHICH HAS DOUBLE FRONTAGE. THEY ARE CURRENTLY ZONED NASSAU COUNTY COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE WITH A COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
TWO OF THE PARCELS ARE VACANT.
ONE PARCEL HAS AN OLD CHURCH BUILDING AND SOME ANCILLARY BUILDINGS LOCATED ON THAT, AND THEY TOTAL APPROXIMATELY 3.47 ACRES OF LAND.
THE REQUIRED APPLICATION MATERIALS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, ALL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID, AND ALL NOTICES HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE RECORD AND A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THIS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAP CATEGORY OF GENERAL, COMMERCIAL AND ZONING DISTRICT OF C-2 FOR A PORTION OF PARCEL C, WHICH I HAVE NOTED HERE ON THE MAP.
THE PORTION OF THE L-SHAPED PARCEL THAT'S FRONTING 14TH STREET IS BEING PROPOSED FOR C-2.
AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT PARCELS A AND B AND THE PARCEL C THAT FRONTS SOUTH 15TH STREET, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR C-1.
AND THAT WOULD BE A GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE WITH THAT AS WELL.
SO LET ME CLARIFY THE PORTION THAT IS C-2 THAT FRONTS 14TH IS COMPARABLE TO WHAT WE WOULD THE COUNTY DAPHNE IS THAT CHURCH THAT'S ON THE ON THE 14TH STREET SIDE.
IS IT EMPTY NOW? IT'S AS FAR AS I KNOW NO ONE'S UTILIZING IT.
IS THAT BUILDING ACTUALLY VACATED YET OR.
FOR THE RECORD, TERESA PRINCE, THOMASSETI AND PRINCE, 303 CENTER STREET.
THANK YOU. MS. PRINCE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO JUST STAY THERE WHILE WE JUST SORT OF GO THROUGH A FEW MORE.
IF WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? AND I DO WANT TO NOTE, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES IN HERE, IN CASE ANYONE ON THE BOARD OR FROM THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN C-1 AND C-2, I'VE INCLUDED AN OVERVIEW OF C-1, AS WELL AS THE ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THAT ZONING DISTRICT, AND AN OVERVIEW OF C-2 AND ALL THE ALLOWABLE USES IN C-2, IN CASE ANYONE WANTS TO SEE IT.
A LOT OF INFORMATION, BUT I JUST FIGURED I'D INCLUDE IT JUST IN CASE SO.
WE KNOW THAT YOU ARE SO PREPARED AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
OKAY. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED WHEN WE MET AND THAT YOU PROVIDED ME WITH BECAUSE I HAD A QUESTION CONCERNING THE OWNERSHIP OF TWO OF THE LOTS.
YES. WHICH YOU WERE ABLE TO HELP GET ME INFORMED ON? YES. YET AGAIN, WE GOT OUR APPLICATION IN BEFORE THE CITY'S RECORD OR THE COUNTY'S RECORDS WERE UPDATED, AND NOTHING AGAINST THE COUNTY.
BUT WE I THINK MY CLIENT BOUGHT IT AND WE APPLIED LIKE A WEEK LATER.
SO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S ADDRESS THE TAX COLLECTOR.
AND NOW IT IS ACCURATELY REFLECTING THE OWNERSHIP AS MY CLIENT.
SO THE DEED HAD BEEN RECORDED.
IT'S JUST IT HADN'T SHOWN UP ON ALL THE COUNTY RECORDS.
IF YOU JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO YOUR OTHER.
YEAH, IT'S SEE THE TWO PARCELS A AND PARCEL B IN THOSE PICTURES WERE THE ONES
[00:15:02]
NOW THEY'RE ALL UNDER ONE OWNERSHIP.THEY WERE PURCHASED PARCELS A AND B WERE IN ONE PURCHASE ON ONE DEED AND THE OTHER L-SHAPED PARCEL, PARCEL C IS UNDER ANOTHER PURCHASE AT A DIFFERENT TIME.
WELL, ALL OF IT. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO THERE.
THE C-2 PORTION OF THAT ON 14TH COULD BE A LOT OF THINGS.
SO I'M KIND OF ASKING A QUESTION OF YOU AND OF STAFF AT THE SAME TIME.
WHATEVER GOES THERE IF IT IS SHOPPING, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT PARKING AND SURFACES FOR SHOPPING CENTERS, SHOULD THEY WANT TO DO A THING LIKE THAT.
WHAT PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE THERE? SURFACES SIZE? IT DEPENDS ON THE USE.
SO OKAY IT'S ENTIRELY DEPENDENT ON THE USE.
BUT B AS IT GOES THROUGH THE TRC TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.
YES. THEN, THEN I THINK THAT'S WHEN THE PARKING PERCENTAGES AND ALL OF THAT GETS WORKED OUT.
AREN'T THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE LDC BASED ON THE CATEGORY OF THE STRUCTURE? CORRECT. YEP.
IT WILL DEPEND ON WHAT THAT STRUCTURE IS.
IF IT'S A HOTEL. HOTELS HAVE THEIR OWN IF IT'S A BANK.
BANK HAS ITS OWN JUST DEPENDING ON THE USE.
SO ANYTHING THAT THEY DO WILL BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE PROCESS OF THE CITY.
CORRECT, UNDER THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND WE AND WE HAVE FOR ALL OF THOSE VARIOUS USES, PARKING MINIMUMS IN PLACE THAT HAVE TO BE MET.
NO, IT WOULD JUST GO CHAIR IF I MIGHT.
IT'S UNDER FIVE ACRES AND WOULD BE A PERFECT CANDIDATE FOR PD SO WE WOULD KNOW I THINK IT'S 3.47.
I SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN THAT DOWN.
AND YES, IT WOULD BE A GREAT CANDIDATE FOR A PUD AND TO BOARD MEMBER DOSTERS' QUESTION, YOU KNOW, IF IT WERE A SHOPPING CENTER AND CORRECT ME BECAUSE I WASN'T PREPARED TO ANSWER THIS KIND OF QUESTION, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO AVAIL OURSELVES OF THE NEW CHANGES TO THE SHOPPING CENTER REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING AND USING THE DIFFERENT SURFACES, AND AND THE CLIENT WOULD BENEFIT MY CLIENT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THAT CHANGE.
AND THAT GOES BACK TO YOUR ANSWER THAT IT DEPENDS ON THE USE.
SO IF HE DID A LITTLE STRIP MALL FACING 14TH AND YES, IF WE.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED OF ME TO BOARD MEMBER GILLETTE POINT IS, HOW DID VINTAGE DO THAT? HOW DID THESE PEOPLE DO THIS? AND I'M LIKE, WELL, THOSE WERE PUDS THAT ALLOWED MORE OR DEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT ALLOWED MORE FLEXIBILITY.
AND RIGHT NOW FIVE ACRES IS YOUR MINIMUM AND WE DON'T HAVE IT.
WELL, I WAS JUST FOLLOWING UP THAT THE THE APPLICANT WOULD KNOW WITH MORE CERTAINTY AS TO WHAT SHE WOULD HAVE, EVEN IF THIS WE WEREN'T CODIFIED COMPLETELY, WE COULD WRITE IT INTO THE PD.
SO THAT WAS JUST BELABORING THAT POINT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALL RIGHT. SO ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OR HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. PRINCE? ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S HEAR IT. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2023-0050 TO THE CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION ASSIGNMENT OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MDR LAND USE LAND USE CATEGORY ONE PARDON . WE'RE GOING TO COMMERCIAL 0050.
YEAH, IT'S UP HERE. IT'S UP THERE.
I'M READING IT FROM HERE I GOT.
ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT, LET'S START OVER AGAIN.
ALL RIGHT. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2023-0050 TO THE CITY COMMISSION REQUESTING THAT A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION ASSIGNMENT OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE CATEGORY AND C-2 ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY FRONTING 14TH STREET AND C-1
[00:20:01]
ZONING FRONTING THE SOUTH 15TH STREET, BE APPROVED, AND THAT PAB CASE 2023-0050 AS PRESENTED, IS SUFFICIENTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO BE APPROVED AT THIS TIME.THANK YOU. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND FROM MR. GILLETTE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYE. OPPOSED LIKE SIGN? VERY NONE. IT IS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
WE NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE ON THAT.
THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. YEAH, WE'VE ALREADY FIXED IT.
[6.1 Update on Commission Directed LDC Edits for Sections 1.03.04 and 1.03.05 - Confirm Board Workshop for Wednesday, October 25, 2023]
BOARD BUSINESS 6.1.LET'S SEE KELLY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME? SO GOOD EVENING, KELLY GIBSON, I AM WANTING TO CONFIRM WITH YOU THAT WE ARE STILL GOING TO MEET AS EITHER A WORKSHOP OR SPECIAL MEETING WITH THE COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 25TH, AND THE MAIN THING I REALLY NEED INFORMATION ABOUT TONIGHT IS THE TIME THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MEET.
DO YOU WANT TO DO A 3:00 MEETING OR START LATER? I THOUGHT IT WORKED OUT REALLY WELL LAST MONTH, STARTING AT 3:00, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU.
I THINK A 3:00 STILL WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.
OKAY. DO YOU WANT A MOTION ON THAT? NO, NO, NO.
JUST GENERAL CONSENSUS 3:00 ARE WE GOING TO DO THREE HOURS MAX OR TWO HOURS MAX? THAT IS UP TO YOU AS WELL.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, I TELL YOU, THREE HOURS WAS A LONG MEETING.
IT IS A LONG TIME. I'D LIKE TO MAKE IT 3 TO 5, IF THAT'S.
YEAH. DOES THAT MEET? EVERYBODY'S OKAY.
WE CAN. I THINK 3 TO 5 IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT.
SOUNDS GREAT. SO JUST TO CONFIRM, OCTOBER 25TH FROM 3 P.M.
TO 5 P.M., RIGHT? YES. OKAY. TO FURTHER DISCUSS THE THINGS WE WANT TO DISCUSS AT THAT MEETING, I WAS ASKED BY COMMISSIONER ASKEW TO MEET WITH HIM AS CHAIR OF THE PAB ONE ON ONE TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH DURING THESE SPECIAL MEETINGS THAT WE'RE HAVING.
AND SO I WILL BE ABLE TO REPORT ON THE 25TH THE CONVERSATION THAT I HAVE WITH HIM.
AGAIN, EVERYBODY IS TRYING TO CONTRIBUTE TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, WITH SECTION 10304, 10305, AS WELL AS THE THE QUESTION OF FLOODPLAINS.
SO I'M SURE HE HAS SOME SOME INPUT THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE TO US.
AND I WILL BE ABLE TO PASS IT ON.
SO DOES THAT INPUT INCLUDE THE DIRECTION? THE DIRECTION HAS ALREADY BEEN GIVEN TO US AS FAR AS I MEAN THAT'S IT THOUGH.
WHAT WE HAVE IS HERE. YEAH. OKAY.
NOW WHAT I'D LIKE TO SORT OF HAVE SOME DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD ABOUT IS WE DELVED REALLY DEEP INTO THE LANGUAGE THAT STAFF HAS PROPOSED TO US BASED ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE CITY COMMISSION WAS ASKING FOR.
AND YOU GOT TO REMEMBER, THEY HAVE DIRECTED STAFF AND SO THEN STAFF HAS PREPARED FOR US WHAT THEY THINK IT IS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR FROM A LANGUAGE PERSPECTIVE, THE WORDS.
AND WE REALLY TOOK A DEEP DIVE ON THAT, AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TRYING TO REALLY GO INTO THAT.
I'VE TALKED TO TO KELLY AND TO TAMMI THAT, THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD MAYBE SHIFT OUR APPROACH, OUR THINKING, AND I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING WE GET INTO THIS TONIGHT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR STAFF AND FOR US TO START TO GET OUR HEADS AROUND THIS IF WE STARTED TO LOOK AT THIS, MAYBE AT A HIGHER LEVEL RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE AT GROUND LEVEL RIGHT NOW AND GOING THROUGH ALL THESE DEFINITIONS AND THE WORDSMITHING, AND I'D LIKE TO MAYBE TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO SORT OF TALK ABOUT WHAT IN MY MIND IS EITHER THE CLARIFICATION FUNCTION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED OF US VERSUS WHAT I PERCEIVE TO BE LANGUAGE THAT CHANGES THESE SECTIONS OF THE CODE.
AND I KNOW TAMMI CAN SORT OF HELP US SORT OF NAVIGATE SOME OF THIS, BUT THEN I THINK IT'S HELPFUL IF WE JUST SORT OF TALK AMONGST OURSELVES TO SAY, I FEEL THIS WAY ABOUT THE DIRECTION THAT WE SHOULD BE GOING.
[00:25:11]
AND, WE DON'T HAVE TO GET INTO WHY I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF TECHNICAL WAYS TO EXPRESS WHAT IT IS THAT WHY WE FEEL THE WAY WE DO, IT'S NOT A TOUCHY FEELY THING BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS REALLY THE ESSENCE OF WHO WE ARE.AND BY BEING ABLE TO REFER BACK TO THOSE SECTIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH REALLY IS THE OVERARCHING DOCUMENT FOR US TO ME THAT HELPS US TO REALLY GIVE SOME GUIDANCE TO STAFF.
[INAUDIBLE] [INAUDIBLE] YOU LOSE SIGHT OF THE HIGHER LEVEL OF THE DISCUSSION I DID ANYWAY.
SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.
TAMMI, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SORT OF.
I CAN I CAN TRY TO HELP BECAUSE VICTORIA AND I, AS SHE SAID, WE SPOKE TODAY AT LENGTH ABOUT HOW TO GO ABOUT DOING THIS AND OBVIOUSLY STAFF MYSELF.
YOU'RE ALL HERE FOR YOU LAST MONTH AND WE WATCHED YOUR DISCUSSION AND SOME OF IT SEEMED TO BE DIFFICULT JUST BECAUSE I FELT LIKE SOME MEMBERS WERE HOLDING BACK. AND SO VICTORIA AND I TALKED ABOUT WE FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT EACH ONE OF US, AS A CITIZEN OF THE CITY, HAS OUR OWN OPINION ABOUT WHAT THE DIRECTION IS.
I DON'T THINK THAT THE DIRECTION THAT CAME FROM THE CITY COMMISSION WAS UNCLEAR IN ANY WAY.
WHAT I HEARD AND WHAT IT'S MY IMPRESSION THAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE NOW, BUT TO CLARIFY HOW STAFF SHOULD PROCESS APPLICATIONS, THERE ARE APPLICATIONS THAT ASK FOR AND I'M GOING TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE THAT I KNOW YOU CAN ALL UNDERSTAND.
AND I'M NOT AFRAID TO DO THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE SOMETHING IN COURT.
THE TRINGALI APPLICATION IN THAT CASE, AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE 20 UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD, RIGHT? AND THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR 12 UNITS AND WANTED TO COME IN AND DO A SUBDIVISION.
SO THE WAY THAT WE HAVE, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THIS OR NOT, THIS IS STAFF'S POSITION.
THIS IS THE CITY'S POSITION IN THE COURT CASE, OKAY, IS THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS PROCESSED THOSE TO MEAN IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD, YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS IN CHAPTER FOUR OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
IF THE SAME PROPERTY, THE TRINGALI PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT CAME IN AND SAID THAT THEY WANT TO DO A SUBDIVISION OF 20 UNITS, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE. I ALREADY CHECKED WITH STAFF.
THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS FIRST AND THEN THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS SO THAT ALL WHEN I SAY IT'S NOT CLEAR, I KNOW SOME CITIZENS THINK THE SECTION IS VERY CLEAR.
IT CAN'T BE CLEAR IF WE'RE IN A LAWSUIT ABOUT IT.
OKAY. IT'S NOT CLEAR TO SOMEBODY, STAFF, CITIZENS, WHATEVER, WE NEED TO CLARIFY IT BASED UPON FROM WHAT I HEARD, THE CITY COMMISSION WANTS TO CONTINUE DOING IT THE SAME WAY.
SO WE WOULD BASICALLY CODIFY AND WRITE LANGUAGE TO SAY WHAT I THE EXAMPLE I USED.
IF IT'S SOMETHING LESS THAN THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO SUBDIVISION SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I HEARD WAS THAT RELATED TO 10305, AND THE LANGUAGE YOU SAW LAST MONTH WAS THE COMMISSION, OR A MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE ASKED US TO WRITE LANGUAGE TO CHANGE THE CITY'S POLICY WITH REGARD TO A PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS SEEN NOW DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S, IF YOU WILL, A LOOSENING OF THE RESTRICTIONS WHEN YOU'RE THE WAY THAT WE APPLY IT NOW, YOU HAVE PRIMARY ACCESSORY. THEY ARE OVER OR ENCROACHING, IF YOU WILL, ON MULTIPLE LOTS OF RECORD.
ALL OF THOSE LOTS OF RECORD ARE THEN ENCUMBERED AND ONE BECOME ONE BUILDING SITE.
THE PROPOSAL IS THAT NOW THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WHICH WILL INCLUDE STRUCTURES, DECKS, PORCHES, OVERHANGS THAT POOL SWIMMING POOLS WILL NO LONGER COUNT TO MAKE YOU GO TO A VARIANCE.
[00:30:03]
UNDERLYING LOT OF RECORD THAT'S THE DIRECTION.THAT'S A CHANGE FROM WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
SO I THINK WHAT THE CHAIR IS SAYING IS WE NEED TO GET A SENSE.
THEY WANT TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK, THAT'S FOR SURE.
BUT TO GO TO THEM AND JUST SAY, IF THIS IS THE CASE, WE JUST DISAGREE.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN REFUSE TO DO THE WORK, YOU KNOW, TO FIND LANGUAGE THAT WORKS.
YOU MAY PHILOSOPHICALLY DISAGREE WITH THAT POLICY DECISION.
AND WE VERY RARELY ARE PUT IN THIS POSITION.
RIGHT. IF WE FIND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD DISAGREES WITH THE CITY COMMISSION'S DIRECTION.
THE WAY THAT I SEE THAT, LET'S SAY WE HAVE A DISAGREEMENT ON THIS POLICY CHANGE, I THINK WE STILL HAVE TO WORK ON THE LANGUAGE, BUT THEN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT GOES FORWARD IS AND THAT'S WHY I THINK VICTORIA SAYING THERE'S TECHNICAL WAYS THAT IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT POLICY DIRECTION, YOU CAN POINT TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT YOU THINK ARE IMPACTED AND THAT THE PROPOSAL MAY NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE COMP PLAN POLICIES.
NOW, I CAUTION YOU, LIKE MANY THINGS, IF YOU MAKE THAT ARGUMENT AND YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME ARGUMENT TO SAY, I JUST DON'T LIKE IT, IT IS GOING TO CAUSE MORE DENSITY.
IT IS GOING TO CAUSE MORE TRAFFIC.
THOSE ARE THE SAME THINGS I TALK ABOUT IN QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS.
THEY'RE LAYPERSON OPINIONS AND THEY DON'T REALLY CARRY MUCH WEIGHT.
SO IF YOUR WORK IS VERY TECHNICAL, YOU'RE IN THE CODE.
YOU JUST KNOW THAT YOU'RE WORKING ON THE LANGUAGE.
BUT WHAT I FELT THE LAST MEETING AND I'VE BEEN TO ENOUGH OF THESE, IS THAT THERE ARE SOME OF YOU THAT ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE POLICY DIRECTION AND HOW TO DEAL WITH IT.
I DON'T I MEAN, YOU COULD NOT COME TO THE MEETINGS WHERE WE DISCUSS IT AND JUST KIND OF CHECK OUT.
BUT FROM YOU CAN WE DON'T DO THAT.
THAT'S CHICKEN. NO, WE DON'T DO THAT.
NO. BUT I MEAN THAT IS WHAT IT.
RIGHT. SO THAT IS WHAT IT IS THAT THAT'S PART OF THE DIFFICULTY.
AND IF WE GO FORWARD WE SHOULD MAKE WE SHOULD MAKE THE MEETINGS AS MEANINGFUL AS WE CAN.
TO ME, THAT'S A PERSONAL I SAY THIS IN ALL RESPECT.
SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO HOW ARE WE GOING TO PROCEED.
IF WE BRING YOU A BLANK SLATE, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND AT LEAST AN HOUR DECIDING WHERE WE'RE GOING.
YEAH. SO IF WE KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU EXPECT AND IF YOU CARE TO SHARE, YOU CAN SHARE.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SHARE YOUR POLICY POSITION ON THE DIRECTION THAT'S GIVEN DOESN'T MATTER.
OKAY. AND THEN FROM THERE, IT'S FINE TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT THAT LANGUAGE AND THIS PROPOSED CHANGE, HOW IT AFFECTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE AND THAT, IF YOU WILL, MIGHT BE YOUR HOMEWORK BETWEEN THIS MEETING AND THE 25TH. RIGHT.
AND IT'S THIS, TAMMI, THE WAY THE ENTIRE CODE IS WRITTEN AS THE PAB.
YES. AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
YEAH. I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS UNCLEAR.
I MEAN I THINK WE KNOW, BUT AFTER THE LAST MEETING AND EVEN DURING THE LAST MEETING.
I TALKED WITH KELLY SINCE THEN, AND IT'S JUST.
ARE WE RIGHT? YOU KNOW, WHAT DO WE DO? BECAUSE WE'RE SORT OF IN BETWEEN.
WE'RE STUCK IN BETWEEN THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE COMMISSION, AND WE'RE LIKE, WHAT DO WE DO? AND I PUT SOME THOUGHT TO IT, AND I THINK THAT'S HOW WE PROCEED.
WE ARE HERE TO DO YOUR WORK FOR YOU AND TO AND TO WORK WITH YOU.
[00:35:07]
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S YOUR CHANGE.THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. BUT YOU WOULD BE GOING TO CLARIFY, CLARIFY.
BUT WHEN YOU SAY CLARIFY AND AGAIN I'M NOT BEING ARGUMENTATIVE USING THAT WORD BECAUSE CLARIFICATION THAT WAS PEOPLE WERE DANCING AROUND THAT LANGUAGE.
THERE ARE TWO THINGS WE WERE ASKED TO DO.
AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE TRINGALI APPLICATION SO THAT CITIZENS, STAFF, ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS ALL ARE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT WHERE AN APPLICATION GOES.
IF YOU THINK THE LANGUAGE IS CLEAR NOW, LET'S MAKE IT CLEARER.
THAT WE SAY IF THAT'S BUT THAT IS NOT THE DIRECTION WE GOT.
THE DIRECTION WE GOT WAS THE THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY COMMISSION WANTS IT TO EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN TRINGALI TO THAT'S THE WAY WE PROCESS IT.
BUT IT IS BECAUSE WE'RE IN COURT.
I MEAN, IF WE SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY WENT OFF IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, WHICH IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THAT'S FINE. YEAH. SO I THINK THAT'S THE CLARIFICATION OF WHEN WHEN DOES WHEN WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES IN AND THERE ARE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD.
AT WHAT POINT DO THEY GO TO THE BOARD OF VARIANCE OR DO THEY GO TO.
I JUST THAT'S THAT'S THE BRIGHT LINE FOR THE SUBDIVISION.
THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN 11.0105, WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT FOR A SUBDIVISION PLAT, WHICH IS TRULY WHAT I THINK IS NEEDS CLARITY, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT I DON'T THINK 10305 REALLY CLARIFIES IT CORRECTLY.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S FAIR STAFF COULD TALK ABOUT THAT AT OUR WORKSHOP.
OKAY. BECAUSE IT ENUMERATES LIGHT YEARS OF THINGS THAT ARE INCLUDED FOR A PLAT, IT AND IT REFERENCES MULTIPLE OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE, BUT IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT STRUCTURES AND IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT SECTION ONE.
SO IF WE WANT THE CODE TO BE CLEAR AND CONSISTENT, THAT TO ME IS WHERE WE START.
THAT'S FAIR. YEAH I DID I KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE IN THE SUBDIVISION REGULATION, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THAT WE WOULD BE THERE WHERE THE CLARIFYING LANGUAGE IS OR WHERE THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE.
IT DOESN'T MATTER. BUT GO AHEAD.
GO AHEAD. I WAS I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK MR. BENNETT BECAUSE HE WAS ADDRESSING ME LAST IS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
WHAT I LAST HEARD WAS THAT YOU SAID WE COULD TAKE 10305 OR CHAPTER 11 OR BOTH AND CLARIFY WHAT? THAT I DON'T KNOW.
LET'S JUST CALL IT. WE DON'T WE DON'T.
WE HAVE THICK SKIN. THAT STAFF WAS WRONG.
WELL, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE WENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
BENNETT WE REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DISAGREEMENTS.
YOU THINK YOU THINK IT'S CRYSTAL CLEAR? OTHERS OF US DON'T.
IF IT WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR AND WHAT I DID IN WITHOUT REDOING THE WHOLE MAY 16TH, HEARING WHAT I DID AND WHAT I SAID WAS THIS WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT STAFF TOOK AN APPLICATION LIKE THIS STRAIGHT TO SUBDIVISION.
AND SO STAFF IS SAYING WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT THIS WAY IF YOU WANT US TO DO IT DIFFERENT.
[00:40:01]
SO THEY WANT IT TO GO IN THAT SAME DIRECTION THAT STAFF DID.AND SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, OTHER DIRECTIONS.
I KNOW, I KNOW I'D WANT TO BE HELPFUL TO YOU.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT ARGUING ABOUT WHAT WE DID IN THE TRINGALI APPLICATION ISN'T GETTING US INTO THE FUTURE WE NEED TO. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD.
AND MARK TO YOUR POINT, 1.0305 IS NOT CLEAR ON PLATS.
BUT IF THEY WERE DOING A NEW PLAT, I DON'T THINK IT IS.
IT'S IT'S CLEAR ON HOW TO DEAL WITH THE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD.
ALL RIGHT. AND AS FAR AS GOING TO 11 WHATEVER 10305 DEALS WITH THE NUMBERS OF LOTS THAT CAN BE BUILT ON THAT PROPERTY.
OKAY, I SEE, I SEE THAT JUST AS WELL AS ANYBODY THAT BELIEVES IT IN THEIR SOUL.
BUT THAT'S ALL IT SAYS, AND THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY FOR IT TO GO.
EVEN THOUGH WE DID SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I ALREADY GAVE YOU MY ARGUMENT, MY LEGAL ARGUMENT FOR DOING IT THAT WAY.
AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHY WE NEED TO KNOW HOW IT IS THAT YOU WANT US TO WRITE THAT CHANGE SECTION.
I WANT TO GO THROUGH WHAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING HERE AND AND LOOK AT IT.
OKAY. SO YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD MY ARGUMENTS OVER IT.
I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT THAT AGAIN.
YOU KNOW, I WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORDS AND I CAN PULL OUT ANY NUMBER OF PROPERTIES HERE AND SHOW YOU THE POSSIBILITIES THAT CAN HAPPEN FROM GOING TO ONE HOUSE TO GOING TO 12 HOUSES.
OKAY AND THAT'S WHAT THE UNDERLYING CHANGE IS GOING TO TACKLE.
AND WE CAN DO A NUMBER OF THINGS BY MINIMUM LOT SIZE [INAUDIBLE].
YOU CAN DO MINIMUM STRUCTURE SIZE AS OPPOSED TO DOING THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS I'M SORRY.
YOU CAN DO MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGES AND MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT.
SO I GUESS AND AND THAT'S THE CLARIFICATION PIECE OF THIS ISN'T IT.
RIGHT. SO IT IT ALMOST SOUNDS TO ME, FORGIVE ME IF I'M, I'M NOT HEARING YOU PROPERLY, MR. BENNETT, THAT YOU THINK THE PLANNING BOARD SHOULD DO WHAT EACH OF YOU FEEL OR COLLECTIVELY YOU FEEL LIKE IN A RECOMMENDATION IS THE BEST THING FOR THE CITY, DESPITE WHAT THE CITY COMMISSION HAS ASKED YOU TO DO.
I'M JUST ASKING, IS THAT WHAT YOU THINK THE PLANNING BOARD'S ROLE IS? SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN VICE MAYOR STURGIS SAYS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, OVERHANGS DECKS NOT BE COUNTED AS ENCUMBERING THOSE UNDERLYING LOTS AS STAFF, WE'RE PREPARED TO PUT LANGUAGE TOGETHER LIKE THAT.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THAT.
GILLETTE SAID MOST OF THESE STRUCTURES ARE BEHIND, THAT'S NOT TRUE.
ACROSS THE CITY, MANY OF THESE STRUCTURES ARE ON THE SIDE.
AND THAT COULD GO FOR TENNIS COURTS AND ALL THESE OTHER ITEMS. AND AGAIN, IN SOME OF THE AREAS AROUND NORTH OF HERE, THERE'S A QUITE A FEW HOUSES THAT HAVE MULTIPLE LOTS OF UNDERLYING RECORD LOTS.
AND THEY BUILT ANY NUMBER OF STRUCTURES ON THEM.
RIGHT. SO IN OUR CONVERSATION HERE I UNDERSTAND HOW YOU FEEL.
I'M SAYING HOW DO YOU THINK WE PROCEED.
AND I WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE NOT HERE TO EVALUATE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD IN GENERAL.
WE'RE HERE TO EVALUATE STRUCTURES ON UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORDS.
SO I THINK THE GOAL WAS TO LOOK AT STRUCTURES.
WELL, THAT'S EVEN MORE DETAILED THAN I THINK WHAT I'M, I'M ASKING IS.
I'M CONCERNED AGAIN ABOUT THE DENSITY INCREASES THAT RIGHT. SO YOU'RE RIGHT. AND THE POTENTIAL FOR CHANGING THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA AND DENSITY AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT.
[00:45:01]
I MEAN THAT IN WRITING THE 10305 WE SPENT, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY YEARS DOING THAT.AND I THOUGHT AT THAT TIME IT WAS CLEAR AND IT WAS CONSIDERED ALL THE IMPLICATIONS.
THIS CITY COMMISSION DOES NOT AGREE WITH THAT.
WELL, AND THEY ARE, THEY ARE THEY ARE THE POLICY MAKERS FOR THE CITY AND AS STAFF AGAIN, IF WE DON'T GET FURTHER THAN THIS, WE'RE AGAIN IN THE MIDDLE AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND MAKING IT SOUND LIKE, NO, I GUESS IT'S JUST BUT NO, I MEAN, IF THE COMMISSION AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO DO WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO ANYWAY, WHICH MEANS THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PROPOSED.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S TRUE.
I DON'T BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY HEARD THE CONVERSATION SINCE THE MEETING FROM INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS.
SO I AM NOT PUTTING THIS TO BED YET.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO GOING TO A MEETING WITH THEM AND HEARING WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY.
I JUST AM HEARING THAT THERE'S A MOVEMENT TO INCREASE THE DENSITY WITHIN THESE LOTS OF RECORDS.
THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME TOO.
OKAY. AND SO NOW WE'VE BEEN TASKED WITH DOING THE LANGUAGE TO GET THAT DONE.
SO HOW DO WE DO THAT OR DO WE DO WE BLOW THE WHOLE THING UP? I MEAN, I CONSIDER IT A LOT OF THINGS WITH VICTORIA.
DO YOU SEND JUST A MEMO TO THE CITY COMMISSION SAYING WE CAN'T DO THIS WORK? THE MAJORITY OF US ARE JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY OPPOSED.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SIT HERE AND WRITE YOUR LANGUAGE THAT WE AS CITIZENS DON'T AGREE WITH.
NO, I'M SAYING WE'RE GOING TO HOLD MEETINGS HERE.
AND IF THE MAJORITY OF THESE MEETINGS AND THE CITIZENS COME THROUGH AND SAY, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE INCREASES IN DENSITY WITHIN THE AREA, RIGHT, THEN THAT SHOULD TELL US WHICH WAY WE'RE GOING.
AND THAT'S THE REPORT WE GIVE BACK.
THEY DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS CHANGE.
IF THEY WANT TO MAKE IT, SO BE IT.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DOING WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
I'M STILL NOT SURE THAT THE MOVEMENT FOR INCREASED DENSITY IS UNIVERSAL.
THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
IS THAT WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS? AND THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M HEARING.
OKAY, SO GIVEN THAT WE'RE IN THIS CONVERSATION, WHAT I HEARD WAS IT'S OUR PERSONAL IT'S OUR OPINION. WE DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, BUT THIS IS THE DIRECTION WE WERE GIVEN.
SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE, ARE WE GOING TO FOLLOW WHAT THE COMMISSION SAYS AND JUST TWEAK THE LANGUAGE AND GIVE THE DIRECTION? OR ARE WE BECAUSE WE MIGHT AS WELL WE CAN HAVE A WORKSHOP AND START OVER AND SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THOUGH.
I MEAN, IF THE IF WE AT THE END OF THE DAY CREATE THE LANGUAGE THAT CLARIFIES AND THEN SUPPORTS WHAT THE DIRECTION HAS BEEN GIVEN TO STAFF, AND WE HAVE THIS LANGUAGE IN WHAT WOULD BECOME A RESOLUTION.
RIGHT? I KNOW ORDINANCE ORDINANCE.
OKAY. WE CAN SAY THAT WE DON'T AGREE WITH IT.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE. IT MIGHT BE 5-0, 7-0 OR [INAUDIBLE], I DON'T KNOW.
BUT I MEAN JUST THERE'S OTHER.
THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO GET THERE ARE WAYS TO APPROACH THIS.
THERE ARE ALL DIFFERENT THINGS THAT YOU CAN MEAN IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T MAKE IT CLEARER WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PLANNING BOARD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, THEY DON'T GIVE US ANY DIRECTION ON HOW TO HANDLE THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO VOTE ON WHETHER WE SHOULD INCREASE DENSITY OR NOT.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON WHAT WE THINK, THE LENGTH, THE PROCESS AND THE LANGUAGE.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY, WELL, WE DON'T AGREE.
BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GIVE AN INDICATION TO THE STAFF.
[00:50:01]
I AM NOT SURE IN MY MIND THAT IF THE TRINGALI PROPERTY HAD SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AS A PROPOSED SOLUTION, THAT IT WOULD HAVE EVER COME UP. I THINK PART OF IT WAS THE STRUCTURE.I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S A CHOICE, BUT THAT'S THE DEVELOPER'S CHOICE.
WE CAN'T CONTROL IT. WE DON'T.
BUT THAT IS WHERE A LOT OF THE EMOTION WAS.
IT CHANGED THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. NOW LET ME GO OVER TO THIS VOTE.
IT MEANS THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT QUITE RIGHT.
RIGHT. WELL, JUST TO BE CLEAR, NOT LIKE SOME LAWSUITS.
I MEAN, VERY FEW. WE HAVE INSURANCE COVERAGE.
I MEAN, THIS IS WHY WE PAY INSURANCE PREMIUMS. IT'S NOT REAL EXPENSIVE.
SO WE HAVE PAID FOR OUTSIDE COUNSEL THAT'S WORKING WITH ME DOING THE HARD STUFF.
THAT'S RIGHT. BECAUSE THERE'S NOT.
WELL, THERE MIGHT BE SOME VALUE ADD COMING OUT.
YOU MIGHT GET SOME STEERING CURRENTS.
I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE REALLY PRAYING THAT HE'S GOING TO BE THE ONE THAT COMES AND SAVES THE DAY FROM OUR STAFF MADNESS, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY DO IN A QUASI JUDICIAL.
THEY'RE JUST DECIDING WHETHER THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS WERE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO INJECT.
HE'S NOT GOING TO INJECT HIS OPINION IN THERE.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'LL BE HELPFUL TO OUR EXERCISE.
BUT I THINK THE PROCESS, LIKE YOU SAID, PETE, IS IS WHAT WE'RE MISSING IN THIS.
YEAH. AND MAYBE THAT'S AN AREA THAT MAYBE THAT'S HOW WE APPROACH THIS FROM, FROM.
I LIKE WHAT NICK IS SAYING ABOUT GOING INTO 110105 AND SEEING WHAT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THEN.
[INAUDIBLE] I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.
NO, NO, BECAUSE YOU JUMP FROM WHAT IS POTENTIALLY DEVELOPABLE, HOW MANY UNITS YOU CAN PUT TO HOW YOU'RE GOING TO DEVELOP IT, YOU'VE GOT TO GET YOU HAVE TO DO THE FIRST THING FIRST.
HOW MANY UNITS CAN WE PUT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY? THAT'S THE FIRST THING.
SO WITH TRINGALI, THEY HAD 12 BUILDABLE SITES.
EVEN WITH 10305, THEY HAD 12 BUILT.
THEY HAD FIVE STRUCTURES THERE.
NOW HOW MANY PLUS SEVEN UNTOUCHED VACANT 25 HOW MANY WERE THERE? HOW MANY SITES WERE ALREADY DEVELOPED? 5.
5. OKAY, SO THEY HAD 5 BUILDING SITES, NOT 12.
YOU MEAN OUT OF THAT WHOLE BLOCK? WELL, OUT OF THAT PROPERTY.
SO WHEN WE'RE. THAT'S INTERESTING JUST REAL QUICK.
SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
SO YOU'VE GOT 20 25 BY 100 FOOT UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD I AND THERE ARE FIVE STRUCTURES THAT WERE THERE WERE.
THE WAY 10305 WAS WRITTEN I KNOW WHY, I KNOW YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS.
YES. THERE'S A HOUSE, THERE'S A GARAGE, THERE'S WHATEVER IT'S ON IT THAT BECOMES ONE BUILDING LOT, ONE BUILDING SITE THAT COULD BE 12 UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD ON THERE.
IT WAS STILL DESIGNED AS ONE BUILDING LOT.
THAT IS NEVER HOW WE'VE APPLIED IT.
SORRY, SORRY. WHEN YOU DRAW THOSE STRAIGHT LINES FOR THOSE LOTS, IF THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE, WHETHER RIGHT NOW IT'S A SHED, A POOL, A FENCE, A PRIMARY STRUCTURE, IF THEY TOUCH THE UNDERLYING LOT OF RECORD THAT LOTS ENCUMBERED, IT GETS SUCKED UP INTO THE BUILDING SITE.
BUT THEY'LL BE TRINGALI, THERE WERE LIKE 8 UNTOUCHED, 25 BY 100 FOOT.
YOU COULD DRAW THE LINES WITH THE PLAT.
ALL RIGHT. SO ALTHOUGH THERE WERE 8 UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD, WHICH AGAIN WAS THE ISSUE, RIGHT.
THAT WAS ONE BUILDING SITE AND IF THAT IS TO BE APPLIED, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I BROUGHT THIS UP.
[00:55:04]
DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT HOW WE GET THAT.SOME OF THEM UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DISAGREE.
WHERE DO WE GO WITH IT? LET ME LET ME GIVE YOU ANOTHER POINT.
CAN YOU PULL UP FOURTH STREET AND ALACHUA NOW IT'S RIGHT DOWN THE STREET HERE.
OKAY. TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE HERE.
IF YOU HAVE A PARCEL ID NUMBER, THAT'S GREAT.
THIS IS THE NORTH WEST NORTHWEST CORNER OF ALACHUA AND THIRD OR SOMEWHERE IN THERE.
THIS IS THE PALM HOUSE DOWN THERE.
WHICH ONE IS IT? THIS ONE HERE.
OKAY. THAT ONE MIGHT BE EXAMPLE.
THAT MIGHT BE A BAD EXAMPLE BECAUSE THAT'S A GINORMOUS HOUSE.
WELL, IT MAY BE A BAD EXAMPLE, BUT, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE ANY GOOD EXAMPLES? I JUST WANT TO SHOW I CAN PULL UP THE TRINGALI SITE.
THE JUDGE HAS A HEARING SCHEDULED.
WE'RE NOT. WELL, LET ME DO THIS ONE HERE.
OKAY. OKAY. AND THIS WAS THIS WAS ONE OF THE EXTREME EXAMPLES.
BUT THAT'S WHY I WANT TO SHOW THIS OKAY.
OVER ALACHUA STREET AND BETWEEN FOURTH NORTH FOURTH AND NORTH THIRD THAT'S.
OKAY. SO THAT'S GOT 123456 LOTS.
LET ME GIVE YOU ANOTHER NUMBER AGAIN.
YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS WHAT CAN HAPPEN, TAMMI.
MY CONCERN IS THAT MAYBE UNINTENTIONAL, BUT BY MAKING THE CHANGES, WE MAY START CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF EXISTING COMMUNITIES. SOMEBODY'S GOT TO CONVINCE ME THAT I MAKE A CHANGE THAT HELPS US AND PULL UP THE UNDERLYING, MANAGE IT BETTER, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SEE A MAJOR CHANGE.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE HIM GOING DOWN ON FIRST AVENUE.
AND A LOT OF THOSE ARE FOUR AND FIVE AND SIX, LOTS OF RECORD THAT ARE IN.
AND THEY ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY SELL OFF ONE 25 FOOT LOT.
YOU THINK THAT'S ONE BUILDING SITE? NO, NOTHING BUT ONE UNIT, I THINK AT 10305.
I'M NOT SAYING I'M NOT OKAY, BUT LET ME LET ME GO ON HERE FOR A MINUTE, OKAY.
IF I'M CORRECT, THAT HAS 12 UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD OKAY OKAY.
YOU'RE UNDERLYING LOT EACH I'M JUST POINTING OUT YEAH.
EACH ONE OF THOSE NUMBERS I THINK EACH ONE OF THOSE IS AN UNDERLYING LOT OKAY.
RIGHT? SO I AS I INTERPRET WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, IS THAT ALL THOSE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD COULD BE DEVELOPED. NO, EXCEPT FOR WHERE THE HOUSE IS.
NO. WHAT DO YOU MEAN, NO? WELL, WELL, YES.
I CAN ONLY EXPLAIN HOW FOR THE LAST 16 YEARS AND BEFORE THAT HOW WE HAVE BEEN APPLYING 10305.
IN THIS SCENARIO, THE PROPERTY OWNER COMES AND WANTS TO SUB, SUBDIVIDE, RESTORE.
THEY WANT TO USE EVERY LOT OF RECORD ON HERE.
THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE ROUGHLY BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ALL THE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE OF THE LOTS ARE ENCUMBERED, RIGHT? THE REST SO FIVE OF THESE LOTS THAT THIS PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS TOUCHING ARE THE ONE DEVELOPMENT SITE, CORRECT.
[01:00:06]
PLUS THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS 123456789 MORE DEVELOPABLE SITES THAT TODAY, IF THEY WERE THEY JUST WANT TO REPLACE THIS KNOCK IT DOWN, REPLACE IT.THOSE FOUR LOTS ARE ENCUMBERED AND THEY CAN BUILD NINE MORE UNITS.
YOU'RE SAYING THEY CAN BUILD NINE? YEAH, I'M SAYING THEY CAN BUILD NINE WITHOUT A VARIANCE TODAY BECAUSE THERE ARE LOTS OF RECORD BEFORE THE 50 FOOT RULE.
AND THEY ARE NOT TOUCHED BY ONE THING ON HERE.
NOW, IF I COULD JUST GO ONE STEP FURTHER.
THE PROPOSAL IS THE AND I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING, AND I KNOW THERE ARE ARGUMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT SAY, WELL, BY GOLLY, YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG ALL THE TIME BECAUSE THIS HOUSE IS HERE.
THAT'S FAIR. BUT HERE WE ARE, FAST FORWARDED 21 YEARS AND WE'RE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE NOW.
WE'RE BEING ASKED BY THE COMMISSION TO DO THIS.
LET'S JUST SAY, LIKE THIS TREE IS A SHED, OKAY? RIGHT HERE. THAT MEANS THIS LOT RIGHT HERE HAS A SHED ON IT.
THESE OTHER FOUR HAVE THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
NOW WE HAVE WITH THIS SHED FIVE LOTS OF RECORD ARE ENCUMBERED IN ORDER TO SPLIT THEM UP AND GET THEM BACK AND SPLIT THEM UP, YOU HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE INCLUDING FOR THIS.
EVEN IF YOU JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS ONE OUT, YOU'D HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE.
THE PROPOSAL IS THIS ONE IS IGNORED.
IT IS NOT ENCUMBERED BECAUSE THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THAT'S THE NEW PROPOSAL THAT DOESN'T COUNT ANYMORE TO ENCUMBER THAT LOT BECAUSE IT'S AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, NOT PRIMARY.
THAT'S THE THE CHANGE AND THE DIRECTION WE RECEIVED.
ONE PARCEL NUMBER ONE PARCEL FOR ALL OF THOSE LOTS.
YES, YES, IT'S UNDER ONE OWNERSHIP.
IT'S JUST A PROPERTY APPRAISER DESIGNATION.
OKAY, BUT IF WHAT THE CITY COMMISSION IS ASKING FOR ISN'T THAT A PROBLEM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE PARCEL? NO, BECAUSE WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THAT YOU CAN RIGHT NOW, IF THIS PROPERTY OWNER WANTED TO, THEY COULD CALL THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND GET A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PARCEL NUMBERS, COULDN'T THEY? WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THEY DO IT ALL THE TIME.
THEY JUST ASK FOR A PARCEL NUMBER AND THEN THEY SELL THIS PART OFF.
WE HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF IT WHATSOEVER.
ALL WE CAN DO IS THEN GO BACK AND JUDGE WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR PERMIT FOR BUILDING.
AND YOU JUST SOLD THIS LOT OFF AFTER YOU TOOK THE STRUCTURE DOWN BECAUSE YOU COULD GO GET A DEMO.
WELL, THIS IS VERY HISTORIC, BUT LET'S JUST SAY IT'S NOT RIGHT.
YOU GO GET A DEMO PERMIT, YOU KNOCK IT DOWN AND YOU SELL OFF THE LOTS, AND THEN YOU COME BACK AND YOU SAY, I OWN THIS 25 FOOT BY 100, AND I WANT TO BUILD MY HOUSE ON IT, AND STAFF'S GOING TO SAY SORRY TODAY.
YOU YOU WOULD HAVE HAD TO GET A VARIANCE OR THE OTHER ONE YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO.
KELLY, LET ME ASK YOU, IT WOULD BE A REAL PROBLEM.
AND WE ACTUALLY HAD SOMEBODY THAT CAME IN THAT HAD A NUMBER OF PARCEL NUMBERS ON A VACANT LOT, AND WE WERE LIKE, OH NO, PUT THAT ALL BACK TOGETHER BEFORE YOU COME BACK IN THE CITY, AND WE'LL DEAL WITH YOU WHEN YOU DO.
I THINK IT IS TECHNICALLY THAT OWNER OF THE WHOLE PIECE OF PROPERTY COULD SELL THAT 25 FOOT SELL THIS TOMORROW AND PUT A 25 FOOT WIDE TOWNHOUSE ON IT, RIGHT? YEP. AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT SO, MARK.
SO, MARK, IF YOU WERE ON THE CITY COMMISSION AND SENDING THE DIRECTION TO US, I THINK WHAT YOU WOULD SAY IS WE WOULD NEED A CHANGE, A REAL CLARIFICATION, AND THAT IS THAT THIS ENTIRE SITE NOW ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARCEL, THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER FROM.
THAT'S FINE. PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER WAS THAT WAS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS AS THIS STARTS AS IT STARTS OUT IN THE BEGINNING TO PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH WAS ONE BUILDING LOT IS WHAT IT'S THERE.
THAT'S IT. NOW IF THAT IF IT'S BEEN DOING SOMETHING ELSE.
TOTALLY MY RECOLLECTION THAT WAS NEVER THE INTENT.
[01:05:03]
RIGHT. OKAY. AND MAYBE THAT'S HOW DO WE HOW DO WE PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOODS CHARACTER OF THIS COMMUNITY.AND AND YET SOMEHOW TO A TO A COMPROMISE IN HOW WE, WE TREAT THESE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORDS.
NOW DOES THIS ONE CHANGE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW.
IS THAT AN HISTORICAL DISTRICT OR IS IT.
WOULD THEY BE UNDER A SUBSET OF UNDER THE.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT HELPS YOU WITH THAT.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE LOTS EXIST FREE AND CLEAR.
THEY COULD INFLUENCE THE PHYSICAL OUTSIDE STRUCTURE IN TERMS OF APPEARANCE.
YES. OKAY, NOW WHAT YOU COULD DO IS ANY LOTS THAT WERE SPLIT OFF OF A STRUCTURE, A PARCEL LIKE THIS, YOU COULD HAVE MINIMUM LOTS OF SAY 50FT OR 75FT.
SO WHERE YOU'RE SAYING NOW THOSE ARE THREE 25 FOOT LOTS TO BUILD ON THAT SITE.
SO. SO HOW DO YOU WANT TO DO THIS? SHOULD WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING THEN WITH THE COMMISSION TO SAY, ARE YOU NUTS? BUT THINK ABOUT OR WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED NO, BUT I MEAN, WE WE CAN'T GO INTO A PLANNING SAYING WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE LANGUAGE.
BUT BUT AT THIS POINT, HOW ARE WE GOING TO OTHER THAN WHEN YOUR BOSS COMES IN AND SAYS, I WANT THIS, HOW DO YOU AND YOU MEET WITH THEM FACE TO FACE AND YOU SAY, GOSH, BOSS, I'VE GOT IT WRONG.
I'VE GOT A LITANY OF REASONS WHY THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.
AND HE SAYS, I DON'T CARE, I WANT IT.
AND SO THAT PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON THIS BOARD.
YES. TO SAY, OKAY, YEAH, YOU KNOW, THE ORDINANCE WILL BE READ TWICE.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT WE ARE READY FOR THAT KIND OF I DON'T THINK WE ARE FACE TO FACE DIRECTION.
WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE READY TO DO THAT.
I'M SORRY. NO, WE'RE NOT READY.
HE'S PROBABLY TECHNICALLY CORRECT.
THERE'S NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF.
I MEAN, DISAGREEING SHOULD NOT CAUSE US HEARTBURN.
I MEAN, IF THAT'S THE PROBLEM AND THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS, WHAT I SAY INCORRECTLY, WE CAN FIX THAT.
I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A JOINT MEETING.
I'M SORRY. WE SHOULD HAVE A JOINT MEETING.
THE REASON WHY, MARK IS BECAUSE WITH A JOINT MEETING, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? WE'RE GOING TO SEND ORDINANCE LANGUAGE THAT IS DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED AND DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY'VE DIRECTED AND JUST SAID, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, THIS IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO DO. AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO BLOW UP AND AND BE WELL.
THEY'RE GOING TO PUT US. WE'RE GOING TO BE LIKE THIS.
RIGHT, VICTORIA? WE WANT TO AVOID THAT, YES WE DO.
YES. WELL, IF YOU GUYS COLLECTIVELY THINK I IF YOU NICK, YOU GOT YOU UNDERSTAND THE BUSINESS.
YOU'RE IN THE BUSINESS, SO I WILL I'M VERY CLEAR.
I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO.
I MEAN, YEAH, YOU CAN ALL AGREE TO DISAGREE.
I WOULD LIKE YOU TO PREPARE SOMETHING AND HAVE IT SENT OUT TO US.
I THINK YOU DID A PERFECT EXAMPLE RIGHT HERE, MARK.
I THINK THAT IS THE POSTER CHILD OF AN EXAMPLE, BECAUSE THE ONE THAT I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT ME EITHER.
YOU INCLUDE THE RIGHT OF WAYS THAT ARE IN THERE.
YEAH, IT MIGHT BE EIGHT UNITS AN ACRE.
SO MY POINT AND I'M BIG ON THE PLANNING ASPECT OF IT BECAUSE MARK TO YOUR POINT, NOTHING REDUCES THE DENSITY MORE OR CONFORMS MORE WITH THE FLUM THAN A PLAT.
IT MEETS THE EXACT REGULATIONS TODAY.
NO ONE WILL, YOU CAN'T PLAT A 25 FOOT WIDE LOT IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT 25 BY 100.
YOU CAN'T. SO, YEAH, I MEAN, SO THAT WAS MY POINT ALL ALONG, IS THAT A PLAT SHARES A LOT OF THIS.
THAT'S INTERESTING. SO WE HAVE 25 FOOT TOWNHOUSES GOING IN.
[01:10:04]
YEAH. BUT SHE'S TAKING.YEAH BUT NOT BUT NOT IN EIGHT UNITS AN ACRE OVER THIS AMOUNT OF, OVER THIS ACREAGE RIGHT HERE.
RIGHT. YOU'D HAVE TO BE EITHER C-3.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE. A DIFFERENT, YOU'D BE IN A DIFFERENT AREA.
SO IN MOST OF THESE AREAS, THE PLAT CURES THE PROBLEM.
THAT'S WHY I THINK THIS DISCUSSION IS IMPORTANT, I THINK AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL, BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THE WAY MARK DOES, THAT SOMEONE COULDN'T WALK IN ON LOT THREE AND GET A 25 FOOT WIDE BUILDING PERMIT AND THEY CAN'T.
WELL, THE HEARINGS WE HAD 15 YEARS AGO.
YEAH, BUT BUT BUT REGARDLESS, THAT'S THE WAY IT'S BEING ENFORCED RIGHT NOW.
AND I THINK PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT.
AND I THINK THEY BELIEVE THAT 1.0305.
IF WE VOTE THIS WAY IN YOUR WAY, THAT THEY CAN'T DO IT, BUT THEY COULD.
SO I THINK THE AREA NEEDS TO BE CLEARED.
AND IF WE CHOOSE TO DISAGREE, WE AGREE TO DISAGREE.
BUT I THINK THIS POINT BRINGS OUT SOMETHING I HAD NOT THOUGHT ABOUT THE FACT THAT OKAY, I WAS THINKING ABOUT AGAIN, I GO BACK TO FIRST AVENUE BECAUSE THAT WAS THOSE WERE ALL 25 FOOTERS GOING DOWN THERE, SPINNING OFF ONE 25 FOOT LOT THERE.
THAT'S AN UNDER SPEC LOT UNDERLYING LOT UNDERLYING LOT.
AND I SURE AS HECK DON'T WANT TO SEE 6 OR 7 TOWNHOUSES IN THAT BLOCK OF PROPERTY.
BUT I'LL GO BACK TO THE POINT.
WELL, THEN WE HAVE TO SIT IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION.
WE DO. I MEAN, THEN WE CAN'T GET AROUND A JOINT MEETING.
WELL, THEN, BECAUSE WE CAN'T SIT HERE AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT, THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT.
WE HAVE TO SIT AND TALK ABOUT OUR CONCERNS.
YOU WANT TO GET IT DOWN TO SOMETHING.
THREE WOULD BE PROBABLY THE PRIME NUMBER, NOT MORE THAN THREE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES.
THEN WE HAVE TO THEN THEY HAVE TO SAY WE DON'T AGREE OR WE AGREE.
THAT'S THAT'S THEIR THAT'S THEIR RIGHT.
THEY ALWAYS PUT DOWN. SO WE HAVE TO GO FROM THERE AND SAY ARE WE GOING TO TAKE THEIR DIRECTION OR.
OR THEY WERE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY.
SO BUT I'M TELLING YOU WHAT THE INTENT WAS.
AND 10305 HAS WASN'T THAT MUCH LONGER.
THAT'S WHAT WE ALL THINK. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DOCUMENT, SO TO SPEAK.
HAS IT BEEN PARTS? HAVE IT BEEN SHORTENED OVER THE YEARS? I DON'T KNOW HOW SOON WE COULD GO.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING ONE, THE CURRENT IS WHAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE? OKAY. SO, CAN I CLARIFY ONE THING? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
I'M HEARING ON THIS EXAMPLE 32.
IS THAT TRUE? IS THAT HOW YOU UNDERSTAND IT? THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TELLING ME.
BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M TELLING YOU.
OKAY, SO THERE'S A FUNDAMENTAL MISUNDERSTANDING THERE.
BUT IF THAT IS TRUE, THEN I THINK THEN THE PLATTING WOULD BE A WAY TO. WE'RE STILL GOING TO GET MORE NO TIME OUT.
HE KNOWS HOW MANY LOTS HE CAN BUILD.
NO. IF YOU'VE GOT 12 LOTS THAT HE CAN BUILD, HE'S GOING TO PLAT IT FOR 12.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING AT THIS POINT HERE.
THE DIFFERENCE IS ONE BUILDING LOT, WHICH IS THE WAY MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WITH THIS, NOT 12 BUILDING LOTS, WHICH IS THE WAY SOME PEOPLE HAVE INTERPRETED.
LET ME TELL YOU, I WISH, I HOPE, I WANT YOU TO BE RIGHT.
[01:15:04]
BUT IF YOU'RE NOT, THEN WHAT'S PLAN B? OUR PLAN HERE IS TO MAKE IT SO THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS BOARD AND WRITE IT DOWN.AND THIS IS NOT TO BE A SMART ASS, OKAY? IT'S NOT.
I'M JUST TELLING YOU, THAT'S A TAKING CLASSIC TAKING.
THERE'S NO WAY WE'LL GET AWAY WITH THAT.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY MY PREDECESSOR, KELLY'S PREDECESSOR, WAS ALLOWING THESE OTHER UNDERLYING LOTS TO BE DEVELOPED, BECAUSE BY RIGHT, IN 1857, THE LEGISLATURE MADE THE DECISION FOR US, FOR THIS TOWN AND EVERY CITIZEN HERE.
AND THEY SAID, AND WE IN 2006 DID A GOOD THING BY SAYING, WHOA, BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE YET.
I MEAN, I WOULD JUST TELL YOU AND I JUST GIVE ADVICE IF THAT IS THE INTERPRETATION.
THAT'S WHY I WAS WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE FIVE ACRES.
YOU'D HAVE A TAKINGS CLAIM SO FAST WE'D BE BUYING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PROPERTY.
AND IF THAT'S WHAT THE TOWN WANTS TO DO, WE CAN DO IT.
SO, YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS GOING BACK TO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WHAT WHAT THEY PROBABLY WANTED TO DO, BUT THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN ENFORCE WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. SO, SIR, WOULD YOU COME UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? THANK YOU FOR WAITING.
NO WORRIES. JACK EMBER, 1003 BROOME STREET, FERNANDINA BEACH.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THEM IS A LOT OF WISDOM THAT.
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE CULTURE OF THE TOWN.
IT'S ABOUT NOT LISTENING TO A BUNCH OF SEMANTICS, TO SHOVE YOU A DIFFERENT WAY THAN YOU YOU'VE ALREADY FOCUSED ON AND YOU'VE ALREADY BROUGHT IN.
THANK GOD THERE WAS CLARIFICATION IN 2006.
AND IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT WHERE WE'RE STILL A SMALL TOWN LOOKING AT THIS THING.
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT TRINGALI WOULD PROBABLY FIT IN HERE SOMEWHERE.
SO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT MISS BOURQUE WAS TALKING ABOUT IS INCORRECT.
THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD ON A BUNCH OF 25 BY 100 LOTS.
WHAT'S BUILDABLE? SETBACKS. OKAY.
DID YOU ALL HAVE TO CONSIDER EVERYTHING? THAT'S WHERE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CAME IN.
THE ANALOGY WAS GIVEN AT THE MAY 16TH SUPPOSEDLY QUASI JUDICIAL MEETING.
I DON'T REALLY CALL IT A HEARING, EVEN THAT THE LAWYER FOR THE PEOPLE, ONE OF THEM, MADE THE STATEMENT BECAUSE MISS BOURQUE MADE THE STATEMENT THAT WHILE WE'VE BEEN DOING IT THIS WAY FOR YEARS, THAT'S WHY WE THOUGHT WE COULD DO TRINGALI.
AND THE STATEMENT WAS BY OUR LAWYER.
HE SAID, TAKE THE ANALOGY THAT YOU'VE BEEN GOING DOWN A1A DOING 75 MILES AN HOUR FOR YEARS AND YOU GOT AWAY WITH IT. AND THEN ONE DAY YOU GET CAUGHT BY A POLICE OFFICER FOR DOING 75 MILES AN HOUR DOWN A1A AND SOMEBODY SAYS, WELL, WE'VE BEEN DOING IT THAT WAY FOR YEARS.
IT'S THE SAME SORT OF ANALOGY.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WAS WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY TO STOP DENSITY, TO STOP COOKIE CUTTER CONSTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, BUT TO MAINTAIN SOME KIND OF CULTURAL HERITAGE THROUGH THE WHOLE TOWN.
ALL RIGHT. SO ARGUING SEMANTICS OR OR MY, MY FAVORITE ARGUMENT FROM THE CITY WAS, WELL, IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU PUT THE COMMAS AND THE PERIODS AS TO HOW THIS READS.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? IT DOESN'T.
SO, YOU HAVE THREE DECISIONS TO GO AHEAD AND SAY, OKAY, TO BACK UP, MAKE
[01:20:10]
YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS OR TO SAY, WE DON'T WANT TO RECOMMEND THIS AT ALL.WE WANT TO DO NOTHING, WHICH IS OKAY.
YOU MADE THE ANALOGY OF, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO DO WHAT OUR BOSS DOES.
YOU KNOW WHO WHO'S THE BOSS? THE PEOPLE OF FERNANDINA, NOT ME.
THIS WHOLE ISLAND OF AMELIA IS IS SUBJECT TO WHATEVER YOU GUYS DECIDE NOW.
MR. BENNETT ALSO SAID, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE GONE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? ABSOLUTELY, THEY SHOULD HAVE.
WHY ARE WE HERE TALKING NOW? RIGHT. WHY IS IT SO CRITICAL TO GET THIS DISCUSSION AND GET THIS RECOMMENDATION AND GET THE CITY COMMISSION TO SAY, OKAY, IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS LAWSUIT, YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO LET THIS LAWSUIT PLAY OUT AND LET THAT BE INFORMATION, CREDIBILITY OR NOT, CREDIBILITY FOR THIS WHOLE ISSUE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DECIDE ON.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S INVESTMENTS BEING DONE.
OKAY. THAT'S A DIFFERENT THAN LIFESTYLE AND CULTURE AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE STEPPING ON ANYBODY'S TOES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE WANT THE CITY TO BE.
ALL RIGHT. SO GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE EVEN LOOKED AT THE 10305.
THE INTRODUCTION HERE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN OPEN SPACE VISUAL CORRIDORS, NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER PROPERTY VALUES AND VISUAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF RESIDENTIAL AREAS WHEREVER THEY MAY EXIST, A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL UNIT OR A DUPLEX STRUCTURE ON ANY AUXILIARY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SWIMMING POOL, BLAH BLAH BLAH IS ONE BUILDING LOT.
I MEAN, WE HAD A ONE BUILDING LOT.
OKAY. I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY HOURS WERE SPENT IN WRITING THAT.
OKAY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WEEKS AND DAYS AND HOURS AND MULTIPLE NIGHTS HERE UNTIL 11:00.
JUST TO PROTECT THAT PART OF THE CITY.
WHEN YOU WROTE THAT, WERE YOU THINKING ABOUT THE AREA OUTLINED IN RED? YES. I MEAN, THAT'S ONE BUILDING LOT.
THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN.
THAT WAS IT SOUNDED SO CLEAR TO US.
INTERPRETATION IS ANOTHER THING.
IT'S LIKE THE ELEPHANT AND THE BLIND GUYS OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW.
WHAT IS IT? OKAY. WE THOUGHT THIS WAS ALL VERY CLEAR.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO HOW IT GOT INTERPRETED AND WHY.
I CAN THINK OF REASONS WHY, BUT IF YOU JUST READ THE WORDS, IT'S.
I CAN'T SEE WHERE THERE'S CLARIFICATION NEEDED.
AND THEN THE RELIEF TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT WAS THE RELIEF TO GET IT.
SO WE DIDN'T GET SUED ALL THE TIME.
BUT WELL, IF YOU TAKE THIS LOT AND I AND IF YOU OVERLAY TRINGALI ON IT, IT'S ALMOST THE SAME SHAPE.
IT'S NOT AS MANY LOT LESS THAN THREE ACRES, I THINK, ON TRINGALI.
BUT PULL UP YOUR INTERPRETATION WAS THAT THE 10305 SAID, OKAY, IT'S THE RED BORDER.
WELL, THAT'S TRINGALI THAT'S ONE BUILDING LOT, RIGHT? ONE LOT. SO NOW ALL ALL THE DEVELOPER DID IS CAME IN AND SAID, I'M GOING TO PLAT THIS OUT FOR DIFFERENT.
I'M GOING TO HAVE VANILLA STRUCTURES INSTEAD OF CHOCOLATE STRUCTURES.
HE DIDN'T REPURPOSE THE LAND, I MEAN, THE TYPE OF STRUCTURES REPURPOSED.
SO I'M SITTING THERE SAYING, NOW YOU'VE MADE AN ARGUMENT THAT SUPPORTS THE DECISION THAT WHAT WAS WHAT WAS PROPOSED, WHAT? I'M JUST GOING TO GO BACK ONE MORE TIME.
THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS SO THAT AS A BUYER OF PROPERTY, IF I GO INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND I BUY THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT SIDE THERE ON THE TOP, I KNOW I'VE GOT ONE UNIT ACROSS THE STREET, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING AT FOREVER.
[01:25:02]
YOU BUY A HOUSE WHERE YOU'RE LIVING, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN SOMEBODY COMES IN AND BUILDS 16 UNITS NEXT TO YOU.THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SIGNED UP FOR.
THAT'S NOT WHERE YOU PUT YOUR MONEY.
I'M NOT GOING TO COMMENT ON THAT, THOUGH, MADAM CHAIR.
I'M JUST TRYING TO LET PEOPLE HERE UNDERSTAND WE GOT THAT.
I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
IT WAS THERE, THAT'S ALL, AND I DON'T I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW.
ANYWAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.
WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN WHO.
AND TWO MORE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK NEED A MOTION? YEAH. HANG ON.
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? HANG ON A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
HANG ON. OH, DON'T ADJOURN YET, PLEASE.
OKAY. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
YES, MY NAME IS DOUGLAS CLARK.
I LIVE AT 816 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET.
THE TRAFFIC IS FIVE OF THEM ARE SOLD.
OKAY. I THINK ONE OF THEM IS RENTED.
ONE OF THE HOUSES HAS TWO CARS, A BOAT AND A GOLF CART.
THE CROWDING OF SEVENTH STREET HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
THEY RUN ON SEVENTH STREET ON SATURDAY.
THERE'S GOLF CARTS THAT GO DOWN.
IT'S IN THE TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S A BUSTLING AREA THAT IT REALLY SHOULDN'T BE.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEPLETION AND DEGRADATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES.
I MEAN, FOLKS, WE ARE IN THE CROWN JEWEL OF FLORIDA.
THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL AREA.
SO IT'S, I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THE CITIES THAT HAVE DONE A MORATORIUM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS BUT FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO MENTION ABOUT THE CULTURE PART OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU GOT TO WATCH BLUE ZONE ON NETFLIX WAS A REALLY IT WAS ABOUT FIVE AREAS IN THE WORLD WHERE PEOPLE LIVE OVER 100 YEARS OLD.
ONE OF THEM WAS OKINAWA, JAPAN.
IT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE.
THEY'RE HEALTHY, THEY WORK, THEY HAVE SOCIAL, A LOT OF SOCIAL.
IT'S REALLY GOOD. OKINAWA, JAPAN, IN THE LAST THREE YEARS HAS HAD FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS COME IN.
ALL OF A SUDDEN THE HEALTH, EVERYTHING ELSE IS GOING DOWN.
AND SOME OF THIS IS DENSITY, SOME OF IT'S FLOODING, EVEN PORTLAND, OREGON, 2016 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, AUSTIN, TEXAS, EAST HAMPTON, NEW YORK, ASPEN, COLORADO.
SO I'M SUGGESTING A MORATORIUM SIX MONTHS A YEAR, WHATEVER YOU FEEL IS BEST.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. MARGARET KIRKLAND, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CONSERVE NASSAU.
ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN THE CITY IS THAT WE TEND TO LOOK AT THINGS IN THE SHORT TERM, AND WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THE LONG TERM. HOW DO I KNOW? THIS IS BECAUSE I SPENT FOUR YEARS WORKING ON A DRAFT FOR THE MOST OF THE THE CHAPTERS IN THE, IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT IS A PROBLEM WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE LONG TERM THERE.
[01:30:04]
IF WE CONTINUE IN THE WAY THAT WE ARE DOING NOW, WHERE WE ARE HAVING ALL OF THIS DENSITY AND ALL OF THIS BUILDING, THERE ARE PARTS, AS I SAID LAST TIME I WAS HERE, THERE ARE PARTS OF THIS CITY THAT I'M VERY WORRIED ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND MAYBE THREE TREES.THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TO PROCESS STORMWATER.
IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO TO PROTECT US AGAINST STORMS. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO KEEP THE TEMPERATURES HERE FROM GOING SKY HIGH, WHICH IS WHERE THEY'RE GOING.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE LONG TERM AND BE DOING THINGS THAT ENSURE THAT WE WILL HAVE A LIVABLE FUTURE, THAT WE WILL HAVE SOME SUSTAINABILITY.
WE WILL BE ABLE TO CREATE SOME RESILIENCE.
THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN.
THERE IS NO REASON WHY ANYONE WOULD HAVE WATCHED THE TV FOOTAGE OF THE HURRICANES LAST YEAR AND NOT REALIZE WHAT YOU DO, WHAT YOU ARE DOING WHEN YOU OVERDEVELOP YOU OVER DEVELOP AND YOU ARE ENSURING THAT YOU ARE CAUSING A MAJOR NIGHTMARE AND A MAJOR EXPENSE FOR EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS FOR THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS IN THAT COMMUNITY.
AND SO IT'S NOT GOOD THINKING IN TERMS OF THE LONG RUN.
OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY IN THIS, NOT THE ENTIRE BUT MOST OF THE ECONOMY IN THIS COUNTY IS BASED ON THIS ISLAND AND IS BASED ON THE ENVIRONMENT OF THIS ISLAND AND THE CHARACTER OF THIS TOWN.
AND EVERY YEAR WE ARE EATING AWAY THE CHARACTER OF THIS TOWN BY PUTTING IN BUILDINGS THAT WERE NEVER DESIGNED LIKE THAT BEFORE.
HERE, BY INCREASING THE DENSITY, ANYONE WHO HAS LIVED IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME KNOWS WHAT COMES WITH INCREASED DENSITY.
AND IT'S NOT JUST TRAFFIC, IT IS CRIME.
LIKE WHAT HAPPENED DOWN AT HARRIS TEETER THE OTHER DAY.
AND IT IS A MISERABLE, CAN BE A MISERABLE ENVIRONMENT.
WE KNOW WHAT THE PEOPLE IN FERNANDINA BEACH AND THE REST OF OF THE ISLAND WANT.
THEY HAVE TOLD US WE HAVE THAT IN IN THE VISION PLAN.
WE HAVE THAT IN THE INPUT WE GOT IN THE EAR PLAN.
AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE BE FORWARD LOOKING.
NOT ONLY DO YOU DESTROY THE ENVIRONMENT AND DESTROY THE ECONOMY ECONOMY, BUT YOU ALSO DESTROY THE SOCIAL FABRIC, AND WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT HAPPEN.
OKAY? MUCH OF OUR COMMUNITY CANNOT LIVE HERE ANYMORE.
I MEET PEOPLE EVERY DAY WHO ARE NOW LIVING IN WILDLIGHT, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO GO, OKAY, BECAUSE THEY WERE COMING TO SOME EVENT I WAS HAVING ON THE ISLAND.
OKAY, SO THEY ARE CONNECTED TO THIS ISLAND.
SO ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE REAL PROBLEMS. I DO THINK THAT BEFORE YOU DISCUSS THIS WITH THE COMMISSIONERS, THIS GROUP SHOULD COME TO SOME CONSENSUS.
AND THAT COULD INCLUDE NOT EVERYONE AGREEING WITH THE SAME WITH THE SAME THING, BUT SHOULD COME TO SOME AGREEMENT ON SOME LANGUAGE THAT CAN BE USED TO CLARIFY THE INTENT OF, OF THIS ORDINANCE.
AND AS YOU POINTED OUT IN READING THE INTRODUCTION TO THE SECTION, IT IS REPEATED OVER AND OVER IN BOTH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
WHAT THE VALUES OF THE COMMUNITY ARE.
WHEN MARK WORKED ON THIS YEARS AGO AND FOR MANY YEARS, THOSE VALUES WERE WRITTEN INTO THOSE DOCUMENTS AND I THINK WE NEED TO, BARRING ANY INDICATION FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THE VALUES HAVE CHANGED.
I THINK WE NEED TO ADHERE TO THAT.
[01:35:03]
RIGHTS. NO ONE IN THE COMMUNITY, EVEN THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE, DOESN'T HAVE RIGHTS.OUR RIGHTS ARE TAKEN AWAY AND I WANT TO KNOW LEGALLY HOW THAT IS POSSIBLE.
OKAY. SO IN 2021, 22, THE STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED THE PROPERTY OWNERS BILL OF RIGHTS, AND IT DIDN'T INCLUDE YOU AND ME.
WE CANNOT IT INCLUDED, AS CITIZENS OF THIS STATE, WE CANNOT TOLERATE THIS.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
EVERYBODY GAVE UP. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LISTEN.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ME OR YOU.
AND I THINK THAT WE MAY BE GETTING A LITTLE MORE GLOBAL THAN.
WELL, YEAH, BUT IT'S WHY WE'RE TUSSLING WITH THIS.
SO WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH THIS.
BUT OKAY. WE ARE NOT I WILL JUST SAY THIS.
WE ARE NOT READY TO MEET WITH THE COMMISSION BECAUSE, I DON'T KNOW, WE COULDN'T BE HERE ALL WEEKEND BECAUSE WE'RE DIAMETRICALLY IT'S OBVIOUS WE'RE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED.
AND YOU KNOW, AND TAMMI SAID, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE OPPOSED.
I KNOW IT DOES. BUT IT'S CONCERNING TO ME THAT WE'RE GOING IN.
THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK THAT MAYBE WHAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IS WHAT DO YOU WANT YOUR STRATEGY TO BE? YOUR VOLUNTEERS, YOUR CITIZENS, IF YOU SEND BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
THAT'S WHY I WAS LIKE, WHAT DO WE DO? DO WE DO A MEMO THAT SAYS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR DIRECTION AND YOUR PROPOSAL? BUT A MAJORITY OF US DISAGREE, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO WASTE OUR VALUABLE TIME WRITING CODE FOR YOU THAT WE DON'T AGREE WITH.
I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD APPROACH.
WELL, ARE WE ONLY GOING TO ADDRESS 10304 AND10304, 10305, AND THE DEFINITION OF NET DENSITY.
THE DEFINITION OF NET DENSITY.
REMOVING THE THE WORD FLOODPLAIN IS.
WE'RE PUSHING THE BOUNDS OUT FURTHER THAN WHAT I MEAN TO LOOK AT.
SO WHAT I WANT TO LOOK AT IS AND I'M GOING TO FOCUS JUST ON ZERO FOUR AND ZERO FIVE, OKAY.
MY OBJECTIVE AGAIN IS TO KEEP THIS FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY AND STUFF.
AND WE TALK ABOUT IT IN THE VISION 2045 AND SO ON.
YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS AGO YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CELL PHONE IN YOUR POCKET.
WELL, NOW YOU DO. SO YOU'VE CHANGED TO MEET THE TECHNOLOGY CHANGE IN THIS CASE.
DAMN IT. SO I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS FOCUS ON THE ON THE ON WHAT, WHAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO DO.
AND I'M CONFUSED NOW, I WOULD EVEN PROPOSE THAT I THINK WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THEY WHAT THEY, THE CITY COMMISSION HAS ASKED US TO DO, WHAT STAFF CAN DO FOR THE GROUPS.
RIGHT. WHAT WE'RE CAPABLE OF DOING.
AND NOW IT'S UP TO WHAT? THE PLANNING BOARD, HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THE DIRECTION THAT WAS GIVEN BY YOUR BOSS.
I WOULD ENTER ONE OTHER THING INTO IT.
IT MIGHT BE WORTH LISTENING TO.
THE PRESENTATION THAT HARRISON POOLE MADE TO THE COMMISSIONERS IS THAT WAS PART OF THEIR VOTE, BECAUSE HE BROUGHT UP SOME THINGS THAT I PERSONALLY HAD NOT PUT ON MY CONSIDERATION LIST, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE WORTH JUST GOING BACK AND SAY, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON THE COMMISSIONERS
[01:40:02]
VOTED THE WAY THEY DID, I DON'T KNOW, WOULD THAT BE WORTH PLAYING THAT? THAT'S UP TO YOU. THAT'S UP TO YOU.I MEAN, YOU COULD DO THAT AT THE 25TH.
NO, NO, NO, WE HAVE ALL THAT STUFF RECORDED.
JUST HAVE THAT AS A YOU KNOW PICK THAT THAT WAS ONLY IT WAS ONLY ABOUT 4 OR 5 MINUTES LONG.
I GOT IT. SO, SO WHAT I'M HEARING THEN IS THAT WE STILL WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A PLATFORM THAT THE BOARD FEELS LIKE THAT THEY CAN GO FORWARD WITH.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE UNANIMOUS, BUT I THINK THAT UNLESS WE JUST WANT TO BE OPEN CONVERSATION BACK AND FORTH WITH THE COMMISSION, I DON'T KNOW, MEETING WITH THAT COMMISSION, SOMEBODY SUGGESTED A MEETING WITH THE COMMISSION EARLIER.
YEAH. AND THAT COULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY, BUT WE'VE ALREADY HEARD WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY.
OTHERWISE YOU'RE GOING TO WORK ON THINGS AND AND WE CAN'T JUST KEEP GOING BACK AND FORTH LIKE THIS.
WE JUST CAN'T. I WOULD I THINK BASED ON WHAT WHAT KIND OF I THINK KIND OF COLLECTIVELY, I THINK PROBABLY THAT MEETING EYEBALL TO EYEBALL AND SIT DOWN AND MAYBE, MAYBE THEY HAVE TO HEAR SOME OF OUR THOUGHTS, BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO REMEMBER.
THAT COMMISSION REPRESENTS THE COMMUNITY.
WE GOT TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY.
WELL, WE CAN'T THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND WE CAN'T GO BACK AND FORTH LIKE THIS BECAUSE IT'S GETTING US NOWHERE.
BUT WE CAN'T WE CAN'T GO IN THE WAY WE ARE NOW, WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY.
NO, NO, I KNOW THAT. BUT THAT'S PART OF OUR JOB I'M TALKING ABOUT AMONG US.
COLLECTIVELY, I THINK THERE'S DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
THAT COULD LEARN THE SAME THING THAT WE LEARNED TONIGHT.
SO, I THINK A JOINT MEETING MIGHT GET MORE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.
IT MAY EDUCATE THE PUBLIC BETTER.
AND I THINK THEN WE COLLECTIVELY COULD GET OUR MARCHING ORDERS AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
WE GOT TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE AND LOOK AT THEM AND SAY, THIS IS HOW WE FEEL.
AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.
WELL, BUT I THINK THAT WHAT MAKES SAID IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND, WHICH IS THEY'VE ALREADY TOLD US WHAT THEY WANT. YEAH, THEY'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR AND SO IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO SAY TO US OTHER THAN WHAT WE'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU WHAT WE WANT.
YEAH, I CONSIDER IT A WORKSHOP.
I WAS THINKING THE OCTOBER 25TH COULD BE A.
A DATE WHERE WE HAD A WORKSHOP TOGETHER, WHERE PEOPLE GOT EDUCATED ON WHAT THE CURRENT PROCEDURES ARE, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS OUT THERE TODAY.
I THINK PEOPLE THINK WE'RE INCREASING THE DENSITY BY CHANGING THIS ORDINANCE.
AND I THINK MR. BENNETT'S GOT THE HISTORY OF, MORE HISTORY THAN ALL OF US COMBINED.
AND HE THOUGHT THAT AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT PROBABLY FEEL THE SAME WAY.
SO IF WE PUT EVERYBODY TOGETHER IN THE ROOM, THEN WE SOLVE THAT, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION.
BUT I'M KIND OF DONE TALKING ABOUT IT.
AND I WOULD ONLY ADD THAT THERE THE INTERPRETATION THAT HAS BEEN MADE IS NOT WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING, EXCUSE ME, IS NOT WHAT I UNDERSTOOD.
CAME OUT OF OUR MEETINGS GOING BACK 15 YEARS TO THIS.
AND I CAN GIVE YOU OTHER EXAMPLE IN THE CITY OF WHAT'S HAPPENING.
AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW, I GUESS, THE WAY IT WAS INTERPRETED, SOMEBODY DECIDED THAT.
WHY NOT DO THAT? SO SO CAN I BRING UP ONE MORE THING? BECAUSE THIS IS YOU NEED SOME VISUALS SOMETIME.
PULL UP THE PLAT AT JASMINE AND SOUTH 10TH STREET, PLEASE.
[01:45:09]
THE OTHER SIDE, THE SIDE OF IT.ALL RIGHT. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF ENERGY ABOUT GENTRIFICATION IN THAT AREA OVER THE YEARS.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JASMINE AND.
WHAT IS THAT? 10TH STREET. 10TH STREET.
RIGHT. BECAUSE THIS IS, AND IF YOU CAN PULL UP, SO THIS IS WHERE THE REAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED.
SO, WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AND THINGS THIS IS AN EXAMPLE.
WAS IT 100? I MEAN, YOU NEED A PARTIAL ID.
I'M AT THE CORNER OF JASMINE AND SOUTH 10TH STREET.
OKAY. SO GO SOUTH A LITTLE BIT.
ZOOM INTO IT. OKAY, NOW YOU SEE WHAT SHE JUST WHAT'S HIGHLIGHTED THERE? 1001. YEAH.
OKAY. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE.
YEAH. THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ALL LOOKED LIKE ACROSS THE STREET.
SEE THE BIGGER HOUSES? THE BIGGER NEIGHBORHOOD.
OKAY. THEY CAME IN, BOUGHT ONE LOT, ONE BUILDING, LOT ONE HOUSE, TORE THE HOUSE DOWN.
SO WHEN RESIDENTS COME TO YOU AND SAY, MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS CHANGING, THERE'S AN EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING? THEY'RE BUILDING SHOTGUN HOUSES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS ORIGINALLY LARGER HOUSES, LARGER LOTS.
OKAY. THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THAT.
WELL, NOTHING ABOUT THEY SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE VARIANCE AND DIDN'T.
NO, NOT ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER.
AND IF THERE WAS A HOUSE THERE, THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE GOTTEN A VARIANCE.
A VARIANCE, RIGHT. THIS RULE CHANGES NOTHING ABOUT THAT.
NOTHING. WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A BIGGER GLOBAL ISSUE.
SO THAT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
A 50 FOOT LOT REQUIREMENT WAS USURPED BY THE ORIGINAL PLATS.
BUT THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS ABOUT TEARING A HOUSE DOWN TO REPLACE IT WITH MORE THAN ONE UNIT.
RIGHT? OKAY. THAT DID NOT GIVE YOU THE FACT THAT THAT WAS VACANT, AND I DON'T I THOUGHT THERE WAS A HOUSE THERE, BUT FURTHER SOUTH, I THINK THAT DOWN IN THAT AREA, I THINK THE AERIAL IS NOT CORRECT.
I THINK THERE'S HOUSES ON THERE NOW JUST NORTH OF KELP ON THE SAME SLIDE.
THESE ARE 20, 23 AERIALS THAT WERE JUST UPDATED A MONTH AGO.
I'M SORRY. THESE ARE 2023 AERIALS THAT WERE JUST UPDATED A MONTH AGO.
I THOUGHT I SAW HOUSES IN THERE FOR SALE.
I'M SORRY MARK, YOUR ISSUE IS WITH 25 FOOT LOTS AND I COMPLETELY GET IT.
BUT THIS RULE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
THIS VARIANCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT AT ALL.
WELL, IN THIS CASE, IF YOU LOOK AT ONE ONE.
WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME THEY WOULD NEED A VARIANCE TO DO THAT.
THIS RULE CHANGE DOESN'T AFFECT THAT.
BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO I THINK THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SITUATIONS WHERE VARIANCES WEREN'T NO NO NO NO.
WE HAVE FOR THE TRINGALI APPLICATION KELLY, HER STAFF, WE HAVE COMBED THE CITY RECORDS BACK TO THE YEAR 2000 AND THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED.
BUT IF YOU IF YOU HAD THESE RIGHT HERE ARE 50 FOOT LOTS AND I CAN'T SEE BECAUSE OF THE TREES IF THEY HAVE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD, LET'S JUST SAY THEY DID THAT.
IF THEY HAD 25 FOOT UNDERLYING, THEY DON'T HAVE STRUCTURES ON THEM THAT I COULD TELL.
THEY JUST COME IN AND BUILD TWO 25 FOOT HOUSES.
[01:50:07]
ORDINANCE, WHATEVER CITY COMMISSION THAT IS, THIS ONE BY THIS BOARD, CONVINCING IT YOU CAN PUT REGULATIONS IN PLACE THAT SAY WHAT YOU SAID IS THAT THAT'S FINE.YOU WANT TO RESTORE UNDERLYING LOTS OF RECORD.
FINE. BUT YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY SMALLER THAN 50 FOOT.
AND I'M NOT SAYING I'M NOT SAYING THAT.
TAMMI, WOULDN'T THAT BE BETTER TO DISCUSS WITH THEM IN PERSON? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH. AS A AS A JOINT WORKSHOP.
NOW, TAMMI, IF A PERSON, AN INDIVIDUAL OR A COMPANY OWNS OUTRIGHT A 25 FOOT WIDE BUILDING LOT VIRGIN SOIL, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT A STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENT COULD BE WRITTEN THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T BUILD ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S GOT TO BE 50FT WIDE? OR HAVE I TAKEN AWAY THEIR RIGHTS OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP? WE HAVE TO INVESTIGATE THAT A LITTLE, IF THAT'S ALL THEY OWN.
IT'S DIFFERENT FROM YOU'RE TAKING SOMEONE AND WE DO HAVE PLENTY.
AND PLENTY ARE STILL VACANT THAT HAVE NOT BUILT YET.
THEY'RE WAITING TO RETIRE OR WHATEVER IT IS.
AND NO, YOU'D BE TAKING THEIR PROPERTY.
WE'LL BE BUYING THOSE LOTS, WHICH WE CAN'T AFFORD.
THIS IS RESTORING AND PROVIDING BUILDABLE SITES.
IF YOU'RE GOING FROM A PROPERTY THAT'S ALREADY DEVELOPED WITH A LARGER HOME AND YOU'RE TRYING THE THE COURTS, THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT PUTTING REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT MEANS THEY CAN DEVELOP SOMETHING.
THEY JUST ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT EIGHT TOWNHOUSES, FOUR TOWNHOUSES OR EVEN TWO TOWNHOUSES.
THEY'RE GOING TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME HERE, THAT'S ALL.
IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A SKINNY, TALL HOUSE INSTEAD OF CONNECTED.
ALL RIGHT. SO, LET'S, IT'S ALMOST 7:00 HERE, FOLKS.
SO LET'S DECIDE IS IT WE WANT DO WE WANT TO SEE IF WE CAN PULL THE CITY COMMISSION IN FOR A JOINT MEETING ON THE 25TH, WHATEVER DATE WORKS OR WHATEVER DATE THAT WE CAN GET THEM ALL TOGETHER? THE ONLY THING I WOULD RECOMMEND ABOUT THE CITY COMMISSION, AND YES, I'M SPEAKING FOR THEM, IT IS GOING TO BE MOST LIKELY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET THEM HERE AT 3:00 ON A WEDNESDAY, SO WE COULD CHANGE THE TIME, RIGHT? OR WE CAN HAVE I MEAN, WE WE COULD MEET AT FOUR.
YOU READ MY MIND. THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
AND THEN THEN AT 5:00 OR EVEN SIX MIGHT BE BETTER FOR DR.
I'M SURE HE'LL HAVE PATIENTS THAT DAY.
ANTON KNOW TOMORROW WHEN WE MEET.
BUT. I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL EVEN IF WE LEAVE THE MEETING SOMEWHERE.
IF WE LEAVE THE MEETING SOMEWHAT FRUSTRATED BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN ALL OF THIS.
IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO LIKE IT OR AGREE WITH WHAT THE OUTCOME IS, BUT.
ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE THINKING 5:00.
YOU WANT TO PROPOSE FIVE TO THEM.
NO. WE'LL DO FIVE FOR US DO WE.
AND THEN DO WE DO FOUR FOR US AND SIX FOR THEM.
AND THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO FOR TWO HOURS? GET THEM HERE. NO, NO.
AT SIX THEY COME, THEY COME AT SIX.
YEAH, THAT'S A NONSTARTER. IT'S GOT TO BE EARLIEST WILL BE FIVE MOST LIKELY I MEAN JUST SIX.
YEAH. THEY HAVE A WORKSHOP I DON'T KNOW THAT.
IT MEANS IF WE SHOULD EVEN START AT FOUR.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO BEFORE THIS.
NO. THERE'S NOTHING TO COVER BEFORE THE JOINT MEETING.
IT STARTED. EVERYBODY STARTS AT FIVE.
THAT'S A GOOD THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL PROPOSE TO THEM.
SO EVERYBODY STARTS LET'S LET'S HAVE A BACK OFF THAT THEY CAN COME IN AT SIX.
IF THEY IF THREE OF THE FIVE THEY'RE GOING TO START THEIR REGULAR MEETING AT SIX.
WELL LET'S JUST WAIT. THEY'RE NOT.
SO THAT WOULD BE SPECIAL FROM TAMMI AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY.
LET'S, JUST YOU SAID, IF I'M HEARING JOINT MEETING ON THE 25TH OKAY.
AT WHAT TIME? STARTING AT EITHER FIVE OR.
[01:55:04]
CAN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THEIR WHAT THEIR.BUT DO YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED? WE HAVE TO HEAR THEM HAVE OUR MEETING WITH THEM AND THEN A MEETING AFTER I DON'T KNOW AFTER.
WELL WE HEAR. YOU'RE GETTING DOUBLE OVERTIME.
I'LL BRING THE WINE I SEE SO ON THE 25TH WE'RE GOING TO SEE DOING THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS.
HANG ON. WE'RE GOING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THEM HERE AT 6:00.
WE'LL MEET FOR MAYBE TWO HOURS, 6 TO 8.
SEE IF WE CAN. YOU GET THEM FROM 6 TO 8 AND WE JUST GO FROM THERE.
NICK, BY THE WAY, IN 2011 THERE WAS A HOUSE ON THOSE TWO LOTS.
OH, GOD. YOU USED TO LIVE THERE? NO. HE DEVELOPED.
HE DEVELOPED IT. YOU DEVELOPED IT.
YOU DEVELOPED IT, RIGHT? YOU TORE THE HOUSE DOWN.
WELL, THERE'S YOUR EXAMPLE RIGHT THERE.
PRETTY GOOD. I'M SAYING I'M SURE WE HAVE A VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR THAT PROPERTY.
OH, THERE WAS A VARIANCE ON THAT PROPERTY.
ALL RIGHT. WE GOT TO MOVE TO ADJOURN.
HAVE WE GOT THIS MEMBER TO ADJOURN? ALL RIGHT, SO WE ARE ADJOURNED.
SECOND. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.