[00:00:03]
WELCOME TO THE DECEMBER THE 11TH, 2024.REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.
WE ARE MEETING IN THE CITY HALL COMMISSION CHAMBERS IN FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA.
MADAM SECRETARY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> MEMBER GILLETTE IS ABSENT, AND MEMBER DOSTER IS ABSENT.
>> WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM THOUGH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> I'M GETTING A TISSUE THING.
I DON'T WANT TO BLEED ALL OVER THE DESK.
>> I'M GOOD. [OVERLAPPING] BAND-AID.
>> YOU NEED A BAND-AID OR ANYTHING?
>> [OVERLAPPING] ABOUT THIS THING. I KNOW THE CONDITIONS AND PUT WATER ON THE DESK.
I LIKE PUTTING A LITTLE THING UNDER IT.
>> NOW YOU'VE TAKEN THEM ALL THE WAY THAT WE USED TO HAVE. [LAUGHTER]
>> PLEASE LET THE MINUTES REFLECT.
[LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] AND MR. BENNETT IS HERE.
>> I HAVE TO STOP THE BLEED BAG, FOR SERIOUSLY [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE CITY EMPLOYEES, SOME OF US GET TRAINED.
SOME IT'S MANDATORY. SOME ARE VOLUNTARY.
IT'S CALLED STOP THE BLEED, SO WE HAVE BAGS THAT IF SOMEBODY GOT SHOT, HOW DO WE STOP THE BLEEDING? HOW DO WE? YES, SO WE'RE READY. [LAUGHTER]
>> [OVERLAPPING] FOR THE HEART HERE, TOO, DON'T YOU?
>> WE DO. DEFIBRILLATOR, AND I KNOW HOW TO USE IT. SO WATCH OUT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] AED. I DON'T KNOW [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S VERY REASSURING. THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE HAVE TO WAKE YOU UP, TOO, I CAN ALSO GET THAT DEFIBRILLATOR. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY'RE AUTOMATIC TOO. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER].
>> EQUIPMENTS IN HERE IF ANYONE NEEDS TO FIND. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND]
[3.1 Review and approval of Minutes for the Regular Meeting of November 13, 2024]
>> ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER THREE APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES.
THIS IS FROM THE NOVEMBER 13TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING.
DO I HEAR ANY CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES?
>> CORRECTIONS. ANYONE, HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS? IT WAS A LONG AND DISJOINTED MEETING, BUT IT WAS A LONG MEETING.
>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING FROM NOVEMBER 13TH AS WRITTEN AND CONGRATULATE MORGAN ON DOING A VERY GOOD JOB.
DO I HEAR A SECOND ON MINUTES?
>> SECOND FROM MISS DAPHNE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED LIKE SIGN? HEARING NONE, THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13TH, 2024 ARE APPROVED.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE ANY OLD BUSINESS? ITEM NUMBER FOUR, OLD BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM FIVE.
[5.1 PAB 2024-0011 - FINAL PLAT REQUEST FOR SEA LA VIE FOR 8 TOWNHOMES AND 1 SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 1110 S. 13TH STREET]
NEW BUSINESS. ITEM 5.1, PAB CASE 2024-001.MORGAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PRESENT THE CASE TO US?
>> YES, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
THE APPLICANT IS GILLETTE AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE AGENT, FOR THE OWNER, S V, AMELIA, LLC.
AGAIN, THE REQUEST IS FOR A FINAL PLAT.
THE LOCATION IS 1110 SOUTH 13TH STREET.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT, AND THE EXISTING USE ON THE PROPERTY IS VACANT AND THE ACREAGE IS APPROXIMATELY 1.29 ACRES.
THE REQUEST, THE FINAL PLAT CONSISTS OF NINE SUBDIVISION LOTS TO ACCOMMODATE EIGHT TOWNHOMES AND ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT CAME BEFORE YOU, CAME BEFORE THIS BOARD ON AUGUST 14TH, 2024, AND WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE CITY COUNCIL HEARD AND APPROVED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, AND THERE'S A RESOLUTION 2024-186, WHICH WAS IN YOUR PACKETS.
[00:05:01]
THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WAS SUBMITTED TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IN NOVEMBER OF 2023 AND WAS ISSUED A LOCAL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE ON OCTOBER 4TH, 2024.THE ORDINANCE, 11.0105 PROVIDES THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT PROVIDES FOR A COMPLETE REVIEW OF THE TECHNICAL DATA AND THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DRAWN PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL PLAT, AND AS I JUST STATED, THAT WAS DONE, AND THE ORDINANCE WAS ISSUED ON OCTOBER 4TH.
DURING THAT TIME, THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS DONE, AND WHEN YOU HEARD THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, YOU ALSO HEARD THAT INFORMATION AS FAR AS THE LEVEL OF SERVICES AS WELL, THE WATER, THE SEWER, THE STORM, DRAINAGE, AND ALL THE STUFF THAT WAS INVOLVED.
THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS, THE FINAL PLAT IS CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THE CITY COMMISSION WILL THEN HEAR IT FOR THE FINAL.
UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARTICULAR SERVICES.
I'LL JUST GO TO WHERE THE CONCLUSION IS.
BASICALLY, IS THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE FINAL PLAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THE PLANNING STAFF OF THE APPLICATION, SO WE RECOMMEND THE FINAL PLAT BE APPROVED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? WE WILL TAKE SOME COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE GO TO THE PUBLIC.
>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
>> ALL RIGHT. WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS ONE, HOW MANY TREES ARE BEING TAKEN DOWN ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND OF THE ONES BEING TAKEN DOWN, HOW MANY ARE BEING REPLACED?
>> THE TOTAL AMOUNT AND THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL, BUT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY IS 88.
OF THAT, THERE ARE GOING TO BE 38 TREES REMOVED, 33 KEPT, AND THERE WERE 17 TREES THAT WERE RATED ON THE TREE MITIGATION TO BE AT A LEVEL POOR OR THERE WERE INVASIVE SPECIES, SO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO.
>> THE MITIGATION IS BASED ON NOT THE NUMBER OF TREES, BUT THE INCHES OF THE TREES, SO OF THE ONES THAT ARE BEING REMOVED, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN 409 INCHES.
THEY'RE ONLY REQUIRED TO MITIGATE 50% OF THAT, WHICH WOULD BE 204, BUT SINCE THEY'RE KEEPING 33, WHICH ARE LARGER TREES, THEY HAVE NO MITIGATION OF THE TREES THEY'RE REMOVING.
BUT THERE IS A SHADE TREE REQUIREMENT THAT THEY HAD TO MEET, AND THERE'S ALSO BUFFERING THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET, SO THEY HAVE EXCEEDED THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THE ONES THAT WERE REMOVED.
>> ALL RIGHT. WAS THAT AREA DOWN THERE BETWEEN LOTS SEVEN AND EIGHT KEPT, AS I CALL IT OPEN SPACE BECAUSE OF THE TREES, OR WAS THAT FOR ANOTHER REASON?
>> WOULD MR. GILLETTE LIKE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD? PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS HERE.
>> ASA GILLETTE, GILLETTE AND ASSOCIATES 31 SOUTH 4TH STREET, FERNANDINA BEACH.
TO ANSWER MR. STEVENSON'S QUESTION.
ALL THE WAY THE CITY DOES ITS TREE MITIGATION IS BASED ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS.
IF YOU LOOK AT OUR DRAWINGS, WE HAVE EACH LOT BROKEN APART.
THE TREES THAT ARE IN THE COMMON AREA THAT YOU REFERRED TO, DON'T COUNT TOWARDS THE LOT COUNTS, THAT'S ALL PART OF THE COMMON AREA COUNT.
>> WE DIDN'T SAVE THOSE TREES SO WE COULD TAKE OTHER TREES OUT, SO TO SPEAK, WHICH HAS BEEN GOOD.
>> YOU GOT TO TAKE ANY OF THOSE TREES OUT PERMANENTLY JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME RETENTION CAPABILITY IN THERE?
>> YES, SIR. THERE ARE SOME TREES BEING TAKEN OUT FOR ROADWAY, OBVIOUSLY, THOSE ARE ALL COMMON AREAS OF THINGS.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF TREES BEING TAKEN OUT HERE AND THERE TO ACCOMMODATE RETENTION FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.
BUT WE TRIED TO SAVE AS MANY OF THEM AS WE COULD.
OBVIOUSLY, TREES THAT WERE IN THE FOOTPRINT, BUT WE STILL PRETTY FAR EXCEEDED THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT OF 50% SAVED.
PLUS WE ARE PLANTING TREES BACK TO THE ORDER OF ABOUT 12 TO 13 NEW TREES THAT ARE PART OF THE CANOPY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY.
>> IT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE THAT LOT IS BASICALLY VIRGIN PROPERTY, AND HAS GOT AN ALMOST COMPLETE TREE CANOPY, AND WE'RE WIPING A CHUNK OF THAT OUT.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF HOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
>> YES, WE'VE ACTUALLY DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO SAVE AS MANY OF THEM AS WE COULD.
>> NOW, MR. GILLETTE, WHILE YOU'RE UP THERE.
UP AT THE, I'M GOING TO CALL IT THE EAST END OF THAT OF THE TOTAL ACREAGE THAT YOU'VE
[00:10:01]
GOT BASICALLY A T AREA THERE RIGHT JUST BASICALLY WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO TURN AROUND AT THE END?>> YES, THAT'S TO ACCOMMODATE FIRE.
>> YES. NOW, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED FOR ANY PARKING OR IS THAT PURELY [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO, SIR. THAT'S PURELY JUST FOR [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOU'RE NOT AT THE END OF THE STREET?
>> OKAY. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPARENTLY WAS HAPPY THAT THEY HAD ADEQUATE [OVERLAPPING].
>> YES, SIR. WE SATISFIED THEIR REQUIREMENTS.
>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION ON THE VARIANCE.
THE APPROVAL LETTER RELATED TO THE FIRE SAFETY ACCESS. I DIDN'T KNOW.
I DIDN'T SEE THE APPROVAL LETTER IN THERE, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS ADDRESSED.
>> YES, MA'AM. WE SATISFIED ALL OF JASON'S.
>> THAT WHOLE REQUIREMENT, THAT HE WOULD HAVE HAD TO MEET HAS ALREADY GONE AWAY.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS ALREADY BEEN REWRITTEN AS OF, I DON'T KNOW, WAS IT FEBRUARY OR MARCH OF THIS YEAR, WHERE NOW IF YOU HAVE LESS THAN 25 WATTS, YOU CAN HAVE ONE EGRESS AGGRESS.
WE PASSED THAT I THINK LATE LAST YEAR.
>> I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHY THEY HAD TO GO TO THE BOA ON THIS.
>> BECAUSE I THINK AT THE TIME WAS PRIOR TO THAT BEING PASSED.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WASN'T SURE OF WAS IN THE COVID AS OF TODAY, ANYWAY, IT'S IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UNLESS YOU'VE GOT 25 LOTS, YOU CAN DO IT JUST ONE EXIT.
>> BUT I BELIEVE WE RECEIVED OUR DEVELOPMENT ORDER BEFORE THAT WAS PASSED.
I THINK WE DID, OR DID WE NOT? MAYBE NOT.
I CAN'T REMEMBER. ANYWAY, THAT'S WHY BECAUSE IT WASN'T IN PLACE AT THE TIME. YES.
>> THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE PURVEYOR OF WHY WE MADE THAT.
>> I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THEM. YES.
>> ARE THERE ANY, I'LL CALL IT I GUESS GROUNDWATER ISSUES IN THE SENSE THAT THERE ARE NOT ANY STREAMS OR CREEKS OR TO BE PRETTY MUCH [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO SIR. THE WATER TABLE ACTUALLY HERE WAS RELATIVELY LOW.
I MEAN, RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE ISLAND.
>> THERE DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY WATER RETENTION AREAS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? IN THIS CASE? NO? OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? MARGARET, YOU'LL COME UP? GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE, MA'AM.
>> MARGARET KIRKLAND 1377 PLANTATION POINT DRIVE, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CONSERVE NASA.
THESE COMMENTS ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING AT THIS STAGE IN THE PROCESS, BUT I THINK SOME OF YOU ARE NOT AWARE THAT OVER THE PAST YEAR, WE HAVE HAD A GROUP FROM CONSERVE NASA, WHICH INCLUDES SEVERAL ENGINEERS WHO HAVE A LOT OF WATER EXPERIENCE.
WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH KTP AND THE COUNTY, SOME OF THE OTHER ENGINEERS IN THE COUNTY, AND ANDRE AND CHARLIE GEORGE, AND TALKING ABOUT FLOODING ISSUES.
WE STARTED OFF MID-ISLAND, RIGHT? AND THEN IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY MONTH, THERE ARE FOUR OR FIVE MORE AREAS WHERE WE HAVE FOUND THERE IS FLOODING.
OF COURSE, THIS HAS HAPPENED OFF-ISLAND AS WELL.
BUT ON THE ISLAND, I CAN SAY, BASED ON OUR OBSERVATIONS, THAT WHAT WE SEE IS A LOT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND WHEN YOU ADD THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, YOU'RE REMOVING THE TREES, WHICH HAVE SERVED AS OUR STORMWATER PROCESSING SYSTEM PRETTY WELL.
WHEN WE HAVE TOWNHOUSES, THESE CLUSTERS OF BUILDINGS, TOWNHOUSES IN THIS BLOCK, AND SO ON, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE ARE CREATING FLOODING PROBLEMS. NOW, MAYBE WE WANT TO HAVE ALL THE HARDSCAPE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT ADEQUATELY YET AT THIS POINT.
THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF CONCERN, AND THIS IS QUITE DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS YEARS WITH THE FREQUENCY.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SALTWATER.
THIS IS FROM THE INTENSIVE RAINFALL THAT WE HAVE.
WHICH IS WHAT IS PROJECTED FOR THE FUTURE, ALSO, AND SO WE WILL HAVE MORE OF IT.
[00:15:01]
THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES, THE NATURE OF THE BUILDINGS, AND THE PROXIMITY OF THE BUILDINGS GOING IN. THANK YOU.>> THANK YOU, MARGARET. ALL RIGHT.
MR. GILLETTE, COULD I ASK YOU ONE MORE QUESTION?
>> THIS IS JUST A GENERAL ENGINEERING.
IS THERE ANY GENERAL ELEVATION CHARACTERISTIC ON THE ISLAND LIKE STUFF GENERALLY FLOWS SOUTH OR NORTH OR EAST OR WEST OR THIS LAND IS ALMOST DEAD FLAT?
THERE'S NOT MUCH OVERLAND FLOW FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORS OR FOR US GOING ON TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE ISLAND AND OVERALL FLOW PATTERN, IT VARIES.
AS A GENERAL RULE OF THUMB, EVERYTHING FLOWS TO THE WATER, WHETHER THAT BE THE RIVER, WHETHER THAT BE DITCHES, WHETHER THAT BE THE OCEAN.
BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'S PRETTY FLAT.
>> IT'S JUST MORE OR LESS JUST FLAT.
>> ONE THING THAT WORRIED ME A LITTLE BIT IS JUST SOUTH THERE OF THE VINTAGE APARTMENTS, AND THAT TOOK A PRETTY GOOD CHUNK OF NATIVE LAND OUT IN TERMS OF ABSORPTION.
>> YES, AND IT'S GOT A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, TOO.
>> OKAY. YOU'RE CALL FOR YOU CAN CAPTURE?
>> WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL BY RULE.
>> THIS AREA IS NOT IN A FLOOD ZONE, SO IT'S THE MIDDLE RIDGE OF THE ISLAND.
LOOK AT THE TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP YOU SEE MOST OF THE MID-ISLAND IS HIGHER THAN THE [OVERLAPPING].
>> SOONER OR LATER, IT ALL GOES DOWNHILL TO SOMEBODY. [LAUGHTER]
>> BUT HE HAS TO CAPTURE SOMEBODY.
>> I WILL ASK YOU ONE OTHER QUESTION.
THIS IS JUST FOR MY ADVOCATION, I THINK.
IN THE WRITE-UP FOR THIS PAB REQUEST, LET ME SEE WHERE IT WAS.
THEY ARE JUST A STATEMENT SAYS THIS PROJECT IS GREENFIELD DEVELOPED.
>> GREEN. PARDON MY IGNORANCE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
>> I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE.
>> YEAH. TYPICALLY, AND THAT'S JUST GENERAL LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HASN'T HAD ANY DEVELOPMENT AT ALL.
IF IT WAS A SIGNAL FAMILY IN THE DOWNTOWN, VACANT LOT COULD BE CALLED IN FIELD, BUT IT'S CONSIDERED A GREEN.
[OVERLAPPING] IT'S NOT REALLY A GREEN DEVELOPMENT IN THE SENSE THAT.
>> I'VE NEVER SEEN THE TERM BEFORE.
BECAUSE IT SAYS THE SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT, AND THE PROJECT IS GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT SO THAT'S BASICALLY VIRGIN LAND.
>> THAT WAS JUST MY OWN ADVOCATION. THANK YOU.
>> TINA, IF YOU CAN COME FORWARD.
>> HI. TINA KRISTENER, 406 BEECH STREET.
I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS, AND ONE, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, IF I'D LIKE TO ASK MISS PEARSON.
THIS IS ZONED R3, WILL THESE NEW UNITS BE ELIGIBLE FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS?
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE FOR YOU SO THIS IS PERFECT.
SO I WAS BEING A GEEK TODAY, AND I WAS LOOKING THROUGH ALL THE FILES, AND I LOOKED THROUGH THE REZONING THAT HAPPENED IN 2005, AND I READ THE MEETING MINUTES, AND YOU WERE PART OF THE MEETING, MR. BENNETT.
SO THANK YOU FOR SUCH LONG SERVICE THAT'S AMAZING.
BUT WHEN THIS WAS ZONED R2 ORIGINALLY, IT WAS REZONED TO R3 BECAUSE THE OWNER AT THE TIME CAME FORWARD AND SAID THAT THEY INTEND TO, AND I'M QUOTING THIS FROM THE ORDINANCE DOCUMENTS, ''CONSTRUCT SENIOR HOUSING UNITS WHICH QUALIFY AS AFFORDABLE UNITS.'' THE PROPERTY IS A VACANT LAND, WHICH TOTALS 1.29 ACRES.
BUT IT WAS ALL ABOUT CREATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
DOESN'T THIS SOUND FAMILIAR WHERE SOMEONE COMES FORWARD AND THEY ASKED FOR REZONING, AND EVERYONE THINKS THEY'RE DOING A GOOD DEED AND NEXT THING YOU GET SEA LOVEY TOWNHOMES, WHICH I DON'T THINK UNLESS YOU CORRECT ME IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE SENIOR HOUSING THAT WILL BE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I SAW THIS WASN'T ACTUALLY PART OF THE ORDINANCE BUT WAS ON THE ORDINANCE APPLICATION DOCUMENTS.
ARE THERE ANY LIMITS TO THIS PROPERTY THAT THEY CAN ONLY USE IT IF IT'S ZONED OR WITH THE ZONING, THAT THEY CAN ONLY USE IT FOR SENIOR HOUSING AFFORDABLE UNITS? AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE TO MISS BAKER.
>> I THINK THAT'S A TAMMY QUESTION.
>> AND SHOULD I SIT DOWN AND SAY KNOW?
>> NOT AT ALL. I NEED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SHARE OUR SIDEBAR HERE.
BEFORE YOU ASKED YOUR QUESTION.
[00:20:02]
MR. GILLETTE, I DIDN'T GET HERE UNTIL 2007, BUT HE SAID HE THOUGHT THAT THE REZONING BACK THEN TO R3, THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A CONDITION PUT ON IT ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS, NOT ALLOWING IT SO I'M GOING TO RESEARCH THAT.>> THAT MAY BE SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO VERIFY.
I THOUGHT IT WAS PART OF THE REZONING.
>> IT COULD BE. I DIDN'T LOOK AT IT.
>> MY RECOLLECTION THERE WAS NO CONDITION PUT IN THERE.
ALTHOUGH I WOULD ASK YOU, "IN THE FUTURE, WOULD IT BE BEST FOR US TO OR IS IT POSSIBLE TO ADD CONDITIONS?" BECAUSE I VOTED FOR THIS BACK THEN BECAUSE IT WAS SENIOR HOUSING AND THEN HERE WE ARE NOT DOING THAT ANYMORE.
I THINK BACK THEN, IF WE HADN'T KNOWN, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN JUST A TYPICAL TUNNEL PROJECT, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
BUT I DON'T RECALL ANY CONDITION IN ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION.
IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO IN THE FUTURE? IF WE HAVE A REZONING REQUEST, CAN WE APPROVE IT BASED ON THE CONDITION THAT IT DOESN'T CHANGE FROM WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED OR A LIMITATION ON IT THAT IT CAN'T BE? I'LL LET YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> I'D BE HAPPY TO BRING THAT BACK TO OUR NEXT MEETING JUST GENERALLY, BUT I WILL, TO THE EXTENT WE CAN TOMORROW, GET THE ANSWER ABOUT THIS REZONING AND WHETHER THERE ARE ANY CONDITIONS, I'LL EMAIL THE BOARD AND INCLUDE MISS KRISTENER IN THE RESPONSE, ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO RESPOND.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, R3 IS THE ONLY ZONING DISTRICT IN THE CITY WHERE SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE STILL ALLOWED.
SOME OF THE HOMES THAT ARE LOCATED ON FLETCHER THAT HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR YEARS.
THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT SINCE BEFORE 2000 WHEN YOU FIRST HAVE THE RESORT RENTAL ORDINANCE AND SO THEY'VE KEPT UP THEIR LICENSE AND AS LONG AS THEY DO THAT, THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED IN.
IF THE LICENSE LAPSES OR CEASES TO BE RENEWED FOR SIX MONTHS, THEN THEY LOSE THAT GRANDFATHERING, BUT IF IT'S R3, LIKE SOME OF THE CONDOS ON THE BEACH, THEY'RE ALLOWED FOREVER EVER TO DO SHORT-TERM RENTALS WITH A LICENSE THROUGH THE CITY.
BUT I'LL FIND OUT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
>> THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY MY QUESTION YOU ANSWERED BOTH MY QUESTIONS SO THANK YOU.
THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE ORDINANCE DOCUMENTS THAT THE INTENT WAS FOR SENIOR HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME, YOU COULD PROBABLY ARGUE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF THIS ZONING CHANGE INCLUDED THAT.
IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY REALLY WANTED TO NOT DO THIS PROJECT, THEY COULD PROBABLY ARGUE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH IT, BUT JUST A THOUGHT SO THANK YOU.
>> I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU COULD NOT PUT RESTRICTIONS IF YOU ZONED A PIECE OF PROPERTY, R3 THAT WAS IT.
IT'S WHATEVER THE CRITERIA IS FOR R3 IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. CAN YOU CONDITION IT?
>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT OFFHAND.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, AND I'M NOT COMFORTABLE JUST GUESSING.
I THINK THERE'S POTENTIALLY A POSSIBILITY.
I DON'T THINK IT'S BLACK AND WHITE ANSWER SO I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU.
>> PART OF YOUR RESPONSE BACK TO US WHEN YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO RESEARCH IT?
>> YES. I WANT TO GET THAT BACK TO YOU AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, YES.
>> BECAUSE THE OTHER THING WAS, WELL, WAS IT 15 YEARS AGO GIVE OR TAKE.
THAT SAYS THAT PROBABLY WHATEVER THE ALTERNATE INITIAL PLAN, PROBABLY EITHER ECONOMICALLY DIDN'T MAKE SENSE OR WHATEVER IT COULD BE SO I LOOKED AT A STANDPOINT THAT'S LONG HISTORY.
THE PROPERTY HAS NOW BEEN DETERMINED TO BE APPLICABLE TO A TOWNHOUSE TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT.
SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE CRITICAL IN TERMS OF I DON'T KNOW.
>> IF THAT'S CRITICAL TO YOUR DECISION, THEN YOU HAVE THE OPTION OF POSTPONING YOUR DECISION.
>> I GUESS IN MY CASE, IT'S NOT.
IT'S NOT CRITICAL ENOUGH THAT I WOULD CHANGE MY VOTE, I DON'T THINK, NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
WHAT CONCERNS ME, I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY TO GO THROUGH A YEAR'S WORTH OF WORK AND THEN SUDDENLY FIND OUT SOMEBODY THREW A NEW ROADBLOCK OUT THERE.
WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IT FROM A PA BEFORE THE FACT.
I WANT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM IN THE FIRST 10% OF THE TIME, NOT THE LAST 10% OF THE TIME.
>> YES. THAT'S THE WAY TO DO IT.
>> THAT'S VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[00:25:05]
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS KIM WOLFORD.
YES, TAMMY, I'M STILL BEHIND THE FUNERAL HOME.
>> I KNOW THAT. REMIND EVERYBODY THAT YOU SAID IT'S GOING TO BE A QUICK DRIVE.
>> YES. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THE SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.
I KNOW IT CAN BE DIFFICULT AT TIMES CAUSE YOU'RE TAKEN AWAY FROM YOUR FAMILY.
I WANT TO THANK MISS BACH ALSO FOR HER SERVICE TO THE CITY.
>> WOW. JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS GENTLEMAN OR COAL BUILDERS AS A WHOLE, OR EVEN INDIVIDUALLY.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY START THINKING ABOUT BETTER BUILDING PRACTICES.
FOR EXAMPLE, WHILE I'M SURE THESE SLABS ARE LOVELY.
IT'S GREAT IN LEVITTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA.
IT'S NOT SO GOOD HERE BECAUSE AGAIN, ALL THE INFILL CREATES FLOODING.
SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING FOR US TO THINK ABOUT GOING FORWARD.
WE HAVE GOALS WITHIN THE CITY.
DEVELOPMENT IS HERE WE ARE NOT STOPPING DEVELOPMENT, IT'S HERE.
BUT JUST WONDERING IF GOING FORWARD, YOU HAVE A DEVELOPER HERE, BETTER BUSINESS PRACTICE.
HOW ABOUT GETTING THE TOWNHOMES UP THREE FEET ON CONCRETE BLOCKS SO THAT THE WATER CAN TAKE ITS COURSE, WATER SEEKS ITS OWN LEVEL.
I JUST THINKING MAYBE WE COULD THINK ABOUT BETTER BUSINESS-BUILDING PRACTICES FOR AN ISLAND SO JUST A THOUGHT.
HAPPY HOLIDAYS, EVERYBODY. BY THE WAY, I THINK IT MAKE A NICE PRODUCT.
>> ANY OTHER CONVERSATIONS FROM THE BOARD? DO I HEAR A MOTION?
I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PAB CASE 2024-0011 TO THE CITY COMMISSION, REQUESTING THAT A FINAL PLAT FOR THE CLV AMELIA SUBDIVISION BE APPROVED AND THAT THE PAB CASE 2024-0011 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?
>> I HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. BENNETT.
DISCUSSION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD?
A COUPLE OF THINGS HAVE COME OUT THOUGH, THAT IF WE RUN INTO ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS, SOMEHOW WE NEED TO CLIP THEM A LOT EARLIER.
THAT'S IN ALL FAIRNESS TO THE DEVELOPERS IN THE BUSINESS INVOLVED IN IT AND FOR US, FROM THE STANDPOINT, I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO COME IN AT THE LAST MINUTE AND THROW A CLINKER IN THE FIRE JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T UNDERSTAND SOMETHING.
>> WELL, I THINK IT WOULD BE TO OUR BENEFIT TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE A LIST BEFORE WE GO INTO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
ASK THIS, ASK THIS, AND WHAT ABOUT THIS? BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M GOING TO ASK THE PLANNING BOARD.
I SAID, IF YOU RUN INTO ONE OF THESE WHERE WE'VE GOT THESE PLATS AND THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL IN THE 2004, '05 TIME PERIOD, MARK, YOU'RE GOING TO BE A BETTER.
>> BUT ANYWAY, IF WE HAVE SOMETHING THERE WHERE IT MAY HAVE BEEN REZONED OR CHANGE IN THE CRITERIA FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT.
THAT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP AHEAD OF TIME TO MAKE SURE, WHAT IS OR WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA THAT WE NEED TO WORK WITH IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT I WANT TO PROTECT THE LAND, I WANT TO KEEP THE TREES, BUT WE WANT TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT WE ARE TECHNICALLY CORRECT.
>> MR. BENNETT, DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I BELIEVE I'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD ON THIS BOARD THAT WE CANNOT PUT CONDITIONS ON REZONING.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CHANGED.
WE HAVE SO MANY CHANGES GOING ON.
BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL ANY CONDITION AT THAT TIME, SENIOR HOUSING SOUNDED LIKE A GREAT IDEA IN 2005 TO SET IT UP FOR THIS PROPERTY AND THAT WAS THE DECISION OF THE BOARD THAT THIS BE A GREAT IDEA TO ALLOW FOR THE HIGHER DENSITY TO ALLOW FOR THAT USE.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IT WAS PASSED AND IT WOULD BE ENORMOUSLY UNFAIR TO CHANGE THIS AFTER 15 YEARS.
SOMEBODY WHO BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AND GOT TO THIS POINT IN THE PRESENTATION WITHOUT HAVING THOSE THINGS IN THE LANGUAGE OR IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS.
>> WAS IT 2005 IT'S TAKEN THIS LONG TOO.
[00:30:05]
>> IT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T DEVELOPED THE PROPERTY.
>> YOU GOT IT REZONED, AND THEN IT JUST SAT THERE.
>> YEAH. SAT THERE. WELL, IT SAT HERE WITH THE NON-PROFIT UNTIL THEY DECIDED TO SELL IT THEN SOMEBODY BOUGHT IT AND SAID, "HEY, IT'S A GREAT ISLAND.
LET'S BUILD SOME HIGH-END TOWNHOUSES HERE."
>> I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE MINUTES FROM THAT POINT WHEN IT WAS APPROVED THAT PUT A STIPULATION ON IT.
>> NO, THERE WAS NO LIMIT I RECALL.
>> I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THERE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] MORE FUN WITH THE DISCUSSIONS.
DON'T ALWAYS MAKE IT INTO THE RECORD.
>> WE'VE HAD A MOTION. WE'VE HAD A SECOND.
WE'VE HAD GOOD BOARD DISCUSSION.
THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
>> WOULD YOU PLEASE COME UP HERE?
>> I'M JIM CROTTY, 1736 SOUTH 15TH STREET, FERNANDINA BEACH.
SO BASED ON YOUR APPROVAL, SAY TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION, THERE WAS NO CONTINGENCY OR REQUIREMENTS PUT ON THAT REZONING.
SAY THERE IS AND WE JUST HAVEN'T FOUND IT YET BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GO BACK AND DIG THROUGH THE PAPERWORK, DID YOUR APPROVAL JUST WAIVE THOSE OR ARE THEY STILL IN FORCE?
>> BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY TO YOU IS THAT BECAUSE WE'VE ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO THIS BETWEEN OUR APPROVAL AND THEN THE TIME THAT IT GOES BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, IF SHE FINDS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BRING THAT UP INTO QUESTION, SHE WOULD BRING THAT UP TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CITY COMMISSIONERS WHEN THEY'RE CONSIDERING THIS CASE.
>> AND I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD YOU PUT A DEED RESTRICTION ON THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME WE WOULD CHANGE THE ZONING?
>> IT'S THE SAME THING AS PUTTING A CONDITION ON THE REZONING.
IF YOU RECORD THAT ORDINANCE, IT ACTS LIKE A DEED RESTRICTION SO THE SAME QUESTION THAT YOU HAD FOR ME BEFORE, WHETHER WE CAN HAVE CONDITIONS, I'D LIKE TO RESEARCH THAT AND GET BACK WITH AN ACCURATE ANSWER.
IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE YOU CAN, BUT I JUST WANT TO LOOK AT IT.
>> WELL, THE DEED RESTRICTION WOULD BE FINE [BACKGROUND]
>> NOW, TAMMY, IF FOR SOME REASON, LET'S JUST SAY IT THERE WAS THE ABILITY TO PUT SOME TYPE OF RESTRICTION ON A REZONING.
SHOULDN'T WE SOMEHOW FOLD THAT INTO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SO IT'S CLEARLY IDENTIFIED?
>> IDEALLY, IF THOSE ARE SURE, IF THAT IS A TOOL, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE IDENTIFY IT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
YES. BUT IT'S NOT THERE ANNOUNCED.
>> I THINK THE FIRST THING YOU GOT THE BALL RIGHT NOW.
LET'S GET THE FIRST BASE BEFORE WE WORRY, TRY AND GET ALL THE WAY BACK TO ALL.
>> SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6, BOARD BUSINESS.
[6. BOARD BUSINESS]
PETER, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD SOMETHING. GO AHEAD.>> IF YOU DON'T MIND. LET ME START OFF WITH THE SIMPLE STUFF FIRST.
I HAD JUST HAPPENED BECAUSE WE HAD A VOTE ON TWO OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD AT LAST COMMISSION MEETING.
SOME PEOPLE WERE ASKING ABOUT WHEN THEIR LATEST THREE-YEAR TERM WOULD TERMINATE. I WENT BACK AND DID IT.
SO I'M GOING TO COVER ALL WE GOT.
DAPHNE, YOU'RE UP NEXT YEAR, 2025.
MARK BENNETT, HE'S UP AT THE END OF 2090.
>> I'M SORRY, A LITTLE TONGUE IN CHEEK, 2025.
ON TOP OF THAT, RICHARD DOSTER, WHO'S NOT HERE WILL BE 2025, AND THEN MARK DURHAM, WHO'S FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD, HE NORMALLY DOESN'T ATTEND, HE'S UP AT 2025, AND MR. STEVENSON AND MR. NICK GILLETTE, WE'RE BOTH UP AT THE END OF 2026, AND MS. ROBAS AND MS. GINGHER ARE BOTH UP AT THE END OF 2027 BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN RE-ELECTED TO THEIR POSITION.
>> APPOINTED, YES. NOW, THAT WAS JUST BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ASKED THE QUESTION.
NOW, DID EVERYBODY GET A COPY OF, LET'S SEE.
THIS WAS FROM JOYCE TUTEN, AND IT WAS THE 14TH.
SHE OUTLINED A WHOLE BUNCH OF SOURCES THAT WE LOOKED AT, RELATED TO THE QUESTION OF, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A NATIVE OR FLORIDA FRIENDLY,
[00:35:02]
WHAT DEFINITION WE'RE GOING TO USE FOR THE FUTURE.EVERYBODY'S GOT A COPY OF THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW, MARGARET.
WE DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH THAT UNTIL WE COME BACK TO START THE LANGUAGE AGAIN ON THAT FLORIDA FRIENDLY VERSUS NATIVE.
>> WHAT MS. TUTEN IS REALLY TRYING TO PUSH FOR ARE GOING TO BE NOT NECESSARILY JUST NATIVE, BUT NATIVE TO NASSAU COUNTY, UP IN THIS AREA.
FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU SAY FLORIDA FRIENDLY, THAT CAN BE A QUEEN PALM.
WELL QUEEN PALMS DON'T REALLY DO SUPER WELL HERE.
IT'S NOT THEIR FAVORITE ENVIRONMENT.
IT WOULD BE A GREAT DECISION TO PUT THEM IN HERE.
I'VE SEEN SEVERAL OF THEM JUST DIE OFF AFTER THREE OR FOUR YEARS.
ANYWAY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY GOT A COPY OF THAT.
>> YEAH, AND IT'LL GIVE US SOMETHING TO WORK WITH.
THE OTHER THING WAS, WE WERE TALKING LAST TIME ABOUT THE VIDEO ON THE BERT HARRIS ACT.
I DON'T KNOW IF MARGARET HAD SENT AN EMAIL OUT, I THINK TO EVERYBODY, THAT WAS FROM NOVEMBER 13TH.
WELL, TODAY THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE.
THIS ONE IS ON LIVE LOCAL, AND I WILL TELL YOU FROM TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH, THAT YOU'VE GOT TO WATCH IT.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD SAY.
IF YOU LOOK AT OUR EMAIL, IF YOU GO OUT AND PULL IT UP, IT'S GOING TO BRING UP BOTH OF THOSE.
THE SECOND ONE, THE LIVE LOCAL, IS NOT YET ON THE SITE.
IF YOU ALSO GO TO THE 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA WEBSITE, THEY SAID THAT IS WHERE IT WILL BE POSTED AS WELL.
AGAIN, I FELT THAT IT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE.
ACTUALLY, IT WAS SO MUCH INFORMATION, IT MIGHT BEHOOVE US TO SEE IT MORE THAN ONCE BECAUSE IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.
>> YEAH. I TOLD YOU I GOT CUT OFF TODAY, BUT THEY HAVE SUGGESTIONS THAT EVERY GOVERNMENT ENTITY IN FLORIDA NEEDS TO START DOING WHEN IT COMES TO THIS LEGISLATION. THAT'S IMPORTANT.
>> ONE OF MY SUGGESTIONS IS THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE EMBRACE FOR ONE OF OUR PROJECTS IN 2025.
>> IT MAY VERY WELL BE, BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU THE COMMENT I GOT BACK FROM ONE PERSON THAT SAW IT WAS, THEY ARE OF THE BELIEF THAT THE CITY IS NOT FOLLOWING, WATCHING, DOING WHAT LIVE LOCAL COULD OR SHOULD REQUIRE THEM TO DO.
AND THERE ARE CITIES THAT ARE BEGINNING TO TAKE COURT CHALLENGES AGAINST THAT ACT SO THAT MAY PLAY OUT OVER TIME.
BUT THE SUGGESTION HERE IS JUST GO THROUGH IT, LISTEN TO IT, BECAUSE BASED ON WHAT VICTORIA SAID, HERE, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MIGHT BE WATCHING IT TWO OR THREE TIMES.
IT IS AN HOUR AND A HALF LONG VIDEOS.
BUT ANYWAY, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE DEFINITELY NEED.
THAT NEEDS TO BE ON OUR LIST FOR THINGS TO TALK ABOUT IN 2025.
>> YEAH. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, ALL OF THIS INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY THAT WE'RE SURROUNDED IN, ARE VERY LARGE PARCELS THAT COULD ALL BE DEVELOPED UNDER LIVE LOCAL.
>> ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THIS WEBINAR IS THAT A LOT OF COMMUNITIES LOOK AT THEIR TAX BASE BASED ON HOW MUCH PROPERTY IS ZONED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL.
RESIDENTIAL IS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT TAXING REVENUE STREAM.
THAT HAS AN IMPACT TO A COMMUNITY.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF, AND I THINK THAT FURTHER DISCUSSION ALONG THOSE LINES WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
>> THEY REFERENCED PASCO COUNTY IN THIS WHERE PASCO COUNTY HAD ACTUALLY HAD AN AREA AT I75, WHICH WAS MANY ACRES THAT THEY HAD PLANNED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, I GUESS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THEY PUT ALL THE ROADS IN, THEY HAD DONE EVERYTHING FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
NOW WITH THIS LEGISLATION, THAT COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE DONE AND ALL THE MONEY THEY'VE ALREADY SPENT, WHICH IS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
THERE'S POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I'LL STILL LOOK INTO IT.
>> THE NEXT THING. LAST MEETING, WE WERE DISCUSSING ALTERNATE BOARDS THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO ATTEND,
[00:40:04]
NOT NECESSARILY ALL OF THEM BUT JUST TO ASCERTAIN [INAUDIBLE] IS GOING WELL.TWO HOURS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE TECH REVIEW COMMITTEE.
NOW, THEY BOTH MEET NEXT WEEK.
WELL, WHEN I CHECKED IT THIS AFTERNOON, NEITHER ONE OF THEM HAVE AN AGENDA, SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP US TRYING TO LOOK FROM OUR MEETING TO THE NEXT MEETING COMING UP.
NOW, I HAVE HEARD A RUMOR THAT NEXT WEDNESDAY, THE 18TT, THERE IS A MEETING AT 5:00, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TRINGALI.
>> I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S ALL I GOT.
I JUST GOT A THING THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON TRINGALI PROPERTIES NEXT WEDNESDAY.
BUT IT'S NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA, IT'S NOT LISTED ANYWHERE ON THE CITY.
>> WE'RE GOING TO LET YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A RUMOR.
>> BUT I JUST GOT A CRUMB OUT, AND I JUST LOOKED IT UP BECAUSE I HAVE THOSE ON MY CALENDAR FOR NOTICES.
>> WHEN I GET THE NOTICE, I LOOK AT THE AGENDAS ON ALL OF THEM.
>> ANYWAY, MY QUESTION IS GOING TO BE TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
IF WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT AND WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GET THE NOTICE OUT UNTIL, SAY TOMORROW, AFTER OUR MEETING, CAN I HAVE THE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SEND A NOTICE TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE PAB TO MAKE SURE THEY KNOW ABOUT IT, SO WE DON'T BREAK SUNSHINE REQUIREMENTS?
>> YEAH. I JUST LOOKED AT THE CITY WEBSITE AND IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THAT THERE'S ONE PUBLISHED.
BUT I DO KNOW THERE IS A MEETING ON THE 18TH.
>> I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE EVERYTHING AUTOMATIC.
IN SOME CASES THERE NEEDS TO BE A HEADS UP.
>> I THINK IT DOESN'T PUBLISH TILL TOMORROW.
IT'S NEXT WEDNESDAY [OVERLAPPING], AND IT'S SUPPOSED BE, AND IT WAS NOT OUT.
NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S OUT NOW, BUT IT WAS NOT OUT WHEN I LEFT TO COME DOWN HERE.
>> I DON'T SEE IT, BUT I'LL FOLLOW WITH KELLY.
>> NEXT THING. WE GOT THROUGH THAT.
IF YOU GUYS DON'T MIND, LAST TUESDAY'S CITY COMMISSION MEETING WAS INTERESTING.
AT 5:00, THEY HAD JUST A, WHAT I WANT TO CALL A PLANNING SESSION, JUST A DISCUSSION SESSION.
LET ME JUST HIT SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT THEY TALKED ABOUT.
A LOT OF THEM AREN'T GOING TO AFFECT US, BUT IT'S MORE OR LESS HAVING THE KNOWLEDGE AND BEING AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON.
LET ME JUST GO THROUGH THIS LIST REAL QUICK.
THIS WILL GET REFINED, I THINK A LOT MORE, WHEN WE GET TO OUR JOINT MEETING, WHICH WILL BE IN JANUARY, AS FAR AS WE KNOW.
IMPACT FEES, CAPACITY FEES, STORM WATER PLANTS, A GLOBAL ONE FOR THE ISLAND, LIKE WE'RE ASKING, JUST GENERALLY, DO WE HAVE A FLOW PATTERN ACROSS THE ISLAND? WHAT WE JUST DID TONIGHT, THAT AFFECTS JUST 1.3 ACRES OF PROPERTY.
ALL THE WATER RUNS OFF OF IT OR PART OF IT OR 80%. WHERE'S IT GOING? IT'S GOT TO GO SOMEWHERE BECAUSE IT CAN'T STAY WHERE IT IS.
>> I'M NOT SURE THAT 80% OF IT RUNS OFF.
>> IT HAS TO RETAIN PART OF IT.
>> YOU HAVE TO RETAIN [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. SOME PART, SOMETHING OVER ZERO.
14TH STREET DEVELOPMENT ISSUE, WHICH WE'RE AWARE OF ON THE EAST SIDE BETWEEN 14TH AND 15TH STREET DOWN BY AMELIA PARK, CONSERVATION LAND PLAN.
CONSERVATION LAND, A PLAN, THE BOSQUE BELLO COLUMBARIUM.
IT'S JUST IT'S BACK ON THE RADAR AGAIN.
THE SEAWALL PLAN. GOSH, THAT'S ONLY BEEN GOING ON FOR 20.5 YEARS.
>> HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THAT THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE CAN DO WITH THESE?
>> I'M JUST BRINGING THEM UP SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR CITY.
>> COULD YOU BACK UP TO THE 14TH STREET PLAN?
>> YEAH. THAT'S WHERE 15TH STREET ENDS UP RUNNING INTO AMELIA PARK, AND PART OF THAT SAYS IT'S C1 AND C2?
>> THERE'S A PLAN DOWN THERE NOW TO PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THAT LAND, AND IT'S GOING TO DUMP A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
[00:45:01]
>> THAT'S THE THREAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK THERE'S A CHANGE COMING, ISN'T THERE TAMMY?
>> THE PROPERTY OWNER DEVELOPER ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION TO THEIR TRC APPLICATION.
>> WELL, ANYWAY, IT'S ON THE COMMISSIONER'S RADAR SCREEN.
SEAWALL PLAN, THE GOLF COURSE MASTER PLAN, REVENUE SOURCES, PAID PARKING, THE BUDGETING PROCESS FOR THE CITY, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO LOOKING AT MAYBE GETTING A TOOL, SOME TYPE, LIKE, I'LL CALL IT SURVEY MONKEY OR ONE OF THOSE [INAUDIBLE], THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE, EVEN LIKE WHEN WE DID THE VISION 2045, TO GET COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND GET IT MORE STREAMLINED AND MORE AUTOMATED.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> WELL ALL THESE THINGS GO TO OTHER BOARDS WITHIN THE CITY.
YOU'RE TRYING TO CAPTURE TERRITORY THAT WE CAN'T.
THIS IS REALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BOARD.
I UNDERSTAND BEING AWARE OF THINGS.
>> BUT SOME OF THESE THINGS MIGHT GET KICKED BACK TO US ANYWAY.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT PAID PARKING AGAIN?
>> BUT HERITAGE TREE PROTECTION, I CAN SEE THAT MAYBE COMING BACK TO US FOR A REWRITE.
THE BIOETHANOL DECISION, THAT'S OUTSIDE.
THE BRETT'S PLAN IS GOING TO BE, AND THEN THE TRINGALI PROPERTY.
>> THAT'S SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT.
NOW WE NEED TO ADD TWO OF THE THINGS THAT WE FEEL WILL BE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH US AS FAR AS THE PAB IS CONCERNED.
I THINK I'VE ALREADY PICKED UP ON A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON.
>> DON'T VOLUNTEER FOR PAID PARKING, OKAY?
I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT THE THOUGHT PROCESS IT.
>> MR. BENNETT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?
>> I WAS WATCHING THAT MEETING LAST WEEK WITH THE CITY COMMISSION.
I WOULD LIKE THE CITY ATTORNEY AND STEPH, TO PLEASE TELL THE COMMISSION TO TELL THE AUDIENCE THAT THEY'VE ALREADY CHASTISED THE AUDIENCE FOR CLAPPING ON THINGS THAT THEY DON'T LIKE.
BUT THAT ENTIRE MEETING, IT WAS LIKE A PEP RALLY.
IT'S VERY DISTURBING TO ME, BECAUSE I DON'T CARE IF THEY LIKE WHAT I SAY OR DON'T.
I DON'T LIKE HAVING PEOPLE CLAPPING ON EVERYTHING, CHEERING ON.
EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT, THAT YOU'VE [INAUDIBLE] CAN COME UP HERE AND SAY WHAT THEY HAVE AND NOT HAVE ANY RESPONSE FROM THE AUDIENCE.
THEY NEED TO BE REMINDED OF THAT BECAUSE MY WIFE GOT MAD AT ME.
IT'S ANNOYING, AND IT'S TERRIBLE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO GO TO A CITY COMMISSION MEETING AND GET UP, AND EVEN IF YOU'RE OPPOSED OR WITH THEM, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE.
THEY NEED TO BE TOLD, ONCE AGAIN, TO STOP IT, AND IF THEY CONTINUE, SEND THEM OUT OF THE ROOM, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THAT MANY YEARS AGO, THAT IT'S NOT PROPER.
>> LET'S BACK UP THE TRAIN REAL QUICK.
>> WHO'S TO BE TOLD TO STOP IT? OTHER PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE?
>> WELL, IT WOULD BE THE HEAD OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
>> MAYOR OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
>> THEY START CLAPPING FOR ANY REASON.
ANYTHING COMING OUT OF THE AUDIENCE NEEDS TO STOP IMMEDIATELY, AND YOU STOP IT UNLESS THEY DON'T STOP IT, AND YOU HAVE TO LEAVE THE ROOM OR STOP THE MEETING.
BECAUSE IT'S NOT FAIR TO WHOEVER IS SPEAKING.
SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THIS THING OF OBSERVING HATE SPEECH.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT HATE SPEECH IS.
I THINK I KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT WHAT YOU THINK AND YOU, I DON'T LIKE ANYONE TELLING ANYONE WHAT THEY CAN SAY.
EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT IF SOMEONE GETS UP THERE AND VOICES AN OPINION, AND THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO HEAR THEM.
WE MAY NOT LIKE IT, BUT IF WE TOOK AWAY WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OR SOMEONE'S DEFINITION OF HATE SPEECH IS OR WAS, WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD MANY OF THE MOVEMENTS THAT WE'VE HAD IN THIS COUNTRY TO CHANGE THINGS TO THE BETTER. I'M DONE WITH THAT.
>> SOMEONE CAN FOLLOW THAT PERSON AND ALSO REFUTE WHAT THEY SAY.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT THERE WAS THIS, DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE TO HAVE RULES ON HATE SPEECH? I'M SAYING THAT THAT'S A DANGEROUS PLACE TO GO, AND DON'T DO IT.
[00:50:05]
>> WELL, THANK YOU, MR. BENNETT. ANYBODY ELSE?
>> I WOULD JUST MAKE A COMMENT.
I THINK THAT GENERALLY, THE PARTICIPANTS THAT COME TO OUR PAB MEETINGS ARE MUCH MORE FOCUSED ON EITHER TRYING TO POINT OUT AN ISSUE OF PROBLEM OR PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE SOLUTION.
I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A CONTRIBUTORY TYPE OF AUDIENCE, AND THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CITY COMMISSIONER DO.
>> I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T HEAR WHAT THE CITY COMMISSION HEARS.
YES, I DO THINK THAT FREE SPEECH, THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK.
BUT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT IN THIS DAY AND AGE AND THE WAY THINGS ARE, TO ELIMINATE YOUR EMOTION.
YOU HAVE TO QUELL YOUR EMOTION.
>> YOU NEED TO DO WORK IN THE PSYCHOLOGY.
>> MY MOTHER WAS A PSYCHIATRIST.
>> I MEAN, THEY CALL HER A PSYCHO.
>> THANK YOU-ALL FOR THOSE COMMENTS.
I'M SURE OUR ATTORNEY WILL PASS THOSE THOUGHTS ONTO THE COMMISSION AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME..
>> I DO HAVE AN UPDATE ON THE BOA.
KELLY WAS IN A MEETING WITH MANAGEMENT THAT RAN OVER.
SHE WAS JUST ABLE TO GET IT DONE, SO IT'S PUBLISHED NOW, SO YES.
>> WE CAN JUST TO THE WEBSITE AND WE CAN PULL UP THE AGENDA.
>> WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT AND MAKE SURE YOU ORDER UP THE LIVE LOCAL AND LISTEN TO THE ENTIRE THING TWICE.
>> THANK YOU-ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, STAFF REPORT.
[7. STAFF REPORT]
>> WELL, WE DO HAVE AN UPDATE ON YOUR WORK SESSION.
YOUR NEXT MEETING IS ON JANUARY, THE 8TH, AND WE'VE CONFIRMED THAT THAT DATE DOES WORK FOR THE COMMISSION, BUT THE TIME WILL BE AT SIX O'CLOCK VERSUS FIVE O'CLOCK.
I DON'T KNOW IF TAMMY HAS ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
>> IT'S GOING TO BE JOINT ON THE 8TH?
>> ON THE 8TH, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE AT SIX O'CLOCK VERSUS FIVE O'CLOCK.
ALSO, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO TELL US NOW, YOU JUST CAN EMAIL KELLY AND I, BUT WHAT WE WANT TO KNOW IS WHAT YOUR EXPECTATIONS, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR AS AN OUTCOME? WE'VE MADE A LIST OF THINGS AND YOU'VE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE FLORIDA FRIENDLY STANDARDS.
WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING TO GET OUT OF THAT CONVERSATION? YOU'RE EXPECTING TO GET DIRECTION TO LOOK AT THIS, WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE STEER IT WHERE YOU CAN BRING UP YOUR TOPICS JUST LIKE THE COMMISSION CAN BRING UP THEIR TOPICS, BUT TO TRY TO GET A DIRECTION.
WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
>> I THINK PUDS IS THE MOST PRESSING ONE BECAUSE IT'S THE ONE THAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING AT THE LAST MEETING AND GETTING DIRECTION FROM THEM IN TERMS OF WHAT KIND OF ACREAGE THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CHANGE IN, IF ANY.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ACREAGE.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE ACREAGE FOR THE PUDS.
IF YOU COULD JUST EMAIL THOSE TO US, THAT WOULD HELP US CRAFT.
>> WELL, THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S PROGRESS.
>> I'M JUST THROWING OUT SOME OF THOSE.
>> YES. WE HAD THE LANDSCAPING, THE PARKING, THE PUDS, OR THE BIG ONES.
>> EMAIL US THE LIST AND THEN WE CAN 1, 2, 03, 4, 5 AND ADD TO IT. HOW'S THAT?
>> IS LIVE LOCAL ON THAT LIST?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME, I DON'T THINK.
>> BUT I WANT US TO START DIVING INTO THAT.
I THINK FOR TRANSPARENCY SO THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THE PROCESS.
I'M NOT SURE WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS IS, AND IT'S MORE THAN JUST SOMEBODY COMING IN AND SAYING, IT'S A COMMERCIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY, I'M GOING TO PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON IT.
AFTER LISTENING TO THIS WEBINAR, IT'S MUCH MORE COMPLEX.
YES, IT DOES HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, BUT THAT ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, I THINK, NEEDS SOME TRANSPARENCY AS WELL.
>> WELL, THEN UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, IT DOES NOT COME TO A PORT OR THE CITY.
I GOT CUT OFF IN THE MIDDLE, I HAD A POWER OUTAGE AND LEFT THE MEETING.
>> BUT I THINK THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT JOINTLY, I THINK,
[00:55:02]
EVERYBODY HAS AN INTEREST IN PARSING THROUGH WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS TO US.I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT ON THE ON THE LIST.
>> WELL, CERTAINLY FROM A STRATEGIC STANDPOINT, YOU GOT THE THREAT OF WHAT IT WOULD MEAN TO THE WHOLE ISLAND.
FORGET WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CITY OR COUNTY.
THERE'S THAT LAND AND THERE'S STILL THAT THREAT, IF IT'S COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL.
>> NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE CITY.
WE, IN THIS BOARD, ONLY CARE ABOUT THE COUNTY.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WE ARE GROWING, NOT SHRINKING.
WE CONTINUE TO CONSUME ADDITIONAL LAND THAT IS CURRENTLY PROPERTY OF THE COUNTY.
>> BUT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
>> CAN I ASK? I KNOW THAT I JUST SAID THAT THIS JOINT MEETING IS GOING TO BE ON WEDNESDAY THE 8TH AT 6:00 PM.
DO WE HAVE ANY CONFLICTS FROM ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS ON THE 6:00 PM. START TIME?
>> NO. OUR REGULAR MEETING WILL BE THE NEXT WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH.
>> THAT IS WHEN YOUR MEETING IS, IS EARLY THIS YEAR.
>> THAT'S OUR REGULAR MEETING.
>> IT'LL JUST BE AT SIX CLOCK VERSUS FIVE O'CLOCK.
>> BUT THAT'S THE JOINT MEETING, BUT INSTEAD OF US MEETING AT 5:00, WE'RE GOING TO MEET AT 6:00.
>> THAT WAS THE REQUEST FOR THE COMMISSION.
>> SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OUR REGULAR MEETING.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M MAKING SURE OUR BOARD UNDERSTANDS THIS, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC, THAT THIS MEETING ON JANUARY, THE 8TH, WHICH IS OUR NORMALLY SCHEDULED TIME TO MEET WILL BE A JOINT MEETING BETWEEN US AND THE CITY COMMISSION AND IT WILL BE AT 6:00 PM.
>> WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING ON THE 15TH.
>> YES, WE ARE. WE'RE MEETING ON THE 15TH OF JANUARY AT 5:00 PM TO HAVE OUR REGULAR MEETING.
>> YOUR REGULAR MEETING IS ON THE 8TH.
>> THE REGULAR MEETING IS THE 8TH.
>> WHY ARE WE CHANGING THE TIME? WHY NOT BE THE SAME?
>> THEY'RE JOINING US, THOUGH.
>> YES. THEY HAVE IN THE PAST, IS WHAT I'M TELLING YOU.
>> YOU MEET THE SECOND WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH, AND SO BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE CALENDAR IS, THE 1ST IS ON WEDNESDAY, SO YOU MEET THE SECOND WEDNESDAY, WHICH IS JANUARY, THE 8TH? IT'S JUST EARLIER THAN NORMAL IT FEELS LIKE.
>> YOU MEET THE SECOND WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH, AND SO THE SECOND WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH IN JANUARY IS JANUARY, THE 8TH.
THEY WORK TO BE ABLE TO MEET WITH YOU GUYS ON THE SAME DATE AS YOUR REGULAR MEETING.
>> BUT THEY REQUESTED A SIX O'CLOCK START.
>> THEY REQUESTED SIX O'CLOCK.
>> NOW, WHY DO I HAVE A MEETING ON 15TH JANUARY?
>> THAT'S THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS REGULAR MEETING DATE.
>> YES. THAT'S WHAT I'VE GOT IS THE 15TH ON THE BOA.
THAT WAS IT. THERE WASN'T ANYTHING ELSE.
>> NOW, GOING BACK, IF YOU GO WAY BACK ON THE 22TH, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY.
IT WAS JUST A GLOBAL DISCUSSION, JUST A WORKSHOP.
>> WELL, WHY CAN'T WE HAVE OUR MEETING AT 5:00 AND THEN MEETING WITH THE COMMISSIONERS AT 6:00?
>> MARGARET, HAVE WE GOT ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA RIGHT NOW, JUST GENERAL ACTION?
>> NO, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING.
ALSO, I THINK WITH PUBLISHING IT WOULD JUST BE SIMPLE TO PUBLISH ONE AGENDA AT ONE TIME AT SIX O'CLOCK.
>> IS THERE A CONSISTENCY ISSUE, TAMMY, AS FAR AS PUSHING THE TIME BACK TO SIX O'CLOCK?
>> JUST BOOK 6:00-9:00, THAT WAY, IF SOMETHING COMES UP, WE CAN DO THE COMMISSION, IF WE'VE GOT A VOTE ON IF THEY HAPPEN TO GET A PAB.
>> WE HAVE UNTIL NINE O'CLOCK.
>> I THINK WE'RE PRETTY CLEAR ON THAT.
EVERYBODY SEEMS TO HAVE A CLEAR TIME AND DATE FOR OUR CALENDARS?
>> WE'LL SEND YOU, WE'LL PUBLISH AGENDA JUST LIKE WE NORMALLY DID.
>> IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE FROM STAFF?
>> NO? IS THERE ANYTHING FROM TAMMY? ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE, ANY UPDATES OR ANYTHING?
AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC COME UP IF THEY LIKE FOR COMMENTS.
[8. PUBLIC COMMENT]
MARGARET, ALWAYS NICE TO SEE YOU.[01:00:01]
>> SORRY TO REPEAT THIS, MARGARET KIRKLAND, 1377, PLANTATION POINT DRIVE, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CONSERVE NASSAU.
I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMISSIONERS, AND THAT IS, HOW CAN WE ADVANCE SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCE? THAT'S A TOPIC OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE TO COMMISSIONERS, AS WELL AS THE PAB.
I THINK BEGINNING A DISCUSSION IS REALLY CRITICAL.
IN TERMS OF CHANGES IN RAINFALL IN TERMS OF MOISTURE IN THE ATMOSPHERE, IN TERMS OF SEA LEVEL RISE, IN TERMS OF ALL OF THESE THINGS, WE REALLY NEED TO BE MOVING AHEAD WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING, NOT JUST THE DISCUSSION, BUT ACTUALLY PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION.
LAST NIGHT I WENT TO THE MEETING IN THE COUNTY THAT THE STORM WATER MANAGER KDP HAD WITH THE BALMORAL PEOPLE WHO WERE JUST FINISHING UP PHASE 3 OF THE COUNTY'S VULNERABILITY STUDY.
I HAPPENED TO RUN INTO THEM A COUPLE OF TIMES OUTSIDE OF THE MEETING CONTEXT.
THEY KEPT SAYING TO ME, YOU GUYS REALLY NEED TO PUSH ON LAND CONSERVATION.
YOU REALLY NEED TO PUSH ON LAND CONSERVATION.
THIS IS NOT JUST THE COUNTY, BUT ALL OF THE COUNTY, INCLUDING THE ISLAND, INCLUDING THE CITY.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE WORKING ON.
I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE FLOODING ISSUE, THERE IS A LOT.
WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION PROJECTIONS OF WHAT'S COMING.
WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS ENOUGH ABOUT REALLY THE THE DYNAMICS OF HYDROLOGY ON THIS ISLAND AND IN THE REST OF THE COUNTY, SO WHAT IS GOING ON WITH WATER LEVELS AND WITH FLOW AND SO ON, WHAT IS IT WE DON'T SEE THAT'S UNDER THE GROUND AND SO ON.
WE NEED TO HAVE SOME REALLY HIGH-LEVEL BEYOND WHAT WE HEARD LAST NIGHT.
WE NEED SOME HIGH-LEVEL RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE ON OUR OWN GEOGRAPHY HERE BEFORE THE TERMINAL ONE.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, MARGARET.
GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE SIR?
>> CERTAINLY. MY NAME IS JIM CROTTY.
A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT LIVE LOCAL.
THERE SEEMS TO BE A GROWING LIST OF COUNTIES THAT ARE OPTING OUT OF LIVE LOCAL.
HAVE YOU EXPLORED AS TO WHY COUNTIES ARE OPTING OUT AND IF WHETHER OR NOT NASSAU COUNTY IS PURSUING AN OPT OUT, AND WHAT IMPLICATIONS THAT WOULD HAVE.
>> I'LL ASK OUR ATTORNEY TO ANSWER THAT.
>> NASSAU COUNTY HAS OPTED OUT, BUT IT IS LIMITED OPT OUT.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AMI IS THE ACRONYM USED, THAT'S AVERAGE MEDIAN INCOME, FOR OUR AREA.
THAT'S WHAT WE DETERMINE IS WHAT OUR AFFORDABLE RATES ARE BASED ON.
OUR INCOME IS ABOUT $96,000, IS THE AVERAGE MEDIAN INCOME.
THEN THE RATES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ARE DETERMINED BASED UPON ANYWHERE FROM THE EXTREMELY LOW, WHICH IS 30% OF THAT 96,000 OF THAT AMI, ALL THE WAY UP TO 120%.
THAT'S CONSIDERED MODERATE INCOME, BUT IT'S STILL UNDER THE AFFORDABLE UMBRELLA.
COUNTIES IN FLORIDA CAN OPT OUT OF PROVIDING A TAX EXEMPTION FROM COUNTY TAXES ONLY FOR THE 80-120% PRICED RENTS.
REALLY, FOR THE HIGHER INCOME AFFORDABLE RESIDENTS, THOSE ARE TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO OWNS THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS AND IS RENTING THEM.
LIVE LOCAL IS ABOUT THOSE UNITS ALL RENTED, NEVER SOLD, AND THEREFORE, AFFORDABLE, AND THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE KEPT THAT WAY FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS.
OUR NASSAU COUNTY HAS OPTED OUT OF PROVIDING THE PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR THE UNITS THAT ARE BETWEEN THE 80 AND THE 120%.
FOR UNITS THAT ARE FOR LOW INCOME,
[01:05:03]
THERE IS NO OPT OUT.THEY GET 100% PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FROM PROPERTY TAX FOR BUILDING THOSE TYPES OF AFFORDABLE UNITS.
>> SO THERE'S NO IMPACT TO FERNANDINA BEACH?
>> THE STATUTE IS REALLY NOT THAT LONG, AND I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO READ IT.
YOU CAN GLEAN A LOT JUST BY READING IT.
ONE OF THE RUMORS THAT'S OUT THERE OR MISINFORMATION THAT'S OUT THERE IS COMMISSIONERS ARE GETTING CALLED ALL THE TIME.
THE CITY OF SO AND SO OPTED OUT, THE CITY OF SANFORD OPTED OUT. WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO OPT.
YOU CAN'T OPT OUT BECAUSE EVERYBODY JUST ABOUT WOULD OPT OUT, EXCEPT FOR CITIES THAT ARE RURAL AND REALLY DYING TO HAVE PEOPLE COME TO THEIR PLACE.
FERNANDINA, BY THE WAY, WAS LIKE THAT.
>> I FOUND OUT RECENTLY JUST THE HISTORY BEHIND BRETT'S AND WHY THAT SWEET DEAL WAS MADE.
APPARENTLY, THE CITY LEADERS AT THE TIME, MR. BENNETT WAS HERE, WERE JUST BEGGING FOR DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN, SO THEY GAVE BRETT'S A SWEET DEAL, AND WE HAVE BRETT'S STILL TODAY UNTIL NEXT YEAR, BUT ANYWAY, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IS VERY LIMITED.
THE STATUTE, I'LL WRITE IT DOWN FOR YOU. HOW ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE IT'S ON MY HEAD.
THERE'S FIVE NUMBERS AFTER IT, SO I DON'T WANT TO TRANSPOSE THEM.
>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR TAMMY ON THAT SUBJECT?
>> NO. BRETT'S HAPPENED BEFORE I CAME HERE.
>> BRETT'S HAPPENED BEFORE I CAME HERE.
>> IT HAPPENED HIM? BEFORE YOU CAME HERE.
>> THE ARC WAS AROUND THAT TIME.
>> BELIEVE ME, WE WOULD BE THE FIRST IN CITY OF FLORIDA TO OPT OUT.
IF WE COULD OPT OUT, WE WOULD BE THE FIRST TO OPT OUT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENT FROM STAFF, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, AND NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT, I'D LIKE TO WISH EVERYONE A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY NEW YEAR, AND HAVE A WONDERFUL HOLIDAY SEASON WITH YOUR FAMILY AND YOUR FRIENDS.
>> THANK YOU-ALL VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.