6.1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - RESOLUTION 2024-244 APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO APPLY FOR A GRANT TO PURCHASE, AND SHARE, A FIRE MOBILE AIR TRAILER; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Approves a Memorandum of Understanding with the Nassau County Board of County Commissioners to jointly apply for a grant to share a regional asset: one mobile air compressor/Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) refill unit for filling Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA).

[6.1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - RESOLUTION 2024-244 APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO APPLY FOR A GRANT TO PURCHASE, AND SHARE, A FIRE MOBILE AIR TRAILER; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Approves a Memorandum of Understanding with the Nassau County Board of County Commissioners to jointly apply for a grant to share a regional asset: one mobile air compressor/Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) refill unit for filling Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA).]

>> YES.. THAT MOTION PASSES, 5-0. MOVING ONTO RESOLUTION 6.1, MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. MR. GLISSON.

>> I'M SLOWLY GETTING UP TO SPEED. THANK YOU, MAYOR. 6.1 IS AN MO YOU WITH NASSAU COUNTY. THIS WOULD BE A JOINT APPLICATION FOR A GRANT TO SHARE A FIRE AIR TRAILER TO REFILL AND TRANSPORT FOR THE SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS CANISTERS. THIS IS SIMPLY JUST ALLOWING US TO JOIN INTO THEIR GRANT APPLICATION, BUT IF THEY WERE AWARDED IT, IT WOULD BE A SHARED ASSET THAT BOTH ENTITIES COULD USE.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS GRANT IS BEING APPLIED ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY, THEREFORE, IN THE SHORT TERM, THERE IS NO FINANCIAL BURDEN ON THE CITY. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK OUR PARTNERS NEGATIVE FOR GRACIOUSLY ALLOWING US TO PIGGYBACK ON THIS, AND, UNLESS WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MISS CAMPBELL, GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER TUTEN.

>> HOW ARE THEY FILLED NOW? >> I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY, BUT WHERE I COME FROM, THERE IS A FIXED UNIT IN THE FIRE BAY WHERE THE TANKS ARE REFILLED AFTER EVERY INCIDENT. I BELIEVE THE COUNTY HAS A COUPLE OF TRAILERS ALREADY. THIS WILL BE

ADDING TO THEIR STOCK. >> OKAY. BUT THIS ONE WON'T BE

JOINED WITH US. >> YES.

>> AND I PRESUME THERE WOULD BE SOMETHING IN THE GRANT THAT EXPLAINS WHO IS IN CHARGE OF FIXING IT WHEN IT BREAKS.

>> YEAH. THE LANGUAGE IN THE MO YOU SAYS THAT THE USE OF IT WOULD BE SCHEDULED, AND THAT MAINTENANCE WOULD BE SHARED, SO, TO ME, THAT'S UNLIKE A 50-50 SPLIT.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MISS CAMPBELL? SEEING NONE, DO I HEAR A MOTION? MOTION ON THE FLOOR. DO I HEAR SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. IN A DISCUSSION? MISS BEST, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. PHILLIPS AND

JORDAN, INC. >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER TUTEN. >> YES.

[6.2 PURCHASE APPROVAL - ZABATT, INC. - RESOLUTION 2024-245 APPROVING THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF A GENERATOR FOR THE AIRPORT TERMINAL FACILITY AND THE PURCHASE OF A MOBILE GENERATOR FOR THE AIRPORT FUEL FARM FROM ZABATT, INC. TO BE UTILIZED AT THE FERNANDINA BEACH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Approves the purchase and installation a generator for the Airport terminal facility and the purchase of a mobile generator for the Airport fuel farm from Zabatt, Inc. in the total amount of $101,459.90 (FDOT grant funded acquisitions). ]

>> THAT MOTION PASSES AND I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO THAT. WE

[00:25:03]

APPRECIATE YOU., WE HAVE ITEM 6.2.

>> STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU, MR. GLISSON. ANY QUESTIONS FOR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER MR. GLISSON?

>> I MOVE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2024-245.

>> MOTION ON THE FLOOR. DO I HEAR SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> DO I HEAR ANY COMMISSION OR

DISCUSSION? >> SEEING NONE, MS. BESS,

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

[6.3 AWARD OF RFQ 24-03 - HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. - RESOLUTION 2024-246 AWARDING RFQ 24-03 TO HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. TO COMPLETE AN ADAPTATION PLAN; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Awarding RFQ 24-03 to Halff Associates Inc. to complete a City's Adaptation Plan, in the amount of $95,500.00.]

>> YES.. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FROM HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC..

>> 6.3 AWARD OF RFQ 24-03 - HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. - RESOLUTION 2024-246 AWARDING RFQ 24-03 TO HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. TO COMPLETE AN ADAPTATION PLAN; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. STAFF RECOMMENDS

APPROVAL. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON A.

THERE ARE CONFLICTING TASK START DATE AND DUE DATE. I PRESUME IN THE GRANT THE JULY 23RD START DATE AND DUE DATE OF OCTOBER 24TH, THOSE DATES HAVE PASSED. I PRESUME THOSE ARE OLD DATES BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THE GRANT.

>> YES MA'AM. THAT IS RELATED TO THE ORIGINAL.

>> FOR THE ORIGINAL VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.

>> OKAY. SO THAT NEW, IN EXHIBIT A, DOWN THERE, ON THE LAST PAGE ON PAGE 11, THE KICKOFF MEETING, THE DUE DATE FOR THE KICKOFF MEETING IS JANUARY 31ST. IF WE DON'T START THINKING ABOUT IT UNTIL AFTER THE HOLIDAYS, THEN DO WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO ACTUALLY HAVE A PROPER KICKOFF MEETING WHERE WE ACTUALLY INVOLVE THE CITY? BECAUSE TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN WE DID THE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT, IT WAS NOT ENOUGH TIME. IT WAS SCRAMBLED. WE BETTER -- BARELY HEARD ABOUT IT. THE ONLY PEOPLE EDIT WORK SIX CONCERNED NASSAU PEOPLE.

>> I WANT TO DEFER TO DIRECTOR GIBSON. I CAN TALK ABOUT THE KICKOFF MEETING DATA FOR JANUARY 31ST. DO YOU HAVE

ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT LIST? >> HI. GOOD EVENING. KELLY GIBSON, PLANNING AND CONSERVATION. THE KICKOFF DATE IS AN INTERNAL KICKOFF DATE FOR THE PROJECT TO BEGIN, NOT A COMMUNITY-BASED MEETING, SO THAT IS A DEADLINE WE CAN

ACHIEVE. >> OKAY. SO, WHEN IS THE FIRST

-- WHEN WILL IT FIRST -- >> I'M NOT SURE IT HAS BEEN

DEFINED AT THIS TIME. >> TEST NUMBER THREE, IT IS FOR

APRIL 30TH. >> OKAY. YEAH. OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS. >> THANK YOU, MISS GIBSON.

>> ACTUALLY, CAN I ASK -- SORRY, SORRY. IT WAS SPECIFICALLY GOING TO BE IN CHARGE OF THIS? IS IT -- IS IT -- IS IT -- RIGHT -- BECAUSE THIS IS NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT WHEN THIS IS GOING ON, AND IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ACTIONABLE ITEMS FOR US TO ADAPT TO RISING SEA LEVELS, AND, MOST OF US IN THIS ROOM ARE GOING TO BE DEBT -- NOT ALL OF US -- ARE GOING TO BE DEAD WHEN THE REAL BAD STUFF HAPPENS, AND THE FUTURE RESIDENTS NEED US NOW TO ACTUALLY ACT AND BEGIN TO ADAPT AND IT IS GOING TO BE PAINFUL AND IT'S GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE, AND IT'S GOING TO BECOME LOCATED, AND WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT, AND PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING. SO THAT FUTURE RESIDENTS AREN'T WRITING NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT HOW HE FAILED. SO, OKAY. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. GLISSON OR MISS GIBSON BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? SEEING

NONE, DO I HEAR A MOTION? >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION ON THE FLOOR. DO I HEAR A SECOND?

[00:30:01]

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AT A SECOND. ANY COMMISSION OR DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, MS. BESS, PLEASE

CALL ROLE. >> COMMISSIONER TUTEN.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

[6.4 (Quasi-Judicial) VARIANCE REQUESTS - ROADWAY STANDARDS - RESOLUTION 2024-247 APPROVING/DENYING VARIANCE REQUESTS TO DEVIATE FROM ROADWAY STANDARDS REFERENCED IN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 7.01.02(B)(2) FOR PORTIONS OF DATE STREET LOCATED EAST OF CITRONA DRIVE; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Approving/denying variance requests to deviate from roadway standards referenced in Land Development Code Section 7.01.02(B)(2) to reduce tree canopy loss. (Part 1 of 2)]

>> YES. >> MAYOR ANTUN.

>> YES. THAT MOTION PASSES 5-0 POINT ON TO ITEM 6.4. WE HAVE AQUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING FOR A VARIANCE REQUESTS - ROADWAY

STANDARDS - . >> I'M HERE TO TELL YOU WHAT IT IS. CITY COMMISSIONERS ARE SITTING HERE AS JUDGES, WHICH IS WHY WE CALL IT QUASIJUDICIAL. THEY COME IN A FEW MINUTES, AT THE MAYOR'S REQUEST, WILL DISCLOSE ANY X PARTAKE MUNICATION'S. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE PARTIES IN THE CASE ARE THE CITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER OR APPLICANT. IF YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION, I AM ACTING TONIGHT AS YOUR BOARD ATTORNEY. ANY CONVERSATIONS YOU HAD WITH ME ARE NOT X PARTAKE. -- EX PARTE. THOSE ARE ALL EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. COMMUNICATIONS THAT YOU HAVE WITH RESIDENTS OF THE CITY ARE NOT EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. IN THESE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS. SO IF THERE AREN'T ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, I WILL GO RIGHT ON TWO PROCEDURES. FIRST, MISS GIBSON WITH CITY STAFF IS GOING TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION AND INTRODUCE HER STAFF REPORT AND THE FINDINGS OF CITY STAFF ON THIS REQUEST FOR THREE DIFFERENT VARIANCES RELATED TO THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ROADWAY STANDARDS. THIS PARTICULAR VARIANCE DOESN'T GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. IT COMES TO THE CITY COMMISSION DIRECTLY, AND THAT IS PURSUANT TO THE LAND DEVELOPED CODE. AFTER MR. GIBSON MAKES HER PRESENTATION, I DO NOT BELIEVE SHE HAS ANY WITNESSES TO CALL.

BUT SHE COULD IF YOU HAD ANY WITNESSES. NEXT, THE PROPERTY OWNER AND OR THEIR AGENTS, WHICH COULD INCLUDE CONSULTANTS, AND ATTORNEYS, THEY WILL COME TO THE PODIUM, STATE NAME AND ADDRESS, AND MAKE A PRESENTATION. AND INTRODUCE EVIDENCE INTO THE RECORD. THERE IS A STAFF REPORT THAT EVALUATES AND ANALYZES ALL SIX OF THE VARIANCE CRITERIA. I NOTE MISS GIBSON WILL SAY IT. STAFF FOUND THAT ALL SIX CRITERIA, VARIANCE CRITERIA WERE MET, AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE, BUT THEY WILL EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU WHEN THEY GET UP. AND SO, I'M SORRY, AFTER THE APPLICANT AND THE PROPERTY OWNER SPEAKS, AND THE AFFECTED PARTIES, ANY RESIDENT THAT WISHES TO SPEAK AND INTRODUCE EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY, IDENTIFY YOURSELF, AS AN AFFECTED PARTY, AND SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, YOU CAN ALSO PRESENT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY. NONE OF THIS IS TIMED. GIVE AS LONG AS YOU NEED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY. PARTIES CAN CALL WITNESSES AND CROSS-EXAMINE EACH OTHER AND EACH OTHER'S WITNESSES. YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF CITY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT. THOSE PARTIES CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF AFFECTED PARTIES, AND EXPERTS CAN BE ASKED QUESTIONS. THAT IS HOW GENERALLY THE PROCEEDINGS GO, AND AT THE END OF ALL OF THE TESTIMONY, MR. MAYOR, YOU WOULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE IS A FINITE TEST LINE WHERE WE HAVE TAKEN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE, AND THE QUORUM SHOULD DELIBERATE AND MAKE A DECISION IF YOU'RE READY TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT. YOU HAVE OPTIONS OF APPROVING THE VARIANCE, APPROVING THE VARIANCE WITH CONDITIONS, OR POSTPONING OR CONTINUING. IF YOU OPEN THIS HEARING TONIGHT, EVERYBODY TAKES AN OATH.

TESTIMONY BEGINS. IF YOU ARE NOT READY TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT OR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF ASKED YOU TO POSTPONE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING, IT MEANS THAT THE HEARING IS A RECESS, BUT IT IS STILL TECHNICALLY OPEN. AFTER THE TIME, IF YOU RECESS TONIGHT, I AM ASKING YOU AND ADVISING YOU, PLEASE DO NOT HAVE ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH ANY PARTIES, ANY AFFECTED PARTIES. THAT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE AT THIS POINT, IN MY VIEW, AND SO, WE WOULD JUST WAIT UNTIL THE HEARING COMES UP AGAIN, AND THEN WE WILL HEAR ALL EVIDENCE, TESTIMONY, AND ARGUMENT IN THE CHAMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? OKAY. ONCE A DECISION IS MADE BY THE COMMISSION'S TONIGHT OR SOMETIME THE FUTURE, ANYBODY THAT IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED, INCLUDING ANY OF THE PARTIES, AFFECTED PARTIES, GETS TO FILE AN APPEAL IN CIRCUIT COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE CITY COMMISSION'S DECISION. THAT'S

ALL I HAVE. >> THANK YOU.

>> QUESTION. >> IS IT POSSIBLE BEFORE THIS

[00:35:04]

EVEN BEGINS AND BEFORE WE EVEN OPEN IT THAT I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE IT OR CONTINUE IT FOR TWO WEEKS FROM

NOW? HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> THAT IS AN OPTION. I WILL LEAVE IT UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS' ATTORNEY IF THEY WANT TO STATE ANY OBJECTIONS ON THE RECORD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT, THIS IS NOT AS FORMAL AS A COURTROOM, AND NO, THERE IS NO RULE THAT SAYS YOU CANNOT

POSTPONE IT. >> BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE IT BECAUSE THE NEW DRAWING THAT WE GOT, YOU KNOW, WE SAY THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR A WEEK AND WE GOT THIS DRAWING YESTERDAY. AND BY WE, I MEAN JUST DESPERATE THE PUBLIC DIDN'T GET IT. IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. AND THE CHANGES TO THE DRAWING ARE CENTRAL TO THE VARIANCE, AND, I DON'T THINK IT IS RIGHT.

>> I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN. >> EXPLAIN HOW THIS WORKS TO

ME. >> THE REASON THE NEW DRAWING IS NOT IN THE AGENDA IS BECAUSE AGENDAS ARE PUBLISHED ONE WEEK IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING DAY TO ALTER BEING SEEN HERE IN THE CHAMBERS, REQUIRES REPUBLICATION, REDISTRIBUTION, DISSEMINATION, AND WHEN WE PUBLISH THE AMENDED AGENDAS, THE PUBLIC IS SKEPTICAL THAT WE ARE DOING SOMETHING NEFARIOUS, SO VERY LIMITED TIME TO AMEND AND AGENDA. WE DO HAVE COPIES OF THIS THAT WE RECEIVED YESTERDAY. THIS NEW DOCUMENTATION WILL BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA TOMORROW AS THE AMENDED EXHIBIT, BUT I CAN'T

DO THAT BEFORE HAND. >> OKAY. THAT MAKES SENSE. I GUESS MY CONCERN IS, IS THE AMENDED CHANGES ARE IMPORTANT, AND WHO HAD TIME TO REVIEW THIS? WHO HAS TIME TO LOOK AT THEM, TO QUESTION, TO GO CALL UP YOUR FRIEND AND ASK AN EXPERT ABOUT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT HAPPY WITH IT. I FEEL LIKE IT IS BEING LESS THAN TRANSPARENT.

WHAT IS THE DELAY? >> I HEAR YOUR CONCERN. I HAVE A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY TO GO THROUGH PUBLIC HEARING. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER.

>> I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HEAR ALL THE TESTIMONY.

BECAUSE IT PUTS IT ON THE RECORD. AND NOW, IT IS RECORDED. AFTER THAT, IF WE ARE NOT COMFORTABLE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS HAD ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY, OR WE HAD ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY, THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE NEXT

MEETING. >> BUT THEN, CORRECT ME. WHAT DID YOU SAY? HOW DOES IT WORK THEN? IF WE OPEN IT AND START TALKING ABOUT IT, WHO SHOULD WE NOT SPEAK TO?

>> WE SHOULDN'T SPEAK TO PARTIES.

>> >> MADAME ATTORNEY. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IF WE WERE TO POSTPONE IT, YOU ARE ADVISING US NOT TO TALK TO AFFECTED PARTIES. EITHER STAFF OR THE

AGENTS FOR THE APPLICANT. >> RIGHT.

>> HOWEVER, CAN WE NOT CLOSE EX PARTE AGAIN? I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY IF WE DID -- IF WE DID A CONTINUANCE -- IF WE WERE TO DO THAT ONCE WE GOT TO THE TESTIMONY, COULD WE NOT DISCLOSE EX PARTE AGAIN?

>> YES, WE CAN. IT'S JUST THAT IN MY EXPERIENCE, THE LEVEL OF PREJUDICE THAT IS ASSUMED BETWEEN AN OPEN HEARING IN THE CONTINUED PERIOD , IT IS HIGHER. IT IS AN ARGUMENT THAT IF SOMEBODY DECIDES THAT THEY WANT TO APPEAL THE CITY COMMISSION, THAT THEY CAN MAKE. I HATE TALKING ABOUT THIS STUFF. I WISH I COULD BE ADVISING YOU GUYS DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE FACT IS, I THINK THE PREJUDICE IS ENHANCED BETWEEN THE OPENING OF THE HEARING, THE POTENTIAL QUESTIONS YOU'RE ASKING, WHICH MAY INDICATE VICES, AND HAVING MORE CONVERSATIONS, SO I WOULD PREFER THAT YOU NOT. THAT IS MY ADVICE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT. YES, IF YOU HAVE ANY OF THOSE MEDICATIONS, YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DISCLOSE THEM, BUT I WOULD CAUTION YOU AGAINST THAT. THE THING IS, AND I WOULD SAY THIS WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU KNOW WE HAVE EXPERTS ON CITY STAFF ABOUT THIS STUFF. SO, I WOULD ASK YOU TO ASK THE EXPERTS ON CITY STAFF ABOUT THE TURNAROUND, AND

[00:40:01]

THE ENGINEERING OF THIS. AND, OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN RELY ON EXPERTS, BUT IF THEY ARE NOT HERE TO TESTIFY, AND YOU ARE USING THAT, THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN CONSIDER COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, SO BECAUSE YOU ABOUT WHO YOU TALK TO. WE HAVE LOTS OF EXPERTS IN TOWN. IF YOU WANT THEM HERE, YOU CAN ACTUALLY, AS COMMISSIONERS, OR YOU CAN TELL STAFF, YOU WANT CERTAIN EXPERTS HERE, OR THROUGH ME, THAT WOULD BE -- WE HAVE THEM HERE, SO THEY ARE AVAILABLE FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION BECAUSE IF WE DISCLOSE -- I SPOKE TO MY BUDDY THAT IS A CIVIL ENGINEER, AND THEY SAID, NONE OF THAT EVIDENCE CAN BE CONSIDERED BY THE SAME COMMISSIONERS.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> PLEASE USE YOUR LIGHT TO BE

RECOGNIZED. >> YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE CASE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE EVIDENCE. I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE ENGINEERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT AND TALKED TO CITY STAFF ABOUT IT. I THINK IT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY HERE TO HEAR BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT. IF YOU ARE NOT OPERABLE WITH IT, WE CAN ALWAYS POSTPONE IT. SO,

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD. >> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, UNLESS THERE ARE MORE QUESTIONS FOR MS. BUCK.

>> THAT IS FOR THE MAYOR. >> MAYOR, HE WOULD ASK FOR X PARTAKE MEDICATIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT ANYBODY THAT WISHES TO SPEAK, THE PARTIES, ANY AFFECTED PARTIES, EVEN IF YOU ARE NOT QUITE SURE YOU WANT TO SPEAK AND INTRODUCE TESTIMONY, YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT, PLEASE DO TAKE THE OATH BECAUSE ALL TESTIMONY IS GIVEN UNDER OATH.

>> DO YOU WANT AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENS?

>> IT DOESN'T MATTER. >> I WILL ASK THE COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMITTEE AGENTS AT THIS TIME.

>> CITY STAFF. I SPOKE WITH ASA GILLETT ABOUT THE DRAWINGS.

>> SO I HAVE SPOKEN TO JEREMIAH. I'VE SPOKEN TO KELLY. I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH ASA GILLETT. I SPOKE WITH TERESA PRINCE. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE ATTORNEY. AND I THINK THAT IS IT.

>> I HAD MEDICATIONS WITH OUR CHARTER OFFICERS AS WELL AS THE ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

>> OKAY. AND I HAVE SPOKEN -- OH, AND --

>> YES. >> YES, THE ATTORNEY.

>> I SPOKE TO STAFF. DO I NEED TO LIST THEM ALL OUT?

>> OKAY. SPOKE TO STAFF AND TO MISS PRINCE.

>> I HAVE X PARTAKE MEDICATIONS WITH CITY STAFF. MY REGULAR STAFF MEETING, AND WITH THE ATTORNEY. TERESA PRINCE.

>> I'M SORRY. FOR THE APPLICANT, NOT THE AGENT.

CLAIMANT >> I BELIEVE WE HAVE ALL X PARTAKE MEDICATIONS. ANY AFFECTED PARTIES, PLEASE STAND

AND BE RECOGNIZED. >> ALL PARTIES AND AFFECTED PARTIES THAT WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, AND THE CLERK WILL ADMINISTER AN OATH, EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT SURE, SO YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO AN OATH AGAIN.

>> DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE STATEMENT YOU ARE ABOUT TO REPRESENT DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE FULL AND

ACCURATE? >> I DO.

>> NOW IT IS OPEN. IT IS ON. NOW, THE EVIDENCE IS ON.

>> WE WILL HEAR FROM THE RESIDENCE, THEN MISS PRINCE.

>> AS SOON AS THIS COMPUTER -- VOTES BACK UP AGAIN.

INAUDIBLE ] >> YES. SUSPENSEFUL MUSIC. IT

WAS ON. >> DO WE NEED THE STAFF REPORT?

>> I NEED THE PRESENTATION. IT IS ON THE COMPUTER.

>> THE COMPUTER IS NOT TURNING ON. IT IS ACTUALLY ON THE COMPUTER ALREADY. IT IS IN THE OFFICE.

>> IF IT DOESN'T VIOLATE THE PROCESS OF PUBLIC HEARING TO

RETURN WHILE STAFF PREPARES? >> SURE. THAT'S FINE. I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS NEED THIS COMPUTER.

[00:45:05]

>> YOU CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND REOPEN IT.

>> WE WILL TEMPORARILY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM

[6.5 POLICY AMENDMENT - CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS POLICY, GUIDELINES, AND APPLICATION - RESOLUTION 2024-248 AMENDING RESOLUTION 2021-200 CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS POLICY, GUIDELINES, AND APPLICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Amending the Ceremonial Documents Policy, Guidelines, and Application by removing Ceremonial Document presentations, including Proclamations, from City Commission Regular Meeting agendas and proceedings. ]

6.4, AND THEN WE WILL SLIDE OVER TO AGENDA ITEM 6.5 UNTIL STAFF CAN BRING THAT INFORMATION UP FOR US. 6.5. WE HAVE OUR POLICY AMENDMENT. I HAVE TWO REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL START WITH PETE STEVENSON.

>> WE WILL WAIT FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> CAN YOU READ THE RESOLUTION?

>> I DON'T HAVE THE ENTIRE RESOLUTION.

WILL BRING IT UP AND THEN TALK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY CHANGING. OR SHE CAN SUMMARIZE. OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. SO, THIS TITLE IS PRETTY VANILLA. RESOLUTION -- RESOLUTION 2024-248. IT IS AMENDING RESOLUTION 2012-200. CEREMONIAL COMMENCE POLICY. TALENTS AND REPUTATIONS -- IT AMENDS THE GUIDELINES AND APPLICATIONS BY REMOVING CEREMONIAL DOCUMENT PRESENTATIONS. PUTTING COMMISSIONS FROM CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDAS AND MEETINGS. THAT IS THE MAIN CHANGE. THERE WERE A FEW OTHER MINOR --

>> YEAH. IT DOES REMOVE THE DIRECTION OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING. THIS AMENDS OUR POLICIES SO THAT PROCLAMATIONS ARE NOT PRESENTED DURING CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETINGS.

THEY WILL GO DOWN INTO THE COMMUNITY AT SPECIAL EVENTS.

>> GET TO SPEAK ABOUT IT I GUESS OR I DON'T REMEMBER, BUT, THAT PRESENTATION THAT IS GIVEN HERE, AND I THINK IT WAS COMMISSIONER AND SHE MENTIONED HOW SACRED IT WAS .

] IT REALLY WAS. HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN RECONSIDER IT, BUT HAVING THE JAZZ FESTIVAL DOCUMENTS READ OUT AND GIVEN TO THEM UP HERE IT WAS REALLY SOMETHING THAT WAS SPECIAL TO SEE THAT MAYOR HAND THAT OUT. WHEN IT IS HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH, OUR ASSOCIATION REALLY APPRECIATES THE RECOGNITION RIGHT IN THIS BODY BECAUSE THE BODY ISN'T JUST YOU GUYS OUT IN THE FIELD. THE BODY IS EVERYONE OF THESE PEOPLE THAT COULD UNDERSTAND THESE PROCLAMATIONS THAT ARE GIVEN OUT. THE EYE OPENING FOR ME WAS THE PROCLAMATION THAT WAS MADE FOR EMILY'S PROMISE, THE YOUNG LADY THAT PASSED AWAY BECAUSE OF A BRAIN CLOT. AND IT MADE ME AWARE OF WHAT I HAD TO DO, AND RECENTLY CHECKED ON MYSELF, TO MAKE SURE -- BUT BEING HERE AND BEING ABLE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MEETING IF I CAN'T MAKE IT AND SEE IT PRESENTED HERE, WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU AND EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE PEOPLE. SO IF THERE IS A WAY THAT YOU GUYS CAN RECONSIDER THE RESOLUTION OF THOSE DOCUMENTS INTO PRESENTATIONS, FROM THIS BODY, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT THING FOR THAT HAPPENED. AND BEING RECOGNIZED -- IT IS HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH IN A CITY THAT WAS NAMED FERNANDINA. IT IS A HISPANIC NAME IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

[00:50:02]

WHICH IS HISPANIC, BUT BEING ABLE TO SEE OUR LITTLE GROUP COME UP AND SHARE THAT EXPERIENCE WITH THE ENTIRE CITY MEANS SOMETHING, SO. NOT JUST THAT, WHEN YOU RECOGNIZED THAT TERRY KELLY SKATE CONDITION. HE SAW HIS SON PASS AWAY AT THE SKATE COMPETITION. YOU GUYS RECOGNIZE THAT. IT IS REAL IMPORTANT NOT JUST TO BE AT A SITE. WHERE THE SKATEBOARDING COMMUNITY OR THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BE AT, BUT WHERE ALL THE COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BE AT, AND THIS SACRED AREA WHERE WE MEET SHOULD BENEFIT MORE FROM HAVING A DOCUMENT GIVEN TO US BY THE MAYOR OR VICE MAYOR, OR ANY ONE OF YOU IN RECOGNIZING SOMETHING THAT IS NEAR TO MY HEART AND MAYBE WHATEVER OTHER PROCLAMATIONS YOU GIVE IT PRINTED ME SOMETHING TO BE UP HERE. IT MEETS ON TO BE OUT IN

THE FIELD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> WHEN THIS CAME ABOUT, IT WAS NOT ON THE AGENDA. IT WAS DISCUSSED BY YOU GUYS, AND THE DECISION WAS MADE. THE NEXT DAY, I WROTE TO YOU AND GOT RESPONSES BACK, WHICH I APPRECIATED. COMMISSIONER TUTEN, YOUR RESPONSE WAS THAT IT WAS A LOT OF WORK FOR STAFF TO DO THIS BUT I THINK THERE IS MAYBE A BALANCE TO SOME OF THIS, AND MAYBE WE CAN LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PROCLAMATIONS IN A DAY OR IN A MONTH, AND FIRST-COME FIRST-SERVED. AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I THINK THIS DECISION WAS MADE AROUND SOMETHING, A TOPIC THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT CONTROVERSIAL, AND THE ONLY TWO TIMES IN 10 YEARS THAT I HAVE HEARD THIS BEING DISCUSSED, IT WAS AROUND THE SAME TOPIC, SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY, IF WE DO THIS, THERE WILL NEVER BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK TO ALLOW THE SHRIMP FESTIVAL OR SOMEONE ELSE, THE TIME, WHEN YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A PROCLAMATION, THAT WILL BE DISCRIMINATION. AND SHOULD NEVER BE DONE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE. I THINK THERE IS A WAY TO MITIGATE THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT IS PUT ON CITY STAFF, IN ORDER TO DO THIS, BUT, THERE ARE SO MANY ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE IN THE FABRIC OF THIS COMMUNITY. I WAS HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH MY COUSIN THIS WEEK. SOME PEOPLE, IT IS THEIR FIRST TIME EVER TO COME HERE FOR A PROCLAMATION. IT IS A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO SEE AND GET ENGAGED. I THINK HAVING IT OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, AS GOOD AS THAT MIGHT SOUND, IT IS UNREALISTIC. I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER THIS. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT, AND I THINK THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN DO THIS TO ALL BE RESPECTFUL. MANY OF US SIT HERE MANY A NIGHT AND HEAR MANY THINGS WE DISAGREE WITH, AND WE SIT HERE QUIETLY AND GLADLY, TO SHARE EXISTENCE

WITH EACH OTHER. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

ANYMORE PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> I MOVED TO TABLE. TO THE NEXT MONTH'S MEETING. ONE MONTH FROM NOW. AND ASK STAFF TO SEE IF THEY CAN TWEAK THIS.

I MEAN, THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN BRASH STATEMENT THAT WE AGREED TO BECAUSE OF THE TOPIC. I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH LOTS OF PEOPLE, AND MAYBE IT IS THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER. WE CAN PROBABLY COME UP WITH A BETTER SOLUTION TO THIS, WHERE, IT IS FIRST COME FIRST SERVED, BUT I WOULD LIKE CITY STAFF AND ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SHARE THEIR THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ABOUT THIS BE ABLE TO BE A BETTER SOLUTION. I WOULD BE OPEN TO IT.

WOULD MOVE TO TABLE. TO THE SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY.

>> I WOULD SECOND THAT. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS. I WAS OPPOSED TO IT BEFORE. I AGREE THAT IS FOR CITY STAFF. THEY ARE STILL GOING TO WRITE THE PROCLAMATIONS. THEY WANT TO LIVE -- LIMIT PROCLAMATIONS DONE IN THE COMMISSION ROOM. I THINK THAT THESE ARE -- THIS IS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE IT.

[00:55:04]

>> I HAVE A MOTION IN THE SECOND. VICE MAYOR.

>> I AM TOTALLY AGAINST IT. I MEAN, THAT'S NOT FAIR AT ALL.

FIRST COME FIRST SERVE. IT IS ALL OR NONE HERE. I AM FINE WITH THAT. OR, IF THEY GO OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY, WHICH IS WHERE I THINK THEY BELONG. FOR ME, THAT IS JUST NOT FAIR. WE ARE GOING TO PICK AND CHOOSE AT THAT TIME. THAT IS LIKE SAYING WE ARE GOING TO PICK AND CHOOSE WHO GETS TO SPEAK ON THE AGENDA. IT IS JUST NOT FAIR. TO ME, IT IS ALL ABOUT IT.

>> I'M FINE WITH TABLING IT TO GET MORE FEEDBACK. COMMISSIONER

TUTEN. >> I AM FINE TO TABLE IT. I'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT HAPPY WITH IT. AND I DO THINK IT IS COMPLICATED BECAUSE WE GO OUT AND READ IT IN THE COMMUNITY, AS MANY PEOPLE HAVE SAID TO ME.

YOU ARE SPEAKING TO THE CHOIR THEN. PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THAT EVENT, AND SO YOU ARE NOT HERE, PUBLICIZING IT, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN PUBLICIZE IT WITH SOCIAL MEDIA AND WHATNOT. I DO AGREE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME EFFECT. I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER AYSCUE. MAYBE WE DO NEED ANOTHER MONTH OF DISCUSSION. AND THAT MEANS WE WOULD LIKE SOME HELP FROM THE COMMUNITY. PLEASE, PLEASE EMAIL US AND GET YOUR FRIENDS TO EMAIL US. HOW DO WE DO THIS? HOW DO WE DO THIS RIGHT? I MIGHT HAVE THOUGHT OF CRAZY THINGS LIKE PROCLAMATIONS THAT START AT 5:45. BEFORE THAT MEETING STARTS. MY MIND IS GOING TO -- IN TERMS OF THE WORK FROM STEPH, MY MIND IS GOING TO THE NUMBER OF STAFF HOURS SITTING IN THE ROOM RIGHT NOW. THE CITY IS PAYING TEXT DOLLARS TO HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS SITTING HERE? THEY'RE HERE DENSITY WORK, BUT THEY'RE NOT DOING CITY WORK, AND HOW MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ARE SPENT EVERY COMMISSION MEETING, AND WHAT IS OUR COST PER MINUTE? IN TAX DOLLARS? YEAH.

SPEAKING OF, I'LL BE QUITE INTIMATE THIS ON.

>> SO I'M HEARING A CONSENSUS TO TABLE THIS MOTION. I DID HAVE GOOD FEEDBACK THAT I WAS GIVEN TWO PROCLAMATIONS. IT WAS RECEIVED BY STAFF THAT OTHERWISE WOULD NOT COME TO ME.

ANY FURTHER POINTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS BEFORE WE

CALL ROLE? >> IT IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE.

>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A DISCUSSION TO POSTPONE THIS ONE

MONTH OUT. >> COMMISSIONER POYNTER.

>> YES. >> THAT MOTION PASSES, 5-0.

BACK TO 6.4.

OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 6.4. SPOKE ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. TONIGHT, WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF ROADWAY STANDARDS. AS WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED,

[01:00:01]

THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION WHERE TYPICALLY FRANCIS ARE HURT BY OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WITH THIS SPECIFIC PROVISION OF OUR CODE, THE AUTHORITY IS DELEGATED TO THE CITY COMMISSION. IT IS A SENSITIVE TOPIC. IT DOES INVOLVE RIGHTS-OF-WAY. AND THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS INAUDIBLE ] THIS IS WHY THE COMMISSION IS HERE FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST THIS EVENING. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO CONSIDER CHANGES FROM OUR ROADWAY STANDARDS THAT ARE PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1012 B2 OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. IN THE AREA FOR IMPROVEMENT IS DATE STREET , JUST OFF OF CITRONA DRIVE. IT IS CURRENTLY SEMI-APPROVED AND THERE ARE CURRENTLY ACCESS POINTS. THE REQUEST FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS OF THIS IS TO MODIFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF IT OR SEVERAL SPECIFIC TERMS, AND WE WILL GET INTO THAT. ON THE SCREEN YOU HAVE THE EXAMPLES OF WHERE THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY STANDARDS REQUIRE CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS. THIS CAN CERTAINLY BE ACHIEVED IN THAT SAME AREA OF THE ROAD. TO ADDRESS ALL REQUIRED STANDARDS. LOOKING AT THIS, WE RECOGNIZE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEVIATE FROM THAT AND PROTECT MARKED TREES, SO AS STAFF, WE WANTED TO ASK THAT THE APPLICANT CONSIDERED SOME CHANGES TO ADDRESS THAT AND REALLY AVOID THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CANOPY LOSS FOR THAT PARTICULAR ROADWAY. AS A RESULT OF THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THE REQUEST, AND IS ASKING FOR THREE AREAS TO BE MODIFIED IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE TREES. THEY ARE ASKING THAT INSTEAD OF FOUR AND CONVERTED TO CROWN -- FOR AN INVERTED CROWN. IT WOULD ALLOW FOR FLOW DOWN THE ROADWAY TO CITRONA DRIVE. THEY ARE ASKING FOR DIMENSIONAL CHANGES FOR THE TURNAROUND. THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARDS AND EMERGENCY ACCESS. AND THAT BE VETTED THROUGH THE PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THOSE STANDARDS CAN BE ACHIEVED, AND TO REMOVE CURBS.

NO CURBS SEGMENT. THE INTENT IS TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FOUR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES THAT WOULD FRONT DATE STREET. IN THE FUTURE, YOU WOULD SEE A PRELIMINARY PLAT, AND A FINAL PLAT TO MOVE FORWARD FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING SITE PLAN REVIEW, THEN, THROUGH THE CITY'S FORMAL PROCESSES, INCLUDING THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND THE CITY COMMISSION FOR TWO SETS OF HEARINGS, BOTH IN A PLAYROOM AND I PLAN REVIEW AND THE FINAL REVIEW. ALTHOUGH THE REQUEST IS COMING TO YOU NOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME FOR THE VARIANCE, IT IS TO ALLOW THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN EFFORT ASSOCIATED WITH THE OVERALL SUBDIVISION. WITH SOME LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE THAT THERE IS AGREEMENT TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS WAY AND IN THE FUTURE, YOU WILL SEE THE FULL SET OF PLANS RELATIVE TO THE OVERALL PROJECT. THIS IS UNIQUE TO VARIANCE US. WE HAVE SIX CRITERIA FOR THE TERMINATION OF HARDSHIP. -- THE DETERMINATION OF HARDSHIP. I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THEM ONE WORD -- WORD FOR WORD. EACH CRITERIA MUST BE ANALYZED. STAFF HAS FOUND THAT AS IT RELATES TO THE CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THAT THE APPLICANT DOES MEET THAT CRITERIA. AS IT RELATES TO SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, THEY ALSO MEET THAT CRITERIA.

UNDER LITERAL INTERPRETATION, THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.

THAT IT'S THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NECESSARY, AND THAT IT IS IN THE GENERAL HARMONY OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. AS WELL AS THE OVERALL PUBLIC INTEREST. ALL SIX CRITERIA ARE ACHIEVED, AND AS SUCH, WE CAN CONFIDENTLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL, HOWEVER, I HAVE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH SEVERAL CONDITIONS. AND THOSE

[01:05:01]

CONDITIONS ARE THAT THE TEA TURNAROUND ADHERE TO THE MINIMAL RECURRENCE OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PREVENTION CODE FOR CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE SAFETY FOR BOTH EMERGENCY ACCESS, BUT ALSO TO THINK ABOUT OTHER VEHICLES. IF THEY NEED TO GET ON THIS ROADWAY, TURNAROUND GARBAGE TRUCKS, DELIVERY VEHICLES, ET CETERA, THAT THERE BE CONSIDERATION OF UNDERSTORY PLANTINGS TO BE USED IN SUPPORT OF DRAINAGE, AND TO REPLACE THE NECESSARY LOST CANOPY THAT WILL RESULT AS PART OF THE OVERALL IMPROVEMENTS. AND THAT DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS ARE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SERVICES BY PROVIDING PERMEABLE PAVERS FOR THE DRIVEWAYS, INSTEAD OF A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY. AND THEN I HAVE ISSUED A SERIES OF MOTIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER WHEN YOU GET TO THAT POINT. WE CAN SUDDENLY BRING THIS BACK UP ON THE SCREEN. I NOTE THE IN ADVANCE BUT THERE IS NO OBLIGATION TO RELY ON THAT.

WITH THAT, I WILL ASK YOU IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> TO ONE POINT, HE SAID IT IS ALL TRAINING TO CITRONA DRIVE.

I THINK THAT HAS BEEN CORRECTED. THE WATER IS COMING DOWN TO THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> YEAH. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS INVERTED CROWN. SO, SO, THE NOTION OF AN INVERTED CROWN. WILL IT BE AN INVERTED CROWN THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE

ROAD? >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. I NOTE THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK TO THAT MORE

SPECIFICALLY. >> IF IT IS AN INVERTED CROWN, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE ROAD, HOW DOES THE CAR GET OFF THE ROAD TO GO INTO, INTO THE SWELL?

>> IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A COLBERT PARK -- PIPE MAKING

THAT CONNECTION. >> WHERE?

>> WITHIN THIS AREA HERE. >> I THOUGHT THAT'S JUST THE

EXTENDED DRIVEWAY. >> THAT IS THE CULVERT.

>> THE NEW CULVERT IS GOING TO BE --

>> I THOUGHT THE CULVERT WAS GOING TO BE EAST WEST TO ALLOW, TO ALLOW THE DRAINAGE SWELL TO CONNECT TO ITSELF.

>> IT SAYS IT IS A NEW DRIVEWAY FOR THIS PIPE.

>> OKAY. THAT IS MY QUESTION POINT WHICH WAY IS THIS CULVERT GOING? SO THEN, THAT MEANS IT IS TWO SWELLS CUT IN HALF?

>> WITH THE PIPE IN THE MIDDLE.

>> SO THERE IS A CULVERT PIPE GOING EAST WEST, CONNECTING THE SWELL AND ALSO A CULVERT PIPE GOING NORTH SOUTH.

>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. YOU MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ENGINEER

ABOUT THIS. >> THIS MIGHT BE AN APPROPRIATE

TIME TO CALL UP JOE. >> YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION. SOME OF THAT MIGHT GET COVERED.

>> CAN I CALL KELLY BACK FOR QUESTIONS LATER?

>> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS GIBSON AT THIS TIME?

>> SEE NONE, WE WILL HAVE OUR NEXT APPLICANT OR OUR NEXT AFFECTED PARTY.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. TERESA PRINCE, 303 CENTER STREET, SUITE 203, FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA. I'M HERE TO DISCUSS TO PUT YOU TO THE TEST ON YOUR SECOND EVENING. WE ARE ALL GOING TO LEARN A LOT ABOUT ROOTS THIS EVENING. I WANTED TO START BY PRESENTING THE PROPERTY AS 3.4 ACRES. HE CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON IT WHICH FACES DATE STREET. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R 1. IT IS SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.

IT IS FOUR UNITS PER ACRE IS WHAT IS ALLOWED. THE PROPOSAL IS TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL SIX HOMES, AS WAS MENTIONED, IN A SUBDIVISION THAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD UNDER OUR NORMAL SUBDIVISION STANDARDS, REGULATIONS TRC. WE WOULD NOT BE HERE TONIGHT UNLESS WE

[01:10:03]

STANDARDS. DID NOT INCLUDE WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THE PROPERTY, WHICH I THINK RAISED SOME CONCERN. THE REASON I DID NOT IS BECAUSE THIS VARIANCE IS SIMPLY A GOOD FAITH VOLUNTEER EFFORT TO PRESERVE TREE COVER AND THE AESTHETIC OF THE ROAD.

IF WE DID NOT COME TO YOU TODAY, THE PLAN MOVES FORWARD AS IS. IT DOESN'T ALTER WHAT WE DO ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

THE T TURNAROUND WOULD STILL BE USED. I CHOSE NOT TO PUT THAT INFORMATION IN. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE FIRST STEP AT TRC, SO THERE IS SOME INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.

I DIDN'T PUT IT IN THIS APPLICATION BECAUSE AGAIN, I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY. I THOUGHT IT WOULD CONFUSE THE ISSUE, AND I AM THE REASON WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE HERE FOR A LONG TIME TONIGHT BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS WAS , AND THAT IS THE KISS OF DEATH IN THESE KINDS OF MEETINGS. WE ALWAYS HAVE TO ASSUME -- EVERYONE IS VERY CONCERNED, SO I DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY. I JUST MEANT THAT THE CLIENT CAME TO ME AND SAID WE WANT TO SAVE THE TREES. THIS IS A -- ROAD.

RATHER THAN GOING IN AND TAKING HER BEING OUT, WE WOULD LIKE TO USE THE VARIANCE. THE VARIANCE -- YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THIS. OKAY. SINCE WE TALKED ABOUT IT, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE THE ROADWAY WHEN THEY SUBDIVIDE, WHEN THEY CREATE A SUBDIVISION.

NOW, THERE IS ANOTHER HOMEOWNER -- THAT IS 2123, DOWN IN THIS CORNER. WITH THAT PERMIT AND DOES NOT HAVE TO IMPROVE THE ROADWAY. THIS REQUIRES US TO IMPROVE YOUR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT IS CURRENTLY 60 FEET, WHICH YOU SEE IN THAT LITTLE AREA WHERE YOU SEE THAT YELLOW LINE OF DATE STREET, AND AS CITY STAFF HAS ALREADY SAID, RIGHT NOW, IT IS APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET WIDE.

FROM THIS PICTURE, THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY IS TO THE RIGHT. I HEARD SOME CONCERNS, ALSO, HERE IS ANOTHER VIEW, DATE STREET, AS YOU PROCEED DOWN IT. I THINK THESE WERE TAKEN AT DIFFERENT TIMES. THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN RECENTLY, SO NOT QUITE AS MUCH FOLIAGE, BUT SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM SPEAKING WITH ALL OF YOU, AND THE REASON I WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS HEARING, COMMISSIONER TUTEN, AND GET IT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, WAS BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK WITH ALL OF YOU, OF COURSE, CAN'T TELL ANY OF YOU WHAT THE OTHER ONE SAID, THAT I WOULD BE GREAT FOR US TO JUST AIR OUT OUR CONCERNS AND IDEAS TONIGHT, ABOUT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD PROPERLY. ONE CONCERN WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE TERMINUS OF DATE ROAD, OR DATE STREET IS THE SEVEN ACRE PARCEL. WE DID CONSIDER THAT BEFORE WE APPLIED. HOW WILL THIS VARIANCE IMPACT THE OTHERS THAT HAVE TO USE THIS ROAD IN THE FUTURE? AGAIN, TO COMMISSIONER TUTEN'S POINT, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE HERE YEARS FROM NOW. AND HOW THEY WILL REACT TO THIS ROUTE, AND SO, BECAUSE OF THE SEVEN ACRES IN THE BACK, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH IT. WE ARE NOT NARROWING THIS ROAD. THE REQUEST IS NOT GOING TO NARROW IT. IT IS GOING TO BE PURSUANT TO LOCAL STREET STANDARDS AND BE 22 FEET WIDE. IF IT WAS DEVELOPED FOR US, THEY WOULD HAVE TO IMPROVE IT TO 22 FEET WIDE. WE ARE NOT BURYING THAT. WE ARE ALSO NOT BURYING THE ASPHALT. WE ARE NOT BURYING WHAT WE ARE PUTTING DOWN ON THE ROAD. WE HAVE COME AS KELLY STATED, THOROUGHLY THE CURB AND GUTTER, THAT WILL ALLOW US TO PRESERVE MORE TREES. AGAIN, IF WE ARE DENIED TONIGHT, IT JUST MEANS THAT WE PUT IN THE CURB AND GUTTER AND THE TREES GO. IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT. IT IS NOT A THREAT. THAT IS JUST WHAT WILL HAPPEN. THAT IS WHY WE ELIMINATED THE CURB AND GUTTER.

AND THE T TURNAROUND, THE MODIFIED T TURNAROUND, AND I HIGHLIGHTED THE SPECIFIC AREAS. THE MODIFIED T TURNAROUND WOULD USE THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. THAT ALLOWS US TO ALSO SAVE MORE TREES. IF THE VARIANCE IS DENIED, THEN THE T TURNAROUND WOULD HAVE TO BE CONTAINED ON OUR PROPERTY. AS A RESULT, IF THIS T TURNAROUND OR ANY OTHER T TURNAROUND THAT USES MY APPLICANT PROPERTY, WE WOULD HAVE TO DEDICATE THAT AS RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO, AGAIN, THIS PARTICULAR SOLUTION WOULD USE

[01:15:02]

ONE OF THE FUTURE DRIVEWAYS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING , AND WE WOULD BE REQUIRED IN TRC TO MAKE SURE THAT IS DEDICATED TO THE CITY, AND TRC WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE SERVICE OF THAT DRIVEWAY BE APPROPRIATE FOR HEAVY VEHICLES, FIRE TRUCKS, FIRE APPARATUS. I KNOW THAT KELLY HAS MENTIONED IN HER STATED REQUEST FOR CONDITIONS THAT WE MAKE THE DRIVEWAYS OF A DIFFERENT MATERIAL. CERTAINLY, WE WOULD IN EVERY AREA BUT THAT. WE ARE PROPOSING CONCRETE FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA BECAUSE IT WOULD LOOK MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER DRIVEWAYS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE FUTURE. I'M TRYING TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE I WANT YOU TO KNOW.

AS KELLY HAS STATED, WE ARE BURYING THE DRAINAGE. AND THAT IS BECAUSE WE ARE NOT DOING CURB AND GUTTER, SO THERE IS A NATIONAL DEPRESSION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW, THAT IS AN AREA TO PUT DRAINAGE SWALE. WHEN WE GO TO TRC, THEY WILL DISCUSS OTHER AREAS FOR DRAINAGE SOILS THAT WILL NOT IMPACT TREES, AND ULTIMATELY, WE ARE REQUIRED BY TRC TO KEEP THE -- TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE DRAINAGE.

THEREFORE, IF WE HAVE TO PROVIDE MORE DRAINAGE FROM THAT PARTICULAR SWILL TO THE APPLICANT'S PARTY, THAT WOULD BE ACQUIRED THROUGH TRC REVIEW. THIS WILL BE FULLY VETTED AT TRC. AS A STAFF HAS ALREADY STATED, THE VARIANT DOES MEET THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF A VARIANCE.

DID NOT MEET THEM, YOU SHOULD NOT APPROVE IT UNLESS YOU CAN FIND A REASON THAT WE ARE COMPLYING. BUT STAFF HAS FOUND THAT WE COMPLY WITH ALL SIX. I FIND THAT WE COMPLY WITH ALL SIX, AS WELL. THIS IS THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION THAT DID NOT CHANGE. AND IT JUST SHOWS THAT THE T TURNAROUND IS GOING TO BE UTILIZING ONE OF THE DRIVEWAYS OF THE NEW ADJACENT SUBDIVISION OR THE CLIENTS PROPERTY. AND WE ARE DOING SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD TO GO BACK TO THAT.

ASA WILL GO OVER THIS AGAIN. THE SIDEWALK IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD, WHICH -- THIS IS THE LEFT-HAND SIDE. AND UNDER -- THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THAT IN THE BEGINNING, BUT UNDER YOUR CITY STANDARDS, THE LOCAL STREET WOULD HAVE A SIDEWALK ON ONE SIDE, SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE PUTTING A SIDEWALK ON ONE SIDE, SO THE CONCERNS WE HEARD AND MY CLIENT DID GO AND SPEAK WITH EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS WITH DRAINAGE. SOME PEOPLE HAVE TURNAROUND, THAT IT BE EFFICIENT FOR THE APPARATUS AND DELIVERY PEOPLE THAT MAY BE COMING DOWN THERE. ANOTHER ISSUE YOU YOU MAY HEAR FROM STREET'S RESIDENCE IS STREET PARKING. IT IS A PUBLIC STREET. WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS PROCESS, WHETHER THE VARIANCE IS CREATED OR NOT, YOU ALL KNOW THE APPLICANT IMPROVES THE ROAD. IT IS YOUR ROAD. WHETHER PEOPLE PARK ON THAT ROAD IS UP TO THE CITY COMMISSION, AND THAT CAN BE DECIDED NOW OR AT A LATER DATE, BUT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS UP TO THE APPLICANT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE CAN PARK ON THAT STREET. AGAIN, WE GET BACK TO THE SIX ITEMS, THE SPECIAL CONDITION. WE FOUND THAT THE SPECIAL CONDITION -- THIS IS AT NATURAL STREET IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA AND IF WE DON'T REQUEST THIS ORDINANCE, IT WILL LOOK LIKE EVERY OTHER STREET IN THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH. THE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE DOES IT DOESN'T GRANT US THE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE. ANYBODY, ANY OTHER DEVELOPER, ANY OTHER APPLICANT COULD ASK FOR SOME SORT OF VARIANCE. THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION, AGAIN, THESE REALLY IMPACT TREE COVER, THE CANOPY. THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION WOULD REQUIRE US TO REMOVE 20 TREES, 199 VERSUS NINE. THE MINIMUM VARIANCE, YES. AGAIN, BECAUSE OF CONCERNS, IT IS STILL 22 FEET WIDE. THAT IS WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES BUT IT IS STILL GOING TO BE ASPHALT. THAT IS WHAT CODE REQUIRES PRINT WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN T TURNAROUND. WE ARE DOING THAT.

IT IS VARIED AND MODIFIED. WE HEAD TO THE PROVIDE DRAINAGE.

WE ARE DOING THAT. THE GENERAL HARMONY AND PUBLIC INTEREST IS OBVIOUS. WE DID THIS BECAUSE WE HEAR ALL THE TIME SITTING IN THESE COMMISSION MEETINGS, SAVE ARTERIES, PROTECT OUR TREE COVER, PROTECT OUR TREE CANOPY. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT HERE. AND AGAIN, I CAN'T EMPHASIZE ENOUGH, IF IT IS DENIED, THEN I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED. IT JUST MEANS THE ROAD WILL BE TO THE ABSOLUTE STANDARDS WITHOUT

[01:20:01]

THESE VARIANCES THAT WE PROVIDE FOR EXTRA TREE COVER AND FOR PRESERVATION OF THE CANOPY. AT THIS TIME, UNLESS THE COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I CAN CALL UP ASA TO GO

OVER IT MORE, IN MORE DETAIL. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. PRINCE? SEEING NONE,

>> AND I WILL SPEAK AGAIN AFTER ASA IS DONE.

>> I TRIED TO TURN THE OTHER WAY.

>> ASA GILLETT. I'M THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT. I CAN KIND OF GIVE YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW IF YOU WOULD LIKE, JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY THINGS AS FAR AS THE OBJECTS THEY'RE ASKING FOR TONIGHT. ASKED ABOUT THE INVERTED CROWN.

THE PURPOSE OF THE INVERTED CROWN. IT REQUIRES A CROWNED ROADS OF THE WATER DRAINS TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE INVERTED CROWN MEANS IT WILL BE DRAINING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AT THAT POINT, I CAN FOLLOW ROUGHLY THE NATURAL SLOPE OF THE AREA OF THE ROADWAY NOW, AND THAT WILL ALLOW ME TO CONVEY THE WATER BACK TO A SPOT WHERE I CAN ACCUMULATE IT. SO THAT IS THE AREA I'VE GOT SHOWN ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.

THERE WITH THE CULVERT PIPE UNDERNEATH THE ROOT. ANY EXCESS WATER AND ANY DEFAULT WATER WILL GO INTO OUR POND ON SITE AND WILL IN TURN TRAIN BACK TO THE ROADWAY AT THAT POINT IN TIME. I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW MUCH OF THAT WATER WILL GO ON TO OUR SITE. WE HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. IT IS NOT A PROBLEM. SO, AS FAR AS THE CURB GOES, IT WOULD BE WORLD LIKE MOST OF YOUR RESIDENTIAL STREETS AROUND HERE. WE WILL WORK WITH ANDRE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE PSEUDO-CURB I CALL IT BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE ROAD SO THERE IS NO SAFETY ISSUES. USUALLY, WE WILL TURN THE SIDEWALK DOWN AND FORM THE SIX INCH CURB, BASICALLY, SO THAT ANY TIRES THAT HIT IT WILL COME BACK ONTO THE ROAD AND THAT GO UP TO THE SIDEWALK. IT HELPS TO PREVENT THE SAFETY ISSUE, THE OTHER SIDE WOULD JUST BE BEARER ASPHALT. WE SLOWED DOWN TO NATURAL READ FROM THAT POINT. WE ARE ANTICIPATING TO BE ABOUT A FOOT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE, PLUS OR MINUS. WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP IT AS LOW TO THE GROUND AS POSSIBLE. THE REALLY AND DRAINAGE STANDARDS REQUIRE THE SPACE. IN ORDER FOR US TO MEET BASE AND SUBBASE REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE TO PICK IT UP A LITTLE BIT. THE INVERTED CROWN WILL FLOW TO THE SPOT THAT WE'VE GOT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. WE CAN DO THAT A COUPLE OF WAYS.

GET THE WATER OUT OF THE ROAD. WE CAN ADJUST IT SO THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD BECOMES LOWER AND THE INVERTED CROWN GOES AWAY IN THE WATER DRAINS INTO THEIR VIA SWALE OF SOME SORT OR WE CAN DO IT VIA A CATCH BASIN OF SOME SORT. I WILL WORK WITH ANDRE TO MAKE SURE -- HE HAS TO PROVE WHAT IS BEST FROM A MAINTENANCE STANDPOINT. AS FAR AS THE TIRE -- FIRE TURNAROUND T, SINCE IT IS A 60 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY, I CAN'T GET ANY T TO WORK. I CAN'T GET A CUL-DE-SAC TO WORK BECAUSE IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH.

UNDER NFPA REQUIREMENTS, YOU HAVE THREE TURNAROUND TS. YOU HAVE THREE TURNAROUND REQUIREMENTS YOU CAN MEET. ONE IS CALLED HAMMER T. IT IS BASICALLY A T AT THE END OF YOUR IT. IT IS 120 FEET LONG, AND YOU RIGHT-OF-WAY IS ONLY 60 FEET. SO I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR IT. THE OTHER IS A Y TURNAROUND. IT LOOKS LIKE A Y. IT ALLOWS THE TRUCK TO TURN AROUND AND COME BACK OUT. AGAIN, THOSE ARE 60 FEET LONG.

BY THE TIME YOU SPREAD THAT OUT, I AM WAY PAST THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE OTHER WAY TO DO IT IS A CUL-DE-SAC. A CUL-DE-SAC UNDER FIRE OCCURRENCE IS 94 FEET IN DIAMETER. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS 60 FEET. THE ONLY WAY I CAN MAKE EITHER OF THOSE WORK IS BY ACQUIRING ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORS, AND I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BE TOO HAPPY ABOUT THAT. I DID WHAT IS CALLED A MODIFIED T. I TOOK YOUR HAMMER T AND TURNED IT 90 DEGREES SO IT IS NOT SITTING AT THE END OF THE ROAD. IT UTILIZES PART OF LOT 7, AS ITS TURNAROUND, SO THAT NOW, AGAIN, THIS IS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, NOT NFPA. NFPA MAY HAVE IT, BUT I JUST DIDN'T FIND IT. THIS HAS TO GO THROUGH JASON. I HAVE

[01:25:17]

TALKED TO HIM ABOUT IT. INITIALLY, HE IS FINE WITH IT.

WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH REVIEW. HAVING NOT GONE THROUGH REVIEW, I CAN'T GET A YES ANSWER, BUT HE IS AMENABLE TO THE TEE SITUATION. WHAT IS THE OTHER THING? OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF YOUR ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE, WE WILL MEET YOUR ROCK THICKNESS. THE TURNAROUND T, WE ARE PROPOSING THE LAKE COMING INTO LOT 7 FOR CONCRETE. THE REASON WE ARE DOING THAT IS SO THAT IT WILL MATCH OTHER DRIVEWAYS AND LOOK MORE CONSISTENT. IT IS ALSO EASIER TO CONSTRUCT, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TURN A PAVEMENT MACHINE IN THERE, WHICH IS USUALLY A PRETTY GOOD FIT. SO, TO DO IT OUT OF CONCRETE LOOKS BETTER.

INAUDIBLE ] AT THAT POINT, WHAT WE WILL DO IS CARVE OUT A SECTION OF THAT PROPERTY AND DONATE IT TO THE CITY AS PART OF THE DATE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY SO THAT YOUR ROADWAY WILL GET WIDER. THAT WAY, THE OWNER OF LOT 7 CAN'T BLOCK IT OFF . NOT LEGALLY. HE CAN'T BLOCK IT OFF. SO THAT WOULD PREVENT ANYBODY FROM DOING THAT SO ANY VEHICLE CAN TURN AROUND. BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WITH JASON, IF I CAN WON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM. THAT'S KIND OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT. I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

AGAIN, I'M NOT

GILLETT? >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, MY BIGGEST CONCERN WAS WATER DUMPING ONTO NEIGHBORS

PROPERTY. >> WE ARE NOT DOING THAT. WE WILL COLLECTED IN THE DATE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY, AS WE WOULD IF WE GOT THIS VARIANCE OR NOT. I HAVE NO OTHER WAY OF DOING IT. THE DRAINAGE STANDARDS ALSO ALLOWS ME TO USE SWISS, WHICH I WILL PROBABLY CHOOSE THAT ROUTE, SO EITHER WAY, I WILL COLLECT IT, AND ANY ACCESS WATER WILL GO INTO OUR DRY POND, WHICH WILL GO THROUGH THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. >> COMMISSIONER TUTEN.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE T TURNAROUND. SO, SO, THAT, AS YOU JUST SAID, THAT WOULD BE PART OF THEIR DRIVEWAY.

>> IN ESSENCE, YES MA'AM. THEIR DRIVEWAY WOULD IN ESSENCE CONTINUE FROM THE END OF YOUR RIGHT-OF-WAY, WHICH WOULD

INCLUDE THAT MODIFIED T. >> ON PAPER, THEY CAN'T BLOCK IT, BUT IT IS NO STREET ARCING, AND TREES UP AND DOWN THE ROAD.

>> I CAN'T PREVENT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO IN YOUR RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> BUT WE COULD NOT MAKE IT PART OF THEIR DRIVEWAY.

>> YOU ARE SAYING I COULD MOVE THE DRIVEWAY TO A DIFFERENT

SPOT PER SE? >> MAYBE.

>> WE ARE GOING TO RUN OUT OF ROOM REAL QUICK AND THAT WILL BASICALLY TAKE WHATEVER REMAINING TREES I HAVE.

>> THE RADIUS IS REQUIRED TO BE SO BIG. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ROOM TO MOVE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE.

>> DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? >> I HAVE SOMETHING. I SPOKE WITH MS. GIBSON ABOUT THIS TODAY. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT REALLY DARKLING. THAT IS THE LINE OF RIGHT AWAY. IT BEGINS AND GOES UP. IT IS ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY, SO, I EXPLAINED TO MS. PRINCE THAT THE VARIANCE OF THE MODIFIED T ALLOWED HER TO DO THAT. IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE HEAVY VEHICLES.

INAUDIBLE ] IS NOT GOING TO HANDLE A TRUCK TURNING AROUND.

SO THAT SERVICE HAS TO BE PREPARED. MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THIS WOULD BE DEDICATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AS RIGHT-OF-WAY. AND SO, THEN THE CITY HAS CONTROL OVER WHAT HAPPENS IN THE DRIVEWAY. THIS WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

50 FEET. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY AND THE CITIZENS. IT HAS TO BE DEDICATED. AND THEN ONCE IT IS PUT IN BY THE DEVELOPER, IT IS ON THE CITY TO MAINTAIN THAT

PORTION. IT IS UNIQUE. >> TO MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE THAT

IT STAYS OPEN AND AVAILABLE. >> THAT IT STAYS OPEN AND

AVAILABLE. >> THAT IT STAYS, YOU KNOW, IN A CONDITION THAT CANNOT BE BROKEN UP AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

RIGHT. SO, UNLIKE SOME OF US THAT DON'T HAVE OUR DRIVEWAYS

[01:30:01]

DEDICATED FOR OTHER USES, WE USE IT, AND IF WE BUCKET, NO ONE IS GOING TO CARE. THIS WOULD BE DIFFERENT. THERE ARE CONDITIONS. THERE WOULD BE DEDICATION. IT IS ALL PART OF

IT. >> THAT IS ONLY IF THIS WERE

ALLOWED. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?

>> CAN ASK A FOLLOW-UP TO THAT? >> ASA, IS IT COMMON -- IS IT EVER COMMENT TO HAVE TO USE PRIVATE PROPERTY TO ENHANCE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND DEDICATE IT TO THE CITY?

>> YES. >> YES. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR

THAT TO HAPPEN. >> IT HAPPENS IN TRC.

>> IT HAPPENS IN TRC OR THROUGH THE COUNTY.

>> I'M JUST CONCERNED BECAUSE I LIVE TWO STREETS OVER ON THE

SAME IDENTICAL DEAD-END. >> OKAY.

>> NO. >> IT'S ON THE SAME TURNAROUND. AND PARKING IS A HUGE PROBLEM. IF NOBODY HAS PARKING -- IF NOBODY HAS PARKING OTHER THAN THEIR OWN

DRIVEWAY SPREAD >> IN ALL HONESTY, MA'AM,

THERE IS NO TURNAROUND NOW. >> THIS WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED FROM THE TURNAROUND AT SOME POINT.

>>, BUT THE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY WHERE THE DRAINAGE POND IS, THAT IS THE ONLY OPEN SPACE.

>> YES MA'AM. >> THAT IS IN ESSENCE USED -- IT IS USED AS PARKING ALONG THERE.

>> I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT. WHEN I MADE TWO SITE VISITS OUT THERE, THERE WERE NOT TRUCKS. THERE WERE NOT VEHICLES IN THAT SPACE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE IS NOT.

I'M JUST SAYING IT IS A CONVENIENT SPACE FOR US TO

COLLECT WATER. >> SO DOES THAT PROPERTY OWNER -- I PRESUME THAT HOUSE FRONT -- DOES THAT PROPERTY OWNER KNOW? DOES THAT PROPERTY OWNER KNOW THAT THEIR DRIVEWAY IS GETTING MODIFIED AND THAT THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BURY HERE? THAT THEIR DRIVEWAY WILL GET LENGTHENED WITH THE CULVERT? THAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS GOING TO GET A SWALE NOW AND

ALL THE WATER? >> YOU CAN PARK IN THE SOIL IF YOU WANT TO. BUT IS THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT IS UP TO YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU DECIDE YOU WANT THEM TO PARK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT IS UP TO YOU.

>> AND THE DEPTH OF THAT SWELL -- ABOUT A FOOT?

>> YOU COULD DRIVE A CAR INTO IT. IT WOULD PREVENT A SAFETY

HAZARD. >> I HAVE COMMISSIONER MINSHEW'S MIC STILL ON. COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

>> I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHEN WE SPOKE THIS MORNING, THAT'S 40 FEET DOWN.

>> THAT IS FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THAT WOULD BECOME CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY. THAT WOULD BE CONCRETE. SINCE YOU ARE PLANNING ON DOING -- THAT ALL DRIVEWAYS BE PAVERS, AND MORE IMPERVIOUS, THEN FROM THAT POINT, BELOW,

>> I DO NOT RECOMMEND PAVERS FOR THE FIRE APPARATUS.

>> IT WOULD BE CONCRETE. >> AFTER THAT, THEY CAN USE THE

PAVERS. >> THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT ALL

OF THEM WOULD BE PAVERS. >> IT WOULD START THERE AND GO BACK TOWARDS THE HOUSE OR THE GARAGE. OR WHATEVER.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> FOR CLARIFICATION, THE DOTTED LINE ON THE TOP OF THE SWALE THAT YOU INDICATED

>> THE DASH ONE THAT IS REPRESENTING THE CONTOUR ONE

FOOT DOWN. >> NO. I'M SORRY. THAT IS THE

CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> WE ARE IN THE CITY

RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> IN SO MANY PLACES. THAT PERSON'S DRIVEWAY IS CROSSING CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY, JUST LIKE AT

MY HOUSE. >> I HAVE MY DRIVEWAY GOING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE STREET. BUT THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY IS 10 FEET. DESPITE THE DEVELOPER WOULD PROPOSE TO CONNECT THEIR DRIVEWAY TO THE PAVEMENT AS WOULD BE REQUIRED IN ANY CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE ARE NOT TAKING ANYTHING. WE ARE ACTUALLY

IMPROVING THAT SECTION. >> FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER, THIS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, WHEN THEY BUILT THAT SWALE WOULD REDO THAT PORTION OF THEIR DRIVEWAY?

>> YES MA'AM. >> AND HE WOULD DO IT AS

CONCRETE? >> THE INTENT WOULD BE TO DO IT

AS CONCRETE. >> IT IS NOT GOING DOWN ON

[01:35:09]

CITRONA DRIVE. >> I DIDN'T THINK YOU COULD, BUT THAT IS A CONVERSATION WE HAD.

>> THE COUNTY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A PROBLEM.

>> THIS INITIAL APPLICATION, AND I IS THIS ENGINEERING LETTER AND REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TALK ABOUT SHEET FLOW IN THE WATER TOWARDS CITRONA , AND IN THE PRESENTATION TO US, TALKED ABOUT THE WATER FLOWING TO CITRONA.

>> AND MS. GIBSON APPROVED IT FLOWING TOWARDS CITRONA.

>> THAT IS PROBABLY AN ERROR ON MY PART. WHEN WE FIRST LOOKED AT THIS, THIS WAS OUR QUOTE UNQUOTE INTENT, THINKING WE COULD GET THE WATER BACK TO CITRONA. ONCE WE REALIZED WE COULDN'T, WE HAD TO MAKE THE CHANGE, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR ANY CONFUSION THAT CAUSED. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS WORKABLE.

IT IS WORKABLE. >> I SPOKE WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER ON CITRONA. THAT PROPERTY OWNER ALREADY HAS HAD ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE HAD TO DO WITH THE CITY.

>> WHICH PROPERTY IS THAT? >> THE ONE --

>> IS THAT ONE OF THE DRIVEWAY?

>> THAT TENDS TO BE -- THAT AREA TENDS TO BE THE LOW SPOT OF THAT. THAT IS WHY WE PICKED THAT.

>> 16 FEET. IT HITS 20 FEET UP AT THE ENTRANCE.

>> IN THE END, WE ARE TRYING TO UTILIZE THAT LIKELY WOULD TO COLLECT WATER . YOU WILL HAVE TO IT WILL FUNCTION BETTER THAN IT IS NOW. IT WILL COLLECT BETTER THAN IT IS NOT. ANY OVERFLOW THAT WE HAVE WILL GO INTO THE ON-SITE POND.

>> SO, I'M EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS WATER BECAUSE -- AND I'M NOT -- I CAN'T RELY ON A PINKY SWEAR. THAT PROPERTY OWNER ON CITRONA ALREADY SAYS THAT THEY HAVE, BECAUSE IF YOU GO TO A TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE WHOLE AREA, UP TOWARDS BEECH STREET, IT HITS 20 FEET. AND IT ENDS IN A BOWL AT 16 FEET ON DATE AND IT GOES BACK UP TO 20 AS YOU HEAD TOWARDS THE HIGH SCHOOL. IT IS ABLE AT THE TOP OF CITRONA AND SHE ALREADY HAS A SHEET FLOW OF WATER ACROSS HER FRONT YARD INTO THAT

DRIVEWAY AREA. >> OKAY. WE WILL EXAMINE THOSE.

IN TRUTH, WE ARE SENDING MORE WATER FROM THE ROOT, BUT IF SHE IS RECEIVING THAT MUCH OFF-SITE FLOW, MORE THAN LIKELY, THAT IS OVER WHAT THE ROAD IS GOING TO PROVIDE. WE CAN ANALYZE THAT BID WE CAN LOOK AT MAPS AND SEE ABOUT ACCOUNTING FOR ADDITIONAL WATER. WE HAVE ENOUGH ROOM ON OUR SITE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.

>> ON YOUR 3.3 SITE. TAKING THE WATER THROUGH THE CULVERT.

>> WE WOULD TRY TO TREAT AS MUCH AS WE COULD IN THAT DATE STRAIGHT RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT IS ALLOWED BY CODE AND ANY EXCESS WILL END UP GOING TO OUR SITE FOR TREATMENT.

>> AND WHAT IF, WHAT IF WE HAVE A 100 YEAR FLOOD EVENT?

>> I DON'T DESIGNED TO A 100 YEAR FLOOD EVENTS. DESPITE IT SAYS YOU HAVE TO DESIGN FOR IT.

>> YOU DO UNDER FEMA RELATIONS, BUT NOT UNDER SERMON WATER

REGULATIONS. >> ON TO SEE IF YOU CAN CLARIFY THAT FOR ME. MS. GIBSON, CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME?

>> COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR .0 5.12, IT TALKS ABOUT NO ADVERSE INCREASES. THAT IS 13.6 INCHES OF RAIN. AND IF YOU DO THE CALCULATION , THAT IS A 330 FOOT ROAD. 22 FEET WIDE. THERE IS NO WAY THAT SWALE IS NOT OVERFLOWING. AND SO QUOTE --, IT IS FLOODING HER GARAGE. THAT IS WHAT WE HAD IN SEPTEMBER. WE HAD PROPERTIES BEING FLOODED BECAUSE OF OTHER PROPERTIES.

>> IT IS A COMP PLAN STANDARD. WHAT ARE THE SIX VARIANCE REQUESTS WE HAVE TO FIND? HOW IS THIS BENEFITING TO THE CITY, IF, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE, WE ARE NOT DEALING WITH THE WATER?

>> AS IT RELATES TO THE OVERALL SITE PLANNING FOR THIS, THIS

[01:40:01]

HAS NOT BEEN FULLY DEVELOPED. WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED IS MODIFIED STANDARDS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD THROUGH ENGINEERING, TO THEN ACCOUNT FOR ALL THE VARIABLES THAT YOU ARE SPEAKING TO.

>> AND IT IS BEING SOLD ON SAVING TREES, WHICH I SUPER APPRECIATE. I SUPER APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE SAVING TREES. I WOULD EVEN ARGUE THAT LET'S NOT HAVE A SIDEWALK. THAT'S ANOTHER FIVE FEET OF SURFACE ON A DEAD-END STREET, EVEN IF THIS GOT FULLY DEVELOPED, AND THAT IS SEVEN ACRES THAT COULD GET DEVELOPED. PART OF IT IS SUPER LOW. 25 OHMS COULD GET

DEVELOPED. >> 23. EVERYTHING IS SO LOW.

>> ONLY A THIRD, ONLY HALF OF IT. IT COMES DIAGONALLY THROUGH

THE PROPERTY. >> YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET A

LOT ON THERE. >> THAT IS R1.

>> THE POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE -- IF YOU DON'T MIND --

INAUDIBLE ] >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO THE SWALE, AND THE CULVERT THAT YOU ARE GOING TO PUT UNDERNEATH, THAT COVERT IS GOING TO BE CONNECTED TO --

>> GOODWILL CONNECTED TO A POND ON OUR SIDE. WE WILL ALSO HAVE

AN EASEMENT. >> WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE

MAINTENANCE OF THAT COVERT? >> THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

THEY MAINTAINED -- THE CULVERT DOES ANYTHING IN YOUR RIGHT-OF-WAY -- THE CITY -- IT WOULD BE THE CITY.

>> OKAY. SO GET BACK TO COMMISSIONER TUTEN'S POINT, IN THIS LAST STORM EVENT, WE SAW CITY STORM DRAINS BUBBLING WATER LIKE AN ARTESIAN WELL BECAUSE APPARENTLY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE UNDERNEATH IS NOT FUNCTIONING BECAUSE EITHER IT WASN'T MAINTAINED, OR IT FAILED, OR I DON'T KNOW, SOMETHING. SO I GUESS I'M BEGINNING TO GET A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEORETICALLY HOW ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO WORK, AND YES, THEY ARE GOING TO PUT THE PIPING IN AND STUFF, AND IN 10 YEARS, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE HOA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PIPING ONCE IT GETS ACROSS THE STREET, BUT THEN, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT FAILS? SO THE CITY HAS TO THEN SUE THE HOA TO GET THEM TO MAINTAIN THEIR DRAINAGE

PROPERLY? >> WELL, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO

MAINTAIN IT. >> I KNOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO.

>> AND, I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT FOR YOU, BUT IN REFERENCE TO THE STORM EVENT YOU REFERRED TO BEFORE, JUST ABOUT EVERY STORM SYSTEM FIELD. IT WASN'T JUST HERE. IT WAS IN NASSAU COUNTY, THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND FLOODING WAS ASTRONOMICAL. I'VE LIVED HERE 57 -- I'M 57 YEARS OLD. I'VE LIVED HERE SINCE I WAS 13. I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO IT WAS UNUSUAL IN THAT SENSE, TO DESIGNED TO EVENTS OF THAT NATURE, WE DON'T. WE DESIGN IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR CODE. IT REQUIRES A CERTAIN EVENT. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT MISS TUTEN IS REFERRING TO. I'M NOT PRIVY TO THAT RIGHT THIS SECOND. IT MAY REFER TO A FEMA TYPE SYSTEM. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. IF IT IS NOT, THEN WE NEED TO KNOW, BUT, IN ESSENCE, WE ARE DESIGNING IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR DRAINAGE STANDARDS. THAT IS WHAT WE DO

FOR EVERY PROJECT. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION, SINCE HE IS HERE? I DIDN'T SWEAR IN.

>> BEFORE I ASK HIM, IF I COULD JUST GET TO THAT OTHER QUESTION.

BRING UP THOSE WHAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DO TODAY -- WE ARE NOT DESIGNING THE WATER. WE ARE NOT DESIGNING THE SWALES.

WE ARE GIVING THEM THE APPROVAL, WITH CONDITIONS, THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THE TRC REGULATIONS THEY HAVE TO DO. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR US IS WHEN WE AGREED TO JUST MODIFY THINGS SO THAT THEY CAN GO AND HAVE TO MEET ALL THE CRITICAL THINGS THAT THE TRC HAS IS DUE, THE TRC IS GOING TO SAY, WE ARE GOING TO MODIFY THAT. WE ARE GOING TO BUY YOUR CALCULATIONS. IF THEY DON'T MEET THAT, IT DOESN'T MATTER. BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET APPROVAL TO DO IT. SO, I MEAN, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ALL THEY ARE ASKING US TO DO IS GET TO THE NEXT STEP INSTEAD OF NOT DESIGNING SOMETHING THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM ,

[01:45:07]

AND THEN BE DENIED, SO LIKE, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE THIS, WITH CONDITIONS, THEN JUST MOVE AHEAD, AND THEN NOT HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF US, AND THEY STILL HAVE TO GO TO TRC.

THIS WILL HAVE TO DO ALL THESE CALCULATIONS.

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER POYNTER. WE CAN DISAPPROVE OR CHOOSE TO POSTPONE, BUT I DON'T WANT US GETTING INTO THE WEEDS OF MAKING SMALL RECOMMENDATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS TO THIS PROJECT, SO IF WE HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESIGN THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, I THINK WE CAN TAKE MORE OF THOSE. OTHERWISE, I THINK WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ALONG. ANY FURTHER PARTIES THAT ARE AFFECTED, I HAVE ONE

SPEAKER FOR COMMENT. >> IF I MIGHT, MAYOR, THEY DO WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS OF ANDRE, AND THAT WOULD BE PART OF OUR PRESENTATION IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT HAPPENING, AS WELL.

OKAY. >> YES. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO WAIT IN OR DO YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. SO, YOU HAVE OTHER STORMWATER SYSTEMS WHERE THE HOA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PART OF THE

UNDERGROUND PIPING. >> YES. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS? HOW DO YOU INTERACT WITH THOSE HOAS, AND HOW IS THAT

DIMINISHED? >> THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR THOSE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED STORMWATER SYSTEMS IS THE SAME THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.

LEGAL AND CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF HAVE DIRECTED US TO UTILIZE THE WATER DISTRICT IS THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM. THEY CAN LEVY FINES. THEY CAN REQUIRE IT. THIS WAY YOU HAVE HOAS. THERE IS AN ENTITY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT MAINTENANCE THAT CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. SO, IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, IT IS LIKE YOUR SUBDIVISION ROAD. YOU KNOW, THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND RIGHT-OF-WAY -- IT DRAINS INTO A PRIVATE RETENTION SYSTEM THAT FUNCTIONS AS DESIGNED. IT OVERFLOWS. AS WITH ANY HOA, THE CITY ALWAYS -- WE ARE INVOLVED. WE ARE ACTIVE. WE MAKE SURE THAT THE HOAS ARE AWARE OF WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN THESE SYSTEMS. WHAT SIGNS OF NEEDED MAINTENANCE. WE ARE A LOT MORE PRODUCTIVE. BUT THEY ARE AVAILABLE WHEN WE NEED AN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM. THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN PLACE REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS APPROVED OR NOT. THEY WILL BE TAKING ACCOUNT OF IT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT OPTIONS ARE APPROVED HERE TONIGHT. THE BENEFIT, I THINK, REGARDLESS FOR EITHER OPTION IS THAT THE SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE TIED INTO THE RETENTION FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT WHICH THEN OUTFALLS TO THE GREAT ONE.

RIGHT NOW, THIS AREA IS KIND OF BOLT. WHEN YOU KEEP GETTING RAIN AND RAIN LIKE WE DID RECENTLY, IT KEEPS FILLING UP.

IT DOESN'T HAVE AN OVERFLOW. IT DOESN'T HAVE AN OUTFLOW.

THIS WILL PROVIDE THAT BENEFIT TO THAT AREA. I THINK BY THAT FOR TWO, IT IS GOING TO IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IT IS SOMETHING WE ARE GOING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT. THE RECORDS FOR THE CODE THAT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT IMPACT UPSTREAM OR DOWNSTREAM. IT WILL BE LOOKED AT CLOSELY DURING THIS REVIEW PROCESS.

>> ANY OTHER FURTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU.

>> AND IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR, TO CONCLUDE, FOR THE ADDITIONAL, IN THE EVENT YOU MAKE A MOTION TONIGHT, OR YOU EVEN CONTINUE IT ON THE OFF CHANCE WE CAN SPEAK AGAIN, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU HAVE THE DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS. TO MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SERVICE AREAS. THAT WOULD BE MODIFIED FOR THE CONCRETE AREA THAT WE NEED, BUT WE HAVE ALSO, AS THE CITY ATTORNEY INDICATED, HAS SPOKEN -- WE ARE ACCEPTABLE -- YOU CAN PLACE THE CONDITION THAT WE DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED IN THE TRC PROCESS. IF WE WENT AND DID THIS WITHOUT VARIANCE, WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT, THAT WE DO IT CONCRETE THICKNESS WITH THE STANDARD REQUIRED FOR A FIRE APPARATUS. THAT WILL BE PART OF YOUR NORMAL TRC REVIEW, AND, YOU KNOW, THE CITY WILL MAINTAIN IT AND MAKE SURE IT IS DEDICATED TO THE CITY SO CAN BE PROPERLY

[01:50:01]

MAINTAINED, AND THAT WILL BE THE FACE OF ANY PLAT OR DEED OF DEDICATION, SO THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS, AND I THINK MR. DESOLATE SAID WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO SAY ALL NIGHT, AND A SET HAS ADDRESSED. IF THE VARIANCE IS DENIED, WE WILL JUST GO THROUGH TRC REVIEW, AND WORK OUT THE DRAINAGE AND ALL THE ISSUES WITH TRC, AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WILL COME TO YOU. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS STILL GOING TO COME TO YOU.

THEY'RE ALSO HELPING ME WITH GET THIS CLEAR. THIS IS TO ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD . THIS IS HOW WE HAVE THE THREE VARIANCES WITH CONDITIONS. SO THAT WE CAN START ENGINEERING, AND AS MR. DESOLATE HAS SAID, WE NEED HAVE TO MEET THEIR STANDARDS. IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED AND WE CAN'T MEET THEIR STANDARDS, IT WOULD JUST DIE ON THE VINE, SO TO SPEAK BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH TRC. AND I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE , BUT, OTHERWISE,

I'LL SIT DOWN. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. PRINCE? COMMISSIONER TUTEN.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THE PROPERTY IS 3.3-ISH ACRES.

>> 3.39. >> ANSELL, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS 4 FRONTING DATE. IN 3 FRONTING --

>> IT IS SEVEN TOTAL. >> IT COULD BE A LOT MORE.

>> IT COULD BE UP TO 10 POTENTIALLY. 15. I'M SPEAKING FOR A SET GILLETTE, THE ENGINEER IN THE ROOM. WE HAVE 3.34, AND YOU GET TO COUNT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO WE COULD GET

UP TO 15. >> IN THEORY, IT COULD BE

THERE. >> I DON'T -- IS A.

>> IF WE DID HIGHER DENSITY, WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING THAT ON. WE WOULD NEED TWO ENTRANCES IN ORDER TO SATISFY THE

REQUIREMENTS. >> COMMISSIONER POINTER.

>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT WILL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION

WITH THE PLAT. >> OH YES.

>> AND YOUR ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL BE SHOWN ON

THAT, AS WELL. >> WE WOULD NOT BE APPROVING

THE SPIRIT >> YOU WILL KNOW. YOU WILL NOT

PRINT ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> I WILL LEAVE THAT UP IN CASE ANYONE NEEDS IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> SEE NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL PARTIES THAT WISH TO SPEAK? OTHERWISE, WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> HOLD ON. I LOST MY QUESTION. I LOST MY QUESTION.

>> FORGET IT FOR NOW. I WILL FIND IT AGAIN.

>> WE WILL BRING UP MR. PETE STEVENSON.

>> DO WE HAVE TO CLOSE THE HEARING? FOR THE PUBLICLY

>> HE IS AN AFFECTED PARTY. >> IT WILL BE CONSIDERED.

>> PETE SIMPSON 12627 HIGHLANDS WAY, FERNANDINA. JUST SOME OBSERVATIONS. MY OPINION, WE ARE PLAYING THE TREE CARD TONIGHT IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. WE HAVE A SET OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STREETS. I THINK THE LATEST ONES WERE DONE IN TWO DOZEN 19 ERSAN LIKE THAT. WE NEED TO FOLLOW IT. IF WE START DEVIATING FROM OUR STANDARDS, WHERE DO WE STOP? WHAT HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE? THAT IS SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. WE HAVE A SET OF STANDARDS FOR A REASON. TWO, WE HAVE SEVEN ACRES TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY. OKAY. ASSUMING THAT -- I THINK ONE THIRD OF THAT IS WETLANDS, SO TWO THIRDS IS NOT. SO YOU HAVE, SAY, FIVE ACRES. THAT IS 15 ADDITIONAL 16 STRUCTURES THAT CAN GO ON THE PROPERTY. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE AREA DOWN THERE. INCLUDING THOSE OTHER LOTS, AND WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. LET'S START THINKING STRATEGICALLY INSTEAD OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. MR. GILLETT CAN ONLY DEAL WITH WHAT HE HAS. HE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED THIS PROPERTY. HE CAN LOOK AT HOW HE CAN HANDLE WATER OUT THERE BUT

[01:55:05]

HE CAN'T LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER THINGS. THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT WATERFLOW, AND THAT IS ONE OF THEM. AND THAT IS AROUND EGAN'S CREEK, WE PROBABLY NEED TO HAVE THIS. WHAT IS IT DOING FLOWING ALL THE WAY DOWN CETRONIA -- CITRONA? I THINK THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE NEED TO CONSIDER. I AM NOT AN ANTI-DEVELOPMENT PERSON, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO DEVELOPMENT IN A SMART WAY, IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT FURTHER ERODE OR DESTROY THE FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT. THAT'S IT.

>> THANK YOU, MR. STEVENSON. I WILL ECHO SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS. COMMISSIONERS, MY VOTE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY AMENABLE TO FUTURE DISCUSSION. THERE IS THE CHANGE IN THE CONDITION THAT ARRIVED YESTERDAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS DONE RIGHT THE FIRST AND POINT I AM OPEN TO HEARING ANY COMMISSIONER, AS WELL. AND I BELIEVE WE WILL CLOSE THE HEARING, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER AFFECTED

>> WE CAN CONTINUE THIS AFTER WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> AND I STILL ASK QUESTIONS? >> YOU CAN.

>> CAN I ASK, MR. GLISSON, IF HE COULD PUT UP THAT TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE WHOLE AREA? BECAUSE I AGREE WITH MR. STEVENSON. I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT IT. AS OUR STREET EXPERT, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THIS INVERTED CROWN? DO WE HAVE ANY STREETS IN THE CITY WITH AN INVERTED

CROWN? >> HE NEEDS TO DO THAT.

>> SORRY. I'M ASKING YOU TO DO TWO THINGS.

>> YES, WE DID. ON STREETS THAT DO NOT HAVE CURB AND GUTTER, WE

SHAPE THE INVERTED CROWN. >> DO WE HAVE ANY WITH A MODIFIED INVERTED CROWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT BOWL? IT SOMEHOW FLATTENS SET TO GET TO THE SITE, AS WELL?

>> BASED ON HOW WE SEE THE STORMWATER WORKING, WE HAVE MODIFIED THE ROAD.

>> OKAY. SORRY. >> COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

>> EARLY WAITING ON THE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP?

>> WE ARE WAITING ON THE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION PROBABLY TO MS. GIBSON.

WHY DO WE HAVE TO DO THIS VARIANCE NOW BEFORE IT GOES TO

TRC? >> BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS. IT DEVIATES FROM HER STANDARDS WHEN IT MAKES SENSE. WE COULDN'T APPROVE IT. WE COULDN'T MOVE IT FORWARD.

IT HAS THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THAT. WE GET HEALTH UP. WE COULD HAVE ISSUED THIS. WE COULD GET IT THROUGH THE PROCESS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THE VARIANCE. IT WILL SHOW HOW IT WORKS, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE OVERALL SITE PLAN. WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MOVE IT THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT PROCESS UNTIL IT PROCEEDS TO THE VARIANCE.

>> BUT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH ALL THE WATER? IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS ROAD, WHETHER IT IS CURB AND GUTTER,

OR IT IS NOT. >> NO. THAT IS WHY THEY ARE SHOWING THOSE DETAILS IN A PRELIMINARY FASHION AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

>> I THINK ASA HAS A COMET. >> I CAN EXPAND ON THAT. THIS ALLOWS US A POINT BY WHICH TO DESIGN. IF I DON'T GET THIS TONIGHT, THEN I EITHER HAVE TO MAKE AN ASSUMPTION OF GOING BACK TO DEFAULTING BACK TO YOUR ROADWAY STANDARDS AND ASSUMING I'M NOT GOING TO GET THE VARIANCE, OR, I HAVE TO STOP.

IT AFFECTS HOW I DESIGNED THE SITE. IT AFFECTS HOW I DESIGNED

[02:00:01]

THE ROAD. THAT IS WHY WE CAME TO YOU FIRST.

>> OKAY. THAT IS SUPPLE. THANK YOU.

>> YEAH. I MEAN, THE CONCERNS I SHARE ARE THE CONCERNS OF THE

WATER. >> IT SOLVES. BOTH HAVE TO CONTROL THE WATER. THE RULES ARE, THE WATER HAS TO BE CONTAINED. THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN SPACE FOR THE WATER TO GO. EITHER WAY, THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. TO THE POINT ABOUT PLAYING THE TREE CARD, WE ARE STILL MAKING A 22 FOOT ROAD. WHICH IS THE CITY STANDARD. WE ARE ELIMINATING ONE SIDE OF CURBING. WE HAVE THE SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE.

WE ARE TRYING TO SAVE SOME TREES. THIS IS NOT A VERY VISIBLY BASICALLY TWO HOUSES THAT USE THIS STREET. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I GUESS THERE'S GOING TO BE FIVE HOUSES THAT USE THIS STREET, AND YES, WE DON'T KNOW THE FUTURE IS GOING TO BRING, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IF THEY DEVELOP IT, THERE'S ONLY GOING TO BE ABOUT 15 HOUSES. ON THE PROPERTY. IF THEY WERE ABLE TO DO THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE SAME STANDARDS, AND CONTROL THE WATER, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THE SAME THING THAT WE ARE ASKING THESE PEOPLE TO DO ON THIS PROPERTY. SO, THE QUESTION, TO THIS BOARD, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, IS, DO WE WANT TO SAVE SOME TREES? AND, LET THEM DESIGNED IS TO MEET ALL THE OTHER STANDARDS OF THE TRC, OR DO WE WANT TO SAY NO, AND THEN JUST BUILD WIDER ROAD, AND STILL MEET ALL THE STANDARDS OF THE TRC. THAT IS THE QUESTION.

>> VICE MAYOR AYSCUE. >> I JUST WANT LITIGATION. I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSING THIS NOW ARE WAITING UNTIL THE

CLOSURE? >> YOU CAN STILL DISCUSS IT

NOW. SURE. >> IT IS JUST THAT IF THE HEARING IS STILL OPEN FOR EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY.

>> SO, I'M JUST SHARING MY THOUGHTS ON IT. I AGREE WITH THE POINT HERE. PLEASE START TALKING ABOUT THIS, WE GO DOWN THE STREET, AND WE LOOK DOWN THE WAY, SAVING THAT TREE CANOPY IS EXACTLY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. WE CAN PAVE IT TO MAKE IT LOOK JUST LIKE HICKORY GOING THAT WAY. I MEAN, WE CAN DO THAT. AND IT WILL LOOK JUST LIKE HICKORY. WE CAN TEAR ALL THOSE TREES AT. IT WILL LOOK LIKE A CITY ROUTE. IT WILL LOOK JUST AS BEAUTIFUL AS EVERY OTHER CITY ROAD THAT WE HAVE, BUT IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT CHARACTER OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN THERE ON EGAN'S, SAVING THE TREE, SAVING THE TREES IS THE WAY TO DO IT. SAVING THE CANOPY IS THE WAY TO DO IT.

I'M SOMEWHAT INDIFFERENT TO IT. IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND THAT COMES UP OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, YOU CAN RIP OUT EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE TREES AND IT WILL BE JUST LIKE THAT, OR YOU CAN TRY TO SAVE AS MUCH OF THAT CANOPY, AS MUCH OF THAT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS POSSIBLE. THAT IS WHERE MY COMMENTS ARE WITH IT. IF, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO STATE THAT WE COULD SAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THAT TREE CANOPY TO MAKE IT LOOK SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE IT IS SUPPOSED TO LOOK. AND, TO ME, THE DRAINAGE IS GOING TO WORK ITSELF OUT THROUGH TRC. I PROMISE YOU THAT THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT MR. GILLETT DOES WHAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THAT WATER BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE OR ANY OF THAT OTHER STUFF. TO ME, WE WANT THIS TO LOOK LIKE THAT STREET IS THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS NOW, AND YOU CAN DO IT. IF NOT, TEAR IT OUT AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE

EVERY OTHER STREET. >> THANK YOU. BEFORE WE CONTINUE, I WANT TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER FURTHER QUESTIONS. OTHERWISE, WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIBERATE AS A COMMISSION WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. WERE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR AFFECTED PARTIES FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE

APPLICANT? YES? >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. GIBSON. THE PROPERTY ON 2111 , FOR THAT TO DEVELOP, THEY DON'T NEED TO IMPROVE THE ROAD, BECAUSE IT IS A SINGLE -- IT IS AN EXISTING LOT THAT IS THERE THAT THEY ARE DEVELOPING.

IT IS ON AN APPROVED ROAD ALREADY. THEY DON'T NEED THE

[02:05:02]

IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY.

>> >> THIS WAS PRIOR TO THE DEVELOPED. IT IS A SUBDIVISION. THAT IS TRUE. YOU'RE TRYING TO DO MORE THAN WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THERE.

>> YES, AND IN THE FUTURE, 10, 20, 30 YEARS FROM NOW, THE PROPERTY GETS DEVELOPED. AS A SUBDIVISION. WOULD THEY BE REQUIRED TO TEAR IT UP AND FIX IT?

>> THE CITY IS OBLIGATED TO MAINTAIN THE ROADWAY. AND THAT DEVELOPED OF THAT PROPERTY. WE ALSO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE STANDARDS WE HAVE IN PLACE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

>> AND IN THAT POINT IN TIME, WE HAVE THE STREET FRONTAGE IS.

>> SO IF WE GET THIS VARIANCE -- BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE WATER DOES -- THE CENTER UPDATE IS THAT RED LINE, WHICH IS 60 FEET. UP ON THE EASTERN SIDE, ON THAT PROPERTY, IT IS THE GREEN AND BLUE LINE. IT IS 21 FEET OF ELEVATION. BACK OVER THERE, BY CITRONA, IT GOES BACK UP TO 18, 19 FEET. THE WATER WANTS TO SIT AROUND. WE ARE GOING TO BE PAVING IT. WE HAVE A LOT OF WATER IF YOU WANT TO SIT IN THAT BOAT.

>> THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS TO STORMWATER TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT.

>> BUT THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCOUNT FOR STORMWATER ON MY STREET, ON BEACH, BUT IT OVERFLOWS. IT FLOWS ACROSS THE BEACHES. THERE ARE EROSION PROBLEMS. THERE IS --

>> ALL RIGHT. I AM JUST CONCERNED THAT WE ARE GRANTING THE VARIANCE ON THIS LOT. ON OUR OWN ROAD. SORRY.

>> TO MAKE SURE YOU RESERVE THIS FOR QUESTIONS RATHER THAN

DISCUSSION. >> YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.

>> HOW MANY UNAPPROVED ROOTS DO YOU THINK WE HAVE LIKE THIS? THAT ONCE WE GRANT THIS ONE, IN ESSENCE, WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER.

HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE COMING FORWARD?

>> THIS IS FOR THE APPROVED ROADS IN THE CITY.

>> HOW MANY MILES? >> EIGHT MILES.

>> TOWN AND THE SMALL CONNECTORS LIKE THIS,

>> AND DON'T GET ME WRONG. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE TREES SAVED. I WOULD LIKE THE ROAD TO NOT BE 22 FEET. WHY CAN'T WE MAKE 10 FOOT PLANES? EVEN JUST A 15 FOOT WIDE ROAD. LIKE IN

EUROPE. YOU PULL OVER. >> COMMISSIONER, WE ARE SIMPLY

VOTING OR NOT VOTING ON THIS. >> OKAY. OKAY.

>> YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE DISCUSSION?

>> SEEN IT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY DISCUSSION

ON THIS ITEM? VICE MAYOR? >> I WAS GOING TO POINT OUT THE DISCUSSION THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THAT THEY ARE GOING TO PAVE THIS ROAD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. THEY'RE GOING TO PAY THIS TO HER STANDARD, WHICH IS WHAT THEY SHOULD DO. WE SHOULD HAVE A STANDARD. THIS IS A FINAL VARIATION OF THAT CENTER, SIMPLY TO ALLOW, FOR ME, LOOKING AT IT, TO KEEP IT HAPPY THERE. THAT IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT LOOK LIKE. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD. YOU CAN SAVE THE TREES. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. BUT, IT IS GETTING PAVED. THERE'S GOING TO BE WATER RETENTION DISCUSSION THAT IS MADE AT TRC, AND THEY ARE GOING TO FIGURE THAT OUT, SO, TO ME, THIS IS JUST A MATTER OF, DO YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, DO YOU WANT TO SAVE SOME OF THE TREE CANOPY OR DON'T YOU? THAT IS WHERE I AM.

I BELIEVE THERE IS -- NOT GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION. THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SPEAK, BUT I BELIEVE THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THESE VARIANCES SHOULD BE GRANTED.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. COMMISSIONER MINSHEW.

>> SO MY BIGGEST CONCERN WAS THIS. I THINK WE NEED TO

[02:10:04]

RESOLVE THAT ISSUE WHERE WE CAN. BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE MORE PROBLEMS LIKE WE HAVE ON SOME OF THE ROADS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I GUESS MY QUESTION MAY BE TO MISS GIBSON.

THESE ARE THREE SEPARATE VARIANCES, AND I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGE BECAUSE OF THE NEW MAP FOR THE NEW TOPO. SO WE COULD DO THREE MOTIONS AND DO EACH VARIANCE SEPARATELY. EACH COMPONENT, SO, ARE THERE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE? ARE WE GOING TO SAY THAT IT IS A ROAD DESIGNED TO MOVE THE WATER TO FEET OR WHATEVER? THAT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. WHAT SHOULD THE VERBIAGE OF THESE VARIANCE MOTIONS BE, BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE SLIGHTLY CHANGED.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE VERBIAGE THAT WAS PROVIDED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION HAS NOT CHANGED. THE REQUESTED APPLICATIONS AS PART OF THIS HAS NOT CHANGED. THAT IS THOSE THREE CRITERIA THAT THEY ARE STILL SEEKING A VARIANCE ON.

THAT UPDATED GRAPHIC I THINK BETTER ACCOUNTS FOR THE DRAINAGE. BUT IT DOESN'T MODIFY WHAT IS BEING ASKED.

>> DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> I WANT TO MAKE US ALL AWARE THAT WE HAVE ALREADY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO THIS IS MORE TIME FOR COMMISSIONER DELIBERATION ON WHAT IS TO BE

VOTED ON TONIGHT OR NOT. >> SO, MY COMMENT IS, BY VOTING INDIVIDUALLY, WE MIGHT DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. THEY ARE TRYING TO DESIGN THIS THING.

THEY SAY, WELL, WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU APPROVAL FOR THE MODIFIED T TURNAROUND, BUT THEY WILL LET YOU DO THIS DURING THE SAME VOTE. EITHER THEY HAVE TO GO SHOULD WE ALLOW THEM TO SAVE SOME TREES, AND HAVE ONE SIDEWALK AND NO CURVES -- CURBS, AND LET THE TRC AND THE STAFF FIGURE OUT THE WATER PROBLEMS, OR THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE OUT THE TREES, DO WHAT THEY REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO, WHICH I DON'T WANT THEM TO DO, IS BUILD IT TO THE COMPLETE STANDARDS OF THE CITY. THEY STILL HAVE TO DO THE TRC. THEY STILL HAVE TO WORK OUT THE WATER THING, SO THE CONCERN I CONTINUED TO HEAR IS WITHOUT US DESIGNING IT, WHAT ABOUT THE WATER? THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET APPROVAL FROM THE TRC IF THEY CAN'T PROVE THAT THEY ARE KEEPING THE WATER ON THE PROPERTY. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

>> SO IF YOU WANT A VARIANCE FOR THE TURNAROUND THAT SAYS THAT THE TURNAROUND IS GOING TO BE FLUCTUATING TO MEET FIRE TRUCK TURNAROUND STANDARDS AND THAT'S OKAY?

>> YES. BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DESIGN IT.

>> OKAY. I MEAN, THEY HAVE TO DESIGN THIS. THEY ARE SAYING, CAN WE MODIFY THE T, TO BE DETERMINED, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SATISFY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M

SAYING? >> BUT WHY COULDN'T THE

VARIANCE SAY -- >> IF YOU DON'T MIND DISH

>> I WILL YIELD. >> MY ONLY POINT IS THAT THEY NOW SAID THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE 40 FEET AND GIVE IT TO THE CITY AS AN ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE TURNAROUND, SO I CAN'T

THE VARIANCE STATE THAT? >> PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT -- I KNOW WHAT THEY ARE SAYING. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT AS THEY SAY, WE NEEDED FIVE FEET WIDER, OR WE NEEDED THIS MUCH DEEPER. THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN. I MEAN, IF WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW A MODIFIED T AND LET THE ENGINEERS FIGURE OUT WHAT THE BEST RATIFIED T, AND HAVE THE CITY STAFF AND THE CITY FIRE CHIEF LOOK OUT AND APPROVE IT OR NOT APPROVE IT. WE ARE GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO TRC AND HAVE THIS ALL DRILLED DOWN. THAT IS ALL WE ARE DOING TONIGHT.

>> I'M NOT GOING TO STEP ON THE TOES OF PENN OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT, AS FAR AS THE T TURNAROUND GOES. IT IS PART OF OUR CODE. IT IS WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN, SIMPLY GETTING AN OBSERVATION. I WOULD JUST BACK ALL THE WAY OUT. I MEAN, IT IS 60 FEET DEEP DOWN THERE. I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE A CHANCE. WE ARE SAVING TREES. I'M JUST GOING TO BACK IT ALL THE WAY

[02:15:02]

OUT AND BE DONE WITH IT. I'M JUST ADDING A LITTLE BIT OF,

YOU KNOW, COMMON SENSE. >> THE GARBAGE TRUCK IS GOING

TO TURN AROUND THERE. >> THAT IS JUST WHAT I WOULD DO. I JUST DON'T GO DOWN THERE.

>> THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. AND, I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT I AM IN FAVOR OF THESE PLANS. I DO BELIEVE AS PART OF THE PRINCIPAL AND PROCESS, THERE HAS BEEN AN ERROR THAT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS FOR THAT REASON.

>> MY THING KEEPS TIMING OUT. >> YOU HAVE TO HIT YOUR MOUSE.

>> I WOULD DO THE MOTION. THE ONE THAT SHE DID.

>> THIS IS THE MOTION. >> OKAY. SO, IN THE MOTION THAT YOU HAVE PREPARED, DO I NEED TO READ THE CONDITIONS AS WELL AS THE MOTION? OKAY. SO, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPROVAL OF VARIANCE CASE 2024-006 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, THAT THE T TURNAROUND ADHERES TO THE MINIMUM OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PREVENTION ASSOCIATION COULD, AND ACCESS TO THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES, AND, TOO, THAT THE CONSIDERATION UNDERSTORY PLANTINGS BE USED TO SUPPORT DRAINAGE AND REPLACE NECESSARY LOST CANOPY TREES, AND, THREE, THAT THE DRIVEWAY CONDITIONS OF CONNECTIONS AND DESIGN BE MINIMIZED BY REQUIRING PERMEABLE PAVERS SET. THESE WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED AS PART OF THE TRC TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, TRC APPLICATION FOR THE ROADWAY AS PART OF THE COMMITTEE'S REVIEW OF A FUTURE SUBDIVISION REQUEST. SO THAT I MOVE TO APPROVE VARIANCE CASE 2024-006, AND I MOVE THAT THE CITY COMMISSION MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AS PART OF THE RECORD OF THE VARIANCE CASE 24 202-4006, PRESENTED, COMPLIANT WITH THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN, AND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, AT THIS TIME.

] AND THIS VARIANCE CASE, 2024 E- 006, MEETS THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA FOR

HEAR A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY FURTHER COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO QUALIFY WHY I'M VOTING NO, AS I STATED EARLIER, I BELIEVE IN STATING -- SAVING THE TREES. I APPRECIATE THE WILLINGNESS TO MOVE THE ROOTS, BUT WE SHOULD COME BACK TO THE CITY WHEN ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED NOT JUST BY US, BUT BY ANY CONSTITUENTS THAT CHOOSE TO SPEAK UP. THAT BEING SAID, MS. BESS, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> VICE-MAYOR AYSCUE. >> YES.

>> MAYOR ANTUN. >> NO. THAT MOTION PASSES, 3-2.

>> MR. MAYOR, IT FAILED. >> I APOLOGIZE. MOTION FAILS.

[6.6 LITIGATION DIRECTION - RESOLUTION 2024-249 DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO WITHDRAW THE NOTICE OF JOINDER TO THE APPEAL IN THE MATTER OF MERRY COALSON, DAVID COALSON & TAINA CHRISTNER V. CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH AND WORTHY INVESTMENT LLC; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Synopsis: Directs the City Attorney to work with the City's insurer and outside legal counsel to withdraw from the appeal in the case of Merry Coalson, David Coalson, Taina Christner v. City of Fernandina Beach, and Worthy Investment LLC, Case 2023-CA-404, in the Fourth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Nassau County, Florida.]

MOVING ON TO ITEM 6.6, LITIGATION CORRECTION FOR

RESOLUTION TWO DOZEN 24-2.9. >> THIS RESOLUTION IS A RESOLUTION DIRECTING ME TO FILE A NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL THAT THE CITY FILED IN THE APPEAL. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON

YOUR DIRECTION. >> MOVED TO APPROVE.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MISS BEST, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> VICE MAYOR AYSCUE. >> I DIDN'T MAKE THE MOTION,

BUT YES. >> I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T HAVE

AN APPLICATION. >> THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

I KNOW IT'S LATE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CONSIDERING THIS RESOLUTION. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> NAME AND ADDRESS. >> I'M SORRY. TRENT -- TAINA

[02:20:03]

CHRISTNER. WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE CITY IS ESSENTIALLY FIGHTING ITSELF SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO ENFORCE ITS OWN LAW 10305, IN MY OPINION. I NOTICED THAT THIS WITHDRAWAL IS MERELY WITHDRAWING THE STUDY FROM THE SUIT, SO IT IS JUST SAYING THAT WE NO LONGER SIDE WITH ANYONE. I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY ENFORCE ITS LAWS AND SAY, NO, WE ACTUALLY SIDE WITH THE CITIZENS ON THIS, AND, WE SIDE WITH SUPPORTING OUR LAWS, AND SIDE WITH SUPPORTING OUR CITIZENS, SO THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE I WOULD ASK FOR, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING

THIS. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. >> DO I HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, VICE MAYOR AYSCUE.