Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Items 1 - 3]

[00:00:10]

OF PARKS AN REC ADVISORY COUNCIL TO ORDER.

CALL ROLL.

DO YOU WANT TO CALL ROLL?

>> ROLL CALL MEMBER BARTELT?

>> HERE.

>> BARTELT.

DID I SAY IT RIGHT?

>> THE SECOND TIME.

>> OKAY.

CHAIR DUNCAN?

>> HERE.

>> VICE CHAIR BEHAN? MEMBER KEGLER?

>> PRESENT.

>> OKAY.

>> YOU FORGOT ONE PERSON.

>> YOU FORGOT ME AGAIN.

>> I'M SORRY.

MEMBER PUGH.

>> PRESENT.

>> OKAY.

AND I DID NOT SEE MINUTES FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING.

IT'S ONLY BEEN SET UP.

IT'S JUST ON THE AGENDA.

>> NOTED THERE'S NO MINUTES FOR THE AUGUST MEETING.

>> OKAY.

DO WE HAVE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES FROM AUGUST? AUGUST 22ND MEETING?

>> I DON'T.

>> OKAY.

CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES?

>> I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS THEY ARE, WITHOUT ANY CHANGES.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 22ND MEETING SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

[Item 4.1]

>> OPPOSED? MINUTES ARE APPROVED.

THE FIRST ITEM WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA, AS I WOULD IMAGINE MOST PEOPLE ARE HERE FOR IS THE PARK DISCUSSION.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH A SMALL UPDATE FROM THE MEETING WE HAD LAST BY BENJAMIN MOORE ON THE PLAY SCAPE.

WE'LL LET HIM START AND THEN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THERE AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE AS WELL IN RELATION TO THE PARK.

>> HI, EVERYONE.

WELCOME TO THE 35TH INSTALLMENT OF WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON AT SIMMONS ROAD PARK? SO, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE UPDATES SO EVERYBODY HAS THE MOST UPDATED INFORMATION THAT I HAVE, AND LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE ROOM, WE CONTINUE TO LEARN MORE AND TO UNDERSTAND THIS PROCESS BETTER AND THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE.

SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU IS THAT, SO, WE'VE DISCUSSED A LOT IN THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS ABOUT THE RETENTION, THE STORM WATER TREATMENT AND RETENTION AND THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO MEET FOR THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, AND THE IMPACT THAT THAT HAS ON THESE RETENTION PONDS EVERYONE HAS SEEN IN THE PLANS AND I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY PEOPLE HAVE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT BECAUSE THEY ARE SIZABLE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MUCH TO BE TRUE.

AND ONE THING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD THE ANSWER TO, BUT I DO HAVE THE ANSWER TO NOW, YOU KNOW, FOR SURE IS THAT, THE ONLY COMPONENT OF THE ENTIRE PARK THAT THE DRY RETENTION PONDS THAT YOU SEE ON THE PLANS ARE SERVING AND ARE THERE TO TREAT THE WATER FOR IS THE PARKING LOT.

SO ALL THE OTHER COMPONENTS OF THE ENTIRE PARK, THE WALKWAYS, THE PLAYGROUNDS, THE BUILDING, THE PAVILION, I THINK THAT'S EVERYTHING ELSE.

I THINK THAT COVERS IT.

ALL OF -- I SAID THE PLAYGROUND.

ALL OF THOSE COMPONENTS COMBINED THE TREATMENT OF THE STORM WATER IS BEING HANDLED THROUGH THE CREATION OF ESSENTIALLY WHAT ARE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE UNDEVELOPED PIECES OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WE'RE NOT TOUCHING AND THAT'S USING THE NATURAL VEGETATION AND THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE THAT'S THERE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ST. JOHN'S.

[00:05:02]

SO, THIS IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT YOU CAN TAKE AWAY EVERY PART OF THIS PARK EXCEPT FOR THE PARKING LOT AND IT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE A SINGLE THING ABOUT THE RETENTION PONDS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR TO EVERYBODY.

BECAUSE I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT UNTIL RECENTLY EITHER.

SO THE OTHER ASPECT OF THAT THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS NOTING THAT THE RETENTION PONDS EXIST SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEALING WITH THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE PARKING LOT IS THAT, WHILE WE TALKED ABOUT PARKING LOT BEING CONCRETE, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE CONCRETE BEING GRAVEL AND ULTIMATELY I THINK IN THE MEETINGS WE'VE HAD LEADING UP TO NOW, WE DETERMINED THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE GRAVEL FOR THE PARKING AREAS FOR THE EXCEPTION OF THE 88 PARKING SPOTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONCRETE.

IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR ST. JOHN'S EITHER WAY IF WE WERE TO USE ONE OR THE OTHER.

AND THERE'S NOT ANOTHER MATERIAL WE CAN USE FOR THE PARKING LOT THAT WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO DECREASE THE SIZE OF THE RETENTION AREAS THAT ARE SHOWN NOW.

SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

>> IS THAT TRUE?

>> THAT'S TRUE.

>> OKAY.

SO THAT'S THE FIRST POINT THAT I WANT TO MAKE.

THE SECOND POINT THAT I WANT TO MAKE IS THAT, AS FAR AS THE DRY RETENTION PONDS ARE CONCERNED, THEY ARE DEFINITELY AS DESIGNED RIGHT NOW AND EVERYBODY IS PROBABLY SEEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S QUITE A FEW TREES THAT HAVE TO BE REMOVED FROM THE MIDDLE OF THESE DRY RETENTION PONDS TO BE ABLE TO CREATE THIS SORT OF SHALLOW DEPRESSION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS AT THE ST. JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.

THAT'S BECAUSE IN ORDER TO DIG DOWN TO GET THE REQUIRED DEPTH TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, IT INTERFERES WITH THE TREE ROOTS THAT ARE THERE.

IT'S SORT OF AN UNINTENDED CON KWEPBS OF HAVING TO CREATE THEM.

HOWEVER, AS OF RECENTLY AS OF THIS MORNING IN OUR, OUR INTENT TO TRY AND MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THESE RETENTION AREAS ON THE OVERALL SITE, OKAY, WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO LOOK AT OPTIONS TO BE ABLE TO MINIMIZE THAT.

SO, GILLETTE'S OFFICE WAS TALKING TO ANDRE DISOLETTE AT THE CITY, WHO I THINK HE'S THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, CORRECT? ALL OF US HAVE BEEN ON THE PHONE THIS MORNING.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN SORT OF PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND GET CREATIVE AND TRY TO MINIMIZE THE SIZE OF THESE THINGS AND THE IMPACT OF THEM.

AND WHILE THIS IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS, LIKE WE'VE BEEN SAYING THROUGHOUT THESE MEETINGS AND STILL IN REVIEW, THE CITY'S TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THERE'S STILL ENGINEERING THAT NEEDS TO GET DONE AND PERMITTING THAT NEEDS TO GET DONE.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS AN OPTION THAT WE'RE HOPING IS GONNA SORT OF MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO HELP MITIGATE SOME OF THAT IMPACT IN THE POSSIBILITY OF INSTEAD OF HAVING TO DIG DOWN FOR THE RETENTION AREAS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OPTION OF BUILDING A SLIGHT MAYBE ONE FOOT HIGH DIRT BERM THAT WOULD GO AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THEM.

AND THEN THAT WOULD CONTAIN THE WATER WITHOUT US HAVING TO CLEAR ALL THE TREES OUT THAT GO IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT AND ALL THE UNDER BRUSH AND THE NATURAL VEGETATION.

SO, WE'RE HOPING THAT ONCE WE CAN GET THROUGH THE NITTY GRITTY OF THE ENGINEERING AND THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AT THE CITY AND THIS CONTENT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ACHIEVABLE, WHICH IT LOOKS VERY PROMISING RIGHT NOW, IT'S GONNA ALLOW US TO, TO MAKE A DRAMATIC DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT HAVE TO BE TAKEN OUT AND THE DISTURBANCE TO THE NATURAL VEGETATION AREAS THAT ARE INSIDE THE RETENTION POND.

I CAN'T SIT HERE IN ALL HONESTY AND TELL YOU GUY, WE'RE GONNA SAVE 50 TREES BECAUSE OF THIS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS YET.

I HOPE Y'ALL CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S MOVING AND WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SHOW A GENUINE EFFORT ON OUR PART AND THAT YOU GUY, YOU KNOW, AS HARD AS IT IS, HAVE SOME TRUST THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT WE LEGITIMATELY ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING HERE.

I WANTED TO AT LEAST SHARE THAT WITH YOU, SO YOU SEE THE EFFORTS BEING MADE AND THAT WE ARE WORKING IN THE BACKGROUND HERE AND LISTENING TO WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING AND THAT WE WANT TO SEE THIS PROJECT HAVE AS MINIMAL IMPACT AS WE POSSIBLY CAN, WHILE STILL HAVING TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SOME OF THESE STATE AGENCIES THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER, UNFORTUNATELY.

SO, THAT'S THE UPDATE THAT I HAVE AS FAR AS THE RETENTION AREAS ARE CONCERNED.

THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO COMMENT ON BRIEFLY IS THAT I

[00:10:01]

KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE, AN IDEA THAT'S BEING FLOATED AROUND OF WHAT IF YOU TOOK PLAYGROUND OUT OF THIS PARK AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE? SAY THE AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING IS ONE BUILDING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.

AND, YOU KNOW, TWO COMMENTS ON THAT.

ONE IS THAT, AS I STATED SORT OF AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS.

YOU CAN TAKE THE PLAYGROUND AWAY FROM THIS PARK, BUT IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE ON WHAT'S BOTHERING EVERYBODY THE MOST, WHICH IS THE SIZE OF THESE RETENTION AREAS.

WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THAT, AS I SAID.

BUT TAKING THE PLAYGROUND AWAY ISN'T GOING TO ACHIEVE WHAT YOU GUYS -- I SHOULDN'T SAY YOU GUYS.

ISN'T GOING TO ACHIEVE WHAT SOME PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY ARE HOPING THAT IT WOULD ACHIEVE, YOU KNOW? SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

THE SECOND THING IS THAT I WAS INTERESTED FOR MY OWN SAKE, SO I WENT AND LOOKED INTO THIS.

I CHECKED ACCORDING TO THE MOST CURRENT CENSUS DATA, OKAY? I LOOKED AT WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S A REASONABLE DISTANCE THAT YOU COULD SAY IS WITHIN WALKABILITY OR BIKABILITY TO A PARK OR PLAYGROUND AND SORT OF BE CONSIDERED A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAYGROUND OR PARK? I THOUGHT A ONE MILE RADIUS SEEMED PRETTY REASONABLE.

MAYBE THERE'S A MORE SCIENTIFIC NUMBER THERE.

BUT THAT'S WHAT SEEMED REASONABLE TO ME.

SO I RESEARCHED IT AND OUT OF CURIOSITY, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, I WAS STAGGERED AT WHAT THE NUMBERS WERE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT SIMMONS ROAD PARK, FOR EXAMPLE.

I'LL TALK TO YOU IN A SECOND.

AT SIMMONS ROAD PARK, IF YOU LOOK AT THE POPULATION THAT'S WITHIN A ONE MILE RADIUS OF SIMMONS ROAD PARK, THERE'S ALMOST 4,300 PEOPLE THAT LIVE WITHIN THE ONE MILE RADIUS THAT CAN BE SERVED BY BEING ABLE TO WALK OR BIKE TO THIS PLAYGROUND.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING AND LOOK AT A ONE-MILE RADIUS OF THAT, IT'S 1,600 PEOPLE.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALMOST 2.5 TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE LIVE WITHIN A WALK OR BIKING DISTANCE OF SIMMONS ROAD PARK AS YOU DO TO THE AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY, FROM OUR END, WE THINK THAT OUR ORGANIZATION IS 100% INVESTED IN THIS CONCEPT FOR SIMMONS ROAD PARK BEING THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THE PROGRAM THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY WE THINK THAT THE AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING ISN'T A VIABLE OPTION FOR A PLAYGROUND.

BUT THAT'S JUST ONE REASON THAT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU GUYS WITH NUMBERS TO BACK IT UP AS TO WHY I THINK THAT THIS MAKES SENSE.

SO I'LL LET THE PUBLIC HAVE THEIR CHANCE TO HAVE COMMENTS AND ASK QUESTIONS AND I'LL TAKE NOTES AND WE'LL ADDRESS EVERYTHING THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN AT THE END.

>> AS A REMINDER, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, THERE ARE FORMS TO FILL OUT.

YOU'LL NEED TO FILL OUT A FORM.

WE'LL START WITH MARGRET KIRKLAND.

OH, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

I'M SORRY.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH SOME QUESTIONS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, AND THEN MARGRET, I'LL LET YOU GO.

>> ARE THESE FOR ME?

>> YES.

>> DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF.

OKAY.

THE QUICK QUESTION THAT I HAVE, YOU CITED THE WALKABILITY NUMBERS.

WHAT AREA DOES THAT ENCOMPASS? IN OTHER WORDS, HOW MUCH OF THAT IS CITY RESIDENT WALKABILITY? HOW MUCH IS OUT SIDE THE CITY?

>> YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

IF SOMEBODY KNOWS HOW TO CALCULATE THAT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW TO.

ALL THE WAYS THAT I FOUND THAT YOU CAN SORT OF FINE LINE MANIPULATE OR PROGRAM TO ALLOW YOU TO CALCULATE POPULATION RADIUSES AND STUFF DON'T ALLOW YOU TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN PHMUNICIPALITI MUNICIPALITIES.

>> COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THE RADIUS WAS USED?

>> ONE MILE.

>> ONE MILE TOTAL --

>> TWO MILE DIAMETER, I GUESS A ONE-MILE RADIUS FOR BOTH PARCELS.

>> OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> ON THAT POINT, IN THE 2015 MASTER PLAN FOR THE PARKS AND RECS DEPARTMENT, THE CONSULTANTS THAT DID THAT IDENTIFIED A HALF MILE AS THE WALKABILITY/BIKABILITY DISTANCE.

SO THEY USED THAT TO MEASURE ALL AREAS OF LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR THE CITY.

SO I USED THAT.

>> OKAY.

SO YOU DID THE SAME EXERCISE? IT'S EVEN MORE DISMAL FOR THE AIRPORT.

I DID IT, TOO.

>> FOR THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK,

[00:15:04]

WITHIN A HALF MILE RADIUS OF THE PARK, THERE ARE 657 HOUSES.

OF THOSE, ONLY 18% ARE IN THE CITY.

82% ARE IN THE COUNTY.

SO THAT DOES BEGIN TO MAKE ONE WONDER, ARE WE BUILDING A COUNTY PARK? THE AIRPORT, ONLY WITHIN HALF-MILE RADIUS IS ONLY 130 HOUSES.

77% OF THOSE ARE IN THE CITY AND 23% ARE IN THE COUNTY.

BUT IT'S A VERY LOW NUMBER.

THERE'S ONLY 100 IN THE CITY AND 30 IN THE COUNTY.

>> YEAH.

YEAH.

OKAY.

SO YOU FOUND A WAY TO DO IT.

IT'S INTERESTING.

>> YOU JUST COUNT.

>> YOU ACTUALLY WENT IN AND COUNTED THEM? OKAY.

>> ON YOUR OTHER COMMENTS, I KIND OF GET THE FEELING THAT THE WAY THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS IS THAT WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PARK.

THE ALTERNATIVE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS PARK AT ALL.

>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

>> IT'S NOT A QUESTION.

THERE'S NOTHING WRITTEN IN STONE HERE THAT SAYS THAT THIS PARK HAS TO MOVE FORWARD AT ALL.

>> WHAT DID I SAY THAT IMPLIED THAT IT DID? I THOUGHT I WAS GIVING A PRESENTATION.

>> I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO HAVE A DISCUSSION -- YEAH.

>> AND THAT'S IT.

THOSE ARE THE ONLY COMMENTS.

I DO HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS LATER ON.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I'M MARGRET KIRKLAND 1377 PLANTATION POINT DRIVE.

I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AMELIA TREE CONSERVANCY.

SIX OF OUR NINE BOARD MEMBERS ARE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.

THERE'S BEEN SOME MISINFORMATION ABOUT WHO WE ARE RECENTLY.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR MEMBERSHIP THAT IS COMPRISED OF CITY RESIDENTS IS BETWEEN 60% AND 70%, DEPENDING ON WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHERE IT'S GOING ON.

SO MAJORITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH MEMBERS.

OUR PRIMARY CONCERN IS THAT THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL ON SIMMONS ROAD IS ONE OF THE VERY LAST FORESTED PARCELS, AND I WILL SAY ONE OF THE LAST ON THE ENTIRE ISLAND.

AND, THEREFORE, WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO CONSERVE THAT IS HELPFUL TO ALL OF US WHO LIVE HERE AND WHOSE LIVES DEPEND ON THE FOREST, DEPEND ON THE ROOT SYSTEMS THAT HOLD THE ISLAND IN PLACE AND SO ON.

WE ARE HIGHLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE DETENTION PONDS BECAUSE WE KNOW IN OTHER AREAS WHERE THEY HAVE TAKEN OUT, LET'S SAY OVER 50 TREES FOR A DETENTION POND TO DEAL WITH WATER, AND THAT'S REALLY RIDICULOUS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE TREES WERE DOING BEFORE THEY REMOVED THEM.

SO, WE WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE MANAGED IN SOME WAY.

WE ALSO WOULD LIKE FOR THE PARK TO BE SIMPLE AND IT'S FINE FOR IT TO BE ACCEPTABLE.

EVERYTHING WE HAVE SHOULD BE ACCESSIBLE NOW A DAYS.

NOW IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE WILD LIFE THERE.

IN ADDITION TO LOSING OUR CANOPY, WE'RE STRESSING OUR WILDLIFE INCREDIBLY, AS THEY LOSE HABITAT.

AND THEY'RE ALSO LOSING THEIR QUARTERS.

THEY CANNOT GET FROM ONE PART OF THE ISLAND TO ANOTHER.

OUR STUFF IS ALL IN THEIR WAY.

SO I THINK THAT THOSE ARE

[00:20:02]

PRIMARY CONCERNS.

WHEN COMMISSIONER ROSS SUGGESTED THE AIRPORT, THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD OPTION TO AVOID DESTROYING THE CANOPY ON THAT PARCEL.

I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THAT.

I THOUGHT THE BEST PROPOSAL PERHAPS WAS COMPROMISE THAT WAS OFFERED BY PAT FOSTER TURLEY WHERE A SIMPLE REALLY WILDLIFE ORIENTED VERSION OF THIS PARK WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AND THEN MORE OF THE EQUIPMENT, THE HEAVIER EQUIPMENT, PLAY EQUIPMENT WOULD BE MOVED TO THE AIRPORT.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TWO PARKS, OKAY? I THINK THAT'S IDEAL BECAUSE OF THE PARTICULAR NATURE OF THE EDUCATIONAL ELEMENTS THAT SHE HAD INTEGRATED BY THE SPACES OF PEOPLE TO OBSERVE NATURE.

WE HAVE TWO GENERATIONS NOW WHO HAVE BEEN RAISED WITHOUT BEING TOO INVOLVED IN NATURE.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS KIRKLAND?

>> IF YOU CAN GIVE US JUST ONE SECOND.

MEMBER KEGLER WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUICK QUESTION.

>> YES.

>> ASSUMING WE HAD -- I'M JUST PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE.

ASSUMING WE HAD THE ABILITY TO JUST PUT A PATH IN, A FOREST TYPE PATH, YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE PARKING, WOULDN'T YOU?

>> YES.

>> I'M ASSUMING.

PEOPLE STILL HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE PARK.

SO FROM WHAT I JUST HEARD TODAY, THE LIMITING FACTOR IN ALL OF THIS IS IF YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF PARKING FACILITY, YOU WILL HAVE TO PUT IN A DRY RETENTION PLAN, ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT?

>> YES.

SO SO EVEN IF IT WAS JUST A WALKING PATH, YOU COULDN'T AVOID, FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, WE COULDN'T AVOID IF WE HAD TO PUT SOME TYPE OF PARKING ACCESS THERE?

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO --

>> YOU STILL HAVE TO COUNT IT.

>> SO THE LIMITING FACTOR IS THE CODE REQUIREMENT FOR ANY TYPE OF PARKING FACILITY.

>> THE CITY'S OWN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS WHAT DICTATES THE NECESSITY FOR THE PARKING.

PLUS, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD PRACTICE TO BUILD A PARK AND NOT PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO PARK.

OBVIOUSLY, I THINK THERE'S A GENERAL OVERALL CONSENSUS NOW, WHICH I LOVE, THAT REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU ARE ON THIS, I THINK EVERYBODY SORT OF IN AGREEMENT AS FAR AS THE ACCESSIBILITY ASPECT OF IT IS CONCERNED.

SO, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME ACCESSIBLE PARKING, AND THAT ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO IT, I THINK.

>> I JUST WANTED TO RAISE THE POINT THAT IT SOUNDS TO ME, AFTER YOU PRESENTED AND OTHER FOLKS HAVE PRESENTED, IF WE WANTED -- IF WE HAD OUR IDEAL SITUATION, OUR IDEAL PARK, WHERE THERE'S PATHS, WHERE YOU HAD ANY TYPE OF PARKING, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A DRY RETENTION POND.

SO WE'RE STILL BACK TO THAT.

>> I CAN CLOSE MY EYES AND ENVISION THE KIND OF PARK SOME PEOPLE ARE ENVISIONING IN THEIR HEADS.

HONESTLY, I THINK WE ALL SORT OF GREW UP GOING TO SOME OF THESE PARKS WHERE THERE'S A DIRT PATH THROUGH THE WOODS.

MAYBE THERE'S A GRASSY SPOT YOU CAN PULL YOUR CAR WHEN YOU GET THERE.

THAT'S NOT A REALISTIC SOLUTION HERE.

IT DOESN'T REALLY EXIST AS A VIABLE OPTION.

AT LEAST AS FAR AS I KNOW.

I DON'T THINK THE CITY'S OWN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS YOU TO DO IT.

CERTAINLY THE ACCESSIBILITY CODES DON'T ALLOW YOU TO DO IT.

I DON'T THINK THE CITY'S OWN MISSION AS FAR AS PROVIDING ACCESSIBILITY WOULD ALLOW YOU TO DO IT.

>> OKAY.

>> I MEAN, THAT'S MY TAKE ON IT.

OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION, WHICH I'M HAPPY TO LISTEN TO.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> ELIZABETH CUBAN, 4615 PHILLIPS MANNER PLACE.

I DO RESIDE IN THE COUNTY BUT OWN PROPERTY INSIDE THE CITY.

MOSTLY TODAY WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WAS PROCESS, BECAUSE WE'RE HERE AGAIN BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FORUM PREVIOUSLY.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE HAD TO DO WITH THE PACKET THIS EVENING.

AND THAT IS THAT WE HAVE THE RECORD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR TO YOUR

[00:25:02]

POINT, THAT WAS ONE ASSOCIATION, EGAN'S BLUFF ONE.

THERE ARE FOUR.

THEY ARE ALL COUNTY.

SO BASICALLY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING WAS SPEAKING TO FOLKS WHO LIVE IN THE COUNTY, NOT THROUGH TAXPAYERS DOING ANY OF THIS.

THERE ARE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE AROUND THIS AREA AND THEY HAVE WEIGHED IN.

I DID A VERY INFORMAL COUNT OFF TWO CONVERSATION THREADS ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

32 WANT LOW PASSIVE IMPACT, 11 THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.

THEIR VOICES ARE NOT BEING REPRESENTED IN THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING.

I'M DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO QUORUM, APPARENTLY THERE ARE NO MINUTES FOR THE MEETING THAT WENT ON PREVIOUSLY FOR LAST MONTH WHERE PEOPLE SPOKE.

I THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE ALL SAVED OURSELVES A LOT OF TIME IF THERE WERE MINUTES AVAILABLE, IN TERMS OF REHASHING AND GOING OVER THINGS.

ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION WAS THAT, I THINK THAT JUST AS WE HAVE THE PARK AT THE NORTH END OF THE ISLAND WHERE IT'S GRAVELY AND EVERYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT, LIKE THE TYPE OF PARKING THAT'S AVAILABLE MAY HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR HOW WE COULD ACCESS A WALKWAY AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING MUCH LARGER THAT INVOLVES A HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE REST ROOM BUILDING, A PAD FOR A PAVILION STRUCTURES.

THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAD.

AND FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT PROCESS VERY BRIEFLY.

I'M NOT SURE THIS IS GONNA GO OVER WELL, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE SEEM TO HAVE GOTTEN TO A SINGLE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR PARK DESIGN IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS CONCEPT OF A PARK HAS NEVER BEEN PUT OUT FOR BID, FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE MORE EXPERTISE, IN TERMS OF GETTING SOMETHING ONTO A SENSITIVE NATURE AREA.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW PEOPLE CAN SPENDING MONEY, $78,000, OUT OF THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.

WHERE'S THE CONTRACT THAT SAYS THIS IS THE WAY WE'RE GOING DOWN THE ROAD? YOU HAVEN'T MADE A RECOMMENDATION YET.

THE HORSE IS WELL OUT OF THE BARN.

AS A TAXPAYER IN THE CITY, WITH ALL THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD ABOUT THE CITY TAX INCREASES, THAT IS SUPER STARTLING.

THANK YOU.

>>

>> GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS MATT BATIALI, 2997 FIRST AVENUE.

I AM HERE TO REPRESENT PROJECT CHANCE, A PARTNERSHIP WITH A FLAG.

WE JUMPED ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING MONEY TO THIS, TO HELP BUILD A COMPLETELY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND.

SO WE HAVE BEEN FUND-RAISING OURSELVES.

TO DATE WE'VE RAISED $37,000 WITH A GOAL OF $100,000 TO BRING TO THE CITY TO HELP BUILD THE PARK.

TO HELP BUILD THE PLAYGROUND PART OF THE PARK.

MR. BARTELT, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT TO YOU IS, I THINK IT'S DISINGENUOUS TO DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THAT AREA AND COUNT HOUSES, BECAUSE WE JUST PUT IN THAT BRAND NEW BIKE PATH AND SO I LIVE DOWN ON FIRST AVENUE.

MY CHILDREN ARE 14 AND 12.

EVEN THOUGH I WOULDN'T BE IN THE DIAMETER OF THAT AREA, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEND MY KIDS ON THEIR BIKES UP TO THE PARK.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE POINTS I WANTED TO BRING UP WITH YOU AS WELL.

PROJECT CHANCE, FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, WE RAISE TRAIN DOGS FOR CHILDREN WITH AUTISM.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE FIND IS, IT'S A GROUP THAT'S VERY UNDER REPRESENTED HERE IN THE COUNTY, IN GENERAL, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T JUST GO TO A CLIMBING GYM, A JUNGLE GYM, A SWINGSET TO PLAY.

OUR PARK WHICH THESE GUYS DID ORIGINALLY, IS AN EXCELLENT FIRST STEP IN THE DIRECTION OF ACHIEVING A PARK THAT ALLOWS A WHOLE FAMILY TO GO TO A PLAYGROUND AND LET THE CHILDREN WHO ARE UNAFFECTED PLAY AND HAVE THE CHILDREN WITH AUTISM PLAY.

THE PROBLEM THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH PUTTING A PLAYGROUND AT THE AIRPORT IS, SOUND IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR CHILDREN WITH AUTISM.

AND A LOT OF DISABILITIES.

AND SO FOR US, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE.

[00:30:02]

IF YOU DECIDED TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION, PROJECT CHANCE WOULD HAVE TO FIND ANOTHER LOCATION TO PUT THIS PARK IN.

MY PERSONAL PROBLEM WITH THIS IS, WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.

IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO KEEP -- PROJECT CHANCE HAS BEEN SERVING THIS COMMUNITY, NOT JUST THE CITY, ALTHOUGH WE'VE HAD DOGS AT THE FARMER'S MARKET FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE LIVED HERE, WHICH IS 2005.

FOR 20 YEARS AND WE ARE VERY IT- EXCITED TO HAVE A LEGACY, WHERE WE CAN BRING MONEY AND OUR DONORS AND OUR FAMILIES AND GIVE TO THE CITY.

THAT'S THE GOAL.

I WOULD BE VERY DISAPPOINTED IF WE WEREN'T GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY.

I'LL YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

>> YES.

>> THIS IS JUST A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING ON MY PART AND WHAT PROJECT CHANCE IS DOING, PROVIDING DOGS AS SUPPORT ANIMALS.

IS ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS SIMMONS ROAD PARK THE WAY YOU SEE IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A MORE WOODED PATH WAY THAT THESE CHILDREN COULD BRING THEIR ANIMALS WITH THEM? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING NOW THAT PETS ARE NOT REALLY PERMITTED WITHIN THE PIRATE PARK AREA, BUT I WOULD THINK THAT IN A MORE WOODED AREA, JUST LIKE CENTRAL PARK, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO BRING THE ANIMALS WITH YOU.

>> WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR A DOG PARK.

>> NO, NO, NO.

I MEAN IF A CHILD COMES WITH A SUPPORT ANIMAL, THEY MAY NOT BRING THAT SUPPORT ANIMAL TO PLAY AT A PRIVATE PARK, BUT IS THAT PART OF THE IDEA THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT AT THE?

>> THE WHOLE IDEA OF US SUPPORTING THIS PARK WAS BECAUSE PROJECT CHANCE WAS FOUNDED HERE.

THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN GENEROUS TO US AS A NONPROFIT AND WE REALLY WANTED A LEGACY HERE.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON.

>> OKAY.

>> WE NEVER HAD ANY INPUT IN ANY PARK.

WE WERE GIVEN A CHANCE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION BEFORE THE PARK WAS BUILT, SO WE CAN HELP GUIDE IT.

BUT REALLY, HAVING AN ACCESSIBLE PARK THAT ISN'T JUST -- IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT CHILDREN WITH AUTISM, BUT IT'S ABOUT A GRANDPARENT IN A WHEELCHAIR BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE PARK WITH THEIR GRANDCHILDREN.

IT'S PART OF OUR GOAL, PART OF OUR, YOU KNOW, OUR ORIENTATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ROBERT WELLS.

>> ROBERT WELLS 2884 ROBERT OLIVER AVENUE.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOLKS FOR THE SERVICE THAT YOU DO.

I'M A USER OF THE PARKS.

MANY OF THE THINGS THAT YOU TOUCH, I BENEFIT FROM, SO THANK YOU.

I WAS GONNA WORK OFF VISUALS, BUT I CAN'T DO THAT, SO I'LL HAVE TO DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE VISUALS ARE.

THE FIRST ONE WAS REALLY AN AERIAL SHOT OF THE SIMMONS PARK.

THE ONLY THING I REALLY WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THAT IS THAT IT IS, I THINK WE ALL KNOW, A VERY CONCENTRATED AREA.

IT'S REALLY WEDGED BETWEEN TWO RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITH VERY LITTLE BUFFER.

I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK MUCH TO THE IMPACTS OF IT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT WILL DO THAT, AND MARGRET DID.

WHAT I WOULD TALK TO TALK ABOUT MORE SO IS THE SO-CALLED AIRPORT ALTERNATIVE.

AND I DON'T KNOW, MAN, DOES ANYONE HAVE A VISUAL OF THE AIRPORT AND WHERE THAT MIGHT BE?

>> AT ANY RATE, THE PARCEL THAT I THINK MOST PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY, WOULD BE ADJACENT TO THE AIRPORT.

AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF ADVANTAGES TO THAT PARCEL.

BUT THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER KEY OPPORTUNITY THAT I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.

THE NEW TRAIL, I CALL THE SIMMONS TRAIL, BUT ITS OFFICIAL NAME IS THE AMELIA RIVER TO SEA TRAIL TERMINATES NOW ON BAILEY ROAD.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY USING CITY PROPERTY TO EXTEND THAT TRAIL ON CITY PROPERTY.

IT WOULD WIND BEHIND THE BALL FIELDS.

[00:35:01]

I'M TRYING TO DESCRIBE THIS.

IT'S EASIER TO SEE IT.

WOULD WIND BEHIND THE BALL FIELDS AND COME OUT WHERE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT IS NOW.

THEN IT WOULD BE ABLE TO CROSS AIRPORT ROAD AND YOU WOULD BE AT THE SITE THAT WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE.

I THINK THIS HAS ALL KINDS OF BENEFITS, BOTH FOR THE SYNERGIES AND BENEFITS FOR THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION, AND ALSO FOR THE TRAIL, WHICH IS VERY SUCCESSFUL.

THIS PROVIDES A CONNECTER THAT IS NOT THERE.

IT JUST WON'T JUST TERMINATE AT THE BALL FIELDS, IT WILL EXTEND UP AND OPEN UP THE AVAILABILITY OF AIRPORT ROAD.

SOME OTHER ADVANTAGES ABOUT THIS ALTERNATIVE LOCATION.

ONE IS VERY OBVIOUS.

THIS SITE, THERE WILL BE NO TREE CUTTING.

THERE ARE NO TREES AROUND SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT SAVING TREES.

THERE AREN'T ANY.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO PLANT SOME.

THAT'S ANOTHER IDEA.

PLANT SOME.

ALSO, THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALREADY THERE.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUT BATHROOMS IN.

THEY'RE ALREADY THERE.

PARKING IS ALREADY THERE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THAT PLACE.

AND IT IS A LOCATION THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE A RECREATION ALLOCATION WITH THE ALVAREZ ATHLETIC FIELDS IN THAT VICINITY.

WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE REDUCED IMPACT ON THE PRESENT PROPOSED PLACE.

AND ALTHOUGH I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT IT WOULD BE CHEAPER BECAUSE I HAVEN'T DONE ANY SORT OF IN-DEPTH STUDY, I THINK THAT IT JUST COMMONSENSE SAYS THAT IF YOUR SITE WORK IS LESS, IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUT IN PARKING LOT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUT IN BATHROOM FACILITIES, IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THESE THINGS, YOU GOTTA BELIEVE IT WILL ALSO BE A CHEAPER ALTERNATIVE.

SO AGAIN, THE THING THAT I THINK IS REAL IMPORTANT FOR MY ASPECT IS TO THINK ABOUT THAT CONNECTER FROM AN ALREADY VERY SUCCESSFUL FIELD, WHICH WOULD BE ON CITY PROPERTY.

IT WOULD EXTEND ABOUT A HALF A MILE -- I'M SORRY, ABOUT QUARTER MILE UP TO THE AIRPORT.

I THINK THIS IS A VERY ATTRACTIVE ALTERNATIVE AND I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER IT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

CAN YOU SHOW ME ON THERE, FOR THE FOLKS WHO ARE IN SUPPORT OF PUTTING IT AT THE AIRPORT.

I'M JUST TRYING TO PICTURE WHERE AT THE AIRPORT.

>> RIGHT BY THE TERMINAL.

>> I CAN SEE --

>> RIGHT THERE.

>> OKAY.

YE YEAH.

>> PUSH THE BUTTON.

>> I HAVE A VISUAL OF WHERE WE'RE TALKING.

>> TURN IT AROUND.

TURN IT AROUND.

>> RIGHT HERE IS WHERE BAILEY ROAD AND THE TRAIL TERMINATE.

THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE CITY PART OF IT.

IT STOPS HERE.

THERE IS AN EXTENSION.

WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, THERE COULD BE A TRAIL THAT WOULD COME UP HERE, FOLLOW THIS.

THIS IS AN EXISTING ROAD RIGHT NOW.

GO THROUGH HERE COME OUT HERE, GO RIGHT HERE.

THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS RIGHT IN THIS AREA HERE.

SO YOU WOULD PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE.

AND ALSO IMPROVE YOUR ACCESS TO THAT LOCATION AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE AIRPORT IN MORE DETAIL AT A LATER TIME.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

AS A FORMER SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR, HAVING TO DEAL WITH PLAYGROUNDS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN THE PAST, I'M VERY MUCH AWARE OF POSSIBLE ISSUES WITH HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVE NEXT TO PARKS.

ONE OF THEM THAT MAY WANT TO BE DISCUSSED WITH THE HOMEOWNERS NEXT TO THE PARK, IF YOU CHOOSE TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS, IS IDEALLY, THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN ELECTRICAL OR LIGHTING PLAN THAT GOES WITH THE PARK.

WHAT EXACTLY IS GOING TO BE LIT? HOW MUCH OF IT'S GOING TO BE

[00:40:01]

LIT? AND WHEN DO THE LIGHTS COME ON AND OFF? IF YOU HAVE A PICNIC PAVILION, YOU HAVE ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT REQUIRE LIGHTING.

IS THIS REALLY GONNA BOTHER THE NEIGHBORS? AND IF THERE IS ELECTRICAL RUN TO THIS PARTICULAR PARK, WHAT IS THE AMPAGE? ARE YOU PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE? SOME ARE REQUESTING TENNIS COURTS GO IN.

OTHER TYPES OF COURTS THAT REQUIRE LIGHTING.

A PARK IS NOT EXACTLY STATIC.

SO IN DISCUSSING THIS WITH NEIGHBORHOODS, I WOULD HOPE THAT SOMEONE WOULD TALK TO THEM ABOUT THE POTENTIAL USES OF THAT, PARTICULARLY IN PARKING LOTS THAT ARE LIT AT NIGHT.

ALSO, REST ROOMS. WHEN ARE THEY OPEN? ARE THEY GOING TO BE CLOSED? IF THERE'S RESTROOMS THAT ARE OPEN, IS ANYONE LOOKING AT THAT? WHAT IS IN OUR BUDGET TO HAVE SOMEONE OPEN AND CLOSE THEM? JUST OUT OF EXPERIENCE WITH OTHER PARKS, LIGHTING HAS BECOME A TREMENDOUS ISSUE FOR NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND IF THAT DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE HELD, IF YOU GO AHEAD WITH THIS, I WOULD STRONGLY URGE YOU DOING THAT.

>> CAN ANYONE SPEAK TO THAT? CAN YOU, NAN?

>> WE'LL DISCUSS THAT AFTER ALL OF THE QUESTIONS.

>> MICHELLE DUNCAN.

>> MINE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PARK.

>> YEAH, LET'S WAIT THEN.

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

I DIDN'T LOOK.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

I JUST MADE ASSUMPTIONS.

CHUCK HOLIVA.

>> HELLO.

MY NAME IS CHUCK HOLIVA, 2865 WEST SIXTH STREET.

I WANT TO SAY RIGHT UP FRONT THAT I'M NOT ANTI-PARK.

I LIVE ON THE NORTH END.

I SEE KIDS SKATEBOARDING DOWN NORTH FLETCHER TOWARD THE SKATE PARK.

IT MAKES ME FEEL LIKE I LIVE IN A VIBRANT COMMUNITY AND THERE'S ACTIVITY GOING ON, AND IT'S NICE TO SEE YOUNG PEOPLE DOING THINGS.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT RIGHT UP FRONT.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I FEEL THAT WHEN WE JUST APPROVED A POINT 5 MILL IN THE MILLAGE RATE TO START PUTTING LAND INTO CONSERVATION, AND IT JUST SEEMS WRONG TO MOVE TO, NOT THAT THIS IS BEING MOVED OUT OF CONSERVATION, BUT THE IDEA OF DEVELOPING THIS PARCEL IN ANY WAY REALLY DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT TO ME.

YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF LATE TO THE PARTY.

I HAVE GOTTEN A COUPLE THINGS WRONG.

I APOLOGIZE TO BENJAMIN.

SOMEBODY REFERRED TO ONE OF THESE PROJECTS AS BEING ACTS OF LOVE.

I KNOW HE'S GOT A VERY GOOD RECORD ON THE ISLAND.

PIRATE PARK IS A WONDERFUL PARK.

SO THE EXPRESSION THAT THEY'RE ACTS OF LOVE, I SAID LET'S NOT FORGET THAT THIS IS HIS BUSINESS.

HE CORRECTED ME AND SAID THAT IT'S NOT HIS BUSINESS, THAT IT'S ALL DONE, 100% VOLUNTEER WORK AND WHATNOT.

SO IT MAKES ME -- I DO APOLOGIZE.

BUT IT DOES MAKE ME WONDER WHAT IS IMPETUS IS FOR BIGGER AND LARGER? IS IT TRULY NOT MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TO YOUR COMPANY THAT A PARK NOT BE JUST A SIMPLE NATURE TRAIL WITH A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY AND IT DOES HEAD IN THIS LARGER DIRECTION? I, TOO, AM A FAN OF THE IDEA OF SPLITTING THE TWO PARKS, HAVING A SMALL NATURE TRAIL, TINY DRIVE WAY, TINY GRAVEL THING.

I NOTICED THAT PORT PRINCE DOESN'T HAVE ANY DRY PONDS AND HAS A TON OF ASPHALT PARKING.

MAYBE THAT'S JUST A DIFFERENT JURISDICTION.

I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION EITHER.

IT SEEMS TO ME A SMALLER FIVE-CAR GRAVEL LOT -- THIS THING, IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED AS A NATURE TRAIL AND HAS GROWN SO LARGE THAT NOW IT'S GOT TO BE OKAYED BY THE ST.

JOHN'S WATER DISTRICT.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT CROSSED A THRESH HOLE AT SOME POINT.

I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT POINT WAS BECAUSE I'M LATE TO THE PARTY HERE.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS TO BE

[00:45:01]

ANSWERED ABOUT WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO GO WITH A LARGER, MORE COMPLEX AND MORE COSTLY DESIGN.

AND AS FAR AS THE AIRPORT IS CONCERNED, IT DOES LOOK A LITTLE BLEAK.

I LOOKED AT THE BOARD PICTURES.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IT LOOKS A LITTLE BLEAK THERE.

BUT KIDS LOVE PLANES.

PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT NOISE AND EXHAUST.

IT'S NOT THAT --

>> THANK YOU.

>> I JUST LIKE LOOKING AT IT.

THANK YOU.

>> LAURA HENKE.

>> HI.

MY NAME IS LAURIE HENKE, 751BERRINGTON DRIVE.

I DO LIVE IN THE CITY.

I TOLD SOME OF YOU I WASN'T GONNA BE HERE, BUT I CAME.

SO HERE I AM.

WITH MY QUESTIONS.

AND I DID WRITE A LETTER TO THE CITY AND TO DALE MARTIN AND TO NAN, SO THAT MY THOUGHT, I'M WRITING AS WELL.

I WANT TO FOCUS SOME ON THE PROCESS AS WELL.

ONE THING THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THE TALK ON THE THE AGENDA.

AT ONE POINT WE TALKED ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS WITHIN A MILE OF THE PARK.

WE ARE CITY LIMITS.

WE PAY WONDERFUL CITY TAXES.

AND WE WERE NOT INVITED TO THE TABLE, WHICH I HAD RAISED THAT ISSUE WHEN THE PARK WAS FIRST DISCUSSED, THAT BERRINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE INVITED TO ALL THE PARTIES AND WE WEREN'T.

SO THAT'S A PROBLEM.

TO SAY TO PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE INVITED NEIGHBORHOODS AND HERE'S A CITY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS NOT INVITED AND ALL THE PROPERTY AROUND US ARE CITY, THERE'S A PROBLEM.

THE OTHER ISSUE THAT YOU'VE HEARD PEOPLE RAISE BEFORE IS, HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT? SO, WHEN WE DID COME TO THE VERY FIRST MEETING HERE, IT WAS ABOUT A NATURE TRAIL.

I UNDERSTAND ABOUT GRANT LIGHTING.

I'M A RETIRED SPECIAL EDUCATION ADMINISTRATOR WITH A SPECIALTY IN AUTISM, I MIGHT ADD.

SO I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND ACCESSIBILITY.

I UNDERSTAND EQUALITY.

BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW -- AND LIGHTING GRANTS.

BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GOT HERE.

I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT PHRASES SUCH AS, WE'RE LEARNING MORE AS THE PROCESS EVOLVES.

A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT IS THAT WE WERE HERE LAST WEEK TALKING ABOUT OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE DETENTION POND.

BECAUSE OF THAT DISCUSSION, WE HAVE YET ANOTHER POSSIBILITY, PROBABILITY, MAYBE-ABILITY.

THAT DOESN'T WORK WITH ME.

TO ME, WHEN YOU'RE GONNA BE CONSIDERING A PLAN, YOU NEED TO SEE WHAT THE DETAILS ARE.

AND THOSE DETAILS INCLUDE THE IMPACT WHICH MANY BEFORE ME HAVE TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF TAKING DOWN TREES, IN TERMS OF WHO'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE USING THE PARK.

I WAS QUITE CONCERNED THAT THERE WAS NO BUDGET HERE LAST YEAR, OR LAST WEEK.

I DON'T KNOW HOW ONE COMPANY -- AND, YES, THE COMPANY IS WONDERFUL.

HOW ONE COMPANY GOT INVOLVED.

I DON'T KNOW IF OTHER BIDS WERE PUT OUT.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT MAINTENANCE.

WE HAVE ATTENDED ONE CITY COMMISSIONER BUDGET MEETING AFTER ANOTHER WHERE STAFF WERE ASKED, WHAT ABOUT MAINTENANCE? WE NEED TO BE BUILDING IT IN.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SO ALL OF THOSE CONCERN ME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> JOYCE NEWLIN.

I LIVE IN THE CITY.

I'M REALLY HERE JUST TO SAY MOST PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY SAID WHAT I WOULD WANT TO SAY.

I WANT TO MAKE ONE SMALL POINT.

THE MEETING LAST WEEK, IT WAS REITERATED OVER AND OVER THAT EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE IN NATURE AND EXPERIENCE NATURE AND ANIMALS AND BIRDS AND ALL THAT.

I PERSONALLY FELT LIKE IF YOU CLEAR THE UNDER BRUSH WHERE THE ANIMALS WOULD BE LIVING AND YOU HAVE KIDS RUNNING AND SCREAMING AND PLAYING AND WHATEVER THEY MAY BE DOING ON THE PLAYGROUND, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY ANIMALS THERE BESIDES SQUIRRELS, WHICH YOU CAN SEE EVERYWHERE.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A REASON TO HAVE A PLAYGROUND IN THE WOODS.

I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THE LETTER DR. PAT FOSTER TURLEY E-MAILED TO EVERYONE.

[00:50:01]

I TOLD HER I WOULD READ IT.

IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU'VE SEEN IT, I DON'T NEED TO READ IT.

I THINK SHE IS QUITE EDUCATED AND MADE THE POINT TO ALL OF YOU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

SCOTT MUIR.

>> THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS SCOTT MUIR, 3052.

PERSIMMONS CIRCLE EAST WHICH IS IN SIMMONS COVE RIGHT NEXT TO THE PARK, PROPOSED PARK.

MY PROPERTY BACKS UP RIGHT TO THAT PARK AND I HAVE GOT TO SAY, I AM 100% FULL SUPPORT OF THIS PARK.

A COUPLE THINGS BEFORE I GET TO MY MAIN POINT.

SOMEBODY POINTED OUT THERE'S A BUNCH OF ASSOCIATIONS AROUND THAT ARE NOT IN THE CITY.

SIMMONS CODE IS IN THE CITY.

EGAN'S LANDING IS IN THE CITY, OCEAN RIDGE IS IN THE CITY, LAND AND LAKES IS IN THE CITY AND I JUST LEARNED BERRINGTON IS, TOO.

THERE'S A LOT OF CITY RESIDENTS AROUND THIS PARK.

I AGREE IT SHOULD BE AS LOW IMPACT AS POSSIBLE.

BECAUSE WE TALK A LOT ABOUT CONSERVATION.

BUT, MY OPINION, THE AIRPORT IS A TERRIBLE PLACE FOR A PARK.

THIS IS AN IDEAL PLACE.

ONCE AGAIN, I'M GONNA LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO IT.

I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT NOISE.

I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT LIGHTS.

I WANT TO FOCUS ON THE BIG PICTURE, WHICH IS MY MAIN POINT.

I HAVE LIVED THERE 20 YEARS.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN TWO, IF NOT THREE, ATTEMPTS BY PREVIOUS COMMISSIONS TO SELL THIS LAND TO DEVELOP THIS LAND, TO HAVE A SUBDIVISION.

AT ONE POINT AN R V PARK.

BIG PICTURE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW TO MAKE THIS PARK HAPPEN.

THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE, HOW CAN WE CONSERVE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE OF THIS PARCEL AND MAKE THIS PARK HAPPEN TO PREVENT OTHER UNDESIRABLE THINGS? WHAT I KEEP HEARING IS, HOW CAN WE PREVENT THIS PARK? I'M HERE TO TELL YA, AT SOME POINT, IF THIS THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, SOME COMMISSION SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE IS GOING TO SELL THIS LAND AND WE'RE GOING TO BE CLEAR CUTTING DESPITE ALL THE OBJECTIONS THAT WILL HAPPEN, AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE A BUNCH OF HOMES OR SOMETHING ELSE IN THERE.

SO, I AM IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS PARK AND LET'S FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN WITH AS LITTLE IMPACT AS POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THAT WAS THE LAST ONE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE.

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS OR DO YOU WANT TO ASK QUESTI FIRST?

>> NO.

>> DO YOU WANT HIM TO RESPOND?

>> DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS?

>> I THINK THERE WERE JUST TWO, RIGHT, THAT YOU HAD? QUESTIONS THAT WERE ADDRESSED TO YOU.

>> YEAH.

I WANT TO GO THROUGH.

WHAT I WANTED TO DO, COMMISSIONER ROSS SENT AN E-MAIL TO EVERYBODY WITH A LIST OF QUESTIONS THAT HE WANTED TO HAVE ANSWERED TONIGHT.

I JUST WANTED TO -- WE PREPARED RESPONSES.

I THOUGHT THE MOST APPROPRIATE WAY WOULD BE TO RESPOND TO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR THEM.

THERE'S SOME REPETITION BETWEEN THE QUESTIONS SOME PEOPLE TONIGHT ASKED.

I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH THOSE QUICK.

I'LL GO AS FAST AS I CAN, AND I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS FROM PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC.

SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS, IT APPEARS THAT THE WALKWAY AREA WAS NOT USED IN THE PARKING REQUIREMENT, ONLY NINE SPACES ON THE CURRENT DRAWING.

WHY? THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS, ONLY THE PLAYGROUNDS AND PAVILIONS WERE USED TO CALCULATE THE ACTIVE USE AREAS AS SIDEWALKS ARE NOT DEFINED THAT WAY IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THE SECOND QUESTION IS, WHERE WILL OVERFLOW PARKING GO? AND ON THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHICH ARE THE MOST CURRENT DRAWINGS FOR THE PROJECT, THERE'S A DRY RETENTION AREA THAT'S SHOWN ADJACENT TO THE PARKING LOT THAT'S LABELED AS POSSIBLE OVERFLOW PARKING IF NECESSARY.

SO THAT'S THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

IT SAYS, WHAT IS THE TREE PLANTING PLAN TO REPLACE THE TREES THAT WILL BE CUT DOWN? THERE'S NO TREE MITIGATION THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

WE'RE WAY OVER ANY POSSIBLE THRESHOLD, AS FAR AS WHAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR PROTECTING TREES ON THIS PROPERTY IS CONCERNED, WITH THE DESIGN THAT IT IS NOW.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE NEW TREES THAT ARE BEING VOLUNTARILY PLANTED AS PROPOSED IN THE LANDSCAPE PLANS THAT WERE

[00:55:01]

SUBMITTED FOR THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW.

SO WE ARE, ON OUR OWN ACCORD, AND OUR OWN EFFORT, RECOMMENDING THAT NEW TREES AND PLANTS BE PLANTED.

AND WE WANTED TO ALSO NOTE THAT THEY'RE ALL NATIVE, INDIGENOUS SPECIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT USING FOR THE LANDSCAPING HERE ON THE PROPERTY.

AND THERE IS A BUDGET FOR LANDSCAPING THAT YOU'LL SEE THAT NAN HAS.

HOW MANY SQUARE FEET OF NATIVE VEGETATION HAB TAEUT AT THAT TIME WILL BE REMOVED? ONLY THE REQUIREMENT SHOWN IN THE DOCUMENTS.

AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO PINPOINT THE EXACT NUMBER, IT'S JUST IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO DO THAT.

ALL WE CAN SAY IS, VERY BARE MINIMUM THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY DO.

WHAT IS THE PROJECTED MAINTENANCE COST, INCLUDED INCLEANING BATHROOMS FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? WHERE WILL THE SEWER LINE GO? THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST PART OF THAT QUESTION IS THE MAINTENANCE COST PER YEAR WILL BE APPROXIMATELY $13,000.

THE SECOND QUESTION ABOUT THE SEWER LINE IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR THE TRC, THERE'S A RUE UNTILTY PLAN THERE THAT SHOWS THE PROPOSED SEWER LINE.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS, WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO BRING THE SEWER TO THE BATHROOMS AND WHAT WILL IT COST? THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS THAT A LIFT STATION NEEDS TO BE INSTALLED.

WITHOUT HAVING A BID OUT, WE'RE APPROXIMATING THE COST OF THAT BEING ABOUT $5,000.

IS THE BATHROOM STILL UNISEX AS DESCRIBED IN THE ORIGINAL GRANT APPLICATION? I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS DESCRIBED AS UNISEX.

EITHER WAY, THE BATHROOM BUILDINGS WE ARE PROPOSING ARE THE SAME BILLINGS THAT WE BUILT AT EGAN'S CREEK, WHICH IS A MEN'S AND WOMEN'S SINGLE STALL HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE WITH ONE FIXTURE IN EACH STALL.

I THINK EVERY OTHER CITY PARK HAS A MEN'S AND WOMEN'S BATHROOM.

MOST ARE MULTIPLE STALLS.

SO THIS IS DEFINITELY THE SCALED DOWN VERSION OF THAT.

I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T RECOMMEND ANYTHING LESS THAN THAT.

WILL THE BATHROOM BE LOCKED AT CERTAIN TIMES? IF SO, BY WHOM? YES, THEY WILL BE OPEN IN THE MORNING AND CLOSED IN THE EVENING, AS ALL OF OUR OTHER OUT BATHROOMS ARE.

WITH THE YEARLY USE AND PER DAY BASIS CALCULATED FOR THIS PROJECT? HOW IS THAT DETERMINED? THE ANSWER IS WE DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS QUESTION SO I'M ASSUMING THE ANSWER IS NO.

THE ORIGINAL GRANT PLAN CALLED FOR LIGHTING.

IS THERE A LIGHTING PLAN? ARE THE NEIGHBORS AWARE OF THIS? UNLIKE EGAN'S CREEK, THE ONLY LIGHTING PROPOSED FOR THIS PARK IS FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY PURPOSES.

IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A 24 HOUR PARK.

IT'S A SUNRISE TO SUNSET PARK AND, THEREFORE, THERE WILL NOT BE SITE LIGHTING THAT WOULD IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS.

IF ANYTHING, I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE A LIGHT FOR SAFETY AT, LIKE, THE BATHROOM BUILDING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, BUT NOTHING AS FAR AS SITE LIGHTING THAT WOULD HAVE ANY LGHT FUSION THAT WOULD AFFECT ANY OF THE NEIGHBORING PARCELS.

WE COULD PUT A LIGHT THERE.

WE NEVER TALKED ABOUT IT.

>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE ELECTRICITY TO THE PAVILION.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE DID.

WE RAN AN ELECTRICAL OUTLET THERE.

I THINK THAT'S FOR -- THAT JUST MAKES LOGICAL SENSE IF SOMEBODY NEEDS IT FOR A BIRTHDAY PARTY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I'M NOT SAYING WE WOULDN'T PUT A LIGHT OUT THERE.

I'M NOT SURE THAT WE WOULD, AS FAR AS WHAT THE INTENT OF IT IS.

THE IMPORTANT THING TO STRESS IS THAT THIS IS NOT A 24 HOUR PARK.

WEIR NOT TALKING ABOUT LIGHTING THE ENTIRE SITE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, AS FAR AS WHAT THE INTENT IS CONCERNED.

AND THE FINAL QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER ROSS IS, WHAT DID THE ENGINEERING PLANS COST TO DATE? THE ANSWER IS $6,855.

I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL FOR THE SERVICES SO FAR.

I HOPE THAT WE'VE MADE CLEAR AT THIS POINT, DESPITE PEOPLE OF ACCUSING US OTHERWISE, OUR COMPANY IS WORKING COMPLETELY FREE OF CHARGE.

NOW CAN I GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS A COUPLE THINGS THAT CAME UP IN PUBLIC COMMENT OR DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO?

>> I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

IS THIS SITE PLAN 2 THAT WAS PART OF THIS PACKET, ASSUMING THE DOTS ARE THE TREES?

>> YEAH.

THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT THE MOST CURRENT SITE PLAN.

>> THIS IS WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.

[01:00:02]

>> YEAH, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THOSE ARE ALL TREES.

>> OKAY.

I MAY HAVE MISSED SOME OF THIS IN THE PROCESS, IS THAT THE DIMENSION ORS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RETENTION POND IS NOT FIXED? THAT YOU CAN'T KNOW BASED ON THE TREE SURVEY, HOW MANY TREES WOULD BE IMPACTED?

>> NO, THAT'S NOT CORRECT.

AS FAR AS THE -- IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR --

>> JUST GIVE HER ONE MOMENT.

SHE'LL GET IT UP THERE.

>> SHE HAS IT.

THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS IS, IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ABOUT 30 DAYS AGO, THERE IS A PAGE ON THERE THAT HAS AN OUTLINE CHART THAT LISTS EVERY SINGLE TREE IN THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING IMPACTED.

SO IT IS DEFINABLE AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S QUANTIFIABLE AND PART OF PUBLIC RECORD.

>> SO YOU DO KNOW HOW MANY TREES IN THE RETENTION POND AREA WOULD BE TAKEN OUT?

>> WE KNOW HOW MANY TREES WOULD BE TAKEN OUT IN THE RETENTION AREA IF WE HAD TO DIG DOWN FOR IT LIKE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT UP UNTIL RECENTLY.

HOWEVER, WHAT I WAS TRYING TO BRING UP AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING TODAY IS THAT, IN AN EFFORT TO TRY AND MITIGATE THAT AND TRY TO BE AS RESPONSIBLE AS WE POSSIBLY CAN AND BEING CREATIVE, IN TERMS OF COMING UP WITH NEW SOLUTIONS, YOU KNOW, OUR PROJECTION RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DRAMATIC DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT HAS TO BE TAKEN OUT.

THIS LEADS INTO ANOTHER THING THAT I WAS GOING TO ANSWER THAT SOMEBODY IN THE PUBLIC BROUGHT UP, BUT I'LL ADDRESS IT AT THE SAME TIME.

I REALIZE THAT THERE'S SOME FRUSTRATION WITH PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC AND FROM YOU ALL AND FROM EVERYBODY THAT SOMETIMES WE CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT EVERYBODY HAS, YOU KNOW? OR WE HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS WITH THINGS THAT ARE NOT 100% DEFINITIVE, OR WE HAVE TO MAKE COMMENTS LIKE, THIS IS A PORK IN PROGRESS.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S STILL MOVING.

I'M HOPING THAT YOU GUYS AND EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT, YOU KNOW, KEEP IN MIND THAT JUST A MONTH OR TWO AGO, WE ALL GOT OUR HANDS SLAPPED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE EVERYBODY SAID, HEY, YOU GUYS WENT TOO FAR IN THIS PROCESS.

YOU HAVE DESIGNED TOO MUCH, THIS WENT TOO FAST, YOU KNOW? YOU ALL NEED TO SLOW DOWN, YOU KNOW? YOU GUYS HAVE SPENT TOO MUCH MONEY ON ENGINEERING.

THE PROCESS HAS GONE TOO FAST.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T DO BOTH.

YOU CAN'T GET ALL THE ANSWERS TO ALL THE QUESTION, GO THROUGH ALL THE CITY PERMITTING PROCESSES, LET ALL THAT STUFF TAKE PLACE, SPEND THE MONEY ON THE ENGINEERING, NOT SPEND THE MONEY ON THE ENGINEERING AND HAVE ALL OF THE ANSWERS UP FRONT.

NOR DO I THINK, IN ALL FAIRNESS, AND YOU CAN KRCORRECT ME ON THI BUT I WOULD BE SURPRISED THAT YOU HAD A PROJECT THAT HAD ALL THE ANSWERS THAT YOU VOTED ON.

RIGHT? SO, WE'RE WORKING ON IT.

ALL WE CAN DO IS GIVE YOU THE MOST UPDATED INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE AND SHOW YOU THE DIRECTION THAT EVERYTHING IS HEADED.

AND THAT'S WHY CITY STAFF EXIST, YOU KNOW? TO SOME EXTENT.

IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS BEING FOLLOWED AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE COMFORTABLE BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE BECAUSE WE FEEL CONFIDENT IN OUR ABILITY TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

AS FAR AS MOVING FORWARD, IF YOU FEEL THE NEED TO MAKE RECOMMEND EIGHTS TO THE CITY COMMISSION TO IMPLEMENT OTHER MEANS TO HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE, WE'LL CERTAINLY PARTICIPATE IN THAT, TOO.

WE ARE COMMITTED TO 100% TRANSPARENCY.

>> IF I COULD JUST STATE TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE PROCESS.

I AGREE WITH YOU.

BUT JUST FOR CLARITY, THERE'S PROBABLY ONLY ONE PERSON HERE.

WE'VE NEVER GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS, OTHER THAN POSSIBLY ERIC.

WE'VE NEVER GONE, ANYONE IN THIS COMMITTEE HAS NEVER SAT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF DOING A PARK.

SO THAT IS WHY YOU MAY BE GETTING QUESTIONS THAT SEEM --

>> DEFINITELY.

>> YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS.

I'M SPEAKING FOR EVERYONE.

WE ARE NEW TO THIS PROCESS.

>> I UNDERSTAND.

>> THAT'S PART OF WHERE THESE QUESTIONS ARE COMING FROM.

>> TO YOUR POINT ABOUT GIVEN THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION IS THAT THE PLAN IS THAT THE MOST RECENT PLANS RIGHT NOW.

>> WE HAVE A TREE INVENTORY ON THE PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED.

>> IT'S THE SAME SET OF DOCUMENTS.

THERE'S LIKE NINE DRAWINGS.

ONE SHOWS THE TREES.

>> THIS IS THE CURRENT PLAN?

>> THAT'S THE MOST UP TO DATE PLAN.

>> HOW DO WE KNOW WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE MOST CURRENT PLAN?

>> THERE'S A DATE THEY UPDATED AT THE BOTTOM OF IT, WHICH YOU CAN'T READ ON THE SCREEN.

YEAH.

THAT WOULD HAVE THE MOST --

[01:05:02]

>> THAT WAS LAST WEEK'S.

>> OKAY.

>> GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU KNOW, NONE OF THE -- THE MOST UP TO DATE PLAN, THE LAST MILESTONE, AS FAR AS THE DRAWINGS WERE CONCERNED, WAS THIS SUBMISSION TO THE CITY'S TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

THOSE DRAWINGS WERE ALL PRODUCED BY GILLETTE'S OFFICE.

>> OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE WERE SHOWING HERE IS ACCURATE.

>> THERE'S BEEN AT LEAST FIVE VERSIONS OF THIS THING SO FAR.

SO IT'S NOT YOU GUYS THAT ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE HAVING A HARD TIME KEEPING TRACK OF IT.

>> WE DIDN'T DO THIS VERSION OF IT.

>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OR DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST ANSWER A COUPLE OF THE OTHER PUBLIC THINGS REAL QUICK?

>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE ON THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> I DO.

>> DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS PUBLIC COMMENTS FIRST?

>> WE CAN ADDRESS THE PUBLIC COMMENTS FIRST.

>> I THOUGHT IT WAS IN THE COMMENTS FROM, I GUESS IT WASN'T IN THE COMMENTS FROM CHIP ROSS.

LET'S PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN.

ONE OF THE THINGS YOU GUYS ASKED FOR THE LAST TIME WE WERE TOGETHER, WAS A NEW UPDATED CONSTRUCTION BUDGET.

I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TONIGHT.

LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC ASKED TO SEE.

CAN WE START THERE, JUST PUT THAT UP? I DON'T KNOW THERE'S A WHOLE LOT TO TALK ABOUT IT.

AT LEAST WE CAN SHOW IT.

HERE IS THE NEW PROPOSED BUDGET.

NAN AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THAT.

THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS.

THERE'S FLUIDITY TO IT, TOO.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT, JUST FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH HERE, IS THAT WHILE THIS IS THE OVERALL ESTIMATED COST FOR IT, ASSUMING, YOU KNOW, IF YOU ALL AND THE CITY COMMISSION CHOOSES TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE PLAY SCAPES AND WITH OUR PARTNERS AND US BEING INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT, OUR CONTRIBUTION OF $100,000 IS WHAT WE'RE ESTIMATING OUR COMMITMENT WOULD BE, WOULD LOWER THAT COST BY $100,000.

THAT DOESN'T REFLECT OUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PARK.

>> OKAY.

>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BUDGET?

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

GO AHEAD.

>> UNDER SEWER, $5,100, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE LIFT STATION?

>> YES, I THINK THAT'S THE ENTIRE THING.

>> WE HAVEN'T FINALIZED THE TIE IN.

SO THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL COSTS.

IT SHOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH MORE.

>> THAT INCLUDES THE DIRECTIONAL BORING UNDER SIMMONS ROAD?

>> IT MAY BE IN ANOTHER PART.

THE --

>> I THINK THAT'S IN THE BATHROOM BUDGET IS WHERE WE WERE ASSUMING THAT WOULD BE.

>> I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THERE FOR LIGHTING, BRINGING ELECTRICITY TO THE BATHROOM?

>> THAT WOULD BE IN THE BATHROOM BUDGET.

WE WOULD DO WHAT WE DID AT EGAN'S CREEK PARK.

JUST PUT AN OUTDOOR PANEL TO SERVICE THE PROPERTY.

>> WOULDN'T THERE BE A COST TO UNDER GROUND A LINE FROM WHEREVER IT'S COMING FROM AT THE STREET?

>> I THINK THEY PROVIDE THE SERVICE TO THE SITE.

>> YEAH.

JUST ASKING.

>> NO, THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

>> YEAH.

I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THE BUDGET.

>> OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE BUDGET?

>> I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE LIFT STATION.

I'M NOT FAMILIAR HOW SEWAGE SYSTEMS WORK.

WHEN YOU SAY LIFT STATION, PICTURING THAT GOD AWFUL STINKY BUILDING IN CENTRAL PARK THAT DRIVES MY FAMILY AWAY FROM THERE EVERY SATURDAY.

IS THIS GOING TO HAVE ANY SORT OF LIKE SMELL ASSOCIATED WITH IT? A WAY TO MAKE THE PARK UNFRIENDLY?

>> UNFORTUNATELY EVERY LIFT STATION HAS A WENCH SYSTEM TO IT.

IF YOU WERE STANDING RIGHT NEXT TO IT IN A SMALL ROOM LIKE THIS, YES, YOU WOULD PROBABLY SMELL SOMETHING.

IT'S SO SMALL.

WHAT WE'RE PUMPING IS FAR LESS THAN WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.

THE BIGGER THE LIFT STATION GET, THE MORE SEWAGE YOU GET, THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE WERE PLANNING TO POSITION IT SO THAT IT'S AWAY FROM THE BILLINGS AND YOU WOULDN'T SMELL ANYTHING.

>> IT'S A VERY SMALL STATION.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH SEWAGE.

>> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, GET INTO A PROJECT LIKE THIS AND YOU RUN INTO SOME TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE LIKE GOPHER TURTLES.

SAY WE RAN INTO A NEST OF GOPHER TURTLES IN THAT AREA, DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE THERE, HOW WOULD

[01:10:01]

YOU HANDLE THAT?

>> WE'VE ALREADY HAD A WILDLIFE SURVEY DONE.

SO WE ALREADY KNOW THEY'RE NOT PRESENT.

WE'VE HAD THE WETLANDS FLAGGED, SO WE KNOW WHERE THE WETLANDS ARE.

WE'VE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED BUFFERS.

THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CITY NOW.

>> ANYMORE QUESTIONS?

>> I DO HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> THERE WERE A COUPLE THINGS PEOPLE ASKED THAT I WAS GOING TO ADDRESS.

DO YOU WANT ME TO DO THOSE FIRST? THIS IS A GENERAL STATEMENT SOME PEOPLE HAVE MADE COMMENTS ABOUT THAT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

I KNOW THAT I REALIZE THERE'S A BUNCH OF DISCUSSIONS GOING ON IN THE CITY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ABOUT RAISING TAXES.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE EVERYBODY AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE COST WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS PARK AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARK ARE 100% PAID BY IMPACT MONEY AND PRESUMABLY AGAIN IF WE'RE INVOLVED WITH THE PRIVACY MONEY THAT WE'RE CONTRIBUTING.

AT NO POINT IN TIME IS ANY OF THE MONEY IS THE MONEY OR COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARK INCREASING ANYBODY'S TAXES.

OTHER THAN I GUESS THE OPERATING MAINTENANCE COST OF IT WHICH IS PART OF THE BUDGET THAT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR REGARDLESS, RIGHT? WHICH WE'VE ADDRESSED IN THE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER ROSS.

I WAS GONNA SAY SOME THINGS ABOUT THE AIRPORT STUFF.

COUPLE PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT IT.

I THINK YOU GUYS CAN DISCUSS THAT.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S -- WE'RE HERE TO SHOW OUR SUPPORT OF SIMMONS ROAD PARK AND THAT WE'RE 100% ALL IN ON IT.

THAT'S OUR STANDPOINT, YOU KNOW? WE BOUGHT IN ON THE IMPORTANCE OF PROVIDING AN ACCESSIBLE NATURE TRAIL.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY NEEDED IN THIS COMMUNITY.

WE BOUGHT INTO THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A SUCCESSFUL PLAYGROUND LOCATED IN THIS PART OF THE CITY.

THOSE ARE TWO THINGS THAT WE ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT.

THOSE ARE TWO THINGS WE BOUGHT INTO IN THIS PARK, WHY WE'RE INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT.

THEY WOULD BE, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF A WAY I WOULD WANT TO SAY THIS.

WE WOULDN'T BE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS PROJECT IF THEY WEREN'T, QUITE FRANKLY.

JUST AS PROJECT CHANCE WOULDN'T BE EITHER.

LET'S SEE.

ROSS ASKED ABOUT IF WE WERE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT FUTURE ELECTRICAL NEEDS AS FAR AS THINGS LIKE TENNIS COURTS OR STUFF LIKE THAT.

QUITE FRANKLY, THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS, NO, WE'RE NOT TAKING THINGS LIKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT'S AT ANY POINT IN TIME A VIABLE THING HERE.

ONE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT, I SHOULD MAYBE MAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON THIS, IS THAT AS PART OF WHAT I STARTED TALK ABOUT AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PRESENTATION WAS THAT THE SITE ITSELF IS ACTING AS A MITIGATING COMPONENT TO THE STORM WATER RUNOFF.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE ARE ABLE TO NOT HAVE EVEN MORE DRY RETENTION POND AREAS THAN WE HAVE NOW.

IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY PLACING LARGE PORTIONS OF THE SITE IN CONSERVATION EASEMENTS THAT ARE LEGALLY TIED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT YOU COULD REALLY SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THE HARD SCAPE OF THIS PARK AT A LARGE SCALE OVER TIME WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO DO.

I WOULD SEE A POSITIVE FOR MOST PEOPLE.

IF YOU THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE TENNIS COURTS OUT HERE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT CLEAR THAT WE ARE, IN SOME CASES, WE ARE ARGUABLY LIMITING THE SCALE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE BY WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, TOO.

AGAIN, I SEE IT AS A POSITIVE.

SOMEBODY, LET'S SEE, THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT OUR ORGANIZATION IS WORKING FREE OF CHARGE, BUT THAT THERE'S PROBABLY SOME SORT OF INCENTIVE THAT IF THIS PARK GROWS IN SIZE THAT IT SOMEHOW BENEFITS US AGAIN.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT'S NOT TRUE.

YOU KNOW? I DON'T PERSONALLY BENEFIT.

NOBODY IN MY ORGANIZATION BENEFITS.

WHETHER THIS IS A HANDICAPPED PARKING SPOT THAT EXISTS IN THE MIDDLE OF A FIELD OR WHETHER WE HAD SOFTBALL COURTS AND IT BECOMES A SPORTS BOX.

IT DOESN'T BENEFIT US ONE WAY OR

[01:15:01]

THE OTHER.

WE ARE A 501C3 NONPROFIT WORKING ENTIRELY FOR FREE WITH NO FINANCIAL BENEFIT WHATSOEVER.

SOMEBODY ASKED A QUESTION OF WHEN DID -- THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

I'M GONNA LET YOU HANDLE THE PROCEDURAL STUFF.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THAT'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS ARE BEST AT DEALING WITH.

WE'VE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS, TRYING TO DO OUR BEST HERE.

BUT AS FAR AS PROTOCOL IS CONCERNED AND HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE GOT, YOU GUYS ARE BETTER TO ANSWER THOSE.

I'M SURE YOU ARE GOING TO.

THE QUESTION WAS ASKED AT WHAT POINT IN TIME DID WE CROSS THIS THRESHOLD TO WHERE THE ST.

JOHN'S RIVER WATER DISTRICT GOT INVOLVED.

THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS THAT EVEN THOUGH, UNFORTUNATELY, IT REALLY DIDN'T COME UP EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS, FROM THE INTEP SHUN OF THE PROJECT THE ST. JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT WAS PART OF THIS PROJECT.

FROM THE VERY CONCEPT OF THE IDEA OF DEVELOPING THIS PARCEL, THEY WERE INVOLVED.

JUST NOBODY TOLD ANYBODY THAT, I GUESS, IS THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, TO SOME EXTENT.

IT DIDN'T COME UP IN EARLY CONVERSATION, I DON'T THINK.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS PART OF THE ENGINEERING OF THE PROPERTY.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS A NECESSITY.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S UNA UNAVO UNAVOIDABLE.

SOMETHING THAT ALWAYS EXISTED.

IT'S JUST HOW PEOPLE PROBABLY DIDN'T REALIZE IT WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT CAUSED AS MUCH CONVERSATION AND DIALOGUE AS IT HAS TO THIS POINT.

HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

I THINK THAT ANSWERS MOST OF THE QUESTIONS.

DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>> CAN I JUST ASK -- I'M SORRY TO INTERJECT.

I JUST WANT TO ASK, DO WE HAVE A TIME LIMIT TODAY ON WHEN WE HAVE TO GIVE THIS ROOM UP?

>> NOT TODAY.

>> OKAY.

JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY CAN SPEAK AND BE HE HEARD.

>> DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION?

>> FIRST I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE I DO REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE PUT IN IT.

NAN AND EVERYBODY.

CREATING AN ENTIRELY NEW PARK IS A BIG DEAL AND IT ISN'T EASY.

I WANT TO ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PLAN ITSELF.

THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE KIND OF GOT TO THIS POINT.

ONE COULD SORT OF ADD TO THAT, HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT SO QUICKLY.

THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT, THIS GOES BACK OVER A FEW MEETINGS IN THE PAST YEAR.

SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFICULT TO REMEMBER EVERYTHING THAT WAS SAID AND DONE.

BUT, FROM MY RECOLLECTION, WHERE WE STARTED FROM WAS THIS LOW IMPACT PARK CONCEPT.

IT INCLUDED A HIKING TRAIL.

AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT DRAWINGS THAT THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT HAS PRODUCED THAT SHOW THIS HIKING TRAIL IN DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS.

>> LIKE THE ONE ON THE GRANT APPLICATION.

>> AND THE TWO I HAD DONE.

IT WAS LIKE HALF A MILE ORIGINALLY, WASN'T IT?

>> I THINK CLOSER TO ABOUT 3/4 OF A MILE.

>> OKAY.

>> SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE THAT DISAPPEARED AND A DIFFERENT KIND OF TRAIL EMERGED WHICH IS A HARD SURFACE QUARTER MILE TRAIL THAT STANDS MUCH CLOSER TO THE ROAD AND IS ALSO ONLY, IF I'M READING YOUR DRAWINGS CORRECTLY, ONLY IN THE SCRUB FOREST AREA.

AS YOU KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS REALLY STRANGE IN THE WAY THAT IT'S DECIDED IN HALF.

ONE HALF TO THE WEST IS ALL VERY TALL SLASH PINE, VERY OPEN UNDER

[01:20:03]

STORY.

THE EASTERN HALF OF IT IS ALL SCRUB, MAYBE --

>> CAN YOU PULL UP THE SITE PLAN? THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO LOOK AT, TOO, WHILE YOU'RE TALKING.

>> THAT ONE SHOWS THE DOTTED LINE IS WHERE THE DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN THE TWO FORESTS.

>> I'M TRYING TO GET MY BEARINGS.

OKAY.

IT'S FLIPPED AROUND.

>> SO THE SCRUB FOREST, IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN OUT THERE, IS ALMOST -- YOU CAN'T EVEN WALK THROUGH IT.

YOUR SITE PLAN HAS, I THINK, ALMOST ALL, IF NOT ALL, OF THE WALKWAY IS IN THE SCRUB.

THE WHOLE INTENT OF BEING ABLE TO WALK THROUGH THE TALL CANOPY IS NOW GONE.

>> CAN YOU OPEN UP THE SITE PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED PARK? THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THAT, ACTUALLY, IN ONE OF THE EARLIEST VERSIONS THAT I DID FOR THE WALKWAY, BASED ON THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'RE SAYING, ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THEM, MAJORITY OF THE WALKWAY WAS IN THE AREA THAT YOU HAD SHOWN.

HOWEVER, AS THE PROCESS DEVELOPED AND WE HAD TO GO THROUGH THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE WETLANDS AREA, THE WETLANDS AREAS HAPPENED TO BE THE AREAS WHERE WE HAD THE WALKWAY.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, HERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT SHOWS IT, I GUESS, THE WHOLE SITE.

YOU ZOOM OUT, YOU CAN SORT OF SEE.

THE WHOLE LOT DOESN'T SHOW UP HERE.

THE AREAS THAT ARE DIAGONAL ARE THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S WETLANDS.

WE HAVE TO HAVE THE 25 FOOT REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIREMENT.

SO THAT PUTS A SHIFT IN EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT TREE CANOPY AREA THAT WE WERE ORIGINALLY HOPING TO HAVE THE WALKWAY IN.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

>> BUT I THINK IT'S POSSIBLE TO STILL HAVE THAT KIND OF PATH IN THE PINE FOREST AND STILL AVOID THE WETLANDS.

I'M TRYING TO GET TO THE MORE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION AS TO WHY THAT DISAPPEARED?

>> WHY WHAT DISAPPEARED?

>> WHY THE FOOT PATH THROUGH THE WOODS? CAN YOU NOT HAVE A FOOT PATH THROUGH WETLANDS?

>> NO, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO.

WE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IT.

EVEN THE CITY ARBORIST WENT OUT THERE.

HE HAD THE IDEA, HEY, WOULD IT BE COOL IF WE COULD BUILD A WOOD BOARDWALK THROUGH THE WETLANDS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE AN EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY, RIGHT? AND THE ANSWER TO THAT WAS, YOU CAN'T EVEN DO THAT.

THE CITY'S OWN ORDINANCES WON'T LET YOU.

>> OKAY.

>> WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THAT 25 FOOT BUFFER, YOU KNOW? WE CAN'T TOUCH IT.

>> OKAY.

LOOKING AT THE PLANS --

>> IT DOESN'T SHOW UP ON THAT.

THERE'S TWO SECTIONS OF THE WETLANDS.

I GUESS IF YOU PULL UP THE PLANS.

ONE OF THEM IS HERE.

AND THEN ONE OF THEM IS DOWN HERE.

IT IS.

THERE.

IT KEEPS GOING WAY DOWN.

IT JUST GETS CUT OFF ON THIS PLAN.

THAT'S THE SECOND SECTION OF WETLANDS THAT WAS IDENTIFIED.

>> I BELIEVE IT WOULD STILL BE POSSIBLE TO RUN A HIKING TRAIL, A FOOT PATH, THROUGH THE WOODS, SKIRTING THE WETLANDS AND THE BUFFER JUST ALONG THE EDGE OF IT AND STILL BE WITHIN THE PINE FOREST.

>> CAN WE PULL UP THE PLAN THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE WALKWAY ON IT? I'M SORRY.

I CAN TELL YOU WHAT DRAWING IT IS.

>> OKAY.

>> IT'S PAGE 4 OF 12.

IT'S GE-1.

DO YOU SEE GE-1? YEAH.

SO, I MEAN, WE CAN BRING THE PATH WAY CLOSER TO THIS AREA, BUT WHEN I WAS LAYING IT OUT, LIKE I HAVE SAID THIS SEVERAL TIMES TO PEOPLE OR WHATEVER THAT MY GOAL PERSONALLY AND I WORKED

[01:25:04]

WITH GILLETTE'S OFFICE DOING THIS.

WE SET OUT TO NOT TAKE OUT A SINGLE TREE FROM THIS TRAIL.

THE GEOMETRY OF THAT WAS BEING THE GOAL.

WHEN YOU OVERLAY THE TREE SURVEY OVER WHERE THE PATH IS GOING, IT'S PRETTY DENSE THROUGH THESE AREAS HERE.

I WOULD TRY TO AVOID TAKING THE TREES OUT.

THAT WHAT SHOWS THE GEOMETRY OF THE PATH.

THERE'S PROBABLY ABOUT 500,000 DIFFERENT WAYS THIS PATH COULD RUN THROUGH THIS PROPERTY.

THERE'S AN UNLIMITED, YOU KNOW R OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO GO THIS WAY INSTEAD OF THAT WAY.

QUITE FRANKLY, WE DID WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT TO AVOID THE MOST AMOUNT OF TREES.

I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND WE COULD LOOK AT IT TOGETHER AND SEE IF THERE'S A MORE LOGICAL OR BETTER WAY TO DO IT.

I DON'T HAVE LIKE A LOT OF PERSONAL PRIDE IN, LIKE, FEELING LIKE I WANT THE PATH TO BE -- I'M NOT GONNA LOSE SLEEP OR BE DISAPPOINTED IF IT CHANGES.

I'M ASSUMING IT'S GOING TO CHANGE.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE SAID PUBLICLY IN SOME OF THESE MEETINGS.

THE REALITY IS, WHEN WE GET OUT THERE AN START LOOKING AT THIS IN REAL LIFE AND THEY START DOING CLEARING, WE PROBABLY ARE GOING TO MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PATH.

WE'RE JUST DOING IT BASED ON THE BEST INFORMATION WE HAVE AVAILABLE NOW.

>> OKAY.

MY POINT WAS THAT IT CHANGED --

>> FROM ONE SIDE TO THE OTHER.

>> IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT WALKWAY.

>> YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED THIS, BUT IS THERE A WAY, AS IT IS NOW, TO AT ANY POINT LATER EXPAND TO COME OFF OF THIS PATH? BECAUSE WITH THE GRANT, THE ORIGINAL IDEA WAS THAT THE PROPERTY WAS LIKE AN L-SHAPED AND YOU HAD SAID, LET'S LOOK AT THIS AS PHASE ONE AND MAYBE PHASE TWO WILL KIND OF BE ABLE TO EXPAND INTO THAT FURTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE IT HOOKS AROUND.

IS THAT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT?

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> SURE.

AS NAN HAD MENTIONED, ONE COULD ADD THE TRAIL TO IT.

>> THAT COULD BE A DIRT TRAIL.

COULD BE AN ADA COMPLIANT TRAIL.

I THINK FROM OUR MISSION STATEMENT STANDPOINT, WE'RE CONCERNED WITH MAKING SURE THERE'S ADA COMPLIANT TRAIL OUT THERE.

WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING NOW ACCOMPLISHES THAT.

OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THAT, WE DON'T FEEL THAT EVERY TRAIL NEEDS TO BE ADA COMPLIANT.

IF THE CITY DECIDES WHETHER IT'S DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROJECT OR IN THE FUTURE THEY WANT TO EXPAND THE TRAIL SYSTEM OUT THERE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD LIMIT THAT FROM HAPPENING.

>> GOTCHA.

THANKS.

THANK YOU.

>> MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THAT, AND WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION, IS THAT SOMETIMES PHASE TWO DON'T EVER HAPPEN.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS MENTIONED IN THE MASTER PLAN AS A DEFICIENCY IS TRAILS ON THE SOUTH END OF THE CITY.

THAT WAS KIND OF AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT.

AND THE TRAIL, THE WALKING TRAIL THAT YOU HAVE NOW, ADDRESSES THAT TO SOME EXTENT, BUT IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE MORE --

>> LONGER KIND OF --

>> YEAH.

THE HIKERS WHO WANT TO WALK FOR A GOOD DISTANCE DEEP INTO THE WOOD TO REALLY ENJOY NATURE.

>> YEAH, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.

>> LET'S SEE.

IF I CAN, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT EIGHT FLAGS.

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN EIGHT FLAGS? WHAT IS EIGHT FLAGS COMPOSED OF?

>> THERE'S FIVE BOARD MEMBERS OF EIGHT FLAGS PLAY SCAPE.

THERE'S MYSELF.

THERE'S AARON MORGAN.

THERE'S TREY WARREN.

SHERYL WOOD AND LINDS NEAL.

UNTIL JUST A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, ALL OF US LIVED ON AMELIA ISLAND.

OUR PRESIDENT FOUNDED THE ORGANIZATION, JUST MOVED WITH HS FAMILY OUT TO LAS VEGAS FOR WORK.

SO HE'S STILL ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT, VERY ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT.

WE TALK ABOUT 20 TIMES A DAY, YOU KNOW? HE LIKES TO STAY INVOLVED WITH WHAT'S GOING ON.

WE STARTED OFF, YOU KNOW, WITH AARON'S VISION OF A REAL NEED TO HAVE A UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND HERE IN THE COMMUNITY.

THAT'S WHAT STARTED THE PROCESS OF THE PLAYGROUND.

FROM THE SUCCESS OF THAT, WE MOVED ON TO EGAN'S CREEK PARK.

[01:30:01]

FROM THAT ONE WE MOVED TO THIS PROJECT.

I TEND TO BE THE, SORT OF PUBLIC FACE OF IT TO THIS POINT.

ALL OF US IN THE ORGANIZATION SORT OF HAVE OUR OWN ROLES THAT WE'RE GOOD AT.

WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S GOOD AT DOING MARKETING TYPE STUFF.

WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S OUR TREASURER THAT HANDLES THE FINANCIAL SIDE OF THINGS.

I JUST HAPPEN TO, PROFESSIONALLY WORK IN THE DESIGN FIELD, SO THIS IS SORT OF MY AREA OF FOCUS.

AT LEAST TO THIS POINT IN THE PROJECT, I'M THE PERSON THAT'S SORT OF HANDLING THE BRUNT OF THE WORK SO FAR.

AND WE ARE A 501C3 NONPROFIT.

>> YOU MENTIONED THAT EIGHT FLAGS AND THE OTHER ORGANIZATION THAT --

>> PROJECT CHANCE.

>> -- THAT YOU'RE PARTNERED WITH, WOULD BE CONTRIBUTING $100,000.

IS THAT IN THE FORM OF MONEY OR IS THAT IN KIND OR?

>> WELL, RIGHT NOW BETWEEN OUR ORGANIZATION, WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY, I THINK, $55,000 TO $60,000 IN CASH THAT'S SITTING IN THE BANK EAR MARKED FOR THIS PROJECT.

AND WE HAVE A FUND-RAISING CAMPAIGN THAT WE'RE EAGER TO LAUNCH, THAT WE'RE WAITING TO GET THROUGH THIS CITY COMMISSION, MAYBE NEXT WEEK BEFORE WE DO SO, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR -- ASSUMING EVERYTHING MOVES FORWARD.

OUR INTENT IS TO RAISE ANOTHER $40,000 IN CASH AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE RAISED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ON PREVIOUS PROJECT, SO WE'RE CONFIDENT IN THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.

WE'D LIKE TO DO MORE THAN THAT.

AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE IN KIND DONATIONS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY, MY SERVICES FACTOR INTO THAT.

BUT WE'RE NOT REALLY QUANTIFYING THAT BECAUSE IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I'M DOING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE PARTNERS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY THAT ARE CALLING US THAT ARE SAYING, LET ME PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN SO FORTUNATE IN THE PAST WITH THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE'VE WORKED ON.

THEY'RE SENDING E-MAILS ASKING ME HOW THEY CAN GET INVOLVED IN THIS? WE'LL LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES THAT WILL HELP BENEFIT THE BOTTOM LINE TO THE COST OF THE PARK TO CONSTRUCT.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TRUE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, AND I THINK IT'S A VALUABLE ASSET WE BRING TO THE TABLE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

WE'RE VERY GOOD AT BRINGING DIFFERENT GROUPS TOGETHER FROM DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES AND PRIVATE DONORS AND CONSTRUCTION PEOPLE AND, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTIVE POLITICALLY AND PEOPLE IN ALL DIFFERENT NONPROFITS LIKE PROJECT CHANCE.

WE LIKE TO SEE EVERYBODY COME TOGETHER, AND WE BELIEVE THAT THESE PARKS ARE MORE MEANINGFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY WHEN THE COMMUNITY HAS A STAKE IN IT, YOU KNOW? THAT THERE'S A SENSE OF OWNERSHIP WHEN PEOPLE ARE VOLUNTEERING AND DONATING THEIR OWN MONEY TO IT AND THEIR OWN TIME AND THEIR OWN EFFORTS.

THAT'S HONESTLY WHAT WE'RE IN IT FOR.

>> IS YOUR INTEREST IN THIS AND YOUR CONTRIBUTION TO THIS SITE SPEC SPECIFIC?

>> FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT?

>> YES.

>> YES.

>> SO IF THERE WERE ANOTHER SITE THAT ELIMINATED MANY OF THE ISSUES THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE HAS AND COULD BE -- COULD FIT WITH YOUR ADA ACCESSIBLE PHILOSOPHY THAT EIGHT FLAGS HAS, WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT?

>> YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE -- RIGHT NOW, WE ARE 100% ALL IN COMMITTED TO SIMMONS ROAD PARK.

THAT'S WHAT WE'VE MADE A COMMITMENT TO AND WE'RE INVESTED IN IT.

WE'VE PUT OUR HEART INTO IT.

WE SAY NO TO LOTS OF PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ASKED TO GET INVOLVED WITH.

WE SAID YES TO THIS ONE FOR A REASON BECAUSE WE TRULY BELIEVE IN IT.

IF FOR SOME REASON THIS PROJECT DOESN'T WORK OUT AND YOU CHOOSE TO NOT PURSUE IT OR TO NOT PURSUE WORKING WITH US ON FIGURING OUT A PLAN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE INVOLVED WITH AND THAT WE'RE PARTICIPATING WITH YOU GUYS IN, YOU KNOW, AND THIS PROJECT SORT OF WENT AWAY AND THERE WAS ANOTHER PROJECT THAT CAME UP, YOU KNOW, WE LOVE PARTNERING WITH THE CITY TO DO STUFF.

WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE -- I WOULDN'T SAY NO, WE WOULDN'T BE INTERESTED IN BEING INVOLVED, BECAUSE THAT WOULDN'T BE A FAIR ANSWER.

BUT I'M SAYING THERE'S FIVE OF US ON THIS BOARD AND THERE'S

[01:35:01]

OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THIS.

IT WOULD BE A CASE BY CASE SITUATION.

RIGHT NOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS, NO, WE'RE NOT INVOLVED IN PARTICIPATING IN ANY OTHER PROJECTS OTHER THAN SIMMONS ROAD PARK.

IN THE FUTURE, I DON'T KNOW.

IT WOULD JUST DEPEND ON THIS SITUATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US.

>> SO IF, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE AIRPORT SITE, IF THERE WAS MOMENTUM FOR THAT AND YOU COULD DESIGN WHATEVER KIND OF PARK YOU WERE COMFORTABLE WITH EIGHT FLAGS TO DO, YOU WOULDN'T DO THAT?

>> I DON'T THINK WE WOULD PARTICIPATE IN THE AIRPORT SITE AS A PROSPECTIVE PROJECT.

MAINLY BECAUSE -- WELL, THRSZ REALLY TWO FACTORS TO THAT.

ONE BEING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY SPARKED OUR INTEREST IN THIS SIMMONS ROAD PROJECT IS THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE AN ACCESSIBLE NATURE TRAIL.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN'T POSSIBLY EXIST AT THE AIRPORT.

>> RIGHT.

>> SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE BOUGHT INTO THAT'S IMPORTANT TO US.

AND SECONDLY, YOU KNOW, AFTER, IN FULL DISCLOSURE, IN A COUPLE YEARS, OR A YEAR AGO WHEN THERE WAS AN IDEA THAT WAS FLOATED ABOUT DOING A PUBLIC PLAYGROUND AT THE AIRPORT, AT THAT TIME, WE DID EXPRESS AN INTEREST IN BECOMING INVOLVED WITH THE CITY AND DEVELOPING A PLAYGROUND THERE.

HOWEVER, IN THE YEARS THAT HAVE TRANSPIRED SINCE THEN AND OUR RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION WITH FAMILIES THAT HAVE CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES AND UNDERSTANDING THE WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT OF A PARK AT THAT LOCATION WOULD HAVE WITH THEM AND COMMENTS FROM, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF MATT'S STILL HERE.

HE MAY HAVE LEFT.

BUT HE HAD WITH THE CHILDREN THAT THEY WORK WITH.

THE AIRPORT JUST ISN'T A CONDUCIVE SITE WITH OUR MISSION STATEMENT AND OUR GOALS.

I THINK AS FAR AS IF THE CITY SAID WE WANT TO BUILD A PLAYGROUND AT THE AIRPORT, WE WOULD SAY, WE THINK YOU SHOULD BUILD A PLAYGROUND AT THE AIRPORT, BECAUSE I THINK PLAYGROUNDS ARE ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA.

DO WE THINK IT'S A PROJECT THAT WOULD APPEAL TO US AS AN ORGANIZATION AND THAT OUR DONORS AND THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE FROM OUR MISSION STANDPOINT, I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD FIT FOR US.

>> IF THERE WAS A THIRD SITE --

>> I THINK I ALREADY ANSWERED THAT ONE.

>> HE DID.

>> IF THERE WAS A THIRD SITE THAT ALSO ALLOWED FOR THAT KIND OF WALKWAY, NATURE WALKWAY, AND MET ALL OF THE OTHER CRITERIA OF THIS -- I DON'T WANT TO TURN YOU DOWN.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT YOUR THRESHOLD IS.

>> YEAH.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU INVOLVED IN ALL THESE KINDS OF THINGS.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT WHERE --

>> I THINK I ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.

>> DO WE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED FOR SIMMONS ROAD PARK FOR BENJAMIN?

>> I HAVE A SHORT ONE.

YOU MENTIONED WITH THE TRAIL.

IT'S NOT AGAINST EIGHT FLAGS MISSION STATEMENT TO SAY, WE HAVE A GOOD PORTION OF THE PARK THAT MEETS OUR MISSION STATEMENT, THERE'S EXTRA THAT DOESN'T? SAY IF WE WERE EXPANDING THE TRAIL.

IT'S A DIRT PATH, RIGHT? SO LIKEWISE, DO Y'ALL FEEL TO MEET YOUR MISSION STATEMENT THAT ALL THE PLAY STRUCTURE EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE WITHIN, LIKE -- IT'S ALL ADA.

I KNOW Y'ALL GO FOR THE MOST ACCESSIBLE, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?

>> WELL, IN PAST PROJECTS WE'VE DONE WITH PLAYGROUNDS OR WHATEVER, THE WAY PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WORKS, SOME OF IT'S SUCCESSFUL AND SOME OF IT'S NOT.

WE'VE ALREADY BEEN IN THE PROCESS OF RESEARCHING PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR THIS PARK.

SOME PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN PURCHASED FOR THIS PARK.

BUT THERE'S STILL EQUIPMENT THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET.

SOME OF IT IS ACCESSIBLE.

SOME OF IT ISN'T ACCESSIBLE.

SOME OF IT, THERE'S DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ACCESSIBILITY, YOU KNOW? WHAT WE FEEL LIKE IS THAT YOU, WE WANT TO ACCOMMODATE EVERYBODY.

THAT MEANS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE STUFF FOR KIDS THAT AREN'T -- I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

>> I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

>> NOT EVERY PIECE OF EQUIPMENT IS ACCESSIBLE.

THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CHILDREN THAT DO HAVE DISABILITIES TO INTERACT AND TO PARTICIPATE AND FEEL LIKE THEY'RE HAVING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.

>> GOTCHA.

I WAS JUST THINKING, NAN HAD SENT US A COUPLE PICTURES OF SOME STUFF.

I KNOW SOME EQUIPMENT HAS

[01:40:02]

ALREADY BEEN PURCHASED.

I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU SENT US.

SOME LOOKED LIKE STOCK PICTURES AND YOU SAID THEY WERE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT COLORS.

IF THOSE WERE THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PURCHASED OR JUST IDEAS OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE PURCHASED IN THE FUTURE?

>> ONLY THREE OR FOUR THINGS HAVE BEEN PURCHASED.

THEY ARE JUST VERY SMALL.

>> IT SEEMS A LOT OF PEOPLE SAID IT SEEMED LIKE THEY WANTED THAT MORE NATURAL KIND OF LOOK, TO GET AWAY FROM LIKE THE PLASTIC STRUCTURE THINGS.

>> I CAN TELL YOU, THE MAJORITY OF THE -- NOT TO SAY LARGER, BUT THE MAJORITY OF KIND OF THE MAIN COMPONENTS OF THE PLAYGROUND THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT WE WANT TO ACQUIRE FOR THIS PLAYGROUND ARE ACTUALLY MADE OUT OF A MATERIAL CALLED ROBINA, WHICH IS A NATURAL WOOD PRODUCT.

OUR LOOK IS A WOOD LOOK.

MAJORITY OF THE PIECES WILL BE A WOOD LOOK.

IT'S NOT GOING TO LOOK LIKE A PIRATE PLAYGROUND.

IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE A PLAYGROUND MEANT TO BE IN THE WOODS.

>> IS THE TIMBER BEAMING STILL INVOLVED OR HAS THAT COME OFF THE TABLE?

>> NO.

THAT'S DEFINITELY PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

SORRY.

MOST OF OUR PLAYGROUNDS THAT WE'VE DONE, WE LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING SOME SORT OF THEME THAT RELATES EDUCATIONALLY TO THE AREA THAT OUR PARKS ARE IN.

WE DID SOME RESEARCH AND SOME BRAINSTORMING AND WHAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, ASSUMING THIS MOVES FORWARD IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO INCOR INCORPORATE A THEME AS AN EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT FOR THIS PARK.

THERE'S GOING TO BE PLAYGROUND ELEMENTS THAT RELATE TO THE LIFE AND VILLAGES OF THE TUMIQWAN INDIANS AND ACTIVITIES, SIGNS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

I THINK IT'S A COOL IDEA.

>> OKAY.

THANKS.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION BETWEEN US.

IF ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING?

>> CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION? I KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER SPEAKER HERE THAT'S BEEN WAITING TO SPEAK.

>> ON SOMETHING ELSE.

THIS COULD GO ON FOR AWHILE.

IF YOU DON'T GET A CHANCE TO SPEAK, ALL OF OUR PHONE NUMBER AND E-MAILS ARE ON THE WEBSITE.

PLEASE E-MAIL US.

I HAVE HERE WHAT YOU WERE SPEAKING ABOUT, SO WE WILL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION FOR SURE.

OKAY.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO SAY?

>> IS THE DECISION GOING TO BE MADE, LIKE, TONIGHT?

>> YES.

WE ARE GOING TO VOTE EITHER TO RECOMMEND -- YES.

WE ARE GOING TO -- NOW, JUST TO BE CLEAR.

WE ARE AN ADVISORY COUNCIL.

ALL WE CAN DO IS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION.

THEY WILL HEAR A PRESENTATION TUESDAY.

THEY WILL, HOPEFULLY IF THEY CHOOSE TO, TAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN THEY DO WHATEVER THEY DECIDE TO DO TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> IF WE HAVE OTHER COMMENT, CAN WE STILL E-MAIL YOU THEM THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

ALL OF OUR PHONE NUMBERS, ALL OF OUR E-MAIL ADDRESSES ARE PUBLIC RECORD.

I PERSONALLY CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, BUT I THINK THIS ONLY WORKS WITH PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.

THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN WAY EASIER FOR ME WITH PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.

DEFINITELY, PLEASE DO.

>> CAN WE ASK HIM ONE QUESTION?

>> NO.

WE REALLY HAVE TO KIND OF MOVE ON, UNFORTUNATELY.

>> YOU SAID WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT.

>> IF WE MAKE A MOTION.

IF SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> ALL RIGHTY.

>> THAT THIS BE POSTPONED OR TABLED UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING.

BECAUSE --

>> UNTIL WHEN, I'M SORRY?

>> UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING.

BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE IS A THIRD SITE THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL OF THE ISSUES HERE.

>> WE CANNOT DO THAT.

AT OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, WE MADE A MOTION AND VOTED THAT THIS NEEDED TO GO BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE CITY MANAGER HAD REQUESTED THIS COME TO US AND WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

WE CAN POSTPONE THIS AND TALK ABOUT THIS AT THE NEXT MEETING.

[01:45:04]

IN THE MEANTIME, THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO MAKE A DECISION ON TUESDAY.

SO WE CAN POSTPONE IT IF WE WANT, JUST KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT.

IT'S NOT GONNA BE EFFECTIVE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A SECOND.

>> IF WE VOTE ON THIS TO APPROVE THIS OR NOT, I WILL HAVE TO VOTE NO.

BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE IS A THIRD VIABLE SITE THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL OF THE ISSUES.

>> HERE'S MY QUESTION HERE.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT WE NEED TO VOTE ON WHETHER WE LIKE EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF EVERY PART OF THIS PARK RIGHT NOW.

LIKE, IT'S MORE SO JUST A GENERAL, LET'S APPROVE THAT THIS CONTINUE IN THE DIRECTION IT'S GOING.

THAT EIGHT FLAGS REMAIN INVOLVED IN THIS.

AND THEIR MISSION, THAT WE USE IT FOR THE GENERAL FOOTPRINT MOVING FORWARD.

I THINK THE NUANCES CAN STILL CHANGE.

AS BENJAMIN SAID, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW UNTIL THEY GET IN THERE AND START TRYING TO PUT IT TOGETHER BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THINGS CHANGE, THINGS HAPPEN.

BUT WE'RE REALLY IN A MORE GENERAL SENSE AT THAT 30,000 FOOT LEVEL TRYING TO SAY, DO WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD? DO WE APPROVE THE IDEA OF MOVING FORWARD OR DO WE NOT? I THINK THAT'S THE THING.

>> I'M GOING TO ADD SOME PERSPECTIVE TO THIS.

BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN HERE.

MY FAMILY'S BEEN ON THIS ISLAND FOR OVER 100 YEARS.

I HAVE SPENT MY CHILDHOOD DOWN HERE EVEN THOUGH I GREW UP IN NEW YORK.

I GREW UP -- I WAS BORN IN HARLEM.

IN NEW YORK, THERE WAS ALWAYS THIS ISSUE OF CONSERVING LAND, CONSERVING LAND.

ONLY PLACE THEY CONSERVED IT WAS IN CENTRAL PARK.

CENTRAL PARK WAS THE MAJOR PARK WHERE IT STILL LOOKS LIKE A PARK.

BUT IT'S THE ONE PLACE IN NEW YORK WHERE YOU COULD GO THAT'S OFF LIMITS, YOU CAN'T DEVELOP, YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

THEY STILL GOT TURTLES.

I REMEMBER TAKING DATES THERE AND ALL THAT STUFF.

UNFORTUNATELY, AMELIA ISLAND IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE LIKE AN URBAN AREA.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE.

THIS IS A HOT INCOME.

THIS IS A HOT PROPERTY.

THIS IS A HOT ISLAND.

PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE ON THIS ISLAND.

IF WE DON'T WANT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE FEW AREAS THAT WE'VE GOT LEFT THAT ARE STILL RELATIVELY PRISTINE, THE WORST THING I EVER SAW AND THAT REALLY BROKE MY HEART WHEN I WAS THERE WAS THAT PROPERTY FROM THE PROPERTY THAT WAS FOR THE YMCA GO.

THAT'S A BAD THING.

SOMEHOW EVENTUALLY, JUST LIKE A GENTLEMAN HERE SAID, IF WE DON'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO A GOOD JOB PROTECTING WHAT PRISTINE LAND WE'VE GOT, AND THAT'S THE MAIN CONCERN, WHETHER WE DO IT HERE OR THERE OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, THIS LITTLE PIECE OF LAND IS GONNA WIND UP GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT WE AREN'T GOING TO LIKE.

>> TO FURTHER YOUR POINT, I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ANYBODY WHO IS AGAINST THIS PARK, ANY SORT OF CONCRETE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO HOW TO KEEP IT IN CONSERVATION, HOW TO NOT ALLOW IT TO BE DEVELOPED.

>> EXACTLY.

>> BY EITHER THIS COMMISSION, THE NEXT COMMISSION OR THE COMMISSION AFTER THAT.

YOU CAN GET PROMISES TO COMMISSIONER, WE'RE NOT GONNA SELL IT.

UNLESS YOU START PUTTING INFRASTRUCTURE ON IT OR YOU GET SOME, YOU KNOW -- UNTIL WE, IF YOU CAME TO ME AND SAID, WE HAVE A SOLID PLAN THAT OTHERWISE WILL 100% WITHOUT A DOUBT KEEP IT IN CONSERVATION, WE'LL KEEP IT THERE.

THIS IS THE BEST KIND OF THING WE HAVE TO OFFER TO KEEP IT AS NATURAL ENJOYMENT.

>> I'M NOT SURE THAT'S TRUE, IN TERMS OF THIS IS THE ONLY OPTION TO CONSERVE THIS LAND.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THERE ARE THINGS THEY CAN DO.

>> THAT'S THE QUESTION I GUESS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS.

I HAVE TWO OTHER CONCERNS.

MY FIRST CONCERN IS FINDING OUT THAT NOT REALLY VERY MANY RESIDENTS WERE INVOLVED IN THESE INITIAL MEETINGS LAST YEAR.

THAT'S A CONCERN.

IT'S NICE THIS IS A COMMUNITY PARK.

IT'S A COMMUNITY PARK PAID FOR

[01:50:02]

BY CITY RESIDENTS.

THE OTHER CONCERN --

>> I HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING.

>> EXCUSE ME.

I'M STILL SPEAKING.

IF YOU WOULD LET ME FINISH WHAT I'M SPEAKING.

MY OTHER, FRANKLY, CONCERN, IS THE FIRST OF ANY TYPE OF PLAN ON ANY SCALE WE SAW ANY FIRST TIME EIGHT FLAGS CAME TO US, THIS COMMITTEE, WAS IN AUGUST.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF RESOURCES YOU PUT INTO IT, THE FOLKS WANTING TO GIVE IN KIND MONEY, HOW THIS IS THE FIRST INTERACTION WE'VE HAD WITH YOUR ORGANIZATION AS A COMMITTEE SINCE AUGUST.

NOW IT'S OCTOBER.

AND YOU'RE ASKING US TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE SPOT.

>> IT'S NOT HIM.

>> I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT YOU.

TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU, THAT WE -- THE FIRST TIME WE EVER EVEN GOT ANYTHING IS AUGUST.

THAT'S WHY IT FEELS LIKE IT'S MOVED SO QUICKLY.

IT'S TWO MONTHS.

I'M NOT SAYING I'M AGAINST THE PARK.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S MOVING TOO QUICKLY, ALSO.

FRANKLY, AS A COMMITTEE, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INVOLVEMENT IN THIS, WHAT'S THE POINT OF US BEING HERE? IF THIS IS GONNA BE DRIVEN BEHIND THE SCENES, AND I'M NOT IMPLYING ANYTHING INSIDIOUS GOING ON.

DON'T THINK THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU DO GOOD WORK.

BUT TO BE BROUGHT INTO IT SO LATE IN THE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, MAKES ME SIT BACK AND GO, WELL, WHAT'S OUR ROLE? IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKED TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HAD TWO MONTHS AND THREE MEETINGS TO DISCUSS.

>> I HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THE PROCESS.

I WOULD SAY 95% OF THE REASON WE ARE ALL HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE THERE WAS A BREAKDOWN IN THE PROCESS.

WE WERE VERY SURPRISED WITH THE FIRST PRESENTATION WE HAD FROM EIGHT FLAGS PLAY SCAPES.

THIS ALL STARTED WITH A GRANT APPLICATION.

THE BEST THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED WAS THAT WE DIDN'T GET THE GRANT.

CLEARLY, THIS DIDN'T HAVE THE COMMUNITY BUY-IN THAT YOU NEED.

THE THING ABOUT PARKS IS THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY.

THIS IS GOVERNMENT.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY.

ANY PARK NEEDS COMMUNITY BUY-IN.

BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY WAS LEFT OUT OF THE DECISION MAKING ON THIS PARK, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE BUY-IN.

THAT BEING SAID, WE DON'T HAVE TO ADHERE TO THIS GRANT.

I HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THE PROCESS AND HOW WE FIX THAT.

THAT'S FOR ANOTHER TIME.

I THINK A LOT OF REALLY GOOD IDEAS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP HERE TODAY AND A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO ME OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING.

THERE'S AN TUNE FOR A WIN-WIN HERE WHERE EVERYBODY'S NEEDS CAN BE ADDRESSED.

WE CAN ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WE DO NEED A PLAYGROUND, AN ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CITY. CONCERN PARK THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THIS LAND WILL BE PUT INTO CONSERVATION.

MY OPINION WOULD BE, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN WOULD BE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH EIGHT FLAGS PLAY SCAPES TO LOOK AT ANOTHER LOCATION FOR A REST ROOM FACILITY.

THERE'S A LOT OF IDEAS.

WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE AT A DIFFERENT TIME.

THERE'S THE GOLF COURSE.

THERE'S THE SPORTS COMPLEX.

THERE'S THE AIRPORT.

THERE ARE A LOT OF REALLY GOOD IDEAS OUT THERE, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT ON SIMMONS ROAD IF WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS.

IT'S A BIG BUMMER THAT WE WEREN'T INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS FROM THE GET-GO AND EVERYBODY HAS TO FEEL LIKE THEY WERE BLIND SIDED.

>> CAN I JUST SAY, FOR ME, I THINK I FELT THE SAME WAY, A LITTLE BIT OF BLIND SIDEDNESS, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

THERE'S A LOT OF MISTRUST FOR OUR CITY.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE THAT PROBABLY FEEL THAT WAY, TOO.

A LOT OF WHAT YOU SAY MAY NOT BE WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS.

SO I THINK THAT WHEN SOMETHING COMES UP LIKE THIS THAT'S MOVING QUICKLY AN HAS MOVED QUICKLY WITHOUT A LOT OF PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S IMMEDIATELY THE REACTION OF DISTRUST.

WHEN I PUT THAT ASIDE, REALIZING THAT'S NOT SOMETHING BENJAMIN OR EIGHT FLAGS HAS WILLINGLY OR KNOWINGLY OR INTENFULLY BEEN PART OF IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, AND PUT ASIDE MY FEELINGS OF THAT, WHAT I HAVE TO LOOK AT IS, HOW DO I FEEL ABOUT THIS PARK? REGARDLESS OF HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT, IS THIS PARK A GOOD IDEA OR IS IT NOT A GOOD IDEA? REGARDLESS OF -- BECAUSE THE

[01:55:02]

FACT IS, YES, MAYBE THE PROCESS WASN'T HANDLED THE RIGHT WAY, BUT WE CAN'T GO BACK IN TIME AND FIX THAT NOW.

JUST BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS A LITTLE BIT HURT OVER THAT DOESN'T MEAN THIS THING NEEDS TO COME TO A SCREECHING HALT AND WE NEED TO SAY, WELL, YOU DIDN'T START IT RIGHT, SO, THEREFORE, WE CAN HAVE ANYTHING.

I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO THINK LIKE, REGARDLESS OF HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT, IS WHAT HE'S BRINGING US DONE THE BEST WAY -- I FEEL LIKE HE'S PUT IN A TON OF WORK TO SHOW US EXACTLY WHERE THESE TREES ARE.

TO MAKE THE SMALLEST IMPACT AS POSSIBLE.

SO I DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE RUSHED INTO IT.

MAYBE RUSHED TO US, BUT NOT TO THEM.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THOUGHT AND WORK PUT INTO THIS PLAN.

FOR ME PERSONALLY, I WOULD HATE TO, BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN GOVERNMENT TAKES SO LONG, SAY LET'S SCRAP IT AND START FROM SCRATCH BECAUSE WE MIGHT NOT -- THIS MIGHT BE IN DISCUSSION THEN FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WHEN NONE OF US ARE EVEN ON THIS BOARD AND IT MIGHT JUST BE SITTING THERE AS THAT PARCEL THAT CAN BE REZONED, YOU KNOW, BEFORE ANYBODY CAN PUT ANYTHING ON IT.

>> RIGHT.

I MEAN, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO SCRAP IT.

UNLESS THAT'S WHAT THE OTHER MEMBERS RECOMMEND.

BUT I DO THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF.

NOW I HAVE SEEN A FEW OF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE, EVERY CONCERN WE HAVE BROUGHT UP, MR. MORRISON HAS WORKED TO TRY TO ADDRESS AND FIND A SOLUTION, INCLUDING REDUCING THE SIZES OF THOSE DRY POND, WHICH I THINK FOR ALL OF US IS A STICKING POINT FOR ME.

IT'S REALLY HARD.

BUT DO WE GAIN SOMETHING IF WE CAN SAY WE WANT AN ACCESSIBLE PATH THROUGH THE WOODS, WE DON'T WANT TO BRING IN A PUMP STATION AND BATHROOM AND PLAYGROUND AT THIS FACILITY AND WE WANT TO PUT THAT ENTIRE PARCEL INTO CONSERVATION ALONG WITH THE PARK? CAN WE GAIN SOMETHING THERE AND THEN EXPLORE SOME CREATIVE OPTIONS WHERE WE CAN HAVE AN ACCESSIBLE PARK? I CAME TO THIS MEETING THINKING I WOULD LOVE A PLAYGROUND AT THE AIRPORT.

AS A PARENT, WE GO OUT THERE AND HAVE PICNICS ALL THE TIME.

MY DAUGHTER LOVES IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE CHILDREN WITH AUTISM SO I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS AN ISSUE.

I WOULDN'T WANT ANYTHING WE PUT DOWN THERE TO NOT TAKE ALL OF THE CHILDREN INTO CONSIDERATION.

THIS ISN'T THE ONLY PLACE WHERE YOU CAN PUT AN ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND.

IT'S JUST NOT.

>> I GUESS THAT'S THE QUESTION THEN FOR BENJAMIN.

IF YOU TAKE A PLAYGROUND FEATURE OUT OF THIS PARK, IS EIGHT FLAGS STILL INTERESTED? TO KNOW IF THAT'S AN OPTION.

>> THE QUESTION -- LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION IN RESPONSE TO THAT, OKAY.

WHAT IS IT THAT YOU FEEL LIKE YOU GAIN BY TAKING THE PLAYGROUND AWAY?

>> THAT YOU DO FAR LESS -- YOU DO LESS IMPACT TO THIS PROPERTY.

IF YOU TAKE REST ROOMS OUT.

WE'VE SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO DESIGN THE PLAYGROUND AROUND THE TREES.

WE LOOKED AT THESE THINGS AS SQUARE FOOTAGES.

IT'S HARD TO GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THEY NEED WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT ON PAPER.

THE AMOUNT OF CLEARING THAT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE TO PUT IN THE PLAYGROUND AT THE SCALE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF CLEARING THAT WOULD BE DONE FOR A TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, ONE HOUSE.

>> RIGHT.

>> ON A SEVEN ACRE PARCEL OF LAND.

>> UNTOUCHED AT THIS POINT.

IT WOULD REQUIRE THE BATHROOM, PLAYGROUND.

>> THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THAT, NO, WE WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS PROJECT IF THERE WAS NOT A HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND THAT WAS A PART OF IT.

>> THE OTHER ISSUE ABOUT THAT IS NOT SO MUCH JUST THE TREES, IT INVOLVES MORE IMPACT ON THE AREA.

NOISE.

FOOT TRAFFIC.

IT REMOVES THAT ESSENCE OF THIS IS A NICE LITTLE NATURE TRAIL TO GO WALK AND LISTEN TO BIRDS.

IT BECOMES A PARK PARK.

TO ME, IT LOSES THE NATURE, THE NATURAL PIECE OF IT.

IT'S JUST ANOTHER PARK.

IT'S NOT REALLY A NATURE PARK.

IT'S A PARK WITH A TRAIL THAT RUNS THROUGH, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT YOU SEE AT FORT CLENCH.

WHEN YOU WALK THROUGH THERE, YOU'RE WALKING THROUGH THE

[02:00:01]

WOODS.

YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAYGROUND SITTING IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

I GET IT ABOUT THE TREE, BUT I DO THINK IT DOES CHANGE THE NATURE OF IT FROM HAVING THAT KIND OF AN IMPACT IN THAT AREA.

>> IT'S UP TO YOU, WHATEVER YOU RECOMMEND.

YOU KNOW WHAT THE VALUE IS THAT WE BRING TO THE TABLE.

I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT FINANCIALLY.

I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE, AS AN ORGANIZATION, BRING TO THE TABLE HERE.

I DON'T LIKE BEING IN A POSITION WHERE I'M HAVING TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION THE WAY THAT I'M ANSWERING THAT QUESTION.

I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU REALIZE THAT.

WHETHER IT'S US OR WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE FULL SWIFT PROJECT CHANCE.

EVEN FOLKS FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT REPRESENT SOME OF THE CONSERVATION GROUPS.

EVERYBODY'S HERE REPRESENTING WHAT THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT, YOU KNOW? THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT.

THIS IS WHAT WE BELIEVE IN.

I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE PARK SYSTEM AND YOU LOOK AT THE NEED FOR A PLAYGROUND IN THIS AREA, THAT'S WHAT MAKES SENSE HERE.

THIS ISN'T -- I FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT, EVEN THOUGH THIS SOUNDS OBVIOUS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REINFORCE THE FACT THAT THIS PROPERTY ISN'T ZONED FOR CONSERVATION.

IT'S ZONED FOR RECREATION.

RECREATION INVOLVES PEOPLE.

JUST THIS YEAR ALONE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT I THINK WHAT THE CITY'S COLLECTING, MAYBE $1.5 MILLION IN RECREATIONAL IMPACT FEES FROM PEOPLE BUILDING HOUSES.

LOT OF THEM ARE BUILDING HOUSES IN THIS AREA OF THE CITY.

THERE'S AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE PLAYGROUNDS FOR THESE PEOPLE.

THERE'S AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, PARKS FOR THESE PEOPLE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IN A PERFECT WORLD, CAN YOU DO THAT WITHOUT HAVING TO LOSE A TREE OR TO TOUCH SOME UNDER BRUSH? SURE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE WAY THIS WORK.

WE'RE FINDING WHAT OUR GOAL FROM THE BEGINNING HERE HAS BEEN IS TO FIND A BALANCE AND TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, THE MOST ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS AND SENSIBLE PRODUCT THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN.

WE'RE NOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATION, BUT IT'S IN OUR BLOOD.

IT'S PROFESSIONALLY IN MY BLOOD, IS WHAT I VIEW EVERY DAY, TOO.

WE'RE GENUINELY TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN.

IF THERE'S -- WE WANT TO FIND A WAY TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS.

ULTIMATELY, WHILE I REALIZE YOU AREN'T THE ONES MAKING THE FINAL DECISION, IT'S THE CITY COMMISSION THAT'S GOING TO DO THAT, HAVING YOUR SUPPORT MEANS THE WORLD TO US AS AN ORG STPHAEUGS BECAUSE WE'VE ALWAYS WORKED SO CLOSE WITH THE PARKES AND REC ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

WE'D REALLY LIKE TO WALK AWAY TONIGHT FINDING A WAY FOR US TO FIND A WAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COLLABORATIVE WAY, WHERE WE CAN ACHIEVE BOTH OF OUR GOALS, YOU KNOW? ARE THERE SOME OTHER SITES THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO LOOK AT FOR PLAYGROUNDS? I'M SURE THAT THERE ARE.

LET'S GET THROUGH ONE PROJECT AT A TIME AND MAYBE WE CAN DO SOME MORE OF THEM, TOO.

WE'D LOVE TO DO THAT, TOO.

THIS IS -- HAVING THIS PLAYGROUND HERE IS, QUITE FRANKLY, ONE OF THE MOST THINGS THAT WAS THE MOST ATTRACTIVE ELEMENTS TO US WHEN WE GOT INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT.

FOR TO IT BE TAKEN OUT OF THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE TO DO WOULD MAKE THE PROJECT NOT PART OF OUR, YOU KNOW, REALM OF INTEREST ANYMORE.

UNFORTUNATELY.

>> CAN I JUST ADD, TOO, TO THAT.

ERIC, YOU REFERENCED THE PLAN AND HOW IT SAYS WE DO.

THERE'S A NEED FOR A PLAYGROUND ON THE SOUTH END OF THE ISLAND.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS TOUCHED ON, WE HAVE A REALLY UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY HERE WITH THE COMPLETION OF THAT TRAIL.

THAT TRAIL IS ONLY GOING TO FURTHER EXPAND THE CONNECTION.

I LIVE IN SIMMONS COVE NEXT TO SCOTT.

THAT IS MY BACK YARD.

I CAN TELL YOU ONE OF THE THINGS WE ABSOLUTELY HATE ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS WE CAN'T GO ANYWHERE WITH MY CHILDREN WITHOUT GOING IN A CAR.

IT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE.

14TH STREET IS A NIGHTMARE.

WE'RE ALREADY WORKING ON THAT BATTLE TO GET A LIGHT PUT IN THERE.

IT'S JUST NOT SAFE.

THIS TRAIL IS THE FIRST THING THAT'S ALLOWED MY FAMILY TO LEAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT'S AMAZING.

WE SEE OUR NEIGHBORS OUT THERE.

TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A PARK THERE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE PARKING.

IT'S NOT ABOUT, IS THERE -- IT'S A MEETING SPOT.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITIES AND CITY RESIDENTS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK THE WAY THE NORTH END HAS CENTRAL PARK.

IT'S ALWAYS WONDERFUL WHEN I SEE FAMILIES RIDE THEIR BIKES UP TO

[02:05:01]

PIRATE PLAYGROUND OR CENTRAL PARK.

IF YOU LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF S SADLER, YOU CAN DO THAT.

WE TALK ABOUT A FOOTPRINT.

A BIG PART OF THAT IS ME NOT STARTING MY VAN UP EVERY TIME THEY WANT TO GO OUTSIDE OR RIDE THEIR BIKE.

IF I CAN DO THAT WITHOUT DRIVING, MY NEIGHBORS CAN DO THAT WITHOUT DRIVING.

THE AIRPORT PARK MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA BUT WE'RE FACED WITH THE FACT THAT THAT'S NOT AN OPTION AT THIS POINT.

THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION A YEAR FROM NOW OR MIGHT BE AN OPTION TWO YEARS FROM NOW.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FAA RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE ABOUT THAT.

THAT'S WHY THAT WAS SCRAPPED WHEN IT CAME INTO PLAY.

THEY HAVE A WHOLE LOT GOING ON THERE THAT IS WELL BEYOND THE DICTATES OF WHAT THE CITY SAYS THEY CAN DO.

MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING.

BUT FOR RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE A REALLY GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ADD A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE COULD REALLY USE.

>> CAN I MAKE JUST ONE MORE COMMENT? I JUST WANT TO PUT THIS OUT THERE FOR YOU GUYS.

AS FAR AS THE PLAYGROUND IS CONCERNED, OUR OBJECTIVE HERE IS TO HAVE A UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND AT THIS PARK, OKAY? I DON'T HAVE PERSONALLY, AND I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR ALL OF US IN OUR ORGANIZATION, A THRESHOLD THAT SAYS THIS IS HOW BIG IT NEEDS TO BE, THIS IS THE SCOPE IT HAS TO BE.

LIKE WE'VE SAID ALL ALONG, THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T REALLY GOTTEN INTO THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING THIS PROCESS BECAUSE WE'VE SPENT SO MUCH TIME DEALING WITH THE OVERALL SITE AND DEALING WITH THE PROCESS TO GET TO WHERE WE ARE NOW THAT, YOU KNOW -- AND IDEALLY, THIS DOESN'T END WITH YOU GUYS HERE TONIGHT REGARDLESS OF YOUR DECISION.

I DON'T SEE -- EVEN IF THIS GOES ON TO THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CITY COMMISSION CHOOSES TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS, I WOULD STILL WANT TO COME BACK AND KEEP YOU UP TO DATE ON EVERYTHING.

I WOULD WANT YOU ALL TO BE INVOLVED WITH EVERYTHING.

IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE TO YOU, AS FAR AS HOW YOU FEEL WITH YOUR DECISION TONIGHT, I'LL GO ON PUBLIC RECORD IN FRONT OF ALL THESE PEOPLE MAKE A PERSONAL COMMITMENT TO YOU GUYS THAT I'LL SIT DOWN AND SPEND THE TIME, AND WE CAN HOLD WORK SHOPS, AS MANY AS IT TAKES, ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO PARTICIPATE IN YOU ALL'S GROUP, WE'LL SIT DOWN WITH THE SITE PLAN W THE TREE SURVEY, WE'LL LAY OUT THIS EQUIPMENT AND YOU CAN HAVE INPUT ON THE SCALE OF THIS PLAYGROUND.

YOU CAN MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T GROW OUT OF SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH.

WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS.

WE WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS WITH YOU GUYS SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT IN A WAY THAT MAKES US FEEL COMFORTABLE, TOO.

IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S APPEALING TO YOU AND IT MAKES YOU FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME ACCOUNTABILITY THAT COMES WITH THAT AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS AND THAT IT DOESN'T GROW INTO THIS, YOU KNOW -- IT DOESN'T GROW INTO THIS PLAYGROUND THING TALKED ABOUT BEING BILL AT CENTRAL PARK, WHICH IT WOULDN'T ANYWAY.

YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S DESIGNED AROUND THE TREES AND HOW MUCH OF THE EXTENT OF THE CLEARING IS AND ALL OF THAT, I WILL SIT HERE AND WE WILL WORK THROUGH THIS TOGETHER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

YOU HAVE MY WORD.

>> THAT'S GREAT.

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, ALMOST $60,000 OF THAT $80,000 HAS ALREADY BEEN SPENT.

IT'S BEEN PURCHASED FOR A PARK THAT'S NOT DESIGNED.

IT'S NOT YOUR ISSUE, BUT THAT'S A HUGE ISSUE.

I APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WITH US.

I FEEL THAT'S THE JOB OF CITY STAFF AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY IS THAT NOBODY HAS BEEN -- WE DIDN'T SEE A BUDGET FOR THIS PARK UNTIL THIS WEEKEND.

THAT'S QUITE UNFORTUNATE.

>> I NEED INTERJECT.

THE BUDGET WAS ORIGINALLY PROVIDED WHEN THE GRANT APPLICATION WAS DONE.

THEN THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT THAT WAS PURCHASED THIS PAST YEAR WAS NOT $60,000.

IT WAS, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE $20,000, $30,000.

SMALL COMPONENT, SWING, TINY COMPONENTS THAT COULD FIT INTO A TINY AREA THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE PARK TO BE.

WHEN YOU DO A PARK, YOU DO THE DESIGN, THEN YOU TAKE THINGS OUT TO FIT.

I CREATED THIS BUDGET JUST SO YOU GUYS COULD SEE HOW BUDGETS WORK.

IT'S NOT -- WE PUT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY, LIKE WHEN WE DID THE SHADE STRUCTURES, FOR EXAMPLE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WERE.

SAY THEY ARE $200,000.

YOU DIDN'T GET INTO THE NITTY GRITTY OF THIS SHADE STRUCTURE WAS 20, THIS WAS 50, THIS WAS I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH.

YOU CAN SEE AN AMOUNT AT ANY TIME.

THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

WE TYPICALLY DON'T SET FORTH A BUDGET UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN THE PARK AND NOTHING HAS YET BEEN TAKEN, SENT TO TRC, BUT NOTHING'S BEEN APPROVED.

SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE A SPECIFIC

[02:10:03]

BUDGET ON ANYTHING UNTIL TRC SAYS, YOU CAN HAVE THIS, YOU CAN HAVE THIS, YOU CAN'T HAVE THIS, YOU'VE GOT TO MOVE THIS.

ANYBODY CAN MAKE UP A BUDGET AND PUT NUMBERS IN THERE.

BUT UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT'S APPROVED, WHAT WE CAN ACTUALLY PUT IN AND WHAT THE IMPACT OF THESE ARE GOING TO BE, YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE -- I CAN'T MAKE UP A NUMBER, EVEN THOUGH THE NUMBERS THAT ARE ITEMIZED IN THAT BUDGET ARE PRETTY CLOSE.

I WOULD SAY THEY'R PRETTY CLOSE.

THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR PROCESS EXCEPT FOR MAYBE WHAT THE FUTURE COSTS WOULD BE.

WE ALWAYS HAVE THOSE, WHEN THINGS ARE SIGNED, YOU GET AN ESTIMATE FROM YEARS AGO WHERE YOU DON'T SIT DOWN AND GO, THESE ARE GOING TO BE 80.

WE HAVE TO BID IT OUT.

>> THAT'S INTERESTING.

WHAT HAS TO BE BIDDED OUT OF THIS PROJECT WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD?

>> 20,000.

>> 20,000 OR ABOVE.

>> RIGHT.

>> THERE'S JUST BARELY AT LEAST FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT OVER $20,000.

IF I'M GOING TO BUILD A HOUSE, I'M GOING TO DECIDE HOW MUCH I'M GOING TO SPEND ON THAT HOUSE.

MAYBE I'LL GO OVER A BIT, BUT I'LL HAVE A BUDGET FOR FLOORING.

I'M JUST SURPRISED THAT THAT'S NOT HOW BUILDING A PARK WORKS AS WELL.

THAT YOU DON'T DECIDE WHAT YOU HAVE TO SPEND AND THEN WORK FROM THERE.

THAT SCARES ME THAT WE CAN HAVE SO MUCH BUDGETED THIS YEAR FOR THE PARK, BUT AT WHAT POINT DOES THIS GET BIGGER AND BIGGER AND BIGGER? WE DON'T REALLY KNOW.

>> THAT'S WHY I REFERENCE THE GRANT APPLICATION.

WHEN WE DID THOSE ITEMS, THOSE WERE PROJECTIONS FOR EACH.

WE DID HAVE LIGHTING IN THERE, WHICH WE AREN'T GOING TO INCLUDE BECAUSE IT WILL BE A DAWN TO DUSK.

BUT THE REST ROOMS WERE IN THERE.

THE DIFFERENT ITEMS. THEY'VE GONE UP A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A YEAR AND A HALF, BUT THE NUMBERS ARE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS WHAT'S IN THE GRANT.

>> IT'S ABOUT $50,000 MORE.

THE GRANT WAS 400.

I KNOW YOU DID IT TO MEET THAT 400 WHEN YOU DID THE GRANT.

>> RIGHT.

>> THIS PROPOSAL CAME IN AT ANOTHER 50,000.

WHICH IS FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT.

>> WE HAVE ADDITIONAL SPONSORS NOW, TOO, PARTNERS.

>> WE ALSO WEREN'T PROVIDED WITH A COPY OF THE GRANT.

I HAVEN HERE WHEN THIS DISCUSSION STARTED BUT THIS BOARD SHOULD HAVE SEEN A COPY OF THAT GRANT APPLICATION WHEN IT WAS APPLIED FOR.

>> YOU DID.

>> I THINK WE DID.

YOU HAD YOUR GRANT READER COME IN HERE AND READ THE PRESENTATION.

>> IT WAS VERY OPEN.

>> YEAH.

LORILEI.

>> VERY QUICK OCTOBER 20TH 2018 WHEN THE WHOLE SUBJECT OF MOVING THE GRANT FORWARD CAME TO THE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER ROSS SUGGESTED THERE'S A 23 ACRE BID THAT SURROUNDS THIS AND THAT SHOULD BE MOVED INTO CONSERVATION, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE QUESTION WAS, SO WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH THE REST OF THIS? IF THIS PARK DID NOT GO FORWARD, IN TERMS OF THE WALKING PATH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE COULDN'T TAKE THE SIX ACRES THAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS, AUDD IT TO THE 23, BRING T BACK TO THEM TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO CONSERVATION, WHICH MEANS NOBODY COULD DEVELOP IT.

I'M A FORMER NEW YORKER.

I GET WHAT YOUR CONCERN IS.

BUT THEY ARE ALREADY WORKING ON THE SURROUNDING ACREAGE.

THERE IS A WAYS TO GO WITH THIS.

THAT IS TO TURN IT BACK INTO THE LARGER AGGREGATE PARCEL AND ACCESS ALL OF THIS BE DEDICATED CONSERVATION.

THEY ARE WORKING ON IT.

IF THAT'S HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT ALL OF THIS.

>> SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO TABLE THIS AND DISCUSS IT AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION?

>> I'LL SECOND IT JUST FOR SAKE OF DISCUSSION.

DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T VOTE FOR IT.

I'LL SECOND IT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION.

>> ALL IN FAVOR.

ALL OPPOSED.

>> AYE AYE.

AYE.

>> OKAY.

SO --

>> WHAT WAS THE VOTE?

>> THERE WAS A MOTION ON THE TABLE THAT WE TABLE IT SO THAT WE CAN GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY.

[02:15:02]

>> CAN I SIT DOWN?

>> YES, SIT DOWN, PLEASE.

>> I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO FURTHER DISCUSS.

>> OKAY.

>> COMMISSIONER ROSS AT THE FIRST HEARING COMMISSION DID DIRECT CITY STAFF TO PUT THE REMAINING ACREAGE INTO CONSE CONSERVATION.

I WOULD SUPPORT MOVING THIS PARK FORWARD, IF WE COULD ADD SOME V VERBIAGE ABOUT PUTTING THE 20 ACRES IN THERE.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING WITH THE GRANT WAS, MY REASON FOR LOOKING AT THAT, WHEN YOU APPLIED FOR THAT GRANT, CONTINGENT UPON TAKING THE 200,000, THE MATCH, HAD TO GO INTO A PERMANENT CONSERVATION.

THAT WAS SORT OF OVERSEEN BY A LARGER ENTITY OTHER THAN JUST THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

>> IF THAT WAS ONE OF THE INCENTIVES.

>> AND SO IF YOU CHANGE THAT IN ANY WAY, YOU HAD TO PAY BACK THE GRANT MONEY.

BUT IF WE JUST LET OUR CITY COMMISSION SAY, WELL, WE'RE GONNA PUT IT IN CONSERVATION, CAN THEY NOT AT SOME POINT CHANGE THAT DESIGNATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT A STATE OF FLORIDA MANDATED CONSERVATION? THEY COULD JUST AS EASILY SAY, WE'D LIKE TO PUT IT BACK TO RESIDENTIAL AND PUT IT UP FOR A COMMERCIAL BIRKED RIGHT? -- A COMMERCIAL BID, RIGHT?

>> NO.

>> YOU HAVE TO CHANGE IT INTO CONSERVATION.

>> IF THEY CHANGE IT INTO CONSERVATION, CAN THEY EVER CHANGE IT OUT AGAIN?

>> I CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

>> I THINK THEY HAVE TO CHANGE THE --

>> THEY'D HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMISSION FOR A VOTE AND CHANGE THE ENTIRE COMPLEX.

>> THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS OF ENSURING THAT A SITE THE CONSERVED IN PERPITUITY.

IT COULD BE A RECREATIONAL TYPE OF A CONSERVATION SITE.

IN A CONTRACT WRITTEN AROUND THE SITE, THAT DOES ENSURE THAT IT CANNOT BE CHANGED.

THAT IF IT IS CHANGED, THEN IT GOES TO ANOTHER PARTY.

OR YOU CAN HAVE A CONSERVATION EDICT PLACED ON THE PARCEL AND PLACE IT IN PERPITUITY.

THERE ARE WAYS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PARCEL.

>> I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT YOU CAN BIND A PROPERTY IN PURPITUITY.

THE STATE COULD, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY CAN.

>> THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL COUNSEL.

I THINK THAT IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF TODAY.

THAT MIGHT BE A FURTHER RECOMMENDATION WE CAN MAKE SEPARATE OF.

WHATEVER MOTION WE MAKE TONIGHT HAS TO BE A SINGLE ISSUE MOTION AND NOT HAVE TOO MANY RIDERS ATTACHED TO IT.

WE CAN MAKE FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDATIONS THAT SAY WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU EXPAND THE CONSERVATION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PARCEL FOR FUTURE.

>> BEFORE YOU MAKE A MOTION, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I STILL HAVE A REALLY BIG PROBLEM THAT A BUNCH OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WAS PURCHASED FOR A PLAYGROUND THAT ISN'T DESIGNED YET AND A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO PUTTING TOGETHER A PRESENTATION THAT WE DID WANT TO SEE AS A PLAYGROUND THERE AND THAT DID NOT INCLUDE PLAY SURFACES, IT WAS NATURAL SURFACES.

I WOULD EXPECT THAT IF WE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS TODAY, I WOULD EXPECT THAT IN THE DESIGN OF THAT, THOUGH LOT OF -- MOST OF THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT AND THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT WE CAN DO.

BUT IN THE DESIGN OF THAT TO WORK WITH THIS BOARD IN MAKING SURE THAT REFLECTS MORE THE VISION OF WHAT WE HAD WHEN WE EMBARKED ON THIS PROCESS TO BEGIN WITH.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> ARE WE READY? OKAY.

>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING?

>> OKAY.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT IF THE PARKS AND RECREATION

[02:20:01]

ADVISORY BOARD THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE COMMISSION THAT THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK PROCEED FORWARD IN WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH EIGHT FLAGS PLAY SCAPE AS THE FURTHER DECISIONS ON THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION MOVE ON.

>> I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO ALSO, WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE PURSUED TO PUT THE ACREAGE --

>> I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A SECOND MOTION FOR THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYONE -- BECAUSE THEY'RE SO DIFFERENT, I DON'T KNOW â– THATBOTHWOULD GET THE VOTES.

THE VOTES MAY BE DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON THE INCLUSION OF THAT.

>> IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION.

RIGHT.

>> IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.

>> IF SOMEONE WANTED TO VOTE NO ON MY MOTION, I WOULDN'T WANT THEM TO BE VOTING NO ON THE CONSERVATION ASPECT OF IT.

>> I SECOND THE MOTION.

>> ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE, AYE.

AYE.

>> OPPOSED.

>> WHEN NAN IS DONE TYPING, I'LL MAKE A SECOND MOTION.

LET HER CATCH UP.

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

WHAT WAS THAT MOTION? I DIDN'T HEAR IT FOR THE SECOND ONE.

>> THAT THIS COMMITTEE --

>> SHE DIDN'T MAKE IT YET.

SHE CAN NOW.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT THIS COMMITTEE ALSO RECOMMENDS TO THE COMMISSION A MOTION THAT THE --

>> I'M SORRY.

I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING.

RECOMMEND --

>> RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY PURSUE PUTTING THE ACREAGE, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT, ACRE THAT'S BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED PUT INTO CONSERVATION.

>> I THINK IT'S A 30 ACRE AREA WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT PARCELS.

THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS 6.5, I THINK.

THEY'RE SIX DIFFERENT PARCELS.

>> YOU CAN READ IT BACK TO US.

>> TO BE ALL OF IT.

>> YOU RECOMMEND TO THE CITY THAT THEY PURSUE ALL THE ADJACENT PARCELS, CITY OWNED PARCELS, ARE PUT INTO ZONED AS CONSERVATION.

IS THAT CORRECT?

>> I WOULD WANT IN IT WHATEVER CAN BE ZONED CONSERVATION.

WHATEVER IS LEFT.

>> I THINK THE REMAINING -- IT'S ALL RECREATION RIGHT NOW.

>> I HAVE A MESSAGE.

SHE REMINDED ME THAT RECREATION LAND CAN'T BE SOLD WITHOUT GOING THROUGH --

>> A REFERENDUM.

>> WITHOUT COMMISSION APPROVAL.

THEN GOES TO REFERENDUM.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT'S BEEN ATTEMPTED TWO OR THREE TIMES.

>> IT'S RECREATION ZONED.

I DON'T SEE THAT IT GOES TO REFERENDUM.

>> I'M CONFUSED.

THAT PARCEL OF RECREATION LAND THAT WAS SOLD FROM THE Y NEVER WENT TO REFERENDUM.

>> IT'S ONLY CITY PROPERTY.

THEY CAN CHANGE THE ZONING.

>> THEY GAVE IT TO YMCA WITH THE INTENT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE USED, BUT IT DOESN'T BELONG TO THE YMCA.

>> IT'S ONLY CITY OWNED PROPERTY THAT WOULD HAVE TO.

OKAY.

>> THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WITH THE BACK PARCELS THAT HAVE THE FAA FLY RESTRAINT ON IT.

THEY HOLD A LOT OF SAY IN THAT, AS TO HOW IT'S ZONED AND USED.

>> CAN YOU READ THAT BACK FOR US, NAN?

>> RECOMMENDS THE CITY PURSUE STARTING THE ADJACENT RECREATION PARCELS TO THE SIMMONS PARCEL INTO CONSERVATION, ZONING IT CONSERVATION.

>> NOW, WOULD THAT AFFECT PUTTING IT POTENTIALLY JUST A DIRT TRAIL THROUGH THE OTHER PARCEL?

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

[02:25:02]

>> OKAY.

>> THERE'S PRETTY MUCH AN EXISTING FOOT PATH IN THERE NOW THAT CAN MEANDER DOWN.

IT'S A NATURAL -- WELL, IT'S MAN MADE, BUT IT'S A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

>> MOSQUITOS CONTROL THAT OVER THERE.

>> RIGHT.

>> NAN SAID SHE DOESN'T THINK SO.

>> DOESN'T THINK WHAT?

>> YOU SAID YOU DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM.

>> NO.

WE WOULD HAVE TO CHECK.

>> RIGHT.

>> SO DO YOU WANT TO VOTE TO PUT ALL THAT LAND INTO CONSERVATION, ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF PUTTING ANY HIKING TRAILS IN THAT PROPERTY.

>> HOW ABOUT YOU RECOMMEND THAT MAYBE THEY RESEARCH IT TO SEE IF CHANGING THE ZONING TO CONSERVATION WOULD IMPACT THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING NATURAL WALKING PATHS THROUGH THE AREA.

>> YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION --

>> YEAH.

>> YOU CAN ALWAYS CHANGE IT AT THE NEXT MEETING, TOO.

>> AS A SEPARATE MOTION NEXT WEEK.

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY.

>> WE'LL JUST LEAVE IT WHERE IT IS THEN.

>> DO YOU WANT TO NOT SECOND THIS AT THIS POINT?

>> I MADE THE MOTION.

>> YOU MEANT WITHDRAW IT.

>> NOBODY HAS SECONDED IT.

>> SHE DOESN'T NEED TO.

UNLESS SOMEBODY SECONDS IT.

>> OKAY.

>> I THINK I GOT THAT.

>> OKAY.

>> WHAT WAS ON THE AGENDA?

>> WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING TO THE COMMISSION THAT WE WANT STUFF TO GO INTO CONSERVATION?

>> NOT AT THIS TIME.

>> DON'T YOU WANT ME TO MAYBE CHECK ON THAT?

>> THE MEETING IS TUESDAY.

>> DID YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE MOTION?

>> DO YOU WANT TO EDIT THE MOTION MAYBE?

>> YEAH.

I THINK THAT RECOMMENDATION NEEDS TO GO TO THE COMMISSION.

>> YES, I AGREE.

>> SAY WHATEVER PARCEL WOULD NOT IMPACT FUTURE FITNESS WHATEVER TRAILS GO INTO --

>> HOW ABOUT IF WE WERE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND PUTTING ALL OF THE REMAINING LAND INTO CONSERVATION PROVIDED THAT DOESN'T AFFECT THE ABILITY TO PUT FUTURE WALKIN PATHS THROUGH.

>> THAT'S FINE.

>> OKAY.

>> -- ONLY IF THIS WOULD NOT ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF FUTURE WALKING TRAILS.

>> I SECOND THAT.

>> OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ALL AYES?

>> ALL AYES.

>> THANK YOU FOR ASKING THAT

[Item 4.2]

QUESTION.

SO WE HAVE A MASTER PLAN.

>> THANK YOU, BENJAMIN.

>> NEXT TIME WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT SIMMONS PARK.

WE CAN WORK ON FINISHING UP THE MASTER PLANS AT OUR NEXT WEEKEND.

WE WILL OPEN UP WITH THAT.

OUR PERSON FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT.

I HAVEN'T ADJOURNED YET.

WE'LL DISCUSS THAT NEXT TIME.

>> GOT YOU.

>> WE WILL START THE NEXT MEETING WITH THE MASTER PLAN.

AND THAT I HAVE -- IS IT OKAY IF I HAVE THE KEEP THE REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM BECAUSE SHE MADE

[Items 5 & 6]

NOTES HA SHE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT CENTRAL PARK.

I DON'T WANT TO HOLD YOU UP, BUT BEFORE WE ADJOURN, IN THE INTEREST OF GETTING A FORUM ON THIS BOARD AN MOVING THINGS FORWARD WE NEED EVERYBODY'S APPLICATION FOR THE NEW BOARD MEMBER.

CAN WE VOTE ON THAT REAL QUICK?

>> UNDER DISCUSSION.

HOLD ON.

>> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO DISCUSS?

[02:30:03]

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR THE BOARD MEMBER.

>> I SECOND IT.

>> DID EVERYBODY SEE IT?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION.

>> I SECOND THAT.

>> ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSED?

>> OKAY.

WE'LL SEE YOU, HOPEFULLY, NEXT MEE MEETING.

>> THE REASON YOU WEREN'T GETTING STUFF, WE ARE REQUIRED TO PUT EVERYTHING ON A WEEK BEFORE THE AGENDA.

I JUST GOT THE DESIGN YESTERDAY FOR WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR.

WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT UNLESS IT'S ON THE AGENDA.

>> YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT.

>> I DON'T GET ALL OF IT.

I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.

>> OKAY.

THAT'S IT.

ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 6:32.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT.

LET'S GO.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.