Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Items 1 - 3]

[00:00:03]

>> DUAL ORDER THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY.

ROLL CALL.

>> WE'RE GOOD. WE NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

>> I SO MOVE. >> I HAVE 'QUESTION.

DID WE NOT APPROVE AT THE LAST MEETING?

>> YEAH. >> THE OTHER ONE.

THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE THAT CAME IN.

>> NOT BY THE COMMISSION. BY US.

>> ANOTHER PERSON HAS APPLIED WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED.

>> WHY DON'T WE TALK ABOUT IT? >> BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED SO I

SENT IT OUT THE YOU. >> WE CAN'T HEAR.

WOULD YOU USE YOUR MICROPHONES PLEASE.

>> ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL APPLIED TO THE COMMITTEE.

AND WEATHER SERVICE PROVED THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION. AND I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE MINUTES. IF WE DIDN'T DO THAT, WHEN DO WE

PUT FORTH THAT RECOMMENDATION? >> I'LL PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

WE'RE WAITING FOR YOU GUYS TO DISCUSS THE MEETING TIMES AND DATES AND NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

>> DO WE I HAVE V A COPY OF THE APPLICATION?

>> I EMAILED IT TO YOU. >> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> THAT WON'T CHANGE IT? >> IT WON'T CHANGE IT.

>> GOT YOU. >> I WANT TO SECOND MOTION.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SH. >> ALL AGAINST? SO THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF WHICH WE'LL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'M GOING GO IN ORDER THAT I RECEIVE THEM.

NAN, IF YOU WANT TO BE THE TIME KEEPER.

>> IT'S RIGHT HERE. >> SO JUST A REMINDER.

[Item 4]

EVERYONE WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

LET'S START WITH ALEXANDRIA. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. I LIVE AT 646 SPANISH WAY EAST IN FERNANDINA BEACH IN THE CITY. AS A DECLARED CANDIDATE FOR CITY COMMISSION GROUP TWO I'M FOCUSED ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY BUT I BELIEVE STEWARDSHIP PLAY ACE KEY ROLE.

THE 6.5-ACRE PATCH OF LAND OFF SIMMONS ROAD CURRENTLY DESIGNATED FOR A PARK IS A RARE ASSET TO THE CITY THAT SHOULD BE GUARD. IT'S COMPOSED OF 90 TREES AND A NATURAL ECOSYSTEM OF WILDLIFE WHICH IS ONE OF THE LAST REFUGES IN THE CITY. COST US NOTHING KEEP AS IT IS.

COST US LITTLE TO ENHANCE THE CURRENT PLAN TO CIRCULATE ANDA

[00:05:01]

PIERCE TO BE A WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY.

I CAN SEE THE VALUE OF HAVING PARKS NEARBY FOR FAMILIES ON THE SOUTH END BUT WE LIVE ON A SMALL ISLAND AND THE NORTH IS ONLY SECONDS AWAY. ONE WAY TO ENHANCE THE VALUE OF THE ASSET FOR BOTH PUBLIC ENJOYMENT AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WOULD HONOR THE CONCEPT OF A LOW IMPACT PARK RATHER THAN CHANGE IT TO AN EXPENSIVE CONCRETED PARK.

DO WE WANT TO BECOME A POST RACHIAL FOR THE SONG THAT GOES PUT UP A PARKING LOT. AND EXPEND FUND TO DO SO.

DETAILED IDEAS FOR KEEPING THE PARK TRUE WHAT THE COMMISSION ORIGINALLY VOTED. PLEASE READ HER LETTER AND TAKE HER ADVICE TO HEART. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

[Additional Item]

>> THEY NEED TALK TO THEM. THE COMMISSION ON THE 1ST.

>> I GOT A QUESTION. WITH REGARDS TO SIMMONS PARK.

AFTER WE HAVE THIS VOTE, I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW POPULAR I WAS. I'VE BEEN APPROACHED IN WAL-MART. I'VE BEEN APPROACHED HERE WHEN WE LEFT. I'VE BEEN APPROACHED AT THE INTERMISSION FOR LEADING LADIES ON THIS VERY SAME ISSUE.

I'M GLAD THAT FOLKS ARE SO ENERGIZED.

IN ALL THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD NO ONE HAS SAID THEY DIDN'T WANT A RECREATION AREA. BUT OVERWHELMINGLY I GOT QUESTIONED ON ONE WHY WE ONLY HAD ONE OPTION TO LOOK AT AND VOTE ON. WHAT WAS THE TOU RUSH TO GET IT DONE? THE BIGGEST ISSUE AND CONCERN I HAVE WAS THAT FOLKS DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THIS WAS A GOOD PROCESS.

THAT THIS WAS A RUSHED PROCESS THAT -- AND ONE OF THE BIG QUESTIONS I KEPT GETTING WAS WHY DID WE PURCHASE THE MATERIAL FOR THE PLAYGROUND AND THEN HAVE A VOTE FOR IT.

I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. PERSONALLY I LIKE THE PARK.

I VOTED FOR IT. HOWEVER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BOTHERS ME IS MY COMMUNITY MEMBERS DON'T FEEL LIKE THIS WAS A FAIR PROCESS. TO ME THE BIGGER ISSUE, I'M A VET. YESTERDAY I CELEBRATED VETERANS

DAY. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

>> MY FAMILY HAS A BENCH AT THE MEMORIAL PARK.

ONE THING WE DID FIGHT FOR IT WAS DEMOCRATIC PROCESS , THE FEELING EVERYBODY HAS THAT THE PROCESS OPEN, FAIR AND THAT EVERYBODY HAS A VOICE. THIS IS A PARK.

THERE ARE SO MANY UNHAPPY PEOPLE WITH THIS PARK AS A RESULT OF THIS VOTE THAT I'M MAKING A MOTION THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR VOTE. THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR VOTE AND THAT I TO TOODOWN DUE DILIGENCE I STARTED RESEARCHING WHAT WAS GOING ON AND A REAL ISSUE. I'M GETTING A LOT OF FLAK BECAUSE PEOPLE LOST FAITH IN OUR GOVERNMENT.

BECAUSE WE DID THIS LOOKED LIKE A FOREGONE CONCLUSION.

AND I DON'T PARTICULARLY LIKE HAVING THAT FEELING.

I SUPPORT THE PARK. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

[00:10:02]

BUT ONE WE DIDN'T GET TO LOOK AT ANY OTHER OPTIONS.

OTHER THAN THAT ONE OPTION. AND IT'S A GREAT OPTION I AGREE.

BUT THERE IS PROBABLY SOME OTHER ONES.

OUR COLLEAGUE, ERIC, HAS BEEN SAYING TIME AND TIME AGAIN THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME OTHER OPTIONS WE CAN LOOK AT.

INVESTIGATE SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE THOROUGHLY VET THIS PROCESS AND THOROUGHLY VET THE CHOICES WE HAVE.

MOST PEOPLE, ALMOST EVERYBODY I TALKED TO WANT SOME KIND OF RECREATION THERE. IT'S JUST THE TYPE OF RECOMMENDATION IS A CONCERN. I DON'T WANT TO BE THE STICK IN THE MUD SLOWING DOWN THIS PROCESS BUT I WANT TO GET IT RIGHT BECAUSE THE BIGGER ISSUE I WANT PEOPLE THE HAVE FAITH IN WHAT WE'RE DOING UP HERE AND NOT JUST WE'RE RUBBER STAMPING SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROCESS. MY MOTION IS I MOVE THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR VOTE SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS, THOROUGHLY VET THE PROCESS AND MAKE SURE WHAT WE APPROVE IS

REALLY WHAT WE WANT. >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> I THINK THAT KNOW N THAT MOTION, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I FEEL LIKE YOU NEED TO MOVE TO CANCEL OUR VOTE AND REVOTE.

LIKE JUST RECONSIDER. I FEEL LIKE YOU NEED A MORE DEFINITIVE. I'M NOT TELLING YOU NOT TO MAKE IT BUT IN THE WAY YOU ARE PHRASING IT.

MAKE IT MORE DEFINITIVE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING TO US DO.

>> I MOVE THAT WE RESCIND THE PREVIOUS VOTE.

WE LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS, WE CONSIDER SOME OTHER OPTIONS AND WE TRULY VET PROCESS SO FOLKS FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN OPEN

PROCESS. >> YOU CAN'T RESCIND THE VOTE.

>> WHY? >> WE CAN'T RECONSIDER IT?

>> ABSOLUTELY RECONSIDER IT BECAUSE IT WAS YOUR LAST MEETING IS MY UNDERSTANDING YOU VOTED ON IT.

YOU CAN MAKE THAT MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

GET A SECOND AND IF THAT MOTION PASSES, ALL THAT -- IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE PLAN IS BACK ON THE FLOOR OR ON THE TABLE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND YOU CAN DECIDE WHAT YOU DO WITH

THE PLAN FROM THERE. >> I'LL MOVE TO RECONSIDER.

>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. >> ONE THING TO INSERT HERE.

JUST TIMING WISE. THIS IS I THINK REGARDLESS OF HOW WE VOTE ON THIS NOW IT'S STILL GOING BEFORE THE COMMISSION. THAT'S STILL GOING TO GO TO

THEM. >> CORRECT.

>> AND FOR TODAY'S PURPOSES AS FAR AS EVERYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK, THAT'S STILL GOING TO GO TO THEM.

>> PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD RECONSIDER THE VOTE.

>> YES. >> SO ALL IN FAVOR SH.

>> >> PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPROVAL

OF THE SIMMONS PARK. >> IS THAT.

>> YES. >> I'D LIKE TO ADD A COMMENT AND THAT WE LOOK AT SOME OTHER OPTIONS.

BECAUSE THAT WAS ONLY OPTION WE HAD.

>>. I WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE MEETING MY DAUGHTER WAS GETTING MARRIED OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

I DID GO BACK AND LISTEN TO ALL 2 AND A HALF HOURS.

I HEARD THROUGH BOTH OF THOSE MEETINGS.

>> IT WAS NOT ORDINARY CARAL INTENT OR PLAN THAT WAS BROUGHT

[00:15:03]

TO US AND A LACK OF CONCERN FOR THE PROCESS OF HAVING THIS COMMITTEE PARTICIPATE IN SOME OF THIS PLANNING.

AS I LISTEN TO THAT AND AGREE WITH WHAT MIKE IS SAYING IS SOMETHING I FEEL WE NEED TO CONSIDER.

ONE OF THE COMMENS BY JOY AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING WAS ARE WE USING THIS AS A PLACE HOLDER WITH THE CONCERN EXPRESSIBLE.

WE DON'T PUT SOMETHING THERE , THE CITY IS GOING TO THE NEXT COMMISSION IS GOING TO COME IN AND SELL IT, IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPMENT. TAMMY WASN'T HERE, WE DON'T HAVE A LEGAL REFERENCE. BUT THE FACT IS THAT LAND CAN'T BE CHANGED FROM THE CURRENT ZONING UNLESS IT GOES TO REFERENDUM. IT'S NOT THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONERS. WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WHEN WE MADE THIS DECISION. I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM WE HAD TO VOTE AT THE LAST MEETING.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAME DOWN FROM THE ADMINISTRATION.

WE WERE TOLD YOU HAVE TO VOTE. WITH ALL THOSE THINGS AND NOT REALLY KNOWING WHAT COULD HAPPEN TO THAT PIECE OF LAND IF WE DIDN'T DO SOMETHING TO PRESERVE IT I FEEL WAS A PREMATURE VOTE AND NEVER FELT COMFORTABLE THE PROCESS.

I'VE BEEN APPROACHED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE AND I'M HEARING SOME OF THE SAME THINGS AND I JUST THINK IT'S TIME TO TAKE A STEP BACK, LOOK AT THE PROCESS, LOOK AT THE OPTIONS SO THAT YOU AS RESIDENTS AND US AS A COMMITTEE FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE MADE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMITTEE THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH.

I THANK MIKE FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO THEN BECAUSE I'M ASSUMING THAT IS WHAT MOST OF THESE SPEAKING COMMENTS ARE ABOUT.

AND SINCE YOU WOULD LIKE TO US DISCUSS FURTHER AND THAT IS GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME. IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THE MEETING TIME AND DATE CHANGE AND THE NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS AN JUST GET THE PECK CENTER UPDATE.

BECAUSE THOSE ARE QUICK BULLETTITE HAPPENS WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE THROUGH QUICKLY AND THEN WE CAN DEVOTE A LARGER PORTION OF THE TIME TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND BOARD DISCUSSION.

BUT JUST SO WE CAN GET THOSE TWO ITEMS OUT OF THE WAY IF NO ONE HAS ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT. OK.

[Item 5.1]

SO THE MEETING TIME AND DATE CHANGE , THE DISCUSSION FOR THE MEETING TIME CHANGE IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS MEETING AT 4:00.

AND SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY ATTEND THESE MEETINGS. A LOT -- A FEW OF THE ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS ARE AT 6:00. THERE IS AN OPENING FOR MONDAYS, THE SECOND MONDAY OF EVERY MONTH AT 6:00.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU -- >> I'M COMMITTED EVERY MONDAY.

>> OK. >> IS THAT THE ONLY ONE?

>> THAT'S EVERY TUESDAY. >> WHAT ABOUT A DIFFERENT DAY

OTHER THAN MONDAY. >> THEY ALL HAVE MEETINGS.

>> FRIDAYS ARE OPEN. >> THAT'S A ROUGH ONE.

>> LOOKS LIKE -- HOLD ON. LET ME TAKE A LOOK REAL QUICK HERE. IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OTHER THING WHILE I LOOK AT THE CALENDAR.

>> MOVING FROM 7 BACK DOWN TO FIVE.

>> THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE COMMISSION MEETING LAST TUESDAY

NIGHT I BELIEVE. >> I WAS AT THAT MEETING AND THERE WAS SOME INFORMATION EXCHANGED, I JUST SENT THE COMMISSIONERS A FOLLOWUP EMAIL CLARIFYING HOW MANY MEETINGS WERE MISSED. WE MISSED THE FEBRUARY MEETING DUE TO LACK OF A QUORUM AND WE POLICE I BELIEVE THE JUNE MEETING BECAUSE THERE WAS A MISTAKE ON THE TIME.

SAID 9:00 INSTEAD OF 4:00. WE RESCHEDULED A WORKSHOP IN LIEU OF THAT. THERE HAS BEEN ISSUES WITH MEETINGS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE MEETINGS THAT WE COULD PUT IN THE GRANT. I ACTUALLY PROPOSED THIS LAST YEAR THAT WE GO DOWN TO FIVE BECAUSE WE WERE MISSING TOO MANY MEETINGS. WE NEVER EVEN TOOK A VOTE ON IT.

WE KNOW IT'S NOT OUR DECISION, IT'S THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION. I WANT TO CLARIFY IT DID COME UP. THERE IS AN APPLICATION FOR

[00:20:04]

ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL TO COME ON. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CHANGES PEOPLE'S OPINIONS ABOUT IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CHANGES THE COMMISSIONERS BUT IT DID COME UP PRIOR TO THE VOTE.

THAT AND THE TIME, CHANGING THE TIME.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF IT DOES GO FROM 2075 THEN FAITH

WOULD BECOME AN ALTERNATE. >> YES AND WE'D HAVE TWO ALTERNATES. LIKE TONIGHT WE DON'T HAVE THE CHAIR. SHE SAID SHE COULDN'T MAKE IT.

WE DEFINITELY NEED TWO ALTERNATES IF NOTHING ELSE.

I JUST CHECKED. HOW DOES WEDNESDAY LOOK FOR YOU GUYS? WEDNESDAYS AT 6:00.

>> 6:00 IS KIND OF LATE. >> I JUST FEEL LIKE IF WE'RE DOING AN HOUR AND A HALF, SOMETIMES IT GOES OVER.

>> 5:00 IS -- >> THE INTENT IS TO GET THE PUBLIC HERE, I DON'T KNOW IF 5:00 IS OK OR NOT.

I DON'T HAVE KIDS SO IT'S NOT AN ISSUE FOR ME.

>> I GOT A SOCCER GAME. >> TONIGHT.

>> YEAH. >> ON TV.

>> NO, MY DAUGHTER IS PLAYING. >> IT STARTS AT 6:00.

>> WE'RE AN HOUR AND A HALF. WE'LL STICK TO THAT.

>> IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE TIME AND DATE. I'M JUST SUPPOSED TO BRING IT

UP. >> DOES WEDNESDAY AT 6:00 WORK?

>> >> WORKS FOR ME.

I WOULD PREFER EARLIER. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS DINNER TIME.

>> I HAVE TO CHANGE MY SCHEDULE BECAUSE WE SWITCHED IT BEFORE FROM WEDNESDAY TO. I MADE THE ACCOMMODATION.

I WORK AT MAY PORT. >> I'M FINE WITH LEAVING IT HOW IT IS. BASED ON THE PAST TWO MEETINGS

WE SEEM TO HAVE OK TURNOUT. >> I'D RATHER KEEP IT TUESDAY.

WE CAN MAKE IT LATER TUESDAY. TUESDAY IS A BETTER DAY FOR ME.

>> I WOULD BE FINE MOVING IT TO 5:00 ON TUESDAYS.

I FEEL LIKE 6:00 IS RIGHT SMACK IN THE DINNER TIME HOUR.

>> I THINK YOU CAN DO 6:00. >> CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOPS AND

MEETINGS ON TUESDAYS. >> VERY GOOD POINT.

>> IF IT'S GOING TO BE LATER IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO

BE A DIFFERENT DAY. >> GETTING BACK TO THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS. SINCE WE HAVE ANOTHER APPLICANT AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR A NEW TIME, ROY POSE THAT WE KEEP IT

AT 7 AT LEAST FOR NOW. >> DOES HA CHANGE THE QUORUM

AMOUNT? >> YES.

>> NO. IF YOU CHANGE IT TO FIVE, YOUR QUORUM WOULD BE THREE. JUST HAS TO BE MAJORITY.

>> IF WE NOW HAVE TWO NEW MEMBERS, THERE IS A MUCH BETTER CHANCE OF HAVING A QUORUM. IF WE HAVE IT AT A LATER TIME.

THAT WOULD BE EVEN BETTER. >> IF WE CAN ADD ALTERNATES.

>> I DON'T THINK YOU ARE GOING TO GET ALTERNATES IF YOU HAVE A 7 MEMBER COMMITTEE. 7 MEMBERS IS LARGE.

>> THAT'S A LOT. >> I AGREE.

>> YOU HAVE 7, YOU HAVE FOUR. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO KEEP

IT 71234. >> DO WE NEED A MOTION OR IS IT

A DISCUSSION? >> I WOULD RECOMMEND MAKING A

MOTION. >> WOULD WE NEED TO DO THAT

UNLESS WE RECOMMEND A CHANGE. >> I WOULD ADVICE.

YOU ARE RECOMMENDING TO THEM YOU KEEP IT AT 7.

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE KEEP THE PARKS REC ADVISORY COMMITTEE NUMBER OF MEMBERS AT 7. FOR THE TIME BEING.

>> OK. >> SEE HOW IT GOES.

>> NEEDS A SECOND. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> YOU WANT TO READ IT BACK FIRST?

>> I HAVE A MOTION TO KEEP THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY

[00:25:05]

COMMITTEE NUMBER AT 7 MEMBERS FOR THE TIME BEING.

>> ALL IN N FAVOR H? >> ALL AGAINST SH.

>> >> I'M LOOKING AT THURSDAYS, LOOKS LIKE THE FIRST THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH.

ERIC IS RIGHT A TUESDAY NIGHT WITH WORKSHOPS WOULD BE TOUGH.

LOOKS LIKE THE FIRST THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH.

>> Y'ALL FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO MOVE THIS LATE SENATOR.

>> I DO. LATER? >> I DO.

>> I FEEL LIKE IF YOU WANT PARTICIPATION, IT HELPS.

>> IT WAS THURSDAY AT 5:00. >> THURSDAY AT 5:00.

WAS THAT THE OPTION? >> THE FIRST THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH THERE IS A BOARD MEETING AT 5:30.

>> NOT IN HERE. >> MAY NOT BE ON THE CALENDAR.

>> FIRST THURSDAY -- >> I'M LOOKING AT THE CALENDAR.

>> I THINK THE PROBLEM IS THERE IS MEETING AFTER US.

>> TODAY. >> I DON'T KNOW.

>> >> WHO IS AFTER US ON THE SECOND

TUESDAY? >> TODAY?

>> JUST GENERALLY? >> WHO IS REGULARLY SCHEDULED

AFTER US? >> NOBODY.

>> THE CITY COMMISSION HAS THE FIRST AND THIRD.

>> DON'T THEY DO THOSE BEFORE THEIR MEETS?

>> NOT ALWAYS. SOMETIMES THEY HAVE WORKSHOP ON TUESDAY BETWEEN THE COMMISSION MEETINGS.

>> THAT WOULD BE THE SIMPLEST THING TO DO IS MOVE THE MEETING

TO 5:30. >> DO YOU WANT TO DO TUESDAY

MOVE IT TO 5:00? >> IS THAT AN OPTION?

>> YOU WOULD NEED TO LEAVE AT 6:00.

>> WE USED TO MEET FOR AN HOUR. WHEN WOULD WE NEED TO BE OUT OF

HERE? >> IF YOU RESERVE?

>> ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE FIRST THURSDAY OF THE MONTH?

>> TUESDAY STILL. >> SECOND TUESDAY.

>> IF WE CAN MAKE THIS LATER THAT WOULD BE FINE WITH ME.

>> LET'S SEE IF WE CAN. >> COULD WE ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE I THINK SHE KNOWS THE SCHEDULE REALLY WELL.

>> I HAVE THE SCHEDULE ON THE SCREEN.

IS THERE A PROBLEM OF DOING THIS ON TUESDAYS AT ESSENTIALLY 6:00?

>> NO. BECAUSE I THINK THAT YOU HAVE A STANDING MEETING HERE THE SECOND TUESDAY OF EVERY MONTH AND WE

HAVE A WORKSHOP SCHEDULED. >> I'VE LOOKED THROUGH MARCH AND THERE IS NOTHING AFTER US AT 4:00.

IF YOU WANT TO MOVE IT TO 5:00. >> I'D RATHER 6:00.

>> I THINK PEOPLE LIKE HE'S GOT KIDS THAT PLAY SPORTS.

SHE'S GOT LITTLE KIDS. >> START AT 5:00 AND IF SOMETHING CHANGES OR WE FEEL PEOPLE'S SCHEDULES ALLOW, WE'LL

CHANGE IT AGAIN. >> MAKE A MOTION.

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THIS MEETING TO THE SECOND TUESDAYS AT 5:00 P.M.

DO WE WANT TO DO THAT NEXT OR START JANUARY 1.

>> START IT NEXT, THAT'S FINE. >> BEGINNING DECEMBER.

>> I'LL SECOND IT. >> I'M HEARING A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THE MEETING TO THE SECOND TUESDAY AT 5:00 EFFECTIVE IN

DECEMBER. >> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> SECOND. >> ALL OPPOSED?

>> OK. SO NEXT IS THE CROSS FIT AREA.

[Item 5.2]

>> JASON BROWN IS HERE. AND I CAN KIND OF GO OVER IT WITH YOU. WE'LL PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN

HERE. >> IT'S ON THE AGENDA.

>> JUST NEED THE PICTURE. >> I THINK IT'S THIS ONE HERE.

[00:30:14]

>> JASON BROWN IS HERE AS WELL. WE HAD THIS ON THE LAST AGENDA ITEM. OR IF LAST AGENDA.

WE BROUGHT THIS TO YOU ALL FOR THE CROSS FIT.

AND NOW WHAT WE DETERMINED BASED ON THE IRRIGATION AND THE WAY IS FIELD LAID OUT CURRENTLY, IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR TO US TAKE D AND E. IF YOU SEE D AND E.

D IS THE CROSS FIT REGULAR, MOVE THAT TO THE BOTTOM WHICH BOWLED THE EAST OF THE FIELD WHERE IT'S CLOSE TO THAT EXISTING PAVILION BECAUSE NONE OF THE OTHER FEATURES IN RED CURRENTLY EXIST.

AND THEN THE PROPOSED E WHICH I? >> AN OBSTACLE COURSE WOULD APPROXIMATE MOVED WHERE THE CLAY IS NOW SO IT WOULDN'T INTERFERE WITH ANY EXISTING IRRIGATION THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE.

SO WE WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION BECAUSE OUR NEXT STEP IS TO PURCHASE THE CROSS FIT WHICH IS D , THE SMALL ITEM IN THE BUDGET. IT WILL BE INSTEAD OF OVER TO THE WEST, WE PROPOSE THAT WE MOVE IT TO THE EAST.

WE WANTED TO UPDATE YOU GUYS ON THAT.

TOTALLY TO THE EAST. SEE THE LITTLE PAVILION, TO THE

LEFT OF THAT. >> THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE

PROPOSING? >> RIGHT.

WE'RE PROPOSING TO MOVE D TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FIELD.

>> CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ON THE TRACK.

>> YES. >> YOU MENTIONED THIS EARLIER.

LET ME COME UP THERE. I LIVE IN THAT AREA AND I USE THIS AREA. A FAT BOY LIKE ME CAN'T MAKE A QUICK CORNER LIKE THAT. I WAS CURIOUS, CAN WE SMOOTH THIS OUT OR SOMETHING AND MAKE IT MORE LIKE A TRACK?

>> I MENTIONED THAT AT THE LAST MEETING.

IT WOULD BE MORE ROUNDED. >> HE CAN'T DRAW IT.

>> MAKE IT MORE OVAL THAT PEOPLE THAT WANT TO RUN DON'T HAVE TO

MAKE SHARP TURNS. >> ONE OF THE OTHER REASONS OF MOVING THAT -- EAST SIDE WAS AN ACCESSIBILITY ISSUE AS WELL.

IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS ACCESSIBLE CURRENTLY, WE WOULD TIE INTO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK THAT IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE FIELD.

>> DOWN BY THE PAVILION. >> THAT WAS ANOTHER FACTOR IN

MOVING IT ON THE OTHER SIDE. >> RIGHT.

>> THAT'S A SOCCER FIELD RIGHT? >> THE WHICH ONE?

>> THE I SIDEWAYS. >> THAT WAS A NETTING TO KEEP SOCCER BALLS FROM GOING. I WOULD GO OVER WHERE E IS.

WE'D STILL HAVE THAT AREA THERE FOR THE MULTIPURPOSE FIELD AND

SOCCER FIELD. >> I'M WONDERING SO E LOOKS LIKE

IT'S GOING TO BE -- >> E WOULD COME DOWN AS WELL.

>> SO THEN THE GRASS FIELD IS GOING TO GO UP WHERE HE IS.

>> IT'S EXISTING ALREADY. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO PULL THE --

>> THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE. >> CORRECT.

WHERE D.C. AND E ARE, THAT WOULD BE THE MULTIPURPOSE FIELD.

>> GOT YOU. >> YOU FLIP IT OVER.

>> OK. >> AND WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED IT YET AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT WE'RE CONSIDERING MOVING B IS A PAVILION, MOVING THAT DOWN TOWARDS WHERE THE EXISTING PAVILION IS AND EITHER EXPANDING IT OR REMOVING IT AND PUTTING IN A LARGER PAVILION.

BEFORE WE DO ANY OF THAT AND MAKE THE CHANGES TO THE SITE

[00:35:03]

PLAN, JASON WILL BRING IT BACK SO YOU CAN REVIEW IT.

NONE OF THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, ONLY D.

>> FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PURPOSES AND DISTURBED AREAS, ARE THERE GOING TO BE ANY RETENTION PONDS OR ANY TYPE OF STORMWATER REPERCUSSIONS ON THIS ONE.

>> NO, MA'AM NOT FOR THIS ONE. THERE IS AN EXISTING SWAIL.

THAT IS A VERY LARGE SWAIL RIGHT THERE.

SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

THIS IS VERY SANDY SOIL. IT PERCOLATES QUICKLY.

IT DOESN'T HOLD WATER. THE ANSWER IS NO.

>> IS THAT -- THERE IS CURRENTLY KIND OF LIKE A CLAY BASEBALL

AREA. >> IS THAT GOING TO STAY THERE?

>> NO. >> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT

WEST. >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING THE RECREATE THAT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GET ANY USE.

MOST OF THE USE IS MULTIPURPOSE FIELDS.

SOCCER AND FOOTBALL. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HURTING THE

MOST FOR. >> SO THAT IS GOING TO COME OUT

THEN? >> YES.

>> OK. >> THAT WILL BE WHERE THE

OBSTACLE COURSE IS. >> THE SURFACE FOR THAT OBSTACLE

COURSE IS ARTIFICIAL TURF. >> SO IT WILL LOOK NICE.

NO WEEDS OR SAND SPURS. >> OK.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT IS ANYTHING WE NEED TO VOTE ON OR MOTION ABOUT. IT'S JUST AN UPDATE RIGHT.

>> WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE OF THAT.

UNLESS YOU WANT TO. >> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO.

>> OK. >> JUST SO YOU KNOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE OF THE CROSS FIT, D.

SO THAT WON'T COME BACK HERE. JUST SO YOU KNOW.

IT'S GOING TO THE NEXT THING GOING TO THE COMMISSION.

AND YOU GUYS SAW THAT LAST MEETING.

IT'S NOT GOING TO COST THAT MUCH.

IMPACT FEES SO IT'S -- ENTER EQUIPMENT AND SURFACING AND ALL

OF THAT STUFF. >> FOR D.

>> 55,000 YOU SAID. >> IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN THAT BUT YES WE BUDGETED THAT AMOUNT.

>> WHAT ARE YOU THINKING IT WOULD COST TO DO THAT TRACK?

>> A LOT? >> WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT NEXT

YEAR. >> TRACKS ARE SURPRISINGLY

EXPENSIVE. >> ON THE PURPOSE FOR THE TRACK, IS THIS A RUNNING TRACK OR JUST A WALKING, RUNG TRAIL.

TRYING TO BEFORE TRIED TO TIE IN WITH THE FITNESS AREAS AS WELL.

I HAVE BEEN APPROACHED SEVERAL YEARS AGO FROM SOMEONE IN THAT COMMUNITY ABOUT HAVING A WALKING TRAIL THAT THE PARK.

AND SO ONE THAT GOT IN MY HEAD ALL THIS OTHER STUFF POPPED IN MY HEAD. KIND OF MAKE IT A FITNESS ORIENTED PARK BUT HAVE MULTIPURPOSE.

>> WE WERE IN A MEETING WITH LYNN AND COVERDALE.

YOU AND I WERE IN THAT MEETING WHEN THEY ASKED ABOUT THAT WALKING PATH. I GUESS MY REASON FOR ASKING IS IN THESE CENTRAL PARK PLAN, WE'VE APPROVED HAVING A WALKING TRAIL THIS GOES -- A WALKING TRAIL THAT GOES AROUND CENTRAL PARK. ARE WE BEING D DUPLICATIVE HERE.

>> THAT IS SOMETHING YOU GUYS CAN RECOMMEND WHETHER BOTH ARE NEEDED. RIGHT NOW THE CENTRAL PARK YOU GUYS HAVE APPROVED THE CENTRAL PARK PLAN.

THIS PLAN -- I DON'T HAVE IT. I BELIEVE YOU GUYS APPROVED NOT WITH THIS IN IT BUT LEAVING THE PECK CENTER IN ITS EXISTING FUNCTION. SO THIS IS NOT SET IN STONE.

[00:40:03]

IF YOU GUYS DECIDE -- IF THE FUNDS -- IF WE DO RECEIVE THE FUNDING FOR THE TRAIL AT CENTRAL PARK, YOU GUYS CAN MAKE THAT DECISION. THE CENTRAL PARK TRAIL IS GOING TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO

BE MUCH LARGER. >> THAT'S PART OF THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION IS THE DISTANCE, WHAT KIND OF BENEFIT ARE YOU GETTING FROM A WALKING TRAIL. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DISTANCE

IS? >> I HAVEN'T WALKED IT YET.

THAT'S WHAT I PLANNED ON DOING SOON.

>> IT'S THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BLOCKS IS 400 FEET IN THE CITY.

>> I DON'T KNOW. >> EAST TO WEST.

SO MAYBE IT'S 1200 FEET LONG ROUGHLY VERSUS THREE QUARTERS OF

A MILE AT CENTRAL PARK. >> RIGHT.

>> AND I THINK BECAUSE YOU ALREADY APPROVED THE CENTRAL PARK ONE WHETHER WALKING PATH IS INSTALLED HERE, REGARDLESS WE WOULD LIKE THE OFFER SOME FITNESS EQUIPMENT.

AND HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA AS IT'S BASICALLY JUST FILLED WITH A PAVILION.

>> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WHEN WE HAD THAT MEETING THAT I WAS PRESENT AT , THE WALKING PATH WAS PREFERRED OVER THE FITNESS EQUIPMENT. I'LL JUST PUT THAT OUT BECAUSE I WAS THERE. LET ME FINISH. THERE WERE TWO THINGS, THEY WANTED A LARGER PAVILION. AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BECAUSE YOU WERE THERE. THEY WANTED A LARGER PAVILION AND THEY WANTED JUST A WALKING PATH.

THE FITNESS STUFF IS NICE HAVE. BUT I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THE PRIORITY AT THE TIME FROM WHAT I REMEMBER.

>> DID THEY KNOW ABOUT THE CENTRAL PARK SNACK.

>> THAT DIDN'T COME UP. >> THAT CAME LATER.

>> THIS IS REALLY OLD. >> WE HAD THAT MEETING ALMOST

TWO YEARS AGO. >> ONE FINAL QUESTION ABOUT THE CROSS FIT EQUIPMENT, HOW DOES THAT DISH FROM THE EAGAN'S CREEK PARK EQUIPMENT ANY ASSUME IT DOES RIGHT RIGHT.

>> SOME OF THE FEATURES ON THIS MIMIC AT LEAST ONE AREA HOWEVER THIS IS MORE IF YOU REMEMBER BACK IN THE DAY LIKE A FITNESS TRAIL THAT HAD PUSHUP APPARATUS, CHIN UPS, DIFFERENT THINGS OF THAT NATURE. EAGAN'S CREEK PARK THAT'S MORE LIKE WHAT YOU WOULD SEE ANYWAY GYM.

THIS IS MORE ALL BODY WEIGHT. >> IF I'M INTO CROSS FIT WHICH OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT, I'M GOING GO HERE OR EAGAN'S CREEK OR BOTH?

>> YOU CAN DO BOTH. IT'S THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS.

PLUS THIS CROSS FIT PEOPLE CAN ATTACH STRAPS TO IT TO DO DIFFERENT TYPE OF THINGS, THEY CAN ATTACH TRANSCRIPTION -T.

RESISTANCE BANDS. IT OPENS UP MORE AVENUES FOR

DIFFERENT TYPES OF EXERCISE. >> IS IT GOING TO HAVE A SHADE

STRUCTURE OVER TOP? >> NOT AT THIS POINT.

>> IT'S VERY SUNNY. >> IT IS VERY SUNNY.

>> EVERYBODY IS GLAD THAT THE COVER CAME BACK FOR THE ONE AT

MLK. >> STILL WAITING FOR THE ONE AT

MAY BEACH. >> JUST A QUESTION.

THAT WALKING TRAIL, IS THERE GOING TO BE AN IMPACT FEE.

>> THAT'S THE PROPOSAL. >> IS THAT IN NEXT YEAR'S?

>> IT'S EARMARKED IN NEXT YEAR'S BUT THAT'S NOT BEEN APPROVED.

>> DID I MISS IT? I SEE THE CROSS FIT.

ARE YOU IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET IS THIS.

>> THIS IS 19-20. THE WALKING TRAIL NOT IN THERE.

>> I WAS NOT SURE IF I MISSED SOMETHING.

IT'S IN THE FIVE YEAR PLAN. >> CORRECT.

>> DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATED COST FOR THE TRAIL?

>> >> WE HAVEN'T SELECTED MATERIAL YET SO THAT'S GOING TO BE A FACTOR.

[00:45:01]

WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING ALL THE WAY UP AND AROUND.

THIS IS JUST A PROPOSAL AT THIS POINT.

WE'RE ESTIMATING ABOUT $80,000. 80-100 DEPENDING ON THE WIDTH.

>> SO IT SOUNDS LIKE D IS SET FOR THIS YEAR AND WE'LL MEET

AGAIN IF MONEY GETS ALLOTED. >> WE'RE STARTING TO WORK ON BUDGET EARLIER THIS YEAR THAN IN THE PAST.

>> WHEN WHEN THAT BECOMES AN OPTION SINCE THE REST OF THIS IS

NOT BUMMED FOR YET? >> YET.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OR ARE WE GOOD TO

MOVE NON- >> OK.

SO LET'S THEN THAT WILL CIRCLE US BACK AROUND UNLESS YOU HAD

[Item 5.4]

CENTRAL PARK ON HERE. >> I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF

QUESTIONS ABOUT CENTRAL PARK. >> THE QUESTION I HAVE, THIS IS THE AREA NEXT TO THE TWO NEW COURTS RUNNING PARALLEL TO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A FRENCH DRAIN OR SOMETHING. THIS COURT WAS FINISHED IN JUNE.

AND THAT IS STILL WHEN WE GET RAIN, THAT STILL IS THERE AND IT DOESN'T LOOK VERY NICE. I DON'T KNOW IF SOMETHING -- I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW MECHANICS OF IT.

THAT TO IT SEEMS TO ME NOT REALLY SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE THERE. IT WAS ALWAYS A PROBLEM.

IT WAS A PROBLEM WHEN THE TREE WAS THERE.

IT WOULD FILL UP LIKE A LAKE. SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT WITH THE DRAINAGE THERE. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER.

SO THAT IS I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE ATTENTION.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION IS.

IF MAINTENANCE CAN LOOK AT IT OR THE ENGINEERS OR SOMEBODY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WANT STANDING WATER OR DIRT AND SAND

ALL OVER. >> COULD WE DIRECT THAT TO BE

INVESTIGATED. >> THAT WAS THE OUT FALL POND AND IT WAS PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE PICKLE BALL

COURTS. >> THAT'S NOT THE RETENTION

POND? >> YES.

>> I THOUGHT THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE SOME KIND OF STONE OR

FRENCH DRAIN OR SOMETHING. >> IT PITCHES TOWARDS.

>> THAT LAYS THERE FOR DAYS AN DAYS AND DAYS AND THERE IS NO

GRASS. >> THEY DUG ALL THE GRASS UP BECAUSE IT USED TO BE GRASS SWAIL.

BUT IT PITCHES TOWARDS THE DRAIN NEAR THE SIDEWALK BY THE

PLAYGROUND. >> A LONGER TERM VIEW.

>> I THINK THE DRAIN IS IN TOWARD THE FOREGROUND.

>> IT'S CLOSER TO THE PLAYGROUND.

IT NEEDS TO BE -- I THOUGHT THERE WAS ANOTHER PICTURE GOING

THE OTHER WAY. >> THAT IS HERE BECAUSE THAT BOTTLE FILLER HAS NOT WORKED THE ENTIRE SUMMER.

YOU CAN SEE THE LITTLE RED DOT. THIS IS THE ONLY FOUNTAIN WE

HAVE RIGHT IN CENTRAL PARK. >> THERE IS ONE BY THE TENNIS

COURTS. >> THERE IS A FOUNTAIN THERE --

MOSQUITO. >> A WORK REQUEST HAS BEEN DONE SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE SUMMER FOR THIS.

IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. WE SUSTAINED TO FACILITY

MAINTENANCE. >> TENNIS HAS BEEN ASKING.

THIS IS NEXT TO THE PLAYGROUND. APPARENTLY THAT IS AN INDOOR FOUNTAIN, NOT AN OUTDOOR FOUNTAIN IS WHAT MAINTENANCE OR SOMEBODY TOLD US. BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT TO GET THAT FIXED. THAT IS ONLY THERE BECAUSE WE RECENTLY THE CITY RECENTLY INSTALLED ANOTHER GATE AND WITH NAN'S HELP THE PICKLE BALL GROUP DONATED $1,700 TO PUT ANOTHER GATE IN THAT IS WIDER SO POTENTIALLY A WHEELCHAIR ATHLETE COULD GET THROUGH THE GATES. THEIR CHAIRS ARE SLANTED OUT SO THEY NEED ANOTHER THREE OR FOUR INCHES ON EITHER SIDE.

[00:50:02]

SO THAT'S A WIDER GATE. THANKS TO NAN'S HELP GETTING THAT IN. WE PUT GATES BETWEEN COURTS.

THEY WEREN'T IN THE ORIGINAL SPECS.

WE OFFERED TO MAKE A DONATION TOWARD.

IT JUST NEEDS TO HAVE SLAB BECAUSE WE THREW SOME NEEDLES

DOWN. >> THANK YOU PICKLE BALL PEOPLE.

THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THAT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP IN WORKING WITH THEM TO GET THE GATE IN THERE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE

SWAIL PART, POND THING. >> I KNOW THAT IT USED TO BE GRASS AND I ALSO KNOW THAT IT HAS TYPICALLY BEEN A VERY ATTRACTIVE PLAY AREA FOR SOME OF THE CHILDREN.

>> A LOT OF TIMES IT'S FULL OF WATER.

>> AS A PARENT, I'VE ALWAYS PULLED MY CHILDREN OUT OF THAT AREA BUT SOME DO NOT. AND IT BEING SO CLOSE TO THE PLAYGROUND IT IS AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE FOR THEM.

WATER TO SPLASH IN. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE THAT COULD KIND OF MAYBE I'M NOT SUGGESTING LIKE A FENCE AROUND IT OR ANYTHING BUT PUT IN TO THEN DRAINAGE?

>> I CAN'T ANSWER THIS. BUT I CAN ASK THEM LOOK INTO IT.

>> OR PRESENT ANYTIM IT IN A WAR KIDS TO PLAY THERE.

>> ON A HOT DAY IT'S DIFFICULT TO TRY DISCOURAGE THEM IN FROM

ANY WATER. >> WE CAN CHECK THAT.

I'LL GET WITH ANDRE AND LET YOU KNOW WHAT HE SAYS.

SO THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO COME ONE AN ALTERNATIVE.

BECAUSE HE'S AN ENGINEER. >> ESPECIALLY WHEN THE SURFACING GETS DONE FOR THE PLAYGROUND. IT'S GOING TO PITCH THAT WAY TOO. BECAUSE THAT MIGHT CHANGE SOME

OF THE DRAINAGE. >> SUPPOSED TO PUT UP NOT NECESSARILY A FENCE BECAUSE FENCINGIS DON'T COME IN HERE.

WE CAN PUT UP SOMETHING TO HOPEFULLY DETER.

WE WILL WORK ON SOMETHING TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT LESS INVITING TO SMALL CHILDREN AND MAYBE LOOK A LITTLE BETTER.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE SOD WILL -- WE'LL WORRY ABOUT IF THE SOD

WILL SURVIVE. >> IT'S TOUGH WHEN IT'S GROWING

UNDER WATER. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THAT.

[Items 5.5 & 7]

>> LET'S GET BACK TO OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

EVERYONE IS GOOD WITH THAT. WE HAVE SANDRA NEWS.

>> HI. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

I LIVE AT 1883 LAKESIDE DRIVE NORTH.

>> I BELIEVE I EMAILED THEM. YOU DROPPED SOMETHING OFF AT MY OFFICE AND I FORWARDED IT TO THEM.

>> IF YOU DON'T MIND I'M GOING TO QUICK GO OVER IT AGAIN.

THIS IS THE LAST PICTURE OF THE PARK WE HAD PROPOSED.

HERE IS SIMMONS ROAD. MY PIECE OF PROPERTY IS RIGHT HERE. AND THE PARK THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING FALLS ALONG THIS WHOLE PART OF EAGANS BLUFF.

UP HERE IS SIMMONS COVE. THE GREEN HERE ARE THE TWO AREAS THAT ARE TOUCHED AND ARE AFFECTED BY THE PARK.

THE BLUE LINE SHOWS THE DISTANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

HERE AND HERE FOR EXAMPLE THE PARKING LOT IS 83 FEET TO EAGANS BLUFF AS COMPARED TO 236 FEET TO SUMMON'S COVE.

THE WALKING PATH IS LESS THAN 1. THAT'S NOT THE YELLOW.

THE YELLOW IS WHAT I THOUGHT MAYBE THEY COULD DO.

IT'S 15 FEET HERE AS COMPARED TO 25 FEET CLOSE TO SIMMONS COVE.

MY CONCERN IS HOW DID THE PARK GET SO BIG? WHEN I FIRST CAME TO THE MEETING ABOUT THE PARK , THE PARK WAS ONLY GOING TO BE A LITTLE WALKING PATH AND NOT THIS GIANT PARK THAT WE HAVE HERE. WHAT HAPPENS TO ALL THE ANIMALS? THE DEER, RABBITS AND GOPHER FURTHER THAT IS COME IN MY

[00:55:04]

BACKYARD. I'VE ENCLOSED PICTURES FOR THAT.

HERE ARE THREE DEERS. THAT'S ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO.

THREE BABY DEER WERE PLAYING IN MY BACKYARD.

HERE IS ANOTHER DEER THAT WAS EATING IN THE BACKYARD.

AND THEN A PICTURE OF A GOPHER TURTLE WHICH IS ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO IN MY BACKYARD. WHAT HAPPENS TO ALL THESE ANIMALS? WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR BEAUTIFUL WALKWAY WHILE THIS PARK IS BEING CONSTRUCTED? I WAS ON A COMMITTEE WITH MIKE FOR THE PATHS THAT WE HAVE NOW , THE BEAUTIFUL WALKING PATH AND LOOK HOW LONG THAT TOOK.

WILL WE BE UNABLE TO USE IT WHILE THEY ARE CONSTRUCTING THIS GIANT PARK? DO WE REALLY NEED SUCH A LARGE PLAYGROUND BETWEEN TWO NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE WOODS WHERE WE SUPPLY PEOPLE HANGING OUT AT NIGHT.

WHO IS GOING TO KEEP THE AREA AND THE BATHROOMS CLEAN? IF THIS IS DONE , THIS IS THE FEELING I GET.

SO MY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MOVE THE ENTRANCE TO THE PARKING AREA TO THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY, 50 FEET WEST FROM THE ENTRANCE AND SENT TER PARKING AREA ON THE DRIVEWAY.

MOVE THE WHOLE SOUTH END OF THE NATURE PATH SO IT'S CLOSER TO THE WETLAND BUFFER AS TO BE FAIR TO THE EAGAN BLUFF PROPERTIES.

ALSO MOVE THE EAST SIDE OF THE PLAYGROUND AREA AND THE PAVILION TO THE SOUTHWEST. BETTER YET LEAVE THE AREA TO THE ANIMALS. NOT MANY AREAS LEFT FOR THEM TO

HANG OUT. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE HAVE CHUCK OLIVIA. >> I'M GOING TO PRETEND I DIDN'T HEAR ALL THE SENSIBLE COMMENTS SHE JUST MADE.

I AM COMPLETELY AGAINST THIS LOCATION FOR THE PARK.

>> 2865 WEST 6TH STREET. I THINK THAT LOCATING THIS PARK AT SIMMONS ROAD MAKES A COMPLETE MOCKERY OF THE RECENT 50 VOTE TO INCREASE THE .583AGE INCREASE IN THE TAXES TO RAISE MONEY FOR CONSERVATION. THIS IS LAND THAT THE CITY ALREADY OWNS THAT IS UNDEVELOPED AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP IT AND THEN PUT THIS ON A REFERENDUM IN SEPTEMBER AND EXPECT PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR IT WHEN THIS KIND OF STEWARDSHIP THAT WE'RE DOING WITH LAND THAT WE HAVE.

WHEN I SPOKE AT OCTOBER'S MEETING ICON TEST I WAS NEW TO THE ISSUE. I DIDN'T LIKE THE IDEA AND I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROCESS EVEN THEN.

NOW THAT I'VE SEEN THE VIDEOS OF THE MEETINGS AND READ THROUGH PUBLIC RECORDS, I'M EVEN MORE TROUBLED BY THE PROCESS.

I FEEL AT THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS HOW COULD THERE WITHB SO MANY QUESTIONS STILL OUT THERE? HOW DID THIS GO SO QUICKLY FROM A NATURE TRAIL TO A FULL BLOWN PARK WITH RESTROOMS AND BIG PARKING LOT? WHY DID MAYOR MILLER SUDDENLY PUT THIS BACK, COULD IT BE DELIVERED ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 14. WHAT IS THE RUSH? HOW DOES FORCING THIS PLAYGROUND ON THE SIMMONS ROAD LOCATION OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF SO MANY CITIZENS FIT WITH PLAY CAPE'S VISION OF UNITY? WHY IS THE SIMMONS ROAD LOCATION SO IMPORTANT THAT MR. MORRISON SAID PLAY CAPES WOULDN'T BUILD IT IF THE LOCATION WAS CHANGED? ALL THESE QUESTIONS ARE PILING UP. I KNOW MR. MORRISON CAN'T RESPOND TO INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS BUT I HOPE YO CAN ANSWER WHY IS THIS LOCATION SO IMPORTANT?

>> I'M NOT CLEAR ON THAT. >> I'M NOT ANTI-PARK.

AN ADA COMPLIANT PLAYGROUND SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT THING.

THE GOLF COURSE WAS MENTIONED FOR.

THAT WE HAVE THE SPORTS COMPLEX WHICH IS NOTHING BUT A MUD PARKING LOT AND SOME OPEN SCRUB LAND.

600 KIDS PLAY SOAKER AND THEIR PARENTS ANTED GRANDPARENTS ANTED SUBLINGS ARE BEING UNDERSERVED WITH A ONE SEAT RESTROOM AND MUDDY PARKING LOT. THE PEOPLE FROM THIS ISLAND AND SOCCER CLUB SAY THEY ARE EMBARRASSED WHEN THEY GO TO OTHER TOWNS BECAUSE THEY HAVE A SPORTS COMPLEX WITH A RESTROOM.

IF A PLAYGROUND WERE LOCATED AT THIS LOCATION INSIDE THE TREE LINE SOMEWHERE, THE SIBLINGS OF THE SOCCER PLAYERS COULD BE UTILIZING IT. THERE IS 600 KIDS PLAYING SOCCER

[01:00:03]

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THEIR PARENTS, GRANDPARENTS ANTED SIBLINGS THAT'S A HUGE SNUB OF PEOPLE THAT COULD ENJOY THAT PARK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THE PUBLIC IS NOT ON BOARD WITH THIS PROJECT.

AND I THINK THE INCLINATION. THE WAY THAT YOU ARE MOVING IS CORRECT IN TRYING TO SORT OF SLOW THIS PROCESS DOWN.

YOU FORMALLY REQUEST THIS BE PULLED FROM THE AGENDA SO WE CAN SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN AND STUDY IT AND TAKE TIME IT DESERVES AND PULL IN THE PUBLIC AND GET SOME CONSENSUS ON THIS.

I THINK YOU SHOULD ALSO IN THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND ALSO IN THAT MOTION THAT YOU SUGGEST THIS WOULD TAKE AT LEAST THE MINIMUM OF THREE MONTHS OF REVIEW, THAT IS NOT A LOT OF TIME IN THE WAY LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORKS. I WOULD RECOMMEND END IN REQUEST THAT YOU FORMALLY REQUEST THAT THE CITY COMMISSION PULL IT FROM THE AGENDA AND THAT YOU WILL DELIBERATE OVER THIS FOR A MINIMUM OF THREE ADDITIONAL MONTHS.

THANK YOU. >> I WON'T REPEAT A LOT OF THE ARGUMENTS BUT I SHARE THE SAME THINGS.

FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND , THE GOLF COURSE SEEMS TO BE THE LOGICAL LOCATION FOR THIS. WHERE YOU HAVE PARKING ALREADY.

I UNDERSTAND IT'S 27 HOLE GOLF COURSE.

YOU COULD ELIMINATE NINE OF THOSE HOLES, PITCH PUTT WHICH PERHAPS WOULD GENERATE A LOT MORE REVENUE FOR THE GOLF COURSE. IT SEEMS THAT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE. I DID HAVE QUESTION AS TO WHY THE EQUIPMENT WAS PURCHASED ALREADY.

AND IF AS I UNDERSTAND IT THE AMOUNT WOULD REQUIRE THAT BIT PUT OUT FOR BID. WHETHER THAT WAS DONE AND IF IT WASN'T DONE WHY NOT. IF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OR DIRECTOR OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COULD ANSWER THIS IT

WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. >> THANK YOU.

>> >>

. >> COME ON.

NO AAPPLAUSE. NOT A MOVIE THEATER.

>> IT'S A PUBLIC FORUM MA'AM. >> YES, IT'S ALSO A MEETING.

>> LET'S NOT HAVE APPLAUSE. >> THE REASON FOR NO AAPPLAUSE IS WHEN YOU APPLAUD, YOU ARE SWAYING THE PUBLIC OPINION.

[01:05:03]

>> THIS SHOULD BE AS NEUTRAL AS POSSIBLE.

FOR THE PEOPLE WHO FAVOR PARK, THAT IS A PROBLEM.

>> ONE OTHER THING. THE ADVISORY COMMIT SEE THE SIMPLY THAT. AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

WE DON'T PURCHASE ANYTHING. SOMEBODY ASKED ME WHY DID YOU PURCHASE THE EQUIPMENT. I DON'T PURCHASE ANYTHING.

NOBODY PURCHASES ANYTHING. WE'RE JUST SIMPLY AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE. DOE HAVE TO LISTEN AND TAKE YOUR THOUGHTS. THAT'S THE WHY THE REQUIREMENT WE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. WE ARE NOT THE ACTION PEOPLE.

WE JUST ADVISE. SO JUST REMEMBER THAT.

THIS IS JUST THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

>> I'M ROSS LYNN. 268 SOUTH FLETCHER.

FERNANDINA BEACH. I'M ALSO GOING TO SAY I REALLY APPRECIATE THE COMMON SENSE APPROACH TO KIND OF SLOW THINGS DOWN. I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THE PREVIOUS MEETING. IT WAS MY FIRST ONE.

I'M LEARNING ABOUT HOW ALL OF THIS WORKS.

I WAS CONCERNED BY WHAT I SAW AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.

THE EXTENT TO WHICH SOME OF THE MEMBERS THEMSELVES ON YOUR COMMITTEE SEEMED TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN INFORMATION VERY LAST MINUTE. IT WAS KIND OF UNFORTUNATE I THINK THAT PEOPLE FELT PRESSURED TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH A VOTE.

AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE REASSURING I THINK AS A FIRST TIME VISITOR TO HAVE SEEN MORE COHESIVENESS AND JUST WITHIN YOUR BODY ITSELF. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT BUDGETARY ISSUES. ONE OF THE PUBLIC SAID SOMETHING ABOUT OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY IN THESE THINGS.

I THINK THIS PROPOSED PLAYGROUND IS A WONDERFUL PLAYGROUND BUT IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME FOR THIS LOCATION.

I ALSO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD STICK TO SOMETHING MUCH MORE NATURAL FOR THE ANIMALS AND IN LINE WITH THE SENSIBILITY OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CONSERVE HERE ON AMELIA ISLAND.

AS FAR AS BUDGETARY THINGS, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THINGS COST.

I HEARD DISCUSSIONS OF BUDGET QUESTIONS.

I WORKED IN BUDGETING FOR A LONG TIME SO THERE WAS ALWAYS A BUDGET AND THEN THERE WAS AN ESTIMATE AND FORECAST AND UPDATED FORECAST AND THEN AN ACTUAL.

IT WAS VERY UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT THE BUDGET TEAR CONSTRAINTS WERE AS WE ENTER UPON PROJECTS. I HOPE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE MADE CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC AS WE GO FORWARD.

I HAD ONE MORE THOUGHT. I'LL USE UP ALL MY TIME TRYING TO THINK OF IT. WITH RESPECT TO THINGS LIKE THE WATER THAT WE SEE WATER IN THAT PICTURE THERE, I'M JUST HOPING THAT FOR ANY NEW PROJECTS THAT WE DO, THAT WE HAVE FORMAL WATER ENGINEERS OR WHOEVER THE EXPERTS ARE TO TAKE A LOOK AT OUR PROPERTIES AND DON'T JUST LOOK AT THEM AND SAY I DON'T THINK THAT IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM. I HOPE THAT IS SOMETHING WE'LL BE ABLE TO HEAR ABOUT AS WELL. THANK YOU.

>> BENJAMIN MORRISON. 2107 WHITFIELD DRIVE.

AS YOU KNOW I'M A REPRESENTATIVE OF PLAY CAPEFUL I'M CAUGHT OFF GUARD BECAUSE I WAS TOLD WE WERE NOT REALLY HAVING A DISCUSSION TONIGHT ON THIS ACTION ITEM AND EVEN TERESA DUNCAN TOLD ME SHE DIDN'T THINK WE WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT.

SO -- WELL, WE ARE WHERE WE ARE. I DON'T THINK IT'S PARTICULARLY APPROPRIATE. THAT'S OK.

EITHER WAY I THINK THAT MOVING FORWARD OUR ORGANIZATION GOT INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE WERE ASKED TO COME ON BOARD AND HELP DEVELOP A PLAN FOR A PARK THAT IS GOING TO BE UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE, THAT IS GOING TO BE LOCATED AT THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK SITE AND AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT MULTIPLE TIMES IS GOING TO HAVE A PARKING LOT, A PLAYGROUND, IT'S GOING TO HAVE BATHROOMS, A PAVILION BUILDING AND PLAYGROUND.

FIVE THINGS. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DELIVERED TO YOU GUYS. OVER AND OVER AGAIN SINCE I

[01:10:02]

THINK THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A YEAR AND A HALF NOW, THIS IS NOT A NEW PROJECT THAT JUST STARTED.

IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AND VOTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION SEVERAL DIFFERENT TIMES. IT'S BEEN ADDRESSED BY YOU GUYS ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. OUR ORGANIZATION HAS MADE AN EFFORT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS IN EVERY WAY WE CAN.

I FEEL REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS AT THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING NEXT WEEK THAT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE DONE WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO AND I FEEL LIKE WE'VE DELIVERED TO YOU GUYS WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DELIVER.

I THINK THAT WE'VE LISTENED TO WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS SAID AND WE'VE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PLANS AS COMMENTS HAVE COME IN AND TRIED TO BE AS CONSIDERATE TO THAT AS POSSIBLE.

ULTIMATELY WE WERE TAKING DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL AND TO THIS POINT, EVEN AS RECENTLY AS THE LAST TIME WE WERE ALL TOGETHER, YOU VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.

NOBODY HAS EVER ONCE GIVEN US AN INSTRUCTION FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE TO SAY WE WANT TO YOU TAKE THIS DIRECTION INSTEAD OF THIS DIRECTION. IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, MAYBE THINGS WOULD BE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE THAN THEY ARE NOW.

WE RELY ON YOU TO TELL US WHAT YOU WANT AND WHAT WE PROVIDED YOU I THINK IS WHAT YOU GUYS SAID THAT YOU WANTED.

LAST TIME WE WERE TOGETHER, EVEN BEFORE YOU ALL VOTED TO MAKE THE DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD AND RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION, I TOLD YOU GUYS THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE WORKING IN THE MEANTIME TO MAKE CHANGES WHERE WE COULD TO TRY ANDLESSEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROJECT. AND WE'VE DONE THAT.

IF YOU ALL WANT TO SEE THE PLANS WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION NEXT WEEK I'LL SHOW THEM YOU TONIGHT.

THAT'S UP TO YOU. WHAT WE CAN SHOW YOU IS PLANS WHERE THE RETENTION POND AREA THIS EVERYBODY WAS CONCERNED ABOUT UNDERSTANDABLY HAVE REDUCED BY 7,000 SQUARE FEET MANY SIZE. AND WE'VE LIMITED THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE CUT DOWN BY 30%.

I'LL SHOW YOU THE PLANS TONIGHT IF YOU WANT TO SEE THEM.

I'LL GO OVER THEM WITH YOU. THAT'S AT YOUR DISCRETION.

IF NOT WE'LL PRESENT THEM TO THE CITY COMMISSION NEXT WEEK.

I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TELL ME IF YOU

WANT TO DO THAT. >> WE HAVE FOUR MORE FOLKS TO

SPEAK. >> YOU GUYS AREN'T GOING TO TAKE

ANOTHER VOTE FLU. ARE YOU?>> NOT TODAY.

>> WE HAVE ABOUT 15 MORE MINUTES.

>> DOES ANYBODY FEEL I GUESS -- >> BEN HAS PUT US ON THE SPOT HERE. WE GOT ABOUT 15 MINUTES LEFT FOR THIS MEETING AND NOW WE HAVE NEW REVISED PLANS TO REVIEW BEFORE THIS GOES TO THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING ON THE 19TH.

THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROCESS.

>> YOU DIDN'T SAY YOU WANTED TO HAVE A PRESENTATION TONIGHT.

>> I THINK WHAT HE'S MEANING IS THAT WITHOUT SIMMONS ROAD PART OF THE PARK. IT WAS JUST MEANT TO BE AN

UPDATE AS TO THE STATUS. >> DID YOU SEE THE PLANS, THE

NEW ONES? >> NO, I HAVEN'T.

>> BECAUSE WE VOTED ON IT LAST MONTH.

IT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE A REDISCUSSION OF LAST MONTH'S VOTE UNTIL MIKE MADE THAT MOTION.

I THINK IS WHAT HE'S SAYING. UNTIL MIKE MADE THE MOTION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING IT WAS NOT -- OUR BOARD WAS NOT SLATED TO REDISCUSS EVERYTHING WE DISCUSSED LAST MONTH.

IT WAS JUST TO GET AN UPDATE BECAUSE WE VOTED LAST MONTH.

IT CHANGED THE TONE OF THE MEETING.

THAT'S WHY HE'S SAYING HE WAS NOT PREPARED FOR THIS

DISCUSSION. >> MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND WEATHER SERVICE PROVED THAT. WE ARE RECONSIDERING.

NOW WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO REVIEW UPDATED PLANS WE'VE NOT

SEEN. >> THAT'S WHY WE ASKED TO SLOW IT DOWN SO THAT MR. MORRISON WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY --

>> THE WHOLE INCENTIVE WHAT I THINK I'M HERE FOR AND AGAIN I SUPPORTED IT , THE PLAN. HOWEVER WHEN WE'RE HERE TO

[01:15:03]

REPRESENT THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY.

AND TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK AND MAKE SURE THE PROCESS IS AT LEAST PERCEIVED AS FAIR. MY ISSUE WAS NOT THE PARK AT ALL. AS A MATTER OF FACT MOST PEOPLE WANT SOMETHING RECREATIONAL IN THAT AREA.

MY THOUGHT WAS WE HAD TO DO SOMETHING OR LOSE IT WHICH WAS NOT THE CASE. DID ANY OF US KNOW WE WERE VOTING THAT DAY? NONE OF US KNEW WE WERE VOTING.

I DIDN'T KNOW. I FOUND OUT WHEN I GOT HERE.

I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED ALL MY EMAILS AND WENT BACK AT LOOKED AT ALL THE DATA. ALL OF A SUDDEN WE WERE TAKING A VOTE ON SOMETHING I WAS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH AND NOT WELL INFORMED ON AND NORMALLY WE DON'T DO THAT.

>> THIS GROUP IS A WELL MEANING GROUP.

THEY WERE GIVEN INFORMATION BUT THAT ENGINEERING STUDY WASN'T INN GO TO THIS GROUP TO MAKE A DECISION ON AT THAT MEETING.

NO ONE IN THIS GROUP ANTICIPATED THAT WITH THOSE TWO RETENTION PONDS THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE TO REMOVE ABOUT 90 TREES.

THAT IS SUBSTANTIAL. AND I AGREE OF JUST PUTTING A LITTLE PARK HERE AND LITTLE THING THERE.

ON THE TREES, IT LOOKED FINE. BUT ONCE WE GOT THE INFORMATION FINALLY AND I JUST SENT IT TO MR. I HAVE BECAUSE IT ALREADY WENT TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT THIS GROUP SEEING IT. AND THERE WERE A LOT OF WELL MEANING PEOPLE HERE. I AGREE BEN YOU GUYS WENT OUT OF

YOUR WAY -- >> MY ISSUE BEN IS YOURS IS THE ONLY PLAN PRESENTED TO US. THAT'S MY ISSUE.

IT'S LIKE A STRONG HAND. YOU GOT THIS OR NOTHING.

AND THAT'S NOT WHAT I BELIEVE WE'RE HERE TO DO.

I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO SAY OK IF WE LOOK AT THIS PLAN, THIS HAS THIS IN IT AND MAYBE THAT'S AN ISSUE.

IF WE LOOK AT THIS PLAN, WE GOT SOME OTHER ISSUES.

WE ONLY SAW ONE PLAN AND WERE TOLD TO VOTE ON IT THAT DAY.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD PROCESS. IT'S NOT A PROCESS I FELT COMFORTABLE AND APPARENTLY A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T.

I DIDN'T REALLY I WAS SO POPULAR.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS I SAID THIS EARLIER, I LOVE THE PARK.

I LOVE THE PARK. BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS THE PROCESS IS THE ISSUE. IT'S NOT YOUR PARK THAT IS THE ISSUE. AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY SHOULD AGREE. IT'S A PARK FOR CHRIST SAKE.

IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S NOT COMBAT. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TOMORROW. THERE ARE NO LIVES DEPENDING ON THIS. WE NEED TO TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE SURE OUR COMMUNITY FEELS GOOD ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON.

NOT JUST THIS PARK. BUT YOU KNOW THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. IT SHOULD BE A HAPPY EVENT.

I'M GLAD WE'RE PUTTING SOMETHING IN THAT IS NOT HOUSES OR APARTMENTS OR WHATEVER. WE GOT TO TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS IS GOING RIGHT SO EVERYBODY FEELS LIKE THIS IS NOT JUST SOMEBODY'S OPINION THAT SHOULD HAPPEN AND PUSHING FORWARD THEIR AGENDA. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'M

SAYING. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO THAT BEING SAID WE HAVE TEN MINUTES LEFT OF OUR TIME.

WOULD WE LIKE TO CONTINUE THROUGH WITH THE REST OF THE

COMMENTS OR REVIEW BEN'S PLANS? >> I DON'T THINK WE CAN REVIEW BEN'S PLANS AT THIS STAGE. I THINK MR. WELLS' COMMENTS ABOUT PULLING THIS FROM THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING, RECOMMENDING WE DO THAT IS THE WAY TO GO. THERE IS A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T EVEN DISCUSSED YET ABOUT THIS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GET ON THE TABLE AND I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE A CHANCE TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF TIME.

>> THIS IS YOUR TIME. YOU'VE BEEN SAYING THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS. WE NEED TO START LOOKING AT

THESE OTHER OPTIONS. >> WE DO HAVE TO HEAR PUBLIC

COMMENT. >> WE'RE NOW UP TO SIX.

>> CAN WE GO PAST 5:30? >>

>> LET'S HEAR THAT AND WHEN THAT IS FINISHED I WOULD LIKE TO

[01:20:03]

ADDRESS THE MATERIAL THAT I HAVE IF WE HAVE TO GO PAST 5:30 THEN

SO BE IT. >> THERE IS NOTHING IN HERE.

DO YOU WANT TO HAVE AN ACTUAL MEETING ON THIS.

>> I THINK THAT IS PROBABLY BETTER THAN TRYING TO SQUEEZE IT. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY BETTER IF WE COULD ACTUALLY PUT I AS AGENDA ITEM.

IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? >> RIGHT.

>> FOR NEXT MONTH. PUT IT AS AGENDA ITEM AND PUT SOME TIME TO IT. RATHER THAN FIVE MINUTE.

>> ALL THIS HAS TO BE DISCUSSED BEFORE THE 19TH.

>> IT'S UP TO THE CITY COMMISSION WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

WE WANT TO RECONSIDER OUR VOTE. >> THEY CAN TAKE WHAT WE WANT TO DO. THEY CAN TAKE THAT AND DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. IT'S ADVISORY.

>> LET'S HEAR THE REST OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN TAKE A MOTION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

>> THAT SOUNDS OK. >>

>>IVE LIVE AT 2428 LOSS ROB LOSS.

>> I SENT A LETTER LAST WEEK TO THE CITY COMMISSIONERS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS OUT OF IT FOR Y'ALL.

PARKING IS DRIVEN BY THE AMOUNT OF LAND THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED.

SO THERE IS ONE PARKING SPACE PER 1,000 FEET OF IMPACTED AREA.

THAT IS OUT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

IF YOU REDUCE YOUR FOOTPRINT, YOU REDUCE PARKING.

IF YOU REDUCE PARKING YOU REDUCE DRY PONDS, IF YOU REDUCE PONDS YOU SAVE TREES. JUST A THOUGHT.

THAT SECTION 7 OF THE LDC ALSO ALLOWS FOR UP TO 20% REDUCTION IN PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO PRESERVE TREES.

THIS MEANS THAT YOU COULD ALSO SAVE MORE TREES WITH A 20% REDUCTION IN PARKING JUST BASED ON THE LAND USE CODE.

NOWHERE IN THE PARK MASTER PLAN OR IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DO I SEE ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT KIND OF BATHROOMS AND HOW MANY YOU SHOULD HAVE. WHY DO YOU HAVE TWO BATHROOMS? YOU DON'T NEED TWO AND WHY DON'T YOU DO WHAT NATIONAL AND STATE PARKS DO AND PUT IN COMPOSTING TOILETS IN BATHROOMS THAT AGAIN SAVE SPACE, HAVE LESS IMPACT ON PROPERTY AND THE ENVIRONMENT AND SAVES TREES. WHY DO WE NEED A PAVILION WHEN THIS IS A FORESTED CANOPIED AREA? I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HAVE PAVILIONS AT MAIN BEACH BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU NEED A COVERED PAVILION AT A PLACE FULL OF TREES. PARTICULARLY IF YOU ARE TRYING TO SAVE TREES F. YOU REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT, YOU REDUCE THE PARKING AND IT'S A CHAIN REACTION.

YOU CAN MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THIS PROPERTY BY REDUCING THE FOOTPRINT AND THAT WILL ALLOW TO YOU SAVE TREES.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION IS THE PARK MASTER PLAN.

THAT DOES NOT IDENTIFY ANY SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR WHAT SHOULD BE IN A PARK. THE PARK MASTER PLAN DOES REFER TO THIS AREA AS NATURE CENTER. BUT THAT IS ALL IT SAYS ABOUT I.

EXCEPT THERE IS ONE REFERENCE AND IT REFERS TO THE NATURE CENTER AS A 30-ACRE AIRPORT SITE THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO A NATURE CENTER. NOWHERE REALLY IN YOUR MASTER PLAN IS THERE ANY REAL INFORMATION THAT WOULD MAKE YOU WANT TO PUT A LARGE PLAYGROUND IN A PARK ON THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE MASTER PLAN DID A SERIES OF SURVEYS ACROSS THE COMMUNITY , THE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SAID -- THE CITY COMMISSION SAID IMPROVE EXISTING FACILITIES, MORE TRAILS, MORE OPTIONS FOR TEENS. TEENS WANT BASKETBALL.

THE PUBLIC SURVEY ASKED TRAILS, BIKEWAYS, GREEN SPACE, SWIMMING POOLS AND PLAY E PLAYGROUNDS. NOR IN YOUR MASTER PLAN DOES IT CALL OUT FOR THIS KIND OF PARK IN THIS LOCATION.

SO THAT IS A PROBLEM. IN THAT IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME YOU ARE FOLLOWING YOUR OWN MASTER PLAN.

THANK YOU. >>

>> MY NAME IS ELIZABETH ANN. >> MR. HUIE: EN.

IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I JUST WANT TO GO OVER A COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS. AS A REAL ESTATE AGENT FOR FUN I DID A ONE MILE RADIUS AROUND THE PROPOSED PARK LOCATION.

[01:25:03]

THERE ARE 16 NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EITHER HAVE HOA'S WHERE THEY COLLECT A LITTLE BIT OF DUES OR FORMAL ATTRIBUTE TO THEM.

THERE IS ONE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COMING AT THE CORNER OF 14TH AT SIMMONS THAT WILL BE A COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. YOU ARE PUTTING UP $400,000 FOR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY COUNTY.

SIX NEIGHBORHOODS WERE ACTUALLY CITY NEIGHBORHOODS AND YOU HAD TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO LAKEWOOD TO GET INTO A SUBSTANTIAL BODY OF CITY. IN ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE HOA'S, COLLECT DEUCE, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE OLD AMELIA ROAD A AMELIA ROAD, DIANE AND SOME OF THESE, THEY DON'T HAVE AN HOA BUT AGAIN THEY ARE COUNTY. SOME OF THEM ARE STILL ON WELL AND SEPTIC. YOU ARE SPENDING $400,000 OF CITY MONEY TO PUT A PARK IN A LOCATION THAT IS REALLY SERVING ALMOST 2/3 COUNTY. AND YOU ARE NOT COLLECTING A DIME FROM THE COUNTY TO HELP YOU WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE PARK AND THERE IS NO PLAN TO DO THAT THAT I'VE SEEN.

THE OTHER ATTRIBUTE THAT WE KEEP MISSING IS THE MAINTENANCE.

YOU THE CITY WILL HAVE THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES AND I DON'T MEAN TO CREATE THAT PITCH BATTLE BETWEEN CITY AND COUNTY. BUT THE REALITY IS THE PUBLIC YOU ARE SERVING BY PICKING THIS LOCATION IS LARGELY COUNTY.

AND YOU SHOULD BE VERY AWARE OF THAT.

SECOND THING I WANT TO SAY IS THE NICE LADY WHO PROVIDED WITH YOU THE PARAGRAPH OF THE GOFFER TORTOISE.

IF THAT IS AND YOU HAVE EVIDENCE OF THAT YOU NEED TO RAISE THE STAKES AND GET ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY DONE.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY IS GOING TO BE VERY UNPOPULAR AND I'M SORRY IN ADVANCE. MRS. BAHAN LIVES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT TO WHERE THIS PARK IS GOING TO GOVERNMENT JUST AS WE QUESTION THE MAYOR AND WHETHER OR NOT HE SHOULD BE VOTENING TO AUTO SEN TRICK RESORT, I QUESTION WHETHER YOU SHOULD RESCIND YOURSELF FROM ANY VOTES ON THIS BECAUSE AS YOU SAID IN THE MEETING YOU WON'T HAVE TO DRIVE YOUR KIDS TO A PARK ANYMORE. SO ARE YOU REALLY LOOKING AT THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF HOW IT BENEFITS THE CITY OR HOW IT BENEFITS YOU? I APOLOGIZE BUT THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING ANSWERED.

THANK YOU. >>>SHE COULD JUST AS EASILY BE O OPPOSED TO THE PARK AS FOR IT. BECAUSE IT'S, THE PARK BACKS UP TO HER BACKYARD. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S ONE WAY OR THE OTHER NECESSARILY.

I JUST IMAGINE THAT. >>>OKAY. >>>VERY QUICKLY.

CAN I PUT A SLIDE UP AND THEN WE'LL DECIDE ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

>> HOW MANY MORE WE HAVE? >> WE HAVE THREE MORE FOLKS.

>> SORRY. I THOUGHT WE WERE DONE. >> MARGARET KIRKLAND.

>>>MARGARET KIRKLAND, 1337 PLANTATION BOINLT DRIVE. SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF TREE CON SER VAN SICHLT I'M GOING TO ABBREVIATE MY COMMENTS. WE APPLAUD WHAT YOU'VE DONE TONIGHT. I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

IF WE ARE GOING TO USE THE SIMMONS ROAD PARCEL, I THINK THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE NEEDS TO BE REDUCED TO THE POINT TO GET RID OF THE DETENTION POTENTIALED TAKING OUT A LOT OF TREES.

EVEN THE REDUCTION TAKES OUT A LOT OF TREES. THAT'S ONE THING.

SEVERAL OTHER LOCATIONS HAVE BEEN PROPOSED AND PROBABLY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.

THE BEST MIGHT BE THE MOST RECENT IDEA WITH THE SOCCER FIELD BUT THAT HASN'T BEEN

INVESTIGATED, TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> DIANA HERMAN. >> DIANA HERMAN. 2116 BELVADERE AVENUE.

EVERYTHING SAID I APPLAUD EVERYTHING ABOUT. I'M NOT FOR THE SIMMONS PARK, AS

[01:30:05]

WELL. BUT I DO WANT TO ADDRESS, I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK BUT MR. KEGLAR SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE MISTRUST. I THINK THAT'S A VERY REAL PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE WITH THE CITY. I KNOW HOW MUCH WITH THE COUNTY BECAUSE I'M A CITY RESIDENT. I THINK THAT REALLY HAS TO BE ADDRESSED.

ONE OF THE WAYS THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED IS TRANSPARENCY. WE, AS CITIZENS, WANT FULL TRANSPARENCY. YOU DID, IT WAS A VERY GOOD MEETING TONIGHT.

I LIKE THE WAY YOU CONVERSE AND YOUR SUGGESTIONS AND LET'S HOLD BACK AND LET'S WAIT BEFORE WE PUSH THIS THROUGH. I'M PART OF THE TREE CONS CONSERVANCY, A BOARD MEMBER.

YOU SPOKE ABOUT AMELIA BLUFF. WHAT WAS AWFUL WHAT HAPPENED AND THERE WERE HUNDREDS, MEETINGS WE HAD HERE WHERE CITIZENS SPOKE FROM THEIR HEART, PASSIONATE AGAINST THIS DEVELOPMENT.

OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THEY WERE NEVER LISTENED TO. THAT'S PART OF THE MISTRUST THAT GOES ON HERE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS BECAUSE ALL THE FACTS THAT WERE GIVEN WERE GIVEN ALREADY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME

AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING. >> THANK YOU.

>> CAMERON MOSS. >> GOOD EVENING COME RON MOSS.

3411 SEA MARSH ROAD. ONE OF THOSE COUNTY PEOPLE. I COME TO THE CITY A LOT.

I COME TO THESE MEETINGS A LOT FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES OF THE CITY.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF CITIZENS FOR TRUSTWORTHY GOVERNMENT. AN ORGANIZATION I FOUNDED ABOUT 17 MINUTES AGO IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM. BUT IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE IN AN AGE WHERE TRUST, TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY SEEM SO LOST IN OUR SOCIETY.

WHERE TRUTH IS VARIABLE AND AN OPINION IS OPPOSED TO A FACT. IT'S NEVER BEEN MORE INCUMBENT UPON PEOPLE ESPECIALLY IN SMALLER GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTS, TO TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITIES AS A GRAVE ONES, WHICH YOU'VE DONE TONIGHT. MR. KEGLAR WE HAVEN'T MET BUT I APPLAUD YOUR EFFORTS. MISS PEW, MISS ROSS, ALL OF YOU PRETTY MUCH SPOKE UP AND SAID WHY ARE WE IN SUCH A RUSH TO DO THIS. THERE'S NO BURNING BUILDING.

THERE'S NO BATTLE THAT WE'RE FIGHTING. THERE'S NO BUDGET DEADLINE WHERE MONEY EVAPORATES. WHY NOT HAVE A BETTER PROCESS THAT WE KNOW AND WE GET WELCOMED AT WAL-MART OR A BAR PUB OR THE BEACH BY CITIZENS WHO HAVE SEEN THE PROCESS THAT THEY GO THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OUR INPUT. THANK YOU FOR DECIDING ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS INSTEAD OF WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING. WHICH IS SHORT OF THE RESPONSE I'VE SEEN IN THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS PARK AND WHAT CAME UP WITH AMELIA BLUFF. I GUESS I WOULD IMPLORE YOU, REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PARK, IN YOUR ROLE AS FEW DISTURB AREAS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT STINKS ABOUT THIS THAT I'M NOT CATCHING A WIF OF? DO THE PIECES NOT QUITE GEL?

>> SECOND, HOW AM I GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS TO PEOPLE WHEN IT'S SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T WANT AND DIDN'T LIKE. AS AN OUTSIDE OBSERVER THIS FEELS LIKE A RUSH THE JUDGMENT TO PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT DIDN'T SEEM TO HAVE URGENCY TO IT THAT DIDN'T OFFER YOU AS COMMITTEE MEMBERS A NUMBER OF VARIANCE TO LOOK AT AND SAY, WE LIKE THAT ONE UT O OF THE FIVE PROPOSED. I'M ESPECIALLY DISTRESSED IF THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY, WE DIDN'T SEE A LOT OF OPTIONS AND PLAY SCAPE SAY WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IF OVER A YEAR YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. THAT'S A TRUTH DISCONNECT TO ME AND WHAT YOU NEED TO BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR AS COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO LOOK OUT FOR POTHOLES AND PITS AND THINGS YOU CAN FALL INTO AND END UP ON TOER SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO BE, OTHERWISE YOU WOULDN'T BE VOLUNTEERING YOUR TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR SUGGESTING TO WITHDRAW THIS FROM THE COMMISSION AGENDA. I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

YOU WILL BE WELL WELCOMED. PEOPLE WILL BUY YOU DRINKS I'M SURE INSTEAD OF THROWING THEM AT

YOU. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THAT WAS THE LAST OF OUR

COMMENTS. >> THERE ARE TWO SLIDES I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW.

THE FIRST ONE IS IN ORDER TO SHOW THERE ARE BIGGER ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN DISCUSSED. SIMMONS ROAD ISSUES. THE FIRST ONE IT MAY VIOLATE THE

[01:35:10]

INTENT, IF NOT THE LETTER OF THE COMP PLAN. WE ARE WAITING FOR THE CITY TO

GET US A READING ABOUT THAT. MY READING OF THE COMP PLAN -- >> MAY I SPEAK TO THAT BRIEFLY. I KNOW MISS BOGG HAS PUT IN AN E-MAIL THAT THIS PARCEL IS WHAT THEY CALL AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND. IT DOES SOMEWHAT LIMIT WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO WITH IT. HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER SECTIONS OF THE COMP PLAN IT DOES CONTRADICT IT. IT'S DIFFICULT TO COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF INTERPRETATION.

I DO BELIEVE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STATES THE PERSON WHO INTREPTS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS THE CITY MANAGER. I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE GO WITH THAT BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. I AGREE WITH YOU.

>> YES. WHETHER IT VIOLATES THE LETTER OF THE COMP PLAN I HAVE NO IDEA.

BUT MY READING OF THE COMP PLAN SAYS IT VIOLATES THE INTENT OF THE COMP PLAN.

THERE ARE TWO POLICIES IN THE COMP PLAN AND I WORKED ON THE COMP PLAN BACK WHEN WE DID THE A-R, THE PREVIOUS TIME. PARKS AND REC, OR THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT WAS THE ONE I WORKED ON.

I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT'S IN THE COMP PLAN ABOUT THAT. THE DEFINITIONS OF

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND AND PASSIVE REC REEUATION. >> I AM NOT SHARING AN

OPINION ON THE CITIES HIRING OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO DO IT. >> I UNDERSTAND.

ALL I'M SAYING IS WE'RE WAITING TO HEAR ABOUT THAT. >> THE SECOND ONE TREE REMOVAL IN MY MIND IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSERVATION TAX AND THE COMMISSIONS RECENT CONSERVATION EFFORTS. SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED AT ALL IS THAT THE WATER FRONT PARK IS A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE CITY COMMISSION AND IT HAS BEEN FOR YEARS. IT'S BEEN THE NUMBER ONE OR NUMBER TWO GOAL OF THE CITY COMMISSION, THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK ISN'T EVEN ON THE LIST. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT, OR THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO PAY FOR THESE PARKS KM AND REC IMPACTS FEEDS. THAT'S NOT A BOTTOMLESS FUND.

MONEY SPENT ON SIMMONS ROAD PARK WILL THEN NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THE WATER FRONT PARK.

THERE ARE VARIOUS THINGS GOING ON WITH THE WATER FRONT PARK. THE CITY HAS HIRED ASSOCIATES TO WORK ON THE SHORELINE ASPECTS OF IT. A COUPLE OF OTHER FIRMS HAVE BEEN HIRED. THE WATER FRONT PARK IS MOVING FORWARD SO TO TAKE MONEY FOR A PROJECT THAT IS NOT IN THE CITY COMMISSION GOAL TO SPEND ON THAT IS PERHAPS NOT RIGHT.

OF THE 657 HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK, 117 OF THEM ARE IN THE CITY. 82% OF THEM ARE IN THE COUNTY. THIS WILL BE A PARK THAT LARGELY

BENEFITS COUNTY RESIDENTS. >> SO I KNOW, I'VE SPOKEN THIS BEFORE I. FEEL VERY STREET SIGNINGLY OUR COUNTY DOES NOT PITCH IN WHEN IT COMES TO PARKS AND REC AND IT SHOULD BE ON THE HOCK. HOWEVER, I'VE HEARD THAT'S BARKING UP A TREE LEADING TO NOWHERE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CITY MAP AROUND THAT AREA IT IS AN AMALGAMATION OF NOTHING THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU HAVE SQUIGGLE LINES THAT INCLUDE LAND AND CIRCLE BUT THEN DON'T INCLUDE THE FARM NEXT TO IT.

YOU HAVE A LINE THAT INCLUDES THIS ONE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT NOT THE OTHER ONE.

I THINK, UNFORTUNATELY, THE NORTH END OF THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM AS MUCH BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE CITY. BUT WHEN YOU START GETTING FURTHER OUT YOU START GETTING WELL, WHY IS SIMMONS COVE IN THE CITY BUT EAGENS BLUFF NOT. WE'RE NEXT DOOR.

MAYBE THE ISSUE IS NOT SO MUCH WELL, WHO IT'S SERVING AS SHOULDN'T WE JUST HAVE CITY

LINES MAYBE THAT ARE MORE REALISTIC THAT ARE NOT. >> WE HAVE TO GET THE CITY

PEOPLE TO WANT TO ENTER THE CITY AND WE CAN'T MAKE THEM. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> I USE THE HALF MILE RADIUS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE CONSULTANTS USE.

YOU HAVE TO DRAW THE LINE SOMEWHERE. >> RIGHT.

I AGREE AND I THINK THAT TO A CER CERTAIN EXTENT, YES.

[01:40:07]

WHERE IS THE MAJORITY OF THE USE COMING FROM LIKE WITH THE SOCCER FIELDS.

BECAUSE THERE'S NO SOCCER COMPLEX THAT RIVALS OURS OUT OVER THE BRIDGE YOU HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS THAT'S SERVING THE WHOLE THIS SIDE OF THE COUNTY. YOU KNOW, IS IT REALISTIC TO SAY THEN, WELL, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THE REC CENTER BECAUSE COUNTY RESIDENTS COME TO THE POOL.

SO IF YOU'RE ON THE SOUTH END OF THE CITY WHERE THE COUNTY ABUTS TO AND YOU HAVE NEIGHBORINGS ON THE COUNTY YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE PARK AMENITIES. BECAUSE YOU ABUT THE COUNTY.

>> IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SIT DOWN AND LOOK AT, I WAS LOOKING AT THIS DOCUMENT, THERE'S A DOCUMENT HERE THAT AN EVALUATION OF OUR PARKS AND THE LEVEL OF PARK THAT YOU HAVE AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IT SERVES. IT WAS REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE THAT IT PRETTY MUCH FIT ALL OF OUR, LIKE THIS PARTICULAR PARK IS SO MANY ACRES AND IT SERVES THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

THAT BY STATE OR NATIONAL STANDARDS WAS AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL.

I THINK THE MINIMAL, I THINK IT'S EITHER A COMMUNITY PARK OR WALK TO PARK, NEEDED FIVE HUNDRED RESIDENTS FOR IT TO BE MEETING THE MINIMUM OF PARK REQUIREMENT.

I WAS STUNNED WHEN I FOUND THERE WERE 117 RESIDENT HOUSEHOLDS IN THE AREA.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A GREAT DESIRE IN THE COUNTY FOR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES BUT I FEEL IN SOME WAYS WE'RE ENABLING THE COUNTY. THERE'S NO REASON FOR THEM TO PROVIDE A NEW SERVICE SIMPLY BECAUSE WE DO IT. AT SOME POINT THERE'S A REAL NEED, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMUNITY HAS REALIZED THIS YET OR NOT, BUT THOSE IMPACT FEES ARE GOING TO DRY UP SHORTLY.

WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF SPACE. WE'VE ASKED FOR A YEAR, THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST OF THE CITY TO PROVIDE THE BUILD OUT FOR OUR CITY. THIS WOULD GIVE US SOME GRASP OF HOW MUCH MONEY IS GOING TO COME IN IN IMPACT FEES. WHAT CAN WE ANTICIPATE AS REVENUE AND WHAT CAN WE ANTICIPATE AS IMPACT FEES AND HOW MUCH IN THE FUTURE CAN WE PLAN FOR MAINTENANCE. WE HAVE A WATER FRONT PARK COMING IN.

IT IS A NUMBER ONE, IT WAS A NUMBER ONE PRIORITY AT THE 2020-2019 VISIONING CENTER FOR COMMISSIONERS. I KNOW COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN EXPRESSED AND INTEREST IN BUILDING A NEW RECREATION CENTER. WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF MONEY FOLKS AND WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE SOME PRIORITIES ABOUT WHAT WE'RE SPENDING OUR IMPACT FEE MONEY ON. IT'S GOING END VERY SHORTLY. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THE WATER FRONT PARK. WE DON'T HAVE MONEY FOR THE RECREATION CENTER.

WE DON'T HAVE MONEY TO FIX THE RECREATION CENTERS WE HAVE WITH DOING MAJOR RENOVATIONS.

IT BECOMES A REAL CONCERN. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE ALL WANT TO APPROACH THIS.

I APPLAUD MICHAEL FOR DOING WHAT HE DID. I REALLY THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SLOW DOWN AS A COMMUNITY AND UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY VERY SHORTLY. THE SANTA CLAUS ISN'T GOING TO BE AROUND MUCH LONGER.

>> MAY I FINISH? >> YES, PLEASE. I'M SORRY.

>> AS SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE MENTIONED, WHAT'S THE RUSH? I WOULD SUGGEST THE WATER FRONT PARK BE BUILD FIRST AND THEN SIMMONS OR ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE SITE BE BUILT.

BY THEN THE COUNTY MAY HAVE MONEY IN THEIR NEW PARKS AND REC IMPACT FEE FUND TO CHIP IN FOR THIS. I REALIZE THAT'S PROBABLY UNLIKELY BUT ONE CAN HOPE.

SHOULDN'T OTHER SITES BE IDENTIFIED IN THE VALLEY WAY. THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE, PERHAPS MORE, CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SIMMONS SLIDE. EVALUATION MATRIX.

[01:45:10]

THIS IS A QUICK EVALUATION BASED ON CERTAIN CRITERIA FOR FOUR SITES.

SIMMONS ROAD, A GOLF COURSE SITE, AIRPORT SITE AND THE SOCCER FIELDS.

THE CRITERIA ARE IS IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMP PLAN INTENT, COMPATBLE WITH ORIGINAL PARK CONCEPT, CITY RESIDENCE SERVED, TREES ARE MOVED, HABITAT DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION.

HABITAT PROTECTED AFTER CONSTRUCTION. DETENTION REQUIRED, SPACE AVAILABILITY, AVAILABLE FOR PLAYGROUND, PARKING CLOSE BY, BATHROOMS CLOSE BY, NATURE TRAIL POTENTIAL, ADA ACCESSIBILITY FOR NATURE WALK, DOES IT HAVE SHADE, IT IS EXPOSED TO WIND, NOISE, POLLUTION. IT IS IN A VISIBLE LOCATION. WILL WE KNOW WHERE IT IS? DOES IT HAVE EASY BIKING ACCESS AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS? IS IT IN A DESIRABLE LOCATION? IS IT ON A CONNECTING STREET? IS IT O ON A BUSY STREET? WHAT IS THE SAFETY OF VEHICLE ACCESS TO IT? AND WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL FOR NIGHTTIME ILL IS IT ACTIVITIES IN THE PARKING LOT AND THE COST TO DEVELOPMENT? THEN I GAVE IT A SCORE BASED ON, BEING AS OBJECTIVE ABOUT THAT AS I COULD. WITH A FIVE BEING GOOD OR BEST

AND 0 BEING BAD OR WORSE. >> CAN YOU SEND THIS? CAN YOU HAVE THIS SENT TO US

FOR NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN TAKE SOME TIME? >> YEAH.

>> I WANT TO PUT IT UP HERE TO SHOW THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES.

THERE ARE SOME OBJECTIVE MEASURES FOR DETERMINING A SCORE FOR THOSE DIFFERENT LE LOCATIONS. YOU'LL SEE THE SCORE BELOW. SIMMONS ROAD IS A 66, I THINK THAT IS. THE GOLF COURSE SITE IS 95. AIRPORT IS 66.

SOCCER COMPLEX IS A 64. AT ANY RATE THERE'S MORE NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED HERE.

THIS IS NOT SO SIMPLE. >> YES. IF YOU COULD HAVE THAT SENT.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR NEXT MEETING AND WE CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

>> IF YOU COULD E-MAIL IT SO I CAN SEND IT TO THEM SO IT'S RECORDED.

>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >>>I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SINCE YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO

RESEND THIS TO THE MOTION YOU MADE. >> MA'AM, CAN YOU COME THE

TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE. >>>SINCE YOU RESENDED THE MOTION.

SANDRA NOOSE, 1883 LAKE SIDE DRIVE NORTH. SINCE YOU SAID THAT IT WAS GOING

TO BE RESENDED. >> RECONSIDERED. >>>RECONSIDERED BUT MS. BAHAN SAID YOU THURP GOING TO VOTEN O IT ANY WAY. THIS WOULD BE PRESENTED TO

COMMISSIONERS AND VOTED ON ANYWAY. >> DISCUSSED.

WE CAN'T TAKE IT OFF THEIR AND WAS MY POINT. IT'S NOT UP TO US TO REMOVE IT FROM THEIR AGENDA. WE CAN REQUEST THAT THEY DO OR WE CAN SAY CAN YOU PLEASE HOLD OFF OR WHATEVER. BUT IT'S NOT UP TO OUR BOARD TO SAY YOU KNNEED TO TAKE IT OFF T AGENDA. WE DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. THAT WAS MY POINT I WAS MAKING.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> JUST A POINT OF FACT IT WAS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE LAST

MEETING AND WAS PULLED. >> I KNOW. >> I DON'T KNOW.

NOT BECAUSE OF ANYTHING WE DID. >> WE DIDN'T HAVE A STAKE IN THAT EITHER.

NOBODY ASKED US. >> WHO KNOWS IF IT'S NOT GOING TO GET PULLED AGAIN.

WE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT. >> OUR AGENDA IS SET DIFFERENT FROM THE CITIES AGENDA. WE DON'T COMMUNICATE BACK AND FORTH AS TO WHAT WE'RE, YEAH.

OKAY. I THINK WE NEED TO TABLE THEN. LAST ONE.

WE HAVE TO WRAP IT UP. >>>CAN YOU MAKE A MOTION, AS A BOARD, YOU REQUEST THE

COMMISSION TAKE IT OFF THE AGENDA? >> YOU CAN.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION. >> LET HIM MAKE IT.

>> I MOVE THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK NOT BE CONSIDERED BY

[01:50:02]

THE CITY COMMISSION AT THEIR NOVEMBER 19TH MEETING BECAUSE FURTHER STUDY AND EVALUATION

NEEDS TO BE DONE BY THE PARKS AND REC. >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

>>>THERE'S A MOTION THAT HAD BEEN MADE FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE SIMMONS ROAD PARK THAT IT NOT BE CONSIDERED AT THE NOVEMBER 19TH CITY COMMISSION MEETING BECAUSE FURTHER STUDY

AND EVALUATION NEEDS TO BE DONE. >>>ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED?

I'M ABSTAINING. >>>I DON'T BELIEVE YOU CAN ABSTAIN.

>> YOU CAN'T ABSTAIN. NO MA'AM. YOU HAVE TO VOTE.

>> THAT'S THE REASON I ADVISED THE MAYOR HE DIDN'T HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

>> THEN OPPOSED. OKAY. LET'S WRAP UP FOR NEXT WEEK.

OR NEXT

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.