Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:01]

>> CALL TO ORDER THE JANUARY 16, 2020 HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING. MISS SAMANTHA, PLEASE CALL THE

ROLL. >> MEMBER HARRISON.

>> HERE. >> MEMBER POZZETTA HERE.

>> MEMBER CONWAY. >> HERE.

>> WE'VE GOT EVERYBODY HERE? WE'RE NOT SEATING ANYBODY NEW.

BOARD MEMBERS. LET'S START ON MY RIGHT WITH

EX-PARTEDE COMMUNICATION. >> NONE.

>> NONE. >> NONE.

>> LET'S COME BACK TO ME. MISS POZZETTA.

>> NONE. >> I GO TO PRETTY MUCH EVERY SITE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA BEFORE THE MEETING.

WHEN I WAS IN OLD TOWN UP AT JONES PROJECT, ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS CAME UP AND CHATTED WITH ME.

I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME. YOU'RE HERE?

>> YES. >> THANK YOU.

I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT WE CHATTED ABOUT JONES' PROJECT.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MADAM ATTORNEY, COULD YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES?

>> YES. TONIGHT WE HAVE, LET'S SEE, SIX CASES, TWO UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND FOUR UNDER NEW THAT WILL BE CONDUCTED AS QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.

THEY WILL BE ONE VARIANCE WHICH I'LL TALK ABOUT SEPARATELY.

QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING MEANS THERE WILL BE A PRESENTATION TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE INTO THE RECORD.

THEN THE AGENT AND/OR THE APPLICANT WILL COME TO THE PODIUM, IDENTIFY YOURSELF BY NAME AND ADDRESS, AND YOU WILL BE INTRODUCING EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY INTO THE RECORD.

YOU ARE PERMITTED TO CALL WITNESSES AND THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT MAY CROSS-EXAMINE EACH OTHER AND EACH OTHER'S WITNESSES. AND IF THERE IS AN APPEAL THAT WILL BE FILED OF ANY OF THE DECISIONS MADE TONIGHT, THAT APPEAL IS FILED TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITHIN 30 DAYS AND IT'S FILED BY THE APPLICANT ONLY.

AFFECTED PARTIES AT THIS TIME ARE NOT PERMITTED TO APPEAL CASES. THERE IS ONE VARIANCE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. WHEN WE GET TO THAT UNDER NEW BUSINESS, THAT VARIANCE, IN ORDER TO HAVE AN APPROVAL, IT REQUIRES A VOTE OF FOUR OF THE FIVE VOTING MEMBERS.

NOT JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY, WHICH IS THREE.

SO TO APPROVE A VARIANCE, IT'S A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE, FOUR OF FIVE. TO DENY THE VARIANCE, IF THE MOTION IS TO DENY, THEN THAT WOULD REQUIRE THREE TO PASS, NOT FOUR. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR MR. CHAIR. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS I'D

BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF COUNSEL? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO

[Item 2]

MINUTES. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE -- WE'RE CATCHING UP TONIGHT WITH MARCH 27, 2016, DECEMBER -- I SEE.

WE HAD A WORK SHOP AND A SPECIAL MEETING.

MR. HARRISON, I UNDERSTAND YOU HAD A REQUEST FOR SOME CHANGES?

>> MY MEMORY SEEMS TO GO BACK TO MARCH QUITE CLEARLY.

AS I LOOK AT THE MINUTES HERE, I HAVE A FEW NAME CORRECTIONS, SPELLING CORRECTIONS AND PUBLIC INPUT.

KAVANAUGH SPOKE. I THINK HIS FATHER SPOKE AND SUGGESTED THAT. LATER HE SAID HE HAD BEEN

MISQUOTED. >> IS THERE TAPE ON THAT?

>> THERE IS. >> CAN YOU CHECK IT?

>> YES. >> APART FROM THAT, NOTHING

ELSE. >> THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER CHANGES? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> I'M SORRY.

YOU CAN'T. ANY OTHER CHANGES? ANY DEBATE? IF NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE AGAINST SAY NO.

MOVING ON. OH, I APOLOGIZE.

I SKIPPED THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE OATH.

WE WILL DO THAT NOW. ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY THIS EVENING, PLEASE RISE AND SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH.

MISS SAMANTHA WILL ADMINISTER. >> RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?

>> I DO. >> THANK YOU.

BOARD MEMBERS, WE HAVE A FULL AGENDA TONIGHT AND WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS WHO WANT TO TESTIFY. IT IS LIKELY THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE END OF THE MEETING TO TALK ABOUT SOME VERY IMPORTANT THINGS, WE MAY NOT HAVE THE ENERGY TO DEBATE THEM IN A

[00:05:04]

SUBSTANTIAL WAY. THIS INCLUDES THE PROPERTIES OF CONCERN WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

IT CONCERNS THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND IT CONCERNS THE LIST OF CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES. SAL AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING TO FOCUS ON THOSE ISSUES WHICH WOULD LIKELY BE LATE AFTERNOON OF FEBRUARY 18TH BEFORE WE MEET WITH THE CITY COMMISSION. DOES ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH

THAT? >> 4:00?

>> I THINK IT MIGHT BE 3:30. 3:30 TO 4:30.

>> THAT'S A TUESDAY. >> THAT'S A TUESDAY.

CITY COMMISSION IS ON TUESDAY. WE'LL SEE HOW WE FEEL ABOUT IT AT THE END OF MEETING TONIGHT. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AS AN IDEA. WE SPEND SO MUCH TIME IN QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTIVITY, THAT WE SOMETIMES LOSE SIGHT OF OF OUR ROLE AS A PRESERVATION GROUP, AS A POLICY GROUP.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT IMPORTANT WORK. SAL SAYS I MIGHT HAVE DONE OKAY.

HE DIDN'T CORRECT ME. MOVING ON.

SAMANTHA GAVE ME AN AGENDA. ARE WE ON TO OLD BUSINESS?

[Item 3.1]

>> YES. >> THANK YOU.

CASE 2019-37 RICE ARCHITECT. IS THAT ADDRESS CORRECT, SAL?

>> YES. >> GOOD EVENING.

I'M THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH. THIS CASE, SEE IF MY COMPUTER COOPERATES, IS HDC2937. 505 CENTER STREET.

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO RENOVATE SOUTH AND EAST ELEVATION AND ADD A ROOF TOP TERRACE WITH CANOPY.

THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED C-3 IN OUR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.

AND PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1957. ACCORDING TO THE MASTER SITE FILE. WE HEARD THIS CASE BEFORE.

THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CONCERNS THAT WERE OUTLINED BY STAFF AND THE BOARD. WE CONTINUED THE CASE TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS.

AS AN UPDATE FROM THAT MEETING, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE SEVERAL CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED DESIGN, INCLUDING THE ELIMINATION OF THE REFLECTING POND AND RAILING AT THE FRONT ENTRANCE, REDUCTION TO THE NUMBER OF CIRCULAR WINDOWS ON THE EAST ELEVATION FROM THREE TO ONE LARGER WINDOW. CHANGE IN ROOF FORM OF THE ROOFTOP CANOPY FROM HIPS TO FLAT ROOF.

CHANGE IN ROOF TOP RAILING DESIGN.

STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE DESIGN AND BETTER REFLECT THE ORIGINAL DESIGN INTENT OF THE BUILDING.

BEING A MID CENTURY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, THIS BUILDING HAS A NUMBER OF CHARACTER DEFINING MATERIALS AND FEATURES SUCH AS THE ILL HRAOUPL NUMB AND GLASS DOOR FRONTS, THE AWNINGS, THE RED BRICK WALLS. AS HAS BEEN NOTED AT THE MEMBER HDC MEETING, THE STRUCTURE IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT RETAINS MUCH OF ITS HISTORIC INTEGRITY. THE BUILDING REPRESENTS AN IMPORTANT SHIFT IN DOWNTOWN FERNANDINA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS THE CULTURAL INFLUENCES THAT SHAPED ITS DESIGN.

CARE SHOULD BE TAKEN TO ENSURE THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT LOSE ITS ARCHITECTURE IN THE CITY. WHILE THE REDUCTION OF SOME OF THE CIRCULAR WINDOWS LESSEN THE IMPACT TO THE BRICK, THE ROUND SHAPE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD COMMONLY BE SEEN ON THIS STYLE AND PERIOD OF BUILDING. IN ADDITION, THE NOVELTY WINDOW AT THE FRONT ELEVATION IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. THE PROPOSAL CALLS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE ALUMINUM GLASS STOREFRONT.

IT IS RECOMMENDED IF THE STOREFRONT NEEDS REPLACEMENT IT UTILIZE THE SAME MATERIALS AS THE ORIGINAL.

THE PROPOSAL CALLS FOR THE WHITEWASHING OF THE BRICK SURFACES AND PAINTING OR COATING UNPAINTED BRICK IS NOT RECOMMENDED. WHEN CONSIDERING THESE PROPOSED CHANGES, STAFF FINDS A NUMBER OF THEM ARE IN CONFLICT WITH THE FOLLOWING SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARD ONE THAT STATES THE PROPERTY SHALL BE USED FOR ITS HISTORIC PURPOSE OR BE PLACED IN A NEW USE THAT REQUIRES MINIMAL CHANGE TO THE DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BUILDING. SECRETARY STANDARD TWO, THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE RETAINED AND PRESERVED, ALTERATION OF FEATURES THAT CHARACTERIZE A PROPERTY SHALL BE AVOIDED. SECRETARY STANDARD FIVE, DISTINCT FEATURE, FINISHES AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES OR CRAFTSMANSHIP THAT CHARACTERIZE A HISTORIC PROPERTY SHALL BE PRESERVED. SECRETARY STANDARD NINE, THAT NEW ADDITIONS, RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL NOT DESTROY HISTORIC MATERIAL THAT CHARACTERIZE THE PROPERTY.

THE NEW WORK SHALL BE DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE OLD AND

[00:10:03]

SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH SIZE, SCALE AND FEATURES TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS ENVIRONMENT AND SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARD TEN, THAT NEW ADDITIONS AND ADJACENT OR RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE UNDER TAKEN IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IF REMOVED IN THE FUTURE, THE FORM AND INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS ENVIRONMENT WOULD BE UNIMPAIRED. STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTEDED IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES AND MUST RECOMMEND DENIAL OF 2019-37.

THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME?

>> THEY'RE SEEKING A FINAL -- >> SAL, WHO'S SPEAKING TODAY?

>> I BELIEVE THE ARCHITECTS ARE HERE.

RANDY AND, I APOLOGIZE, MARK. COME UP, STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MARK AIKENS I'M WITH RICE ARCHITECT, GATEWAY BOULEVARD. QUESTIONS?

>> WE'RE TAKING QUESTIONS, OKAY. >> OR I'M HAPPY --

>> YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPEND A MINUTE AND TELL US WHAT YOU WANT

DID. >> WE REALLY LABORED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD LAST, IN PARTICULAR THE THEME THAT HAD BEEN PROVIDED BEFORE HAD FOCUSED ON A NAUTICAL THEME. THE IDEA WAS TO PARE THIS ALL DOWN. SAL'S ILLUSTRATED PRETTY WELL THE THINGS WE'VE CHANGED ON THIS.

IF I MOVE UP HERE AND SPEAK, YOU CAN STILL HEAR?

>> I CAN GO TO ANY PAGE YOU WANT.

>> THAT IMAGE WAS FINE. THE PREVIOUS IMAGE IS MORE AN AERIAL VIEW. WE DO THINK IT'S WORTH -- I KNOW YOU HAVE ALL GOTTEN THE PACKAGE THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED.

BY GOING THROUGH AND LOOKING AT THE CHARACTER OF THIS BUILDING AND THEN COMPARING THAT CHARACTER WITH WHAT YOU WOULD FIND IN A MID CENTURY MODERN BUILDING.

THE ATTENTION TO THE WINDOW OVER HERE WAS A STICKING POINT.

THOUGH EVERY MID CENTURY MODERN REPRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURE WASN'T, DIDN'T CONTAIN ROUND ELEMENTS LIKE THIS, IN FACT, I BELIEVE THE BOW HOUSE MOVEMENT HAD TRIANGLES IN THE CIRCLE.

THE TRIANGLE IN THE CIRCLE WAS ESSENTIALLY THEIR LOGO.

A SIMILAR REPRESENTATION OF THIS, A SIMPLE FORM, WAS WHAT WE USED TO ADDRESS THAT, RATHER THAN REPETITIVE THREE WHICH WAS NOT LOOKED FAVORABLE UPON. WE TOOK OUT THE RINGS HERE.

AGAIN, JUST MORE TO PRESERVE WHAT WE HAD.

I DON'T THINK IT WAS MUCH CONCERN ABOUT WHAT WE DID UP TOP. WE ARTICULATED THAT BETTER.

THE ROOFLINE UP TOP IS ESSENTIALLY A SCALED DOWN VERSION OF WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BOTTOM.

THE SCALE AND PROPORTIONS AND PLACEMENT OF THE COLUMNS.

THOSE ELEMENTS FIT WITH THE BUILDING AND WITH MIDCENTURY MODERN LANGUAGE. THEN THE RAILINGS, WE DID CHANGE THE RAILING STYLE. WE STRAIGHTENED THEM.

YOU MAY NOT HAVE NOTICED THAT. IN THE LAST, THERE WAS A JAW TO THAT RAILING AS IT CAME DOWN HERE.

WE DECIDED TO KEEP SIMILAR LINES, MOVE THE RAILING BACK A BIT. ESPECIALLY ON THIS SIDE, AND SIMPLIFY THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION.

I CAN'T SAY MUCH ABOUT THE DISLIKE OR THE REJECTION OF THE WINDOW IN THE FRONT. IT'S NOT A LOGO.

IT CERTAINLY HAS -- IT CERTAINLY HAS SOME THEME.

IT CERTAINLY HAS SOME SYMBOLISM, WHICH ARE IMPORTANT TO THE

[00:15:04]

CHURCH, WHICH CONFORMS TO THE FACILITY, IT'S THE ANCHOR.

THERE'S SOME SYMBOLISM HERE, NOT ONLY WITH THE NAME OF THE BUILDING AND THE NAME OF THE GROUP, BUT FOR THE CHURCH AND ITS USE. I'D SIMPLY DISAGREE WITH THE ASSESSMENT THAT THIS IS NOT PRESERVING AND ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF THIS BUILDING. EVEN WITH RESPECT TO MIDCENTURY MODERN, WHERE SIMPLE FORMS AND SOLUTIONS AND EVEN OFTEN TRIANGULAR ACUTE ANGLES APPEAR, USUALLY YOU WOULD FIND THEM IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN ENTIRE BUILDING THAT HAD ANGLES OF THAT SORT, BUT IT WAS NOT UNUSED. OUR GOAL HERE REALLY WAS TO TAKE EVERYTHING THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US AT THE LAST MEETING, TAKE THIS BACK AND REALLY PRESENT SOMETHING THAT HAD MORE ELEGANT LINES, SIMPLE LINES, AND THAT DIDN'T OFFEND YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF POST MODERN ARCHITECTURE. WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY

QUESTIONS. >> POST MODERN?

>> MID CENTURY MODERN. IT KIND OF CROSSES A COUPLE OF

LINES. >> I THINK WE'RE REALLY TALKING

ABOUT MID CENTURY MODERN. >> AGAIN, THERE'S SOME LINES

THAT ARE CROSSED THERE. >> QUESTIONS?

>> I WONDER IF YOU WOULD ADDRESS STAFF'S CONCERNS ONE BY ONE.

>> SURE. >> SEE WHETHER THERE IS ANY

WIGGLE ROOM. >> SURE.

>> SO I AGREE AND WE APPRECIATE YOU TAKING A LOT OF COMMENTS INTO IT. THIS IS A MUCH SIMPLER DESIGN, WHICH HONORS THE ARCHITECTURE MORE.

SO SOME OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS, I THINK THE ROOFTOP CANOPY I THINK IS MUCH MORE IN LINE WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING.

AND MUCH LESS OF A FOCAL POINT, WHICH IS GREAT.

SOME OF THE STICKING POINTS, TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE REVERSIBLE. SO THE WINDOW.

THE WINDOW ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.

THAT DAMAGING A CHARACTER TPAOEUING FEATURE OF THE BUILDING WHICH IS THE BRICK. THAT IS NOT REVERSIBLE.

SAME THING WITH THE PAINTING OF THE BRICK.

THE ROUND WINDOW I DO AGREE THAT IT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE THREE WINDOWS. IT DEFINITELY HAS A MUCH MORE STREAM LINED PRESENCE ON THAT WALL.

WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THAT FROM ROUND TO A MORE HORIZONTALLY EXPRESSED WINDOW? I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. THE OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE THE ELEMENT OF THE WINDOW THAT GOES THROUGH THE BRICK.

COULD SOMETHING SIMILAR BE ACHIEVED WITH A SIGN ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING THAT DOES THAT AND DOESN'T DAMAGE THE BUILDING? I THINK YOU'RE CLOSE.

>> THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES. HOW HOWEVER -- WELL, FIRST, MAYBE I'M DISPUTING A LITTLE BIT THE TERM IRREVERSIBLE. I WOULDN'T SUGGEST THAT THESE WERE IRREVERSIBLE, HAVING BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS AND CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME.

BRICK IS PIECE BY PIECE. ADMITTEDLY, YOU HAVE TO WEAVE SOME BRICK BACK IN TO RESTORE IT TO ITS PRESENT CONDITION.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS, YOU KNOW, RESTORING IT TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, WHICH IS WHAT IT IS NOW, I DON'T SEE THE PARTICULAR AFFINITY FOR THAT. THIS BUILDING ITSELF RIGHT NOW, IT REALLY DOESN'T PRESENT ITSELF VERY WELL.

EVEN AS A MID CENTURY MODERN EXAMPLE.

AND THE IDEA HERE IS TO, OF COURSE, HONOR MY CLIENT'S DESIRES HERE. AND I RESPECT YOUR REFERENCES TO SECRETARY OF INTERIOR GUIDELINES ON THIS.

BUT THIS BUILDING DOESN'T FALL UNDER THOSE GUIDELINES.

>> IT IS NOT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE DISTRICT, AND THAT IS TRUE. IT IS STILL A HISTORICALLY

[00:20:03]

SIGNIFICANT BUILDING IN ITS OWN RIGHT FOR THAT PERIOD IN THE CITY. THE OTHER THING THAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THIS BUILDING, UNLIKE A LOT OF OTHER MID CENTURY MODERN BUILDINGS, THIS BUILDING MAINTAINS MOST OF ITS INTEGRITY.

IT HASN'T BEEN ALTER. >> WHAT OTHER MID CENTURY MODERN BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN ALTERED THAT WOULD REFLECT THAT?

>> WE HAD ONE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET THAT WAS DEMOLISHED IN THE LAST YEAR, TWO YEARS. THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF THEM.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE HISTORY OF FERNANDINA AND THAT

EVOLUTION. >> I WON'T DISPUTE THAT NECESSARILY, IN TERMS OF THE EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURE.

AGAIN, I'LL GO ON TO YOUR NEXT PIECE, IF YOU HAVE MORE.

>> BRONZE VERSUS -- >> THAT'S A SMALL DETAIL.

BUT AN IMPORTANT ONE. THE WINDOW, THE STOREFRONT.

THE TWO ELEMENTS, THE CIRCLE ELEMENT AND THE FACT THAT IT'S BRONZE NOW, WHICH ISN'T A MAJOR CHANGE, BUT IT IS IN A WAY, BECAUSE IT TAKES AWAY ONE OF THOSE CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES OF THE BUILDING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN IN ITS PER PERIOD.

>> YES, BUT NOT EXCLUSIVELY. >> THAT'S TRUE.

>> THE CIRCLES OF THE WINDOWS, WE'LL HAVE THEM APPLIED NOT INTEGRATED. THEY CAN BE REMOVABLE.

>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND. >> RATHER THAN THE FRAMES OF THE CIRCLES PASSING THROUGH THE GLASS AND THOSE BEING SEPARATE PIECES OF GLASS, THEY WILL BE APPLIED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE GLASS. THEY CAN BE REMOVED AND RESTORED

TO LINEAR FASHION. >> OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I STILL NOTICED IS BRICK FINISH.

I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST TIME.

YOU MENTIONED YOU MIGHT LOOK INTO THE PROCESS AND IF IT'S

REVERSIBLE OR NOT. >> WHITEWASHING BRICK?

>> YEAH. >> IT CAN BE REVERSED, BUT, AGAIN PAINTED BRICK WAS NOT AN UNCHARACTERISTIC FEATURE OF MID

CENTURY MODERN ARCHITECTURE. >> SORRY POST MODERN.

I'M DISCUSSING PHILOSOPHY. MID CENTURY MODERN ARCHITECTURE.

SO, FOR INSTANCE, IF THE BUILDING WERE TO BE PAINTED RATHER THAN WHITEWASHED, EITHER WAY, THE IDEA BEHIND WASHING THE BRICK RATHER THAN PAINTING IT WAS EXACTLY THAT, THE TEXTURE.

YOU RETAIN SOME OF THE NATURE OF BRICK IN THE JOINTS WHEN YOU WHITEWASH RATHER THAN PAINT. THAT'S WHERE WE STOOD.

>> THANK YOU. >> I THINK I JUST WANTED TO SAY -- I MEANT TO JOT DOWN FAW OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK ARE BENEFICIAL THAT YOU'VE CHANGED. I LIKE THAT YOU'VE MINIMIZED THE ROUND WINDOW TREATMENTS. I POTENTIALLY COULD BE SWAYED WITH A SINGULAR CIRCLE ONE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE YOU REDUCED AND ELIMINATED AND DUE TO YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT THE ROUND ONE ON THE FRONT, THAT THAT POTENTIALLY IS REVERSIBLE.

THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN CERTAINLY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.

THE BOAT WINDOW IS STILL A BIG STICKING POINT FOR ME.

>> IS IT A BOAT OR AN ANCHOR? >> SORRY, THE ANCHOR WINDOW.

I FEEL LIKE IF THE IDEA IS TO HAVE SOME KIND OF ICONIC GRAPHIC SYMBOL OR SOME KIND OF IDENTIFYING SYMBOL OF THE STRUCTURE, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER WAYS TO DO IT OTHER THAN CUTTING A HOLE IN THAT WALL AND MAKING A WINDOW ELEMENT.

I'M SURE THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT COULD BE BROUGHT INTO THE MIX. I DO WANT TO DEFINITELY COMPLIMENT YOU. WE ASKED PEOPLE FOR CONTEXT IMAGES AND 3-D IMAGES SO WE, AS A BOARD, CAN UNDERSTAND, HOW'S THIS GOING TO FIT IN THE CONTEXT AND WHAT'S IT GOING TO LOOK LIKE WITH NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES? YOU'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF

[00:25:02]

PRESENTING THAT. MAKING THE UPPER MOST ROOF TO BE FLAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER 3-D LEVELS FROM STREET LEVEL I THINK REALLY HELPS MINIMIZE THE VIEW OF THAT UPPER STORIED FEATURE FROM THE GROUND.

IN MY MIND, THAT'S BENEFICIAL. KEEPING THE RAILING BACK FROM THE FRONT. THOSE ARE ALL GOOD DESIGN DECISIONS THAT KIND OF HELP MITIGATE SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS THAT I KNOW OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY.

SO I THINK REALLY FOR ME, THE BOAT WINDOW AND POTENTIALLY THE CIRCULAR WINDOW, OR THE CIRCULAR MOUNTED ELEMENTS FOR ME ANYWAY THAT ARE STILL KIND OF STICKING POINTS.

I WANT TO APPLAUD YOU FOR ALL THE OTHER CHANGES THAT YOU'VE

ADOPTED INTO THIS. >> WHAT ABOUT THE WHITEWASH?

>> YES. WHEN YOU PAINT A SURFACE, THIS IS A PAINTED BRICK WALL HERE. THE PAINTING, IF YOU'RE ADDING SO MANY MILLIMETERS OF PAINT ON THE WALL, WHEN THE WALL IS WHITE -- WHEN A BRICK IS WHITEWASHED, IT'S MORE LIKE A STAIN, LIKE

STAINING YOUR DECK. >> SO WHEN STAFF SAID IT WOULD BE PAINTED, HE WAS SPEAKING LOOSELY?

>> CORRECT. WE SHOULD TRY TO SHOW THAT CHARACTER IN THE RESOLUTION -- WE TRY TO SHOWTHAT IN THE 3-D I.

THE WHITEWASHING OF THE BRICK REALLY ALLOWS THE BUILDING TO

MAINTAIN THE BRICK. >> I TEND TO AGREE WITH PRETTY MUCH WITH EVERYBODY MEMBER POZZETTA SAID.

YOU SAID THE NOVELTY WINDOW ON THE FRONT AS BEING SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO GET PASSED.

I GUESS I WOULD ANSWER THAT THE TREATMENT TO THE BRICK WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING PAST.

I THINK THOSE ARE THE TWO MOST SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE DECISIONS THAT WOULD BE BEING MADE.

I THINK THE COLOR OF THE STOREFRONT WINDOW FRAMES AND STUFF, WHILE I AGREE WITH SAL, ALUMINUM WOULD BE MORE PERIOD APPROPRIATE, STOREFRONT WINDOW MATERIAL CAN GENERALLY BE CHANGED EVERY DECADE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ANYWAY.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN IRREVERSIBLE DECISION.

>> WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET THROUGH QUESTIONS FOR MARK AND CALL THE MEETING FOR DISCUSSION, IF THAT'S OKAY.

DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MARK?

>> WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE RAILING ON THE ROOF?

>> 42. >> THAT'S AROUND ALL FOUR SIDES,

42? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? MARK, COULD YOU COMMENT ON THE USE OF BRONZE AS A DESIGN ELEMENT THROUGHOUT LOOKS LIKE ON ALL THE RAILINGS AND THE EXISTING FLASHING OVER THE FLAT ROOF LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT 12 ICHES OR LESS.

LOOKS LIKE FROM YOUR DRAWINGS, I DON'T WANT TO READ TOO MUCH INTO IT, YOU'RE EMPHASIZING THE BLACK AS YOU MOVE FORWARD THERE.

>> THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY THE IDEA.

EMPHASIZING THOSE HORIZONTAL LINES, OFFSET THE COLOR, OFFSET THAT ROOF ELEMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD FIND IN MID CENTURY MODERN. IN TERMS OF THE WAY THAT ELEMENTS ARE EMPHASIZED VERSUS LIKE AN ART DECO WHERE YOU HAVE ALL THESE LINES THAT SORT OF ARE THERE WITHOUT HARD LINES.

THAT WAS REALLY THE IDEA. >> THEN YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY REPEATING THAT DETAIL WITH THIS ROOF?

>> RIGHT, EXACTLY. >> THANK YOU.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL MOVE INTO WHAT'S MY ORDER OF THINGS, SAL? PUBLIC MEETING, RIGHT? THANK YOU, MARK. APPRECIATE IT.

>> JOHN, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

>> WE'LL BE CALLING YOU BACK PROBABLY.

WITH THAT I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC MEETING, IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME ON 2019-37 515 CENTER STREET, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO COME FORWARD.

[00:30:07]

NO MID CENTURY MODERN ENTHUSIASTS WANT TO ENGAGE IN THIS POST MODERNIST DISCUSSION? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT THEN, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING AND ENTER FOR DISCUSSION. I HAVE WARNED MARK IT'S LIKELY WE'LL PROBABLY DRAG HIM BACK UP HERE AT SOME POINT.

BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE?

>> I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT THE ANCHOR WINDOW.

>> OKAY. >> BUT THE REST OF IT THEY'VE

DONE A GOOD JOB OF IT. >> I'M WONDERING IF THAT COULD BE MADE MORE OF A RECTANGLE. PEOPLE CONFUSED IT FOR A BOAT.

I CAN SEE THE ANCHOR OR THE INVERTED CROSS IN THERE, THE SYMBOLISM THERE. MAYBE IF IT WAS A RECTANGLE, TRIA TRIANGLE.

>> IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO HAVE UNDER THE BUILDING WITHOUT KAOUZ CAUSING IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE TO THE BRICK FACADE.

>> IS THE BRICK AND THE STOREFRONT.

I APPRECIATE THEY'VE LEFT THE CANTELEVERED FRONT.

THEY LEFT THE APPEARANCE OF THE FRONT.

WE CUT THROUGH THAT BRICK. I'M GOING TO GO RIGHT TO THE GUIDELINES. WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT DESIGN OR STYLISTIC IDEAS ABOUT THIS.

WE HAVE FOUR PAGES DEVOTED TO BRICK AND SPECIFICALLY WE SHOULD PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL BRICK AND THAT INCLUDES CUTTING, ALTERING AND PUTTING ANY SORT OF COATING ON IT.

WE GO EVEN IF IT IS A REVERSIBLE COATING.

THEY SAY NOT TO CLEAN IT IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

HOW CAN WE RECOMMEND PUTTING A COATING ON THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SAND BLASTED OR REMOVED? THAT'S MORE DAMAGE TO IT.

I THINK IT'S A NICE LOOKING DESIGN.

IT'S VERY CREATIVE. I APPLAUD THAT.

I LIKE WHAT IT'S DONE. BUT NOT IN THIS POSITION.

WE'RE IN A VERY STRATEGIC PERIOD OF HISTORIC BUILDING THAT WE DON'T HAVE MANY OF AND WE REALLY NEED TO CELEBRATE WHAT'S THERE.

>> WE FAILED TO ASK THE APPLICANT WHETHER THE WHITEWASHING WOULD PROVIDE ANY SECURITY TO THE BRICK OR WHAT IT WOULD DO TO THE BRICK OTHER THAN CHANGE ITS COLOR.

>> IT'S A NATURALIZING TREATMENT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE WATER PROOFING OF IT OR ANYTHING

LIKE THAT. >> WHICH IS A CONCERN WITH PAINT, TRAPPING WATER BEHIND A BREATHABLE BRICK.

THE LIME WASH WOULDN'T HAVE IT. I WOULD INTERJECT, IT'S NOT JUST THE TEXTURE OF THE BRICK THAT'S SIGNIFICANT.

IT'S ALSO THE COLOR OF THAT BRICK WHICH IS SIGNIFICANT TO THE PERIOD AND KIND OF PLAYS A PART IN THE CHARACTER OF THE

BUILDING. >> MY ONLY OTHER FEAR ABOUT THAT IS IF WE EVEN GO PAST THE BOAT OR THE ANCHOR, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THAT UP FRONT, THE NOVELTY WINDOW AND JUST TALK ABOUT THE WHITEWASHING OF IT, TO ME WE'RE TAKING A VERY OBVIOUS MID CENTURY MODERN 1957 STRUCTURE, GRANTED IT'S NOT GORGEOUS, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. AND WE'RE PUTTING ALUMINUM OR BRONZE OR BLACK WINDOWS IN IT AND WHITEWASHING THE BRICK SO WE'RE ALMOST CREATING A FINE ASIAN DINING EXPERIENCE INSTEAD OF A MID CENTURY MODERN BUILDING.

I FEEL LIKE IT WILL LOOK LIKE 2015 WHERE EVERY BIT OF BRICK IS PAINTED WHITE WITH BLACK WINDOW TRIMS. EVERY SHOPPING CENTER, THEY'RE REDOING ALL THEIR BRICK, THEY'RE PAINTING OR WHITEWASHING IT. THIS WILL BE STUCK IN LIKE 2015 THEY TRIED TO UPDATE THIS BUILDING AND WE LOSE THE

HISTORY. >> TELL ME IF THIS IS CORRECT.

JUST PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. IF YOU WERE TO WALK AROUND TOWN, AND THERE ARE SOME PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW, YOU WOULD FIND EXAMPLES OF RECENT PROJECTS THAT LOOK LIKE BRICK THAT HAS BEEN PAINTED. I'M PRETTY SURE MOST OF THOSE SITUATION WERE FAKE BRICK NOT ACTUALLY TRUE ARCHITECTURAL BRICK. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. THE TWO BUILDINGS WE HAVE THAT ARE PAINTED IS BECAUSE THEY WERE PAINTED LONG AGO BEFORE WE REALIZED THAT IT WAS NOT THE BEST THING FOR THE BRICK.

>> I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

PEOPLE WOULD SAY WHY IS IT OKAY WITH THAT? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PAINTED BRICK BUT IT IS NOT ACTUALLY BRICK.

>> IF APPROPRIATE, I'LL ADD A LITTLE SOMETHING.

[00:35:04]

YEAH, WE GO ON AT LENGTH IN THE GUIDELINES ABOUT PROTECTING BRICK. IT'S AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THIS BUILDING, AS IS THE EXISTING SILVER WINDOW ELEMENTS AND FLASHING. I THINK WE'VE BEATEN THE ANCHOR/BOAT POINT DOWN. I LIKE THIS BUILDING AS IT IS.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO APPROVE ADDITIONS TO IT TO ALLOW THEM TO MOVE UPSTAIRS AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR UPPER DECK AND, BY EXTENSION, THEY'RE PUTTING A NEW ROOF ON IT.

I'M FOR THAT. BUT THIS DARK BLACK BRONZE HORIZONTAL ELEMENT IS REALLY TAKING THIS BUILDING WAY AWAY FROM WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS AND TO SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.

SO QUESTION IS, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO HERE AT THIS POINT IN TERMS OF BOARD ACTION? DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE IT? I WOULD NOT BE INCLINED TO TURN IT DOWN.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY FAIR.

>> ASK THE APPLICANT. >> ASK THE APPLICANT, DO THEY WANT MORE DESIGN GUIDANCE FROM US?

>> ASK THE APPLICANT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

>> I SENSE THEY'RE ON THE VERGE OF BEING DENIED.

>> IF IT CAME FOR A VOTE RIGHT NOW, MY SENSE IS YOU'RE RIGHT.

>> MY QUESTION IS, IS THE APPLICANT PREPARED TO CONSIDER SOMETHING EL OR SIMPLY STICK WITH HIS DESIGN?

>> COULD YOU REJOIN US, PLEASE? >> SURE.

>> JUST STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN. >> MARK ENKINS RICE ARCHITECT.

>> JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.

>> YEAH. YOU KNOW, WE'VE LABORED CAREFULLY TO CREATE A BEAUTIFUL SOLUTION FOR OUR CLIENT.

WHAT I'M HEARING, OTHER THAN PUTTING THE ROOFTOP TERRACE UP THERE, YOU JUST WANT TO KEEP IT AS IT IS.

I THINK IT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. THERE'S A BIGGER PICTURE ITEM HERE WHERE WE LOOK AT BUILDINGS THAT ARE BUILT IN AND AROUND THE CITY, THE DEVELOPMENT JUST TO OUR SOUTH, I BELIEVE, IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE BEFORE LONG EVERYTHING IS SORT OF DISNEY WORLD, WHAT'S REAL AND WHAT'S NOT? THESE PARTICULAR BUILDINGS HAVE A PARTICULAR SIGNIFICANCE THAT I UNDERSTAND HISTORICALLY. THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING IS A MID CENTURY MODERN BUILDING. IT'S NOT A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE.

WHAT WE'VE DONE IS TO, LABORED TO CREATE A BEAUTIFUL EXPRESSION AND BEAUTIFUL SOLUTION FOR OUR CLIENT THAT MEETS THEIR NEEDS ON THEIR PROPERTY. I THINK WE'RE GOOD.

I UNDERSTAND ALL YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK WE'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

>> STAY WITH ME FOR A SECOND. >> DO WE WANT TO ASK HIM IF HE WANTS A VOTE ON IT OR IF HE WANTS TO CONTINUE?

>> AGAIN, I'M HEARING MARK WOULD NOT CHANGE HIS DESIGN.

>> WELL, I'D HAVE TO DO WHAT MY CLIENT SAYS.

>> I REALLY DON'T WANT TO VOTE THIS DOWN TONIGHT, DESPITE OUR DISAGREEMENT ABOUT FORM. YOU'VE TRIED VERY HARD.

WE APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T WANT TO FORCE THIS ALL THE WAY BACK TO A WHOLE NEW APPLICATION.

>> I DISAGREE WITH SOME OF WHAT YOU SAID.

WE'RE NOT SAYING WE WANT YOU TO LEAVE EVERYTHING THE WAY IT IS BUT WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO PUT THE ROOFTOP DECK.

I THINK YOU'RE 90% OF THE WAY THERE.

WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE OF THESE ISSUES.

THERE'S A PRETTY BROAD CONSENSUS FROM ALL OF US THAT ARE THE ONES THAT ARE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GET PAST.

I THINK YOU'RE CLOSE, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE SAYING AND TALK TO YOUR

CLIENTS AND SEE IF THERE'S -- >> I'LL CHAT WITH THEM.

>> THANK YOU, MARK. >> JOHN, ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS?

[00:40:07]

>> IS YOUR BIGGEST CONCERN WITH HAVING IT IRREVERSIBLE?

>> IS IT YOUR THINKING THAT WE WOULD ASK THEM TO CONTINUE THIS?

>> I'D RECOMMEND IT. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE OUR REQUEST.

>> THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THAT.

WE'RE TRYING TO WORK TOGETHER TO GET EVERYBODY WHERE THEY NEED TO

BE. >> FEBRUARY TO WHEN THEY'RE READY. CAN WE CONTINUE IT UNTIL WHEN

THEY'RE READY, TAMMI? >> WE NEED A SPECIFIED DATE.

>> MARCH? >> THANK YOU MARK.

APPRECIATE IT. WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT A DATE HERE.

>> MARCH 19TH. >> MARCH 19TH.

SO CONTINUE TO MARCH 19TH? >> YEP.

>> SECOND? ANYONE?

>> SECOND. >> MISS CONWAY.

>> YES. >> MOVED TO SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

ROLL. >> MEMBER HARRISON.

>> YES. >> MEMBER CONWAY.

>> YES. >> MR. MORRISON.

>> YES. >> POZZETTA?

>> YES. >> WHY DON'T WE ASK SAL FOR HIS

CRITIQUES? >> GOOD WORK.

NOT SURE EVERYONE SHARES THE DEPTH OF ARCHITECTURAL

[Item 3.2]

KNOWLEDGE. HDC2019-42 MR. STOKES FOR CAIRNS LOTS ONE AND TWO, OLD TOWN. HDC2019-42.

LOT ONE AND TO BLOCK 16 WHITE STREET.

AN OT-2 ZONED PROPERTY OUT IN OLD TOWN.

APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

T BOARD HEARD THIS CASE IN DECEMBER.

IT'S CONTINUED FROM THAT MEETING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO AMEND THE APPLICATION TO CLEARLY ADDRESS THE MIDLOT VISIBILITY CORRIDOR. THEY HAVE MADE THAT CHANGE AND HAS ALSO A FEW OTHER MINOR CHANGES, WHICH I CAN SHOW YOU.

IN TALKING WITH APPLICANT, THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT THAT DORMER.

THE DORMER SERVES A FUNCTION AS FAR AS MECHANICALLY IN THE ATTIC SPACE SO THEY DECIDED TO LEAVE THAT WHERE IT IS AND DECIDED TO ADDRESS THE MIDLOT CORRIDOR IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

WHAT THEY DECIDED TO DO IS TO DELINEATE THAT TEN-FOOT SECTION OF THE BUILDING ARCHITECTURELY BY CHANGING THE TEXTURE OF THE BUILDING WITH DIFFERENT SIDING WHICH DOES MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. AND YOU'LL SEE, PULL UP THE NEWER ONE. IT DOES SPAN THAT TEN FOOT SECTION REALLY HIGHLIGHTING THE VISIBILITY CORRIDOR BETWEEN THE TWO. SOME OTHER CHANGES THAT THEY DID. WE TALKED ABOUT THE SPACE BETWEEN THE PIERS. THEY ADDED WITH LATTICE FOR FUNCTIONAL REASON. THEY'VE ALSO RAISED THE HOUSE UP, THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION IS A LITTLE HIGHER, ONE BLOCK HIGHER THAN IT PREVIOUSLY WAS. THOSE ARE THE THREE CHANGES.

EVERYTHING ELSE WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MONTH WAS IN COMPLIANCE.

>> WHAT ARE THE PIERS? >> ONE BLOCK HIGHER.

>> THAT WASN'T SOMETHING WE ASKED?

>> THAT WAS A CHANGE THEY WANTED TO MAKE.

>> THAT'S FINE. QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I WAS NOT AT LAST MONTH'S MEETING BUT I DID WATCH IT. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT DORMER. WHAT IS THE MATERIAL ON WHAT

WOULD BE THE WINDOW SIDE OF IT? >> SAME THING THAT'S ON THE HOUSE, I BELIEVE. THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK TO THIS, BUT I BELIEVE AC MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THAT'S IN THAT DORMER.

>> GOT TO PUT IT SOMEWHERE. >> IS THERE A DETAIL IN THE DRAWINGS THAT TELLS US WHAT THAT LATTICE IS?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I IT THIS'S JUST THE DESCR DESCRIPTION.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. STOKES?

[00:45:08]

COME ON UP. >> JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, I THINK. YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> JOHN STOKES 9609 VICTORIA'S PL

PLACE. >> I ASKED WHAT IS THE LATTICE

ELEMENT GOING TO BE? >> IT'S A PRESSURE TREATED

MATERIAL. >> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR

MR. STOKES? >> I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON YOUR SOLUTION ON MIDLOT VISIBILITY CORRIDOR WAS CREATIVE AND THOUGHTFUL. NICE.

VERY SMART. GREAT TO SEE SOMEBODY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE MATERIALS IN A WAY THAT POINTS OUT WHAT WE'RE

TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. >> I'D LOVE TO TAKE YOUR

COMPLIMENT, BUT THAT WAS SAL. >> DON'T EVER TELL US THAT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I SUGGESTED IT TO SAL AND HE

SAID YES. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. STOKES? THANK YOU, SIR.

WE MAY CALL YOU BACK. SO WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 2019-42 LOTS ONE AND TWO BLOCK 16 OLD TOWN TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? ABOUT THE HOUSE OR ARCHITECTURE? WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING,

MOVE INTO BOARD DISCUSSION. >> I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS DONE EVERYTHING WE ASKED HIM TO DO.

>> I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT THE WINDOWS ARE PGT.

I MEANT TO ASK SAL. IS THAT ON THE APPROVED LIST?

>> FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, YES. >> AND I THINK BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN A QUESTION FOR AWHILE, WHAT CONSTITUTES ADDRESSING THE MIDLOT CORRIDOR? WHAT'S GOING TO BE ACCEPTABLE? IT'S HARD. IT'S BEEN HARD FOR US ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I AM GLAD THAT YOU CAME FORWARD WITH A SOLUTION TO PRESENT TO US.

IT'S SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH THE FACT THAT IT WRAPS AND IS PRESENTED ON BOTH SIDES, IT'S GOOD. I THINK, SAL, YOU SAID THAT IT ALSO IS RENDERED WITH THE VERTICAL ALONG THE INSIDE OF THE

PORCH. >> I BELIEVE IT WRAPS ALL THE

WAY AROUND. >> IT COMPLETELY WRAPS THAT

WHOLE ELEMENT. >> REMEMBER, THIS IS AN UNUSUAL LOT BECAUSE IT'S ON A BENDED STREET SO IT'S UNLIKELY, IT'S MUCH LESS LIKELY THAT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO FOLKS GOING BY.

THEY RESPECTED IT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

>> I HAD ONE THOUGHT ON IT. I APPRECIATE THE CHANGE IN MATERIALS. IT MAKES A LARGE VISUAL STATEMENT. MY QUESTION GOING BACK TO THE LAND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING OLD TOWN AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE MIDLOT CORRIDOR. SKITTED FOR SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN EITHER ROOF, ELEVATION, INDENTATION, EXTERIOR.

THAT IS A VERY OBVIOUS CHANGE. I WONDER IF THERE CAN BE A SLIGHT OFF SET PHYSICALLY AS WELL AS JUST AN APPLY SURFACE CHANGE SO IT LOOK LIKES THERE'S A REASON THAT THIS CHANGE IS RATHER THAN A RANDOM CHANGE IN SURFACE.

MORE OF A BUILDER DISCUSSION. LIKE AT MY HOUSE WHERE I HAVE THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL JOINING ONE IS A LITTLE OFF SET SO IT'S PURPOSEFUL AND LOOKS A LITTLE MORE INTENTIONAL THAN JUST A RANDOM CHANGING OF THE DIRECTION.

IT ASKS FOR A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE OF INDENTATION, IF POSSIBLE.

THAT'S MY ONLY THOUGHT ON THAT. >> MY THOUGHT, AND I FEEL LIKE WE TALK AB THIS EVERY TIME ONE OF THESE PROJECTS COMES UP.

FROM OUR STANDPOINT, AS FAR AS WHAT THE LANGUAGE IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND HOW IT READS AND HOW IT CAN BE INTERPRETED, I THINK A SOLUTION LIKE THIS, IT'S HARD TO ARGUE IS IN COMPLIANT WITH THE GUIDELINES, BUT AT LEAST FROM MY PERSONAL

[00:50:04]

PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T THINK THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ACTUAL CONTENT OF THE GUIDELINES AS IT WAS WRITTEN WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT DIFFERENTIATING THE MIDLOT CORRIDOR.

SO AS THIS PARTICULAR CASE IS CONCERNED, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MET THE CRITERIA, AS FAR AS HOW WE CAN DEFENSIVELY DEFINE IT. I HOPE THAT AS A BOARD, AT SOME POINT WE'RE GONNA TAKE IT SERIOUSLY AND ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT THIS AND LOOK AT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE.

WE TALK ABOUT, HOW CAN WE SHOW GRAPHICALLY SOME EXAMPLES OF HOW THIS REALLY SHOULD BE DONE SO THAT WE CAN SHOW THE APPLICANTS IN THE FUTURE BEFORE THEY START DESIGNING THESE PROJECTS WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACHIEVE AND WHAT THE INTENT OF IT IS. 50 YEARS FROM NOW PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO LOOK AT THE SIDING ON THIS HOUSE AND GO, OH, THAT'S WHERE THE OLD MIDLOT CORRIDOR USED TO BE.

IT'S JUST NOT GONNA BE ASSOCIATED LIKE THAT.

THAT'S WHAT THE REQUIREMENT WAS TO BEGIN WITH.

MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS LATER DURING BOARD BUSINESS.

I REALLY THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT AS A BOARD AND DO

SOMETHING ABOUT IT. >> HAVE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE BEEN HIRED TO REDO THE OLD TOWN GUIDE LINES.

YOU'LL HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK ABOUT THAT AT LENGTH.

YOUR CHANCE IS COMING. >> I DISAGREE IN A NUMBER OF YEARS TIME PEOPLE WALKING AROUND OLD TOWN WILL NOT NOTICE THIS.

I HOPE THAT THEY WILL. I HOPE THAT THEY WILL BE SUFFICIENTLY INFORMED AND KNOW THERE ARE MEDIA LOTS AND THERE ARE VARIOUS WAYS IN WHICH THOSE MEDIA LOTS ARE NOT.

AS THEY WALK AROUND, THEY WILL SEE EXAMPLES.

>> IS THAT DOWN THERE? >> I DOUBT ANYBODY WILL BE LOOKING AT THAT IN 50 YEARS TIME.

IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENT BEFORE REMOVE ON?

>> I'LL JUST REITERATE AND TAG ON TO SOME OF MISS KOSACK'S COMMENTS. WHAT I LIKE IS THE PEER SPACING ALIGNS WITH HOW WE'RE MARKING THAT MIDLOT CORRIDOR.

EVEN VISUALLY IT MIGHT LEND A LITTLE MORE TOWARD HOUSE, ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS THIS BIG, THEN WE ADDED ON THIS PIECE.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE TO APPROVE HDC CASE NUMBER 2019-42 WITHOUT CONDITIONS AND I MOVE HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW PART OF THE RECORD THAT HDC CASE 2019-42 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES TO WARRANT APPROVAL

AT THIS TIME. >> SECOND.

>> POZZETTA SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> MEMBER CONWAY. >> YES.

>> MEMBER MORRISON. >> YES.

>> MEMBER POZZETTA. >> YES.

>> MR. HARRISON? >> YES.

MR. SPINO? >> YES.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM COLD. LAST NIGHT I FELT PARTICULARLY

COLD SITTING BACK THERE. >> OH, THANK YOU.

[00:55:05]

W WOW.

>> I'M FREEZING. >> THIS IS HDC2019-45.

[Item 4.1]

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE.

PROPERTY IS ZONED C-3 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.

AS YOU STATED, THERE WAS A PART OF THE PDF THAT DIDN'T GET INTO THE PACKET. IT'S A 1 1/2 STORY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE. THIS ALLOWS THE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE CONSIDERED AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

LARGER PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS DESIRED IN THE FUTURE, DESIGNING THE STRUCTURE TO LOOK LIKE A CARRIAGE HOUSE ALLOWS THIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO BLEND IN WITH THE ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT EXIST CURRENTLY ON THIS BLOCK.

THE BUILDING WILL BE CONSTRUCTED UTILIZING MODERN MATERIALS SUCH AS HARDY LAP WHICH REPLICATES TRADITIONAL MATERIALS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND WITH THAT STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC GUIDELINES. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF HDC2019-45. THANK YOU.

>> BOARD MEMBERS, AS SAL PULLS THOSE UP, YOU CAN FORMULATE YOUR

QUESTIONS FOR HIM. >> I GUESS JUST ONE QUICK THING.

I NOTICED THAT IT SAYS ON THE APPLICATION THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE ON THREE SIDES OF THE PROPERTY THEN THIS DECORATIVE FENCE IN FRONT.

THAT C-3 ALLOWING YOU TO DO EIGHT FOOT FENCES?

>> YES. >> IS THERE A DETAIL ON WHAT

THAT EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL BE? >> YES.

>> IT'S NOT CHIP AND DALE THOUGH.

>> OKAY. >> DO WE KNOW WHAT THE TRANSITION IS FROM THREE FOOT TO FIVE FOOT, HOW THAT'S ACHIEVED?

OR IS THAT A MIRANDA QUESTION? >> WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT.

>> THERE'S A PRECIPITOUS DROP IN HEIGHT.

ARE WE ASKING SAL QUESTIONS OR AM I JUST TALKING? CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT THE ZONING IS ON THE IMMEDIATELY

ADJACENT PROPERTIES. >> THEY'RE ALL C-3.

>> EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SOME RESIDENCES IN THERE.

>> CORRECT. >> THE NEW BUILT WHITE HOUSE?

>> C-3. >> CAN WE SEE A PICTURE OF THE

STRUCTURE? >> WORKING ON IT.

>> IS THAT RIGHT. THERE'S A MILLER HOME.

ANOTHER HOME. THEN THIS ONE.

>> WITH THE BIG TREE. >> IT'S A BEAUTIFUL FENCE.

>> WE TOLD YOU WE COULD IDENTIFY BUILDING.

DO YOU KNOW WHO THE ARCHITECT WAS BEFORE?

>> YEAH. >> WE CAN ALSO --

>> ARCHITECT 309. THERE IS A FRONT OF THE PROPERTY

[01:00:10]

THAT'S BEING KEPT IN GOOD SHAPE. CERTAINLY IMPROVED.

THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE CARRIAGE HOUSE THERE SHOULD THE BUSINESS FAIL AND THEY DECIDE TO SELL THE LOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES.

YOU'VE GOT THE GARAGE READY TO GO.

>> DO YOU? >> YOU NEVER KNOW.

>> YES, WE DO HAVE AN 8 FOOT FENCE.

WE HAVE THE MINOR'S RESIDENCE, STEAM BOAT HOUSE.

A PRIVACY FENCE. ALSO NINA'S HOUSE HAS THE SAME FENCE. WE'RE CONTINUING WITH THAT SAME STYLE, THE EIGHT FOOT PORTION. NOW, WE ARE WORKING WITH NINA ON WHERE THE TRANSITION HAPPENS. WE WERE GOING TO DROP THE HEIGHT ROUGHLY IN THE FRONT SIDE. SHE'S ASKING WE EXTEND IT FURTHER EAST. WE'RE PULLING IT BACK ANOTHER 20 FEET OR SO FROM THE FRONT. BASICALLY THE FRONT HAS THE CHIPPEN DALE LOOK AT THREE FEET. IT RETURNS BACK ON THE LEFT SIDE ABOUT 15 FEET THEN JUMPS UP EIGHT.

WE GOT EIGHT ON THE THREE SIDE. ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE IT'S GOING TO GO BACK ABOUT 30 FEET BEFORE IT JUMPS UP TO EIGHT FEET AGAIN. SO THERE'S TWO TYPES OFFENSING.

WE'VE GOT A MINIMAL DRIVE WAY WHICH WILL BE PAEUFRS.

THE REST OF THE SITE IS PRETTY MUCH PLANTING BEDS FOR THE FLOWERS. FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING IS ESSENTIALLY THE RETAIL SPACE WITH THE ADA BATHROOM, COOLERS, FLOWER, A WORK AREA. NEXT IS STORAGE, AC WITH A STAIR

GOING UP TO IT. >> ARE THOSE RAISED BEDS?

>> YES. >> DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE

YOU WANTED TO OFFER BEFORE WE -- >> I JUST THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO

SEE THE STREET SCAPES. >> WE GAVE YOU THE STREET SCAPE TO SHOW YOU WHAT'S HAPPENING ALONG THAT ENTIRE STREET IN TERMS OF SCALE GOING FROM THE NEW ZION BAPTIST CHURCH TO THE FAR MOST CORNER. THERE ARE TWO EMPTY HOUSES RIGHT NOW, WHICH ARE 12 AND 14 SOUTH TENTH STREET.

THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT, SLIVER OF LOT NEXT TO THAT.

THEN THERE'S OUR HEIRLOOM YARD. YOU SEE OUR BUILDING IS PUSH BACK 70 FEET FROM THE FRONT. NEXT HOUSE THE NINA WEST HOUSE WHICH IS EIGHT FEET UP TO THE FRONT.

THIS IS THE STEAM BOAT HOUSE. >> THAT'S ALL TO SCALE.

>> THAT'S WHY YOU HIRE THE BEST. WE DO DRAWINGS TO SCALE.

>> THE TREES? >> THE RELATIVE CANOPY, MOST OF IT GOES OUT OVER THE STREET. IT'S ALREADY BEEN PRUNED UP.

>> IS THAT 48 INCHS? >> IT'S ACTUALLY 42.

WE GOT THE SURVEY BACK. WE'RE KEEPING IT.

IT'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE. OH YEAH.

WE'RE WORKING AROUND IT. >> DO YOU DO ANY SPECIAL

ANTI-COMPACTION OVER THE ROOTS? >> YEAH.

WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH PREAPPLICATION TRC.

WE'VE GOT THEM WORKING ON THE STORM WATER IN CIVIL.

WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT AS MINIMAL AN IMPACT AS POSSIBLE USING THE PAVERS. WE'LL SEE HOW THAT WORK.

>> MAYBE PUT SOME UNDER GROUND RETENTION IN WITH THIS?

>> NO. FOOTPRINT'S 625 SQUARE FEET.

I'M HOPING THAT'S NOT GONNA KILL US.

>> IT'S GUARDED. >> ONE WOULD THINK.

DO I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE ELEVATIONS.

IT'S DONE LIKE A CARRIAGE HOUSE STYLE.

LAP SIDING, METAL ROOF. I THINK THE WINDOWS LOOKING AT VERY TRADITIONAL LOOK. LITTLE SHED ROOF.

YOU CAN SEE THE STEPS GOING UP TO THE STORAGE AREA.

AS WE GET FURTHER DETAIL, THE RAILING, WE'LL PROBABLY GO CHIPPENDALE TO MATCH THE FENCING, IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE REVISION ON THAT, TO KIND OF CARRY THAT ON.

>> WE'D LIKE THAT TO BE IN THE MOTION.

>> CAN I ASK WHY IT IS EIGHT FEET?

>> IN COMMERCIAL IT IS PERMITTED TO BE EIGHT FEET.

>> I UNDERSTAND IT IS. >> THE NEIGHBORS ALREADY HAVE

EIGHT FOOT FENCES. >> WHAT DOES THIS BACK UP TO?

[01:05:07]

>> I THINK RESIDENTIAL ON THE BACK SIDE.

RIGHT, SAL? NINA WEST IS OVER ON THIS SIDE.

THEY'RE NOT VERY WELL MAINTAINED RESIDENCES ON THIS SIDE.

THAT IS A NEW ONE. RIGHT.

IT'S A HODGE PODGE OFFENSING. THERE'S A PICKET FENCE THAT IS

BEING REMOVED. >> LARGE GATE GOING TO MATCH THE

CHIPPENDALE DETAIL OF THE FENCE? >> YES.

>> THERE'S NO COLORS MENTIONED. >> NOT YET.

WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IT THIS WEEK.

WE'RE PROBABLY GOING WITH A COTTAGEY GREEN SIDING, WHITE TRIM, WHITE WINDOWS. METAL ROOF, PROBABLY A DARK COLOR. IT'S STARTING TO GET MORE EARTH TONES, ESPECIALLY PUSHED BACK TO KIND OF MAKE IT A LITTLE JEWEL.

THE GARAGE DOORS WE'RE PROBABLY LOOKING A STAINED LOOK TO GET A

MUCH MORE NATURAL FEEL. >> IS THE ROOF HEIGHT, I GET THE GIST THAT POTENTIALLY THIS COULD BECOME AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AND THE MAIN HOUSE WOULD BE THERE. OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I CAN REMEMBER WHAT THE REQUIRED HEIGHT IS.

>> 24.6. >> SO IT MEETS?

>> YES. >> THAT WAS INTENTIONAL.

OBVIOUSLY, COMMERCIAL, WE COULD GO UP TO, WHAT, 45? THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT CONTEXT. THIS SEEMED -- THEY DIDN'T NEED TO GO VERTICAL. THEY DIDN'T NEED THE EXTRA SPACE. SO WE JUST MADE IT A STORY AND A HALF AND TREATED IT AS AN ACCESSORY BUILDING.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I SEE A WATER TABLE AT THE BASE. ARE WE ON SLAB?

>> WE'RE GOING TO BE COUPLE COURSES UP.

THEN THE WATER TABLE WILL BE CLOSE TO GRADE.

>> SO WILL YOU SEE PIERS? >> BECAUSE IT'S GOT TO BE ADA COMPLIANT, WE HAVE TO BE AT A CERTAIN HEIGHT AND GRADE AND MAKE IT A SMOOTH TRANSITION. IT WILL BE BLOCK COMING UP BEFORE WE GET FRAMING UP. FROM THE OUTSIDE --

>> THAT COVERS THE BLOCK. >> IT COVERS EVERYTHING.

>> THERE'S NOTHING ON THE LINE? >> OTHER THAN THE TREE AND THE

FENCE. >> IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY OF THAT ONE TREE THAT'S RIGHT IN THE APEX OF THE TURN FOR THE

DRIVE WAY BEING SAVED? >> NO.

>> DO WE HAVE TO MITIGATE THE TWO COMING OUT?

>> THAT'S OUR NEXT PHASE. OBVIOUSLY, THE BUILDABLE AREA AN PAVING OR THE FOOTPRINT AREA WE'RE ALLOWED TO REMOVE IT.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME MITIGATION.

BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING BACK SO MUCH PLANTING ALREADY, THAT'S WHAT WE WILL BE TALKING TO THE CITY ABOUT.

>> THAT'S OUTSIDE OUR PERVIEW. >> YES.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I'D JUST COMMENT, JOSE, SUCH A WONDERFUL SOLUTION TO CREATING A LITTLE COMMERCIAL SPACE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOWN THE ROAD SOMEBODY CAN

EVOLVE AND DO SOMETHING ELSE. >> WE WANT TO MAKE IT A UNIQUE DESTINATION. HOW MANY SALES DO WE HAVE

LOCALLY? >> NOT ENOUGH.

>> THIS BLOCK IS COMING ALONG NICELY AS A RESULT OF THE STEAM

BOAT HOUSE WORK. >> YES.

>> CUTE LITTLE HOUSE THAT FITS PERFECTLY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

LET'S HOPE THE GOOD WORK GOING ON ENDS UP SOUTH 11TH STREET.

OKAY. IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR MR. MIRANDA, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO PUBLIC HEARING ON 2019-45. WE'RE OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING OF 2019-45 20 SOUTH TENTH STREET.

IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC MEETING MOVE INTO BOARD DISCUSSION. BOARD MEMBERS, I HAVE HEARD A COUPLE OF CONDITIONS. I'M GONNA ASK, SAL.

ON THE FENCE, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE THINGS.

DO WE NEED TO PUT THAT IN THE MOTION?

>> COLOR. >> COLOR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. YOU HAVE IS A LIST, A BOOK.

>> YES. >> NOT A SPECIFIC LIST OF COLOR.

WHAT WE LOOK FOR ON COLOR IS THAT THEY OCCURRED AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY AN WERE SEEN IN FERNANDINA.

RULES OUT SOME OF THE NEON COLORS.

>> WHEN YOU SAY TURN OF THE CENTURY, YOU DON'T MEAN 1999.

>> SO IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY,

[01:10:06]

MR. MIRANDA. ANYBODY ELSE?

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> THE ONLY CONDITION I GUESS I THOUGHT I HEARD WE WOULD WANT TO INCLUDE IN THE MOTION IS THAT COULD CHIPPENDALE DETAIL BEING USED ON THE FENCE IS AN ACCEPTABLE RAILING DETAIL ON THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.

OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HEARD ANYBODY SAY ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION. >> PLEASE DO.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE CASE 2019-45 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE CHIPPENDALE STYLE DETAIL ILLUSTRATED ON THE FENCE DETAIL WOULD BE AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE FOR THE RAILING DETAIL ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINING OF FACT AS PART OF THE RECORD THAT 2019-45 AS PRESENTED IS COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECRETARY CODE TO WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>> SECOND. >> MOVED.

MORRISON SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> HARRISON? >> YES.

>> MEMBER SPINO. >> YES.

>> MEMBER CONWAY. >> YES.

[Item 4.2]

>> MEMBER MORRISON? >> YES.

>> MOVING ON PEPPERS 20 SOUTH TENTH STREET.

THAT'S THE WRONG ADDRESS. >> 530 CENTER.

>> I'M SORRY. >> 530 CENTER STREET.

>> THIS IS HDC2019-46. IT IS, THE ADDRESS IS 530 CENTER STREET. IT IS TO RESTRIPE A PARKING LOT AND CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT WILL SERVE AS A STORAGE ROOM A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, MASONRY PRIVACY WALL AND THE ADDITION OF EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS ON THE MAIN BUILDING. THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED C-3 WITHIN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS.

IT WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1973. SO IT IS A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL ONE WAY TRAFFIC PATTERN IN THE PARK LOT TO ALLOW FOR BETTER FLOW. THE STORAGE ROOM DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND PRIVACY WALL WILL ADDRESS THE FUNCTIONAL NEEDS OF THE BUILDING WHILE SCREENING THEM FROM VIEW.

ADDITIONS OF THE EAST AND WEST ELEVATION ARE IN KEEPING WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THIS NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.

ONLY NOTE STAFF HAD THAT WASN'T IN THE REPORT WAS, I ASKED THE APPLICANT TO BRING A SAMPLE OF THE COLOR OF THE WALL.

IN THE PHOTO IT SHOWS UP AS A SALMONISH COLOR.

I'M GOING TO ASK ABOUT THAT. IT MIGHT BE SERVED BETTER TO BE ONE OF THE OTHER COLORS. WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT. STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARD AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC20 HDC2019-46.

>> FROM MEMORY, WE HEARD SOME MECHANICALS HERE THAT HAVE BEEN OF A CONCERN TO US. IS THERE ANOTHER THING THAT CAN

BE DONE TO MITIGATE THAT? >> NO.

MECHANICALS AREN'T BEING WORKED ON.

THOSE MECHANICAL, THAT ISSUE CAME ABOUT BEFORE WE HAD THE STANDARDS FOR MECHANICAL SCREENING.

WE DO ENCOURAGE MECHANICAL SCREENING EVEN IF IT'S GRANDFATHERED TO BE SCREENED FROM VIEW.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT -- IS THIS ONE OF YOURS? GOOD TO SEE YOU. YOU'RE STAYING BUSY.

>> I DID GET A SAMPLE. THIS IS KIND OF A SALMON COLOR.

IT'S NOT AS DARK AS THE BRICK. >> YOU NEED TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF

FOR THE RECORD. >> SURE.

ARCHITECTURE, 1365 MINUCCI ROAD. >> THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT REALLY IS TWO PARTS. FIRST OF ALL TO IMPROVE THE GUEST EXPERIENCE FOR THE RESTAURANT INCLUDING MORE FUNCTIONAL PARKING, CLEANING UP THE PARKING LOT, CLEANING UP THE SIDES OF THE BUILDING WHERE THE UTILITIES THAT ARE BUILT IN

[01:15:01]

WOOD. IMPROVE THE FINISHES AND COLORS SO THAT WE HAVE PERMANENT MATERIALS.

ALSO WANT TO IMPROVE THE STORAGE FUNCTION.

PLACE THE UTILITY FUNCTIONS UNDER ROOF AND THEN THE WALK IN COOLER AND KITCHEN, PUTTING THAT OUTSIDE TO IMPROVE THE KITCHEN FUNCTION, THEN ORGANIZE THE STORAGE EXTENSION AND TRASH DISPOSAL. SO DESIGN REASONING IS THAT THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL, I GUESS BANK BUILT IN 1973.

AND SURVIVED WITH PEPPERS RESTAURANT COMING ALONG.

AND ABOUT 2011, 2012, THE CONSTRUCTION WAS GOING ON.

OPENED AROUND 2013, I BELIEVE, OR SHORTLY BEFORE IT.

I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> IS THERE A DUMPSTER THERE NOW?

>> THERE IS A DUMPSTER. IT KIND OF SITS IN THE PARKING LOT ON AN ANGLE AND HAS A TEMPORARY WOOD STRUCTURE AROUND IT. IT REALLY IMPEDES THE TRAFFIC FLOW OF THE PARKING LOT. IT REALLY CUTS OFF THE PARKING TO WHERE IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK VERY WELL.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS FREE THE PARKING LOT UP TO WHERE THE CUSTOMERS CAN USE IT. ALSO HAVE MORE FUNCTIONAL TRASH

DISPOSAL AREA FUNCTION. >> THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO TIDY UP THESE AREAS.

>> THE OWNER JUST REALLY WANTS TO KIND OF CLEAN IT UP AND ENHANCE THE BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPING THAT THEY HAVE STARTED THERE AND KIND OF CARRY THAT THROUGHOUT THE SIDES AND

THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. >> QUESTIONS?

MR. POZZETTA? >> I'M JUST TRYING -- LOOKING AT THE DRAWINGS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M SEEING WHAT I THINK I'M SEEING. THERE'S A NEW UTILITY YARD AT THE TOP AND A NEW -- THAT ACTUALLY TOUCHES THE BUILDING.

ALSO A NEW UTILITY YARD AT THE SOUTH.

>> THEY'RE ACTUALLY EXISTING RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY'RE WOODEN

STRUCTURES. >> I SEE IT SAYS STUCCO.

ARE THOSE WALLS GOING TO BE STUCCO PANELS ON THOSE?

>> YES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE STUCCO PANELS BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ON A STEEL FRAME. SO WE HAVE TO PUT A FOUNDATION IN THAT WILL SUPPORT THE STEEL STRUCTURE AND FRAME THAT OUT WITH STEEL AND METAL AND THEN GO WITH THREE PART STUCCO AND MATCH THE COLOR ON THE EXISTING FASCIA AND SOFFIT.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO USE THE BRICK. WE DIDN'T THINK WE COULD MATCH IT. IT WOULD KIND OF INTERRUPT THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING IN A WAY THAT WOULDN'T BE DESIRABLE.

SO WE PREFER TO OFFSET THAT SO WE CAN GO ALONG WITH THE SOFFIT AND FASCIA ON THE EXISTING BUILDING.

>> WHAT IS THE FINISH ON THE STUCCO?

>> IT'S A SAND FINISH. IT'S MEANT TO MATCH THE EXTERIOR

THAT'S EXISTING. >> IT A THREE-PART STUCCO OR

SYNTHETIC? >> THREE-PART.

>> QUESTIONS? MISS CONWAY?

>> I ALSO LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THAT TAKEN CARE OF.

IT WILL BE VERY GOOD FOR THAT WHOLE PERIOD.

I KNOW YOU WILL WORK VERY HARD. I LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THEY'RE WORKING ON IT ALL THE TIME.

THEY DO A NICE JOB. >> WE'RE ADDING THE LANDSCAPE AREA, WHICH IS NEXT TO THE DUMPSTER SPACE.

>> GOOD. >> WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER AN ALTERNATE COLOR FOR THIS MASONRY PRODUCT BESIDE THE

SALMONY COLOR? >> WE LOOKED AT SEVERAL.

WE HAVE A PALLETTE THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT.

WE'VE TRIED NOT TO MATCH THE BRICK ON THE BUILDING BUT TO GO

TO A WHITER COLOR. >> RED BRICK.

[01:20:13]

>> YOU'RE DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A MISS, BUT HAVE SOME MAYBE WARMER TONES TO IT, LIKE 139.

>> MAYBE TRYING TO MATCH THE GROUT COLOR OF THE BRICK WOULD PROBABLY BE WHAT I WOULD TRY TO PULL OFF.

>> SOMETHING THAT WENT AWAY. >> IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE. THOSE WERE SOME OF THE OPTIONS THAT WERE AVAILABLE. IF WE GO TO COLORED CONCRETE, THAT'S FAIRLY DIFFICULT TO CONTROL.

SO WE WANT TO GO WITH A COLORED BLOCK.

WITH A COLORED BLOCK, WE CAN GUARANTEE THAT THE COLOR OF THE WALL AND OF THE STORAGE BUILDING ARE GOING TO BE CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM. IF YOU LOOK AT THE PATTERN ON THE BRICK, IT'S REALLY A STACK PATTERN AND SO THE EXAMPLE WE SHOWED WITH THE APPLICATION OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO LAY THE BRICK UP DOES CONFORM FAIRLY WELL WITH THE STACKED BOND LAYUP OF THE

BRICK ON THE BUILDING. >> WE ALSO MAKE A NOTE OF A TRIM COLOR OF AUBURN THAT'S IN THERE. THERE'S NO COLORED DRAWINGS IN THERE. WHAT WILL ACTUALLY BE PAINTED

THAT TRIM COLOR? >> TRIM COLOR WILL BE THE DOORS, THE DOOR FRAME AND THE IRON GATES.

THERE ARE A SET OF IRON GATES ON THE FRONT OF THE DUMPSTER, AS WELL AS AN IRON PANEL, WHICH WILL BE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE GATE SO THAT YOU CAN'T SEE THROUGH THE GATE.

AND THEN ON WHAT IS THE WEST/SOUTHWEST CORNER, THERE'S A NEW ENCLOSURE ON THAT CORNER. THEN WE ARE SECURING THAT SPACE WITH A TALL IRON GATE STRUCTURE AND FENCE.

SO AS TO BE ABLE TO SECURE THE SERVICE YARD THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THAT WILL NOT HAVE METAL PANELS BEHIND IT. THAT WILL BE A CLEAR OPEN DESIGN GRATE. SO THAT WILL BE WHERE THE ACCENT

COLORS ARE OCCURRING. >> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. RICE?

>> I HAVE ONE COMMENT. I CAN SEE ON YOUR DRAWINGS THAT YOU ESTABLISHED THE STUCCO CONTROL JOINTS TO KIND OF MIRROR THE SPACING OF THE WINDOWS UP ABOVE.

I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF BREAKING DOWN THE SCALE OF THAT. OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE A GIANT

BLANK WALL. >> EXACTLY.

>> THAT'S SOMETHING I DEFINITELY WILL LOOK TO HAVE CARRIED THROUGH TO FINAL COMPLETION. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT

ELEMENT TO THIS. >> THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT,

YES. >> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> I'D JUST LIKE TO COMPLIMENT YOU AND THE OWNERS FOR THIS EFFORT. I WAS SO PLEASED WITH THIS TO SEE IT TURN INTO SOMETHING VIBRANT AND USEFUL.

THE WOOD FENCING HAS OUTLIVED ITS USEFUL LIFE.

YOU'RE TAKING IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL.

I THINK THAT'S ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. RICE. >> PUBLIC HEARING.

BOARD MEMBERS AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE INTO PUBLIC HEARING

FOR CASE 2019-46. >> PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> I PUT MY NAME DOWN. >> ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THE

PUBLIC? >> I AM.

>> CAN I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN CALL YOU?

>> SURE. >> TRY IT ONE MORE TIME.

OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 2019-46.

R-4 DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS 530 CENTER STREET.

IF ANYBODY WISHES TO SPEAK, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO COME FORWARD. PLEASE START BY GIVING US YOUR

NAMED A AND DRESS. >> BLAKE HARDEN I'M REPRESENTING 3HL LLC BASED OUT 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE IN JACKSONVILLE.

WE OWN THE PROPERTY NEXT TO PEPPER'S.

SO THAT'S 508 CENTER STREET. >> WEST?

>> I BELIEVE SO. L-SHAPED LOT RIGHT NEXT TO CENTURY 21. WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THEIR DESIGN. WE KNOW IT'S A VAST IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT'S BACK THERE NOW. WE DID WANT TO JUST RAISE FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD TWO CONCERNS. THE FIRST WAS PERHAPS THAT THEY CONSIDER A MORE NEUTRAL WALL COLOR.

I KNOW A LOT OF THE SAMPLES LISTED THERE MAY BE TEN OTHER COLORS THAT ARE MORE NEUTRAL. ANY OF THOSE WOULD BE

[01:25:01]

SATISFACTORY TO US. WE ALL HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF THE DUMPSTER. SO WE'RE HOPING TO, IN THE NEAR FUTURE, DEVELOP A MIXED USE PROJECT ON OUR PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL AND SECOND IF NOT THIRD FLOORS, PENDING EVENTUAL APPROVAL BY ALL OF YOU FINE PEOPLE.

AND WE ARE HOPING THAT PERHAPS THEY MIGHT CONSIDER A REPOSITIONING OF THE DUMPSTERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LOT CLOSER TO THE BERLIN RESTAURANT. CURRENTLY ON THEIR SIDE THERE'S A CONCRETE WALL THAT DOESN'T HAVE WINDOWS AND PERHAPS -- IF YOU HAVE THE OTHER SCHEMATIC UP THERE THAT I MIGHT BE ABLE TO

POINT TO. >> I HAVE A FEELING THAT THIS IS

WHERE IT IS. >> EASE OF ACCESS.

>> CAN'T GET IN AND OUT WITH A TRUCK, DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU

PUT IT. >> WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THEM AND HE'S TAKEN SOME OF OUR FEEDBACK. WE WERE HOPING PERHAPS THE DUMPSTER COULD BE POSITIONED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OVER.

PERHAPS SWITCHING THE SIDE. PERHAPS THEY COULD REVERSE IT.

WE'RE JUST HOPING TO TRY TO LESSEN THE EFFECTS OF THE DUMPSTER PLACEMENT ON THE PROPERTY LINE FOR FUTURE RESIDENCE OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. HARDEN.

>> THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS?

>> WOULD YOU ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS?

>> SURE. >> DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT? ALTHOUGH MISS PRINCE NEEDS NO INTRODUCTION.

SHE NEEDS AN OATH IS WHAT SHE NEEDS.

>> I WASN'T HERE FOR THE OATH, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> SHE'S AN ATTORNEY. >> I KNOW.

>> NOT JUST BECAUSE SHE'S AN ATTORNEY.

NORMALLY YOU DON'T NEED AN OATH FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS.

>> IN OTHER STATES IT'S JUST ASSUMED THAT YOU WOULD TELL THE

TRUTH. >> SOMETHING'S HAPPENED IN FLORIDA AND IT IS NO LONGER AN ASSUMPTION.

I WILL NOW SWEAR TO IT. >> DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, WHOLE

TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. >> YES.

TERESA PRINCE, THOMASETTI AND PRINCE, 406 ASH STREET.

I'M HERE REPRESENTING MARLON MCDANIELS AND HERE TONIGHT FOR THE FIRST TIME TO SPEAK ON A PROJECT AND NOT FOR THE APPLICANT. THIS IS AN INTERESTING EXPERIENCE FOR ME. BUT WE ECHO SOME OF THE CONCERNS THE GENTLEMAN JUST MADE ABOUT THE DUMPSTER PLACEMENT.

I DO WANT TO SAY THAT WE DID SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT, WILSON, AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE, JOEL, WHO IS HERE TONIGHT.

I THINK I'M GETTING EVERYBODY'S NAMES RIGHT.

THEY WERE VERY KIND TO RESPOND TO US QUICKLY, BECAUSE I DIDN'T REACH OUT TO THEM UNTIL TODAY. STAFF ALSO SAT DOWN WITH US.

SO THEY'VE BEEN VERY RECEPTIVE AND WE ECHO ALL THE BOARD'S COMMENTS ABOUT HOW IT'S REALLY NICE TO SEE THIS PROPERTY GETTING CLEANED UP AND WHAT A NICE JOB THEY'RE DOING.

WE ECHO THE COMMENT ON THE DUMPSTER AND HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE APPLICANT PRIOR TO MEETING ABOUT SWAPPING IT AND NOT NECESSARILY EVEN CHANGING THE PATTERN.

YOU KNOW, DUMPSTERS OFTEN GO IN, THE TRUCKS COME IN WHATEVER THEY'RE PICKING UP AND GO BACK OUT.

WE ECHO THE SAME CONCERN THAT THIS GENTLEMAN HAD.

THEY DID SAY THEY WERE OPEN. OF COURSE THEY CAN GET UP AND SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. BUT REPRESENTED TO US THAT THEY WERE OPEN TO SWAPPING IT. MY CLIENT'S MAJOR CONCERN, AND I THINK ANYBODY ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET IS RIGHT NOW THE

DUMPSTER IS PERPENDICULAR HERE. >> RIGHT.

>> AND SO YOU SEE, YOU CAN SEE THE SIDE WALL.

WHEN THE GATES ARE LEFT OPEN, YOU DON'T SEE THE DUMPSTER.

NOW WHEN THE GATES ARE ACCIDENTALLY LEFT OPEN, YOU'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THE DUMPSTER.

WE DID TALK TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT KEEPING IT WHERE IT IS.

AND JUST TO MEET UP WITH WHAT THEY PROPOSED TO DO, BUT THERE IS CONCERN BECAUSE THEY WOULD LOSE PARKING WITH THAT.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT JUST SWAPPING THE DUMPSTER LOCATION.

AND THEN THEY FELT CERTAIN THAT THIS NEW TYPE OF DOOR WOULD BE EASIER TO OPEN AND CLOSE AND SO HOPEFULLY IT WOULD NOT BE OPEN AS MUCH. IT'S NOT JUST FOR PICKUP.

THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO GET IN THERE.

SO WHEN YOU EMPTY THE TRASH MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY, THOSE DUMPSTER DOORS ARE GOING TO BE OPEN.

WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THEM SHUT. WILSON DID GO AROUND TO SOME OF

[01:30:02]

THE SIXTH STREET RESIDENTS. HE CAME AND KNOCKED ON MARLA'S DOOR ON HIS OWN ACCORD, TALKED ABOUT THE PLANS.

I JUST APPLAUD THAT EFFORT OF JUST WORKING WITH THE EFFORTS.

LUKE GOLDMAN WAS HERE EARLIER. THEY STEPPED OUT SPENT 20 MINUTES GOING OVER THE PLANS WITH US.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT EFFORT. I THINK IT HELPS JUST TO MOVE FORWARD. WE AGREE ABOUT THE COLOR.

JUST A DIFFERENT COLOR, LIGHTER BGS MORE NEUTRAL COLOR WHICH SAL IS RECOMMENDING AS WELL. WE DID NOT RAISE THAT ISSUE WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT WE CONCUR WITH THE EARLIER COMMENTS AND THE BOARD'S COMMENTS ON THAT. AS FAR AS THE ROOFING THAT WAS SHOWN, I TOLD WILSON I WAS GOING TO GIVE HIM KUDOS.

THE ROOFING ELEMENTS THAT ARE NOT SHIELDED, HE HAS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN COMING BACK AND ATTEMPTING TO SHIELD THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. IF I'M MISREPRESENTING HIS STATEMENTS, HE CAN GET UP AND SPEAK.

HE SAID THAT IT IS HIS INTENT TO LOOK AT THAT AND COME BACK AND PRESENT SOMETHING TO SHIELD THOSE ELEMENTS ON THE ROOF.

AND THEN THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE LIGHT THAT COMES OUT OF THAT BUILDING AT NIGHT.

THEY'RE WILLING TO SHADE THE WINDOWS AS WELL.

I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH HDC. I DON'T KNOW IF SHADING THE WINDOW, TINTING THE WINDOWS, WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO COME BACK OR IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY CAN DO.

DO YOU -- >> IF IT'S SOMETHING WITH JUST BLIND, NO. IF IT'S ACTUAL TINTING TO THE GLASS, THEN YES. STAFF APPROVAL.THAT WOULD NEED -

>> OKAY. THOSE TWO ITEMS I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THEM KUDOS FOR THEM WILLING TO LOOK AT IT AFTER THEY WORK THROUGH THE PROJECTS. WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THE REVERSE PATTERN OF THE PARKING BECAUSE THEN THE LIGHTS WOULD BE COMING OUT DIRECTLY AT NIGHT, DIRECTLY AT THE HOUSES THAT ARE POSITIONED THERE. WITH THE WAY THEY'RE PATTERNING IT NOW, HEADLIGHTS WILL NOT BE SHINING DIRECTLY INTO A HOUSE.

IF YOU REVERSE THE PATTERN, YOU WOULD HAVE LIGHTS SHINING DIRECTLY INTO A HOUSE. WE WOULD PROMOTE SWAPPING THE DUMPSTER, KEEPING THE TRASH PATTERN THE WAY IT IS AND JUST HAVING THE DUMPSTER COLLECTOR, GARBAGE TRUCK, GO IN JUST THE WRONG WAY AND PICK IT UP AND GO BACK OUT.

THOSE ARE OUR COMMENTS PIP EEL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> I'LL ASK YOU. ANYBODY TALK TO ERIC ABOUT THAT?

>> ABOUT WHAT? >> MOVING THE DUMPSTER BEHIND

THERE? >> THEY'RE OVER HERE.

IT WOULD PUT IT CLOSER TO THEM. IT WOULDN'T BE EXACTLY BEHIND

THEM. >> THAT'S HELPFUL.

THAT'S THE KITCHEN. THAT'S NOT THEIR OPEN DINING

AREA. >> RIGHT.

>> WHERE IS THEIR TRASH? NEVER MIND.

>> DON'T OPEN THAT CAN OF WORMS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS PRINCE WHILE SHE'S HERE? IF NOT, WE'LL LET HER GO.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT. APPRECIATE THE EFFORT TO BE

COLLABORATIVE IN THE COMMUNITY. >> DO WE KNOW HOW FREQUENTLY THE

DUMPSTER IS CHANGEED? >> DO YOU KNOW HOW OFTEN THE

DUMPSTER GETS CLEARED? >> EVERY OTHER DAY.

>> EVERY OTHER DAY? >> EVERY OTHER DAY.

>> IF BUSINESS INCREASES, COULD BE EVERY DAY.

COULD BE TWICE A DAY. OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE? STILL IN PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYBODY ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK TO CASE 2019-46? HEARING NONE, WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE.

DO WE NEED TO BRING MR. RICE BACK? DON'T GO ANYWHERE. OKAY.

BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?

>> I THINK ALL WE CAN DO OR WHAT WE'RE TASKED WITH IS TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY WHAT ARE THE DRAWINGS THAT ARE PUT IN FRONT OF US, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SAYING THEY HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT SAYING THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO LOOK AT SWAPPING LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTERS BUT THAT DOESN'T REALLY MEAN ANYTHING TO US, UNLESS THE APPLICANT WANTS US TO HOLD OFF AND SAY, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION SO LET'S PUT THIS ON HOLD OR ARE WE GOING TO APPROVE IT TONIGHT? THE APPLICANT CAN TELL US IF THEY WANT TO PROCEED WITH APPROVAL BASED ON WHAT THE

[01:35:03]

DRAWINGS ARE AS PRESENTED OR HAVE A CHANCE TO RE-EVALUATE BASED ON THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THESE OTHER FOLKS.

>> TRAFFIC PATTERNS IS SUBJECT TO US?

OR IS THAT A TRC -- >> IT'S MORE A TRC.

>> I CAN SEE DUMPSTER PLACEMENT. >> HOW IT AFFECTS DESIGN.

THE ACTUAL PATTERN ITSELF. >> THAT'S WHAT I MEANT, JUST THE

LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTER. >> HAS TRC SEEN THIS?

>> YES, THEY HAVE. >> THEY'RE OKAY? THEY CAN GET THE TRUCK IN AND OUT OF THERE.

I'D HATE TO APPROVE SOMETHING AND THEN COME BACK.

>> THERE IS NO COMMENTSES ABOUT THE TRASH.

THE TRUCK CAN PULL RIGHT IN AND GET IT.

>> IF THEY FLIP FLOP OR CHANGE THE LOCATION, OBVIOUSLY, SOMEBODY HAS TO ENSURE THE DUMPSTER TRUCK CAN GET IN AND O OUT.

>> OKAY. WHAT'S THE ANSWER TO THAT

QUESTION? >> WELCOME BACK.

>> WE DID TALK WITH THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

THIS LAYOUT DOES CONFORM TO THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED.

WE WOULD NOT BE AMENABLE TO REVERSING THE TRAFFIC PATTERN.

WE BELIEVE IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE, NOR WOULD IT CONFORM WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY STAFF.

WE HAVE HEARD THE COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THOSE. WE BELIEVE WE CAN PROBABLY FLIP THE STORAGE ROOM AND THE DUMPSTER WITHOUT ANY MAJOR IMPACT UPON THE DESIGN OR FUNCTION.

WE WOULD ASK A QUESTION OF YOU THOUGH.

DO WE NEED TO CONTINUE THIS TO DO THAT?

>> WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. WE'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF

CONTINUING. >> CAN WE APPROVE THAT CONCEPT

-- >> WE'RE GONNA TRY TO GET YOU

THERE. >> OKAY.

>> CAN I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION?

>> YES, PLEASE. >> CONSIDER THESE DUMPSTER DOORS OFTEN DO STAY OPEN EVEN IF THEY HAVE A SELF-CLOSE MECHANISM ON THEM, WILL THE EMPLOYEES OPEN THEM EVERY TIME THEY ACCESS IT.

CAN YOU PUT A PEDESTRIAN DOOR ON THE SIDE OF IT?

>> EXACTLY. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING TONIGHT. WE'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATION WITH BOTH OWNER AND STAFF OF PEPPERS AND THEY ARE AMENABLE TO ADDING THAT WHICH WE'D BE WILLING TO D

DO. >> I THINK THERE'S ISSUE WITH THE COLOR. IF THEY'RE SAYING THEY WANT TO REVERSE THE LOCATIONS OF THE DUMPSTER WITH THE STORAGE AREA, I THINK THAT WARRANTS COMING BACK NEXT MONTH FOR THOSE TWO THINGS FOR FINAL APPROVAL. I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN APPROVE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T ACCURATELY DEPICTED ON THE DRAWINGS.

THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'VE EVER DONE ANYTHING.

>> IT ALSO WOULD NEED TO GO BACK TO TRC, NOT FOR A FULL APPLICATION, BUT JUST FOR PREAPP DISCUSSION FOR THAT CHANGE.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE -- WHAT'S THE DEADLINE FOR NEXT MONTH?

>> TODAY. >> WOULD YOU BE ABLE CONSIDERING HOW SIMPLE THIS CHANGE IS, WOULD YOU BE ABLE --

>> BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK, THAT'S DOABLE.

>> THAT FLIP DRAWING? >> UNFORTUNATELY, I'M OUT OF TOWN NEXT WEEK. I WILL BE BACK IN ON FRIDAY SO -- SLIM POSSIBILITY. BUT WE WANT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

>> WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH YOU.

>> IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED. >> MAY I HAVE YOUR FURTHER COMMENTS ABOUT COLORS SO THAT I CAN GET A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF

WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE. >> NEUTRAL.

>> NEUTRAL. >> BUFF, NEUTRAL, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. FIGURE IT OUT.

YOU CAN TALK TO SAL IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

IS THAT FAIR? >> YEAH.

IF IT WAS ME, I WOULD LOOK AT, INSTEAD OF THAT REDDISH TRIM COLOR, I WOULD LOOK AT USING THE COLOR OF THE STOREFRONT WINDOWS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE BUILDING.

THAT'S ALREADY THE KIND OF PALETTE YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH.

>> I THINK THAT'S A FAIR IDEA. >> INSTEAD OF COMING UP WITH

SOMETHING ELSE. >> WITH REGARD TO THE CONCRETE BLOCK, WE DON'T WANT TO GO TO A SPECIAL COLOR CONCRETE.

WE WANT TO GO WITH SOMETHING THAT'S MANUFACTURED SO IT WILL

[01:40:01]

BE CONSISTENT. >> THERE ARE MORE OPTION.

ONE OF THOSE IS GOING TO BE OKAY.

JUST COME BACK WITH ONE. >> YOU'LL WANT TO TAKE ANOTHER RUN AT TRC MAKE SURE THAT ONE MOVE DOESN'T -- WE DON'T WANT TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT TRC IS GONNA SAY NO TO.

>> ACTUALLY, DID NOT SHOW THE DUMPSTER AND THE STORAGE ROOM AT TRC. ACTUALLY DID NOT HAVE THAT AT THE TIME. WE WERE ONLY STRIPING THE, SILICONING AND STRIPING THE PARKING LOT AT THAT TIME.

>> THEN YOU DO NEED TO GO TO TRC.

>> FOR PREAPPLICATION DISCUSSION.

>> PRIOR TO YOUR NEXT MEETING? >> YEAH.

JUST TRY TO GET THAT IN JUST TO MAKE SURE.

WE'D HATE TO APPROVE SOMETHING AND HAVE TRC COME BACK AND SAY NO AND FORCE YOU BACK HERE A THIRD TIME.

>> AND YOU CAN'T COME IN AS A WALK ON.

>> THE ONLY COMMENTS THEY HAD WAS REGARDING THE HANDICAPPED PARKING, WHICH WE DID NOT -- WE DECIDED TO NOT CHANGE.

WE ARE LEAVING THE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACING IN PLACE, AS WELL AS THE SIGN. WE'RE JUST IDENTIFYING IT MORE

CLEARLY. >> WHAT TIME OF DAY ARE THE

DUMPSTERS CHANGED? >> NORMALLY EARLY IN THE MORNING. 6, 7 IN THE MORNING.

WE PREFER FOR THEM NOT TO COME TOO EARLY, BUT IT'S AROUND 7

A.M. >> SO THE PARKING LOT IS CLEAR.

>> IF THEY CAME IN THE OTHER COUNTER FLOW, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE HITTING A CAR UNLESS IT'S A CAR THAT'S PARKED THERE FROM A NEIGHBOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR LEFT OVERNIGHT.

>> DOES STAFF PARK ON SUNDAY? >> I WANT TO SAY ONE OTHER THING. IF WE DO ACCOMPLISH THIS FLIPPING AND SATISFYING THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GO ANY CLOSER TO THE BURLING GAME BUILDING THAT IS PRESENTLY SHOWN. THERE'S NO WAY FOR THEM TO GET BEHIND THE BUILDING FOR THEM TO CHECK THEIR GAS METER.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO FENCE THAT OR CLOSE THAT OFF BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ACCESS THEIR UTILITY.

>> AN YOU'RE BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS.

THANK YOU. >> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE MY LIGHT ON ONLY TO JUST MAKE IT CLEAR. SOUNDS LIKE THE BOARD IS GOING TO CONTINUE THE CASE TO FEBRUARY 20TH MEETING BUT IF YOU CANNOT MAKE THE DEADLINE NEXT FRIDAY IT WOULD COME UP ON OUR AGENDA AND SAL WILL EXPLAIN IT, IT WILL COME UP ON OUR AGENDA AND THIS BOARD WITH SAL'S UPDATE CAN CONTINUE IT AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE

DOING. >> REALLY DO APPRECIATE IT.

WISH YOU COULD GUT IT OUT, BUT YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

OKAY. SO MR. MORRISON IS GOING TO MAKE

A MOTION TO CONTINUE. >> WHAT'S THE DATE?

>> FEBRUARY 20TH. >> I MOVE THAT, LET'S SEE.

2019-46. >> I MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE CASE 2019-46 TO THE FEBRUARY 20TH MEETING.

>> SECOND THAT. >> DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> MEMBER HARRISON. >> YEAH.

>> MEMBER CONWAY. >> YEAH.

>> MR. POZZETTA. >> YES.

>> MR. MORRISON. >> YES.

>> MR. SPINO. >> YES.

>> MOVING ON. ACTUALLY, DID YOU TELL ME I HAVE

TO DO THE VARIANCE FIRST? >> YES.

OKAY. 2019-04 IS A VARIANCE.

WHITE STREET. AND WE WON'T HEAR THEM TOGETHER.

WE'LL HEAR THEM SEPARATE. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES. >> I ALREADY DID THAT.

VOTE TO APPROVE IT REQUIRES FOUR OUT OF FIVE VOTING MEMBERS.

[Item 4.3]

>> THIS IS HDC2019-04 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 908 WHITE STREET. VARIANCE, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 8.01.01.02 I, SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS WITHIN OT1 DISTRICTS.

THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED OT1 IN OLD TOWN.

IT'S A VACANT PROPERTY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THE PROJECT WAS GRANTED FINAL HDC APPROVAL JANUARY 17, 2019 THROUGH HDC2018-33.

[01:45:03]

THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WAS DESIGNED AND APPROVED TO HAVE A HEIGHT OF 22' 10 3/4". RESPONDING TO CONCERNS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE EXCEEDED THOSE OF THE APPROVED PLAN, THE BUILDING DIRECTOR STEVEN BECKMAN VISITED THE SITE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 5, 2019 AND DETERMINED THE STRUCTURES UNDER CONSTRUCTION ARE BUILT ABOVE THEIR APPROVED HEIGHTS.

APPLICANT WAS INFORMED THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REQUEST BUILDING INSPECTIONS UNTIL A REVIED PLAN WAS PROVED.

APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE OT1 AND OT2 ZONING DISTRICT.

SPECIFICALLY THE 24 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWABLE FOR ACCESSORY DWELLINGS. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO REMAIN AT THE HEIGHT IT IS CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED WHICH IS 25' 2". HERE'S SOME STRUCTURE, PICTURES OF THE STRUCTURE UNDER CONSTRUCTION THE WAY IT IS NOW.

AS YOU KNOW, WHEN GRANTING VARIANCES, WE HAVE SIX CRITERIA WE LOOK AT AND EVALUATE. THOSE CRITERIA ARE, ONE, SPECIAL CONDITIONS. THAT SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST WHICH ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND STRUCTURE OR BUILDING INVOLVED AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT RESULT FROM ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND ARE NOT BASED ON A DESIRE TO REDUCE DEVELOPMENT COSTS. THE APPLICANT HAS RESPONDED THAT THE DESIGN FOR THE FIRST FLOOR WAS TO BE 9 FEET.

THAT THEY SPOKE WITH THE HEAD OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND WERE TOLD THAT THE LIMIT WAS 25 AND THEY COULD MAKE THE FIRST FLOOR 10 FEET HIGH AND PROCEED WITH TALLER WALLS.

STAFF FINDS SPECIAL CONDITIONS DO NOT EXIST.

THE BUILD DEPARTMENT DOESN'T ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO HISTORIC COUNCIL CERTIFICATES OF APPROVAL AMENDMENTS ARE APPLIED FOR THROUGH THE PLANNING AND CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT AND NO APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT WAS MADE. SECOND ITEM IS SPECIAL PRIVILEGE. THAT GRANTS VARIANCE DOES NOT CONFER UPON THE APPLICANT SPECIAL PRIVILEGE DENIED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO OTHER LANDS STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME DISTRICT. APPLICANT RESPONDED THAT OTHER HOMES ARE GRANTED VARIANCES FOR SIZES IN OLD TOWN MAKING THIS A NORMAL REQUEST NOT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.

STAFF FINDS GRANTING VARIANCES FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS, BY NATURE, A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, THAT ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO DEVIATE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE THIRD ITEM, LITERAL INTERPRETATION. LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. APPLICANT STATES THAT BY TURNING THIS APPLICATION DOWN, IT WOULD BE A MAJOR FINANCIAL BURDEN WHEN OTHERS ARE ALLOWED AFTER THE FACT CHANGE.

THEY SAY THEY BUILT THE BUILDING ON THE ADVICE GIVEN BY THE HEAD OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. STAFF FINDS THAT LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF THE RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT PER LDC 10.02.01D6 A VARIANCE SHALL NOT BE GRANTED IF THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY AN APPLICANT IS SOLELY A DEMONSTRATION OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION. ADDITIONALLY LDC8.03.03 I 3 STATES THAT ALL WORK NOT IN COMPLIANCE MAY BE REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED REGARDLESS OF HARDSHIP TO THE OWNER.

ITEM 4, MINIMUM VARIANCE. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NEEDED THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND STRUCTURE OR BUILDING.

THE APPLICANT STATES THIS IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NEEDED IN ORDER TO NOT HAVE TO TAKE DOWN THE BUILDING, THAT IS COMPLETELY FRAMED BASED ON CONSTRUCTION AND INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE HEAD OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OF FERNANDINA BEACH.

STAFF FINDS THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS NOT THE MINIMUM NEEDED TO MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND STRUCTURE OR BUILDING. THE APPROVED PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT DID NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND WOULD HAVE CONSTITUTED REASONABLE USE.

FIVE, GENERAL HARMONY, THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

APPLICANT STATES THE MAIN HOUSE IS FOUR FEET HIGHER THAN THE OUT BUILDING, KEEPING THE APPEARANCE IN IN LINE WITH THE GUIDANCE.

THE OLD TOWN FERNANDINA PRESERVATION GUIDELINES DEFINE OUT BUILDINGS AS BEING ANCILLARY -- IT WAS MUCH MORE KEEPING WITH TK HARMONY AND SCALE OF THE STRUCTURES IN OLD TOWN.

SIX, PUBLIC INTEREST. THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, WILL NOT CAUSE

[01:50:02]

INJURY TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH SAFETY OR WELFARE OR ENVIRONMENT.

THE APPLICANT STATES THE SCALE IS LOWER THAN THE MAIN HOME KEEPING THE PROPERTY'S APPEARANCE THE SAME AS SURROUNDING HOMES. STAFF FINDS THAT ALLOWING THE PROPERTIES TO EXCEED THE PHBGS MUM BUILDING HEIGHTS WOULD NOT BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND WOULD NOT BE IN KEEPING WITH THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPING GUIDELINES. APPLICANTS ARE MADE AWARE OF THE CONDITION OF THEIR APPROVAL AT PREAPPLICATION MEETINGS AS WELL AS ACKNOWLEDGING THE REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVAL OF AMENMENTS BY SIGN THE CERTIFICATION PAGE OF THE APPLICATION WHICH STATES THAT I OR WE UNDERSTAND THAT ALL CHANGES TO THE APPROVED SCOPE OF WORK STATED IN THE COA HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE HDC BEFORE WORK COMMENCES ON THOSE CHANGES. THERE WILL BE NO CHARGE FOR REVISION TO A COA. MAKING CHANGES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED CAN RESULT IN STOP WORK ORDER BEING PLACED ON THE ENTIRE PROJECT AND/OR ADDITIONAL FEES AND PENALTIES.

STAFF FINDS THAT THIS REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 8.01.01.02I SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE OT1 AND OT2 ZONING DISTRICTS DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN LDC10.02.02, 10.02.03A OR 10.02.03B FOR APPROVAL. STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND MUST RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE HDCB2019-04.

THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS?

>> JUST FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, SO THIS AGENDA ITEM IS A VARIANCE THAT'S SPECIFIC TO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE?

>> CORRECT. >> THEN THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS AFTER THE FACT CERTIFCATE OF APPROVAL, WHICH I ASSUME, IS PENDING WHETHER OR NOT WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. BUT JUST THINKING AHEAD HYPOTHETICALLY IF WE WERE TO NOT APPROVE THE VARIANCE WITH THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHEN IT CAME TO THE NEXT ITEM, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO APPROVE AN GIVE A COA FOR THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE?

>> YES. YOU WOULD MAKE A CONDITION OF THAT APPROVAL THAT IT NOT INCLUDE THE APPROVAL FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THAT IT ONLY BE FOR THE PRIMARY.

>> OKAY. THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE.

>> GOOD POINT. >> HOW IS THE HEIGHT OF 25' 2"

DETERMINED? >> HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM APPROVED GRADE OF THE LOT TO THE HIGHEST PEAK OF THE ROOF.

>> WHO DETERMINED IT WAS 25' 2". >> THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT IS TELLING US THAT IT IS. I BELIEVE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WENT OUT AND LOOKED AT IT AND DETERMINED THAT IT WAS HIGHER BUT DIDN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THE GRADE IS.

HE WAS ABLE TO DETERMINE FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF THAT IT WOULD BE OVER.

>> AVERAGE GRADE LOOKS AT THE FULL LOT THEN?

>> FOUR CORNERS OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.

>> I THINK YOU MEASURE FIVE FEET FROM EACH CORNER OF THE BUILDING

THEN AVERAGE. >> OKAY.

OKAY. OKAY.

SO IT'S A SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT, IN THAT IT HAS TO BE TAKEN ON THOSE FOUR CORNERS. IT HAS TO BE TAKEN ON THOSE FOUR CORNERS. DOES A SURVEYOR DO THAT?

>> I DON'T KNOW. I THINK IN THE PAST AND CERTAIN OCCASIONS THE CITY'S REQUIRED HOMEOWNERS TO HAVE A CERTIFIED SURVEYOR COME OUT TO VERIFY THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.

IF IT WAS QUESTIONED TO A POINT WHERE THAT WAS A REQUIREMENT.

AS FAR AS LIKE A STANDARD PROCEDURE WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I DON'T THINK IT'S STANDARD PRACTICE THAT IT'S REQUIRED UNLESS THERE'S AN ISSUE OF NONCOMPLIANCE.

>> IT'S VERY HARD TO TRUST YOUR EYES LOOKING AT THIS.

AS I LOOK AT THIS, IT LOOKS AS IF THE PEAK OF THE ROOF ON THE ANCILLARY BUILDING APPEARS TO BE VERY CLOSE TO THE SAME HEIGHT AS THAT OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDINGS. I'M SAYING AS YOU LOOK AT THEM, THEY SEEM TO BE PRETTY MUCH ON THE SAME LEVEL.

I THINK PART OF THAT IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE ANCILLARY BUILDING IS ON HIGHER LAND THAN THE HOUSE.

>> YEAH, IT IS. >> IT SLOPES OUT.

>> EVEN MORE THAN THAT. HOUSE IS PROBABLY DETERMINED BY THE HEIGHT OF THE FRONT. ON WHITE STREET.

[01:55:05]

SO THE BACK TENDS TO, AS IT WERE, GO INTO THE HILL.

THIS QUESTION OF MEASUREMENT IS IMPORTANT TO ME.

ALSO THIS QUESTION ABOUT THE GRADE.

>> WHEN I READ THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, IT SEEMS LIKE THE HEIGHT DIFFERENCE OCCURRED WHEN AN EXTRA FOOT WAS ADDED TO THE FIRST FLOOR BUILDING HEIGHT. THAT ACCOUNTS FOR 12 INCHES.

BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY MORE THAN 24 INCHES HIGHER THAN WHAT WE APPROVED AS A BOARD. I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE THAT ADDITIONAL FOOT AND A COUPLE INCHES CAME INTO THE MIX, IN ADDITION TO THE ONE FOOT ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? >> WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT THAT. I'M NOT SURE.

>> I HAVE TO SAY, WHEN I WAS OUT THERE SATURDAY, I NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO 4X8 PANELS AND TWO 4 FOOT SECTIONS ALONGSIDE NOW IMPEDIMENT. YOU'RE AT 24 FEET ON TOP OF A SLAB PLUS ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF.

I HAD IT AT 25 1/2 FEET ON TOP OF THE SLAB.

I UNDERSTAND FROM MR. MORRISON'S DESCRIPTION THAT ON THIS LOT, THIS IS A CHALLENGING MEASUREMENT TO MAKE.

IT'S AT LEAST 25 1/2 FEET, BY MY EYES.

YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

>> AT THE END OF THE DAY THE APPLICANT IS THE ONE WHO'S GIVING US THE MEASUREMENT 25' 2" AND ASKING US TO APPROVE IT.

IT'S THEM PUTTING THEMSELVES AT RISK IF THAT ENDS UP NOT BEING

THE MEASUREMENT. >> THIS IS TRUE.

WAS THERE A DOCUMENT THAT THEY SIGNED THAT SAID THEY WOULD DO WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO OR COME BACK AND SEE US?

AND DO WE HAVE A COPY OF IT? >> IT'S PART OF THE APPLICATION.

THERE'S A CERTIFICATION ON EVERY APPLICATION.

I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE THAT IS. >> THANK YOU.

>> I SEEM TO RECALL THAT MANY YEARS AGO.

>> HERE IT IS. IT IS PAGE --

>> 24 FOOT. >> PAGE 9.

IT IS THIS HIGHLIGHTED SECTION HERE.

NUMBER SEVEN. >> OKAY.

WHAT SLIDE ARE YOU ON, WHAT NUMBER?

>> 23 OF 26. I HAVE THE SAME NUMBERING AS YOU

DO. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> SAL, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE SUMMARY REQUEST. SUMMARY REQUEST AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION. YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF COLOR PHOTOS. I HAVE BEEN TO THE SITE, BUT LOOKING AT THESE JUST OFF THE BAT, I CAN'T TELL WHICH IS THE MAIN STRUCTURE AN WHICH IS THE AUXILIARY BUILDING.

>> THE STRUCTURE TO THE LEFT ON THAT PHOTO IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT IS THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE RE

REAR. >> AND THE PURPOSE IS SO ONE IS NOTICEABLY SMALLER SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S TWO MAIN

BILLINGS? >> RIGHT.

ANCILLARY SCALE AND OCCUPATION. >> I KNOW YOU READ THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINES AND SO HAVE I. IT GOES ON ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT SECOND STRUCTURE LOOKING LIKE A SECONDARY STRUCTURE.

OKAY. MR., MRS. JONES? COME ON UP. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> STAT JONES 2057 HIGHLAND

DRIVE, FERNANDINA BEACH. >> DO YOU WANT TO START OFF WITH

MATT OR WHAT? >> TELL US WHAT YOU WANT TO TELL

US. >> WE HAVE EIGHT FOOT SHEET, 42 INCH RIP, 18 FOOT -- 16 INCH TRUSS ADDS UP TO APPROXIMATELY 24' 4". ALLOWED A LITTLE BIT FOR PLYWOOD ON TYPE, ICE AND WATER SHIELD AND METAL IS WHERE I CAME UP

WITH 24' 6". >> WHAT'S 24' 6".

>> FROM THE SLAB. >> THE QUESTION IS WHERE WAS IT?

>> I'M JUST GIVING YOU WHAT IT IS.

THAT'S HOW I CAME UP WITH THAT. >> YOU'RE ADDING A FEW MORE

[02:00:03]

INCHES TO GET TO 25' 2". >> THE REST OF IT IS GRADE, WHICH IF THIS WAS APPROVED, I COULD TERRACE THE GRADE UP WHERE IT WAS A FLAT GRADE WITHIN FIVE FEET AND GET TO THAT MEASUREMENT. SO WE WOULD BE 1' 2" OFF.

I HAVE GOT 25 FOOT FROM SO MANY PEOPLE THAT I AM SORRY I TRUSTED THE CITY. I WOULD LIKE TO USE THE GREAT BOX THING IS I'M ONLY HUMAN, I APOLOGIZE.

SEEMS TO BE A GOOD DEFENSE. SEEMS LIKE THIS WAS DETERMINED BEFORE I CAME IN. I HAVE GOTTEN E-MAILS.

HDC, I VERY MUCH DOUBT A VARIANCE WILL BE APPROVED FOR THE HEIGHT. SO SEEMS LIKE THAT'S DETERMINED.

ALSO, I HEARD THAT A CITY HAS NO HAND IN THIS.

I WAS TOLD TO STOP -- NOT STOP WORK.

BUT NOT HAVE ANY MORE INSPECTIONS BECAUSE OF AN E-MAIL THAT WAS WRITTEN, REQUESTING THIS.

A STOP WORK BE MADE FROM A MEMBER, FROM THE CHAIR HERE.

SOME ARGUING DO YOU HAVE THE POWER TO HAVE THEM STOP WORK.

I'M WONDERING DO YOU HAVE A HAND IN THEM?

IS THAT SOMETHING THEY CAN DO? >> PER THE LDC.

>> CITY DID NOT KNOW THAT. SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T KNOW A LOT OF THINGS. I CAN CITE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WE'VE HAD. IT'S BEEN VERY EXPENSIVE ON MY BEHALF. I FAILED TO MEET THE SIX GUIDELINES. UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING I CAN

ANSWER. >> THOSE ARE HARD TO MEET FOR

ANYBODY. >> I FIGURED I'M DONE.

>> YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF VARIANCES APPROVED FOR THAT REASON. USUALLY HAVE TO BE PRETTY EXTRAORDINARY. QUESTIONS FOR MR. JONES?

>> YOU ARE ACTING AS YOUR OWN CONTRACTOR, RIGHT?

>> YEAH. >> THE POINT MEMBER POZZETTA MADE EARLIER. I KNOW I READ IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PACKET THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE DECISIONS THAT WAS MADE WAS TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FROM NINE FEET TO TEN FEET. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU

KNOW OF THAT WOULD CONTRIBUTE? >> BAD MATH ON THE ARCHITECT'S PART. HE DID NOT ALLOW FOR THE TRUSSES. NORMALLY YOU HAVE A 3 1/2 INCH HEEL HEIGHT. THESE HAVE SEVEN OR EIGHT INCH HEEL HEIGHT. THERE'S A BIT.

AND THE REST IS JUST BAD MATH ON HIS -- YOU KNOW, WHEN HE DREW IT. I HAD NINE FOOT STUDS ORIGINALLY. ALL HE DID WAS USE THE TEN FOOT STUDS INSTEAD OF NINE FOOT. WHICH WE DID THE SAME THING ON THE HOUSE, BUT IT'S NOT A QUESTION ON THIS CASE.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO TO THE PUBLIC MEETING.

LET ME GET MY GLASSES HERE. HDC 2019-04, THIS IS THE VARIANCE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 908 WHITE STREET.

ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK, THIS IS THE TIME TO DO SO.

MR. GREEN, COME ON UP. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

FOR THE RECORD. >> TIM GREEN, 1119 SUMMERS AVENUE. I'M KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT ONE THING. SAID THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAME OUT AND FOUND THIS? WAS THIS AN INSPECTION OR HE JUST DECIDE TO -- HOW DID HE -- DID HE CATCH THIS ON AN

INSPECTION? >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

I BELIEVE IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMPLAINTS.

>> IMAGINE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? COME ON UP.

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ALEX SIEGFRIED.

902 LADY STREET. I'M SORRY.

I'M JUST ASKING FOR A CLARIFICATION HERE.

I'M REALLY CONFUSED. SEEMS THERE'S TWO THINGS HERE.

THIS ONE TALKS ABOUT ZONING BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT.

I'M THOROUGHLY CONFUSED. >> HEIGHT IS PART OF OUR LAND

DEVELOPMENT CODE. >> SO IS THE REQUEST HERE TO GO TO OT2 SIMPLY TO ADDRESS THE HEIGHT? 'CAUSE I THOUGHT OT2 WAS ABOUT COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL?

>> OT2 ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL IN OLD TOWN BUT THE PROPERTIES ARE NOT NECESSARILY COMMERCIAL JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE OT2.

[02:05:02]

>> SO IF IT WERE APPROVED FOR OT2, IT COULD BE THEN USED AS A

COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE? >> CORRECT.

MIXED USE OR WHOLLY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE.

>> YOU'RE JUST CITING THE SECTION HERE FOR THE VARIANCE

NOT IDENTIFYING THE PROPERTY. >> THAT'S THE TITLE OF THE LAND

DEVELOPMENT CODE. >> THIS ISN'T A REQUEST TO

CHANGE IT? >> IT'S A REQUEST FROM THAT

SECTION OF CODE. >> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I HAVE NOTHING ELSE.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE? WELCOME. IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF,

NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS BEVERLY TRIAN.

MY CONCERNS ARE AS AN OLD TOWN PERSON, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TWO STORY HOMES GOING UP THERE. IS THERE A QUOTA FOR THE AMOUNT OF TWO STORIES GOING ON? I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SINK HOLES EVENTUALLY HAPPENING. IT'S A SMALL PART OF PROPERTY.

GROWING UP, IT'S BIG NOW. ARE YOU ALL CONCERNED WITH THE LEVEL OF TWO STORY HOMES GOING UP IN OLD TOWN? DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE I NEED YOU TO BE CONCERNED.

OKAY. I REALLY DO.

>> I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. ALL I CAN DO IS APPROVE THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINE WES OFFER UNDER. AS LONG AS THE LAW IS SUFFICIENT AND THEY KEEP IT UNDER 35 FEET AND THEY KEEP THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UNDER 500 SQUARE FEET AND 24 FEET.

>> YEAH. I SAW A MAP, I DON'T KNOW WHERE I SAW IT. IT WAS ON TV TALKING ABOUT SINK HOLES INCREASING IN FLORIDA. SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE

THOUGHT ABOUT AS WELL. >> I THINK THOSE SINK HOLES MAINLY OCCUR WHERE YOU'VE GOT LIME STONE GEOLOGY THERE.

AND IT ERODES FROM UNDERNEATH THEN COLLAPSES DOWN.

FORTUNATELY, WE'RE ON SAND. >> THE EROSION IS CHANGING EVERYWHERE. ONCE UPON A TIME THE EROSION OF AIR CONDITIONERS AND THAT DID NOT OCCUR.

NOW IT IS. SO THE EROSION NOW IS DIFFERENT AS WELL. THE CONSTANTANCE OF IT NEEDS TO

BE IN OUR EAR. >> THAT'S GONNA OPEN MY TAB SIX.

>> YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGE.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? MISS HARRISON?

>> I GUESS THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN --

>> JENNIFER HARRISON.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S 25 FOOT GARAGE PROBLEM HAVING THE ACCESSORY BUILDING BUILT AT 25 FEET CAN BE A PROBLEM.

IT HAPPENED TO US. OUR ARCHITECT HAD WRITTEN IT IN AT 25 FEET IN HEIGHT. WE, TOO, HAD TO GO BACK, HAVE THAT CHANGED. WE HAD TO PAY EXTRA MONEY.

SO I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH.

BUT WE HAVE THE GUIDE LINES AND WE NEED TO STICK TO THOSE.

>> MR. CHAIR, SPEAKERS ARE SUPPOSED TO ADDRESS THE --

>> SINCE SHE'S ADDRESSING ME, CAN I ANSWER IT?

>> NO. WE'D ASK YOU TO TALK TO US.

>> THAT'S RIDICULOUS. HOW CAN SHE SAY SOMETHING TO ME

AND I CAN'T APPLY? >> I HAVE CONCERN, TOO, THAT AS THESE BUILDINGS STAND AT THE MOMENT, THERE IS SOMEONE ADJACENT TO THEM RIGHT ON THAT CORNER.

WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT WILL BE A SINGLE STORY BUILDING OR IT WILL BE A TWO STORY BUILDING. SO I THINK HAVING TWO BUILDINGS THAT APPEAR IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS OR TO THE NAKED EYE, THAT THEY ARE VERY SIMILAR IN HEIGHT COULD OVERSHADOW ANY BUILDING THAT IS BEING PLACED NEXT DOOR TO IT. THOSE ARE MY OPINIONS.

I'M SORRY. >> THANK YOU.

WE APPRECIATE THAT. >> DON'T CALL ME OUT.

I DIDN'T GIVE YOU A HORRIBLE LOOK.

I WAS LOOKING OVER THAT WAY. >> THANK YOU, MR. GREEN.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? THE APPLICANT MAY RETURN AND COMMENT ON ANYTHING THAT THEY'VE HEARD AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE ARE FOLLOWING OUR RULES.

[02:10:01]

WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE REC RECORD.

>> ALL OF THE ABOVE. >> DISCUSSIONS? 2057 HIGHLAND DRIVE, SCOTT JONES.

I GUESS JUST TO THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE TO ME.

MR. HARRIS, DID YOU HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR PLAN OR DID YOU HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR BUILDING? CHANGING THIS BUILDING IS GOING ANY CONSTRUCTION WORK, IS GOING TO BE A SEVERE DANGER, I MEAN, ONLY WAY I CAN DO IT THAT I CAN THINK OF S TO SUPPORT THE ROOF, CUT OUT A FOOT OF IT AND LOWER IT DOWN WITH ME UNDER IT.

PLEASE CONSIDER THAT. >> THANK YOU, MR. JONES.

WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. LAST CHANCE.

I'M LOOKING AT YOU, BOB. CLOSE THE MEETING.

OKAY. SO BOARD MEMBER, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? I THINK 24 FOOT IS THE RIGHT

HEIGHT. >> AGREE.

>> I THINK, UNFORTUNATELY -- SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT AREN'T GREAT DECISIONS TO HAVE TO MAKE.

I THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS WHILE STILL BEING COMPASSIONATE TO THE SITUATION THESE APPLICANTS ARE IN.

UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF OPTION HERE EXCEPT TO HOLD TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINES AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

>> I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE WAY IN WHICH HEIGHT IS MEASURED. I KNOW IT'S A DIFFICULT THING TO DO AND WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO HIGH SCHOOL TRIGONOMETRY TO DRAW TRIANGLES AND VERTICALS AND SO ON TO GET IT RIGHT.

BUT I THINK CERTAINLY DEFINITION OF WHAT THE STARTING POINT IS ON

THE GROUND IS VERY IMPORTANT. >> JIM, YOU CAN COMMENT ON THIS, TOO, BUT FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS IN THE DESIGN WORLD, IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S CONTROVERSIAL.

IT'S JUST AVERAGING FOUR DIFFERENT POINTS AND MEASURING

VERTICALLY FROM THERE. >> IT'S THE MEASURING VERTICALLY

THAT I FIND -- >> I WOULD COUNSEL THE OWNER BEFORE THEY CUT ANYTHING TO SERIOUSLY LOOK AT THE WHOLE MEASURE ISSUE AND IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO THE SURROUNDING GRADES TO POTENTIALLY MITIGATE THE HEIGHT ISSUE AND POTENTIALLY CORRECT IT WITHOUT HAVING TO CUT ANYTHING.

I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE FOOT TWO INCHES.

THAT MAY NOT BE DOABLE. BUT AS AN EXERCISE AND WITH TAPE MEASURE, IT MAY BE WORTH WHILE TO GO TO BEFORE CUTTING ANYTHING. THERE'S SOME SMALL CHANCE THAT HEIGHT MEASUREMENT COULD BE MITIGATED THROUGH MANIPULATING

THE GRADE. >> TO CLARIFY, THE WAY THE MEASUREMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MADE ISN'T FROM THE GRADE AS IT EXISTS TODAY. THERE IS A CERTAIN ABILITY TO MANIPULATE THOSE. WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE HEIGHT UP HERE. WE'RE CHANGING THE GRADE DOWN

HERE. >> TO SOME EXTENT WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE APPLICANT'S PROBLEM. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

>> I'D LIKE TO ASK SAL WHETHER WE HAVE ANY REGULATION

CONCERNING CHANGING THE GRADE. >> WE DO.

>> SO I'M THINKING BACK ABOUT 12 YEARS MAYBE.

WHEN WE FIRST MOVED TO OLD TOWN, WE FOUND THAT SOMEBODY HAD SCRAPED THE TOP FOOT OF TOP SOIL AND PARKED IT AT THE END OF THE STREET LOOKING FOR TREASURE, I GUESS.

AND WHEN WE BUILT, WE SAW A STREET HAD A REAL DROP.

WE PUT IN MAYBE 14 OR 16 TRUCKLOADS OF FILL DIRT AND TOP

[02:15:05]

SOIL. GOT A PERMIT FROM THE CITY TO DO THAT. BUT I THINK THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE ORIGINAL GRADE WAS.

>> YES. >> AND WHETHER WE WERE JUSTIFIED

IN CHANGING THAT. >> THAT WOULD HAVE TO DO WITH FLOOD ZONES. THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER TOPIC.

>> THIS PROPERTY IS NOT IN A FLOOD ZONE.

>> ARE WE THINKING ABOUT THE HOUSE AS WELL?

>> WE'LL GET THERE IN THE NEXT CASE.

>> WE AREN'T GOING TO DO THAT SEPARATELY?

>> YES. >> IT'S TAKEN SO LONG.

I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW YOU DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE ON THAT ITEM.

IF IT'S MY CHANCE TO SPEAK, I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I VISITED MANY JOB SITES ONCE WE'VE APPROVED PROJECTS AND, LIKE ANY CITIZEN IN THE COMMUNITY, I HAVE THE ABILITY TO REPORT WHAT I THINK AS AN IRREGULARITY IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE. IN THIS CASE I WAS STUNNED BY THE SCALE OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHEN I VISITED THERE AND REPORTED IT TO MR. BECKMAN FOR HIS REVIEW.

I DON'T THINK THIS BUILDING IS 25' 2".

>> THEN I'M A LIAR. >> THAT WOULD BE YOUR WORD, SIR.

I THINK THE BUILDING IS SUBSTANTIALLY TALLER.

BUT I'M COGNIZANT OF MR. MORRISON'S NOTE THAT THE CALCULATION ON THE GRADE IS MORE COMPLEX THAN MY EYEBALL IS.

IT JUST REALLY LOOKS OUT OF SCALE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

CERTAINLY NOT WHAT WE APPROVED. ANYBODY ELSE?

IF NOT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOVE TO DENY HDC CASE NUMBER HDC 2019-04 AND I MOVE THAT HDC 2019-05 FOR THE RECORD THAT THE BUILDING IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LDC.

>> IS THAT A SUFFICIENT MOTION? CAN I GET A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND. >> MEMBER CONWAY.

ANY DISCUSSION? >> I WOULD JUST ADD THAT IT WILL BE INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> AS FAR AS CORRECTING -- >> YEAH.

>> IT'S UP ON THE SCREEN. THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE STOP WORK ORDER. IT'S 8.03.01.

IT ALSO TALKED ABOUT BRINGING IT INTO COMPLIANCE.

SO IF THE OWNER OF A STRUCTURE OR BUILDING FAILS TO E CORRECT THE DEFECTS AFTER KNOWLEDGE OF SUCH DEFECTS HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO HIS ATTENTION THE OWNER SHALL BE FOUND IN VIOLATION OF THE LDC

AND SUBJECT TO A FINE. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL ROLL.

>> I WILL RELUCTANTLY VOTE YES. >> MEMBER MORRISON.

>> YES. >> MEMBER HARRISON.

>> YES. >> MEMBER CONWAY.

>> YES. >> MEMBER SPINO?

[Item 4.4]

>> YES. >> MOVING ON 9088 STREET AFTER THE FACT FOR INCREASED HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY, IN THIS CASE JUST

THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. >> CORRECT.

>> SO THIS IS HDC2019-47 PROPERTY AGAIN LOCATE 908 WHITE STREET. IT IS AN AFTER THE FACT CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE OT1 ZONED LOT VACANT AND CURRENTLY ON SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AS WE SAID BEFORE, PROJECT WAS GRANTED FINAL HDC APPROVAL JANUARY 17, 2019 THROUGH HDC2019-33. THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE WAS DESIGNED AND APPROVED TO HAVE A HEIGHT OF 27' 6 1/4".

AGAIN RESPONDING TO CONCERNS THAT THE HEIGHT EXCEEDED THOSE OF THE APPROVED PLANS THE BUILDING DIRECTOR BECKMAN VISITED WEEK OF NOVEMBER 5 AND DETERMINED THE STRUCTURES ARE BUILT ABOVE THEIR ROOF HEIGHTS. APPLICANT WAS INFORMED THEY

[02:20:02]

WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REQUEST ANY FURTHER BUILDING INSPECTIONS UNTIL A REVISED PLAN WAS APPROVED.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN AFTER THE FACT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURES TO REMAIN AT HEIGHT IT WAS CONSTRUCTED, PRIMARY STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED AT 29 FEET 7 INCHES AND JUST AS PART OF THIS, THE APPLICANT HAD ALSO CONCURRENTLY APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHICH HAS NOW BEEN DENIED. AGAIN, SAME TWO PHOTOS AS IN THE PREVIOUS CASE. OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES STRESS THE KEY TO KEEPING THE DISTINCT LAND THAT MAKES OLD TOWN UNIQUE. OUR SCALE CONSTRUCTION AND NEW STRUCK KHURS. HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS ARE SET AT 35 FEET FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURES.

SO THE REQUEST IS WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR OLD TOWN. THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS WITHIN THAT 35 FEET. AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO REMAIN AT A HEIGHT OF 29 FEET 7 INCHES WOULD BE IN KEEPING WITH THE GUIDELINES AND THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHER HOMES CONSTRUCTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE AFTER THE FACT REQUEST TO INCREASE THE APPROVED HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE BE GRANTED. NOT TO TALK ABOUT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. SO, YEAH, WE REQUEST THE REQUESTED ACTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE AFTER THE FACT AMENDMENTS TO HDC2019-47 WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY HDC2018-33 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.

THAT APPROVAL OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT ITS CURRENT HEIGHT OF 29 FEET 7 INCHES AND THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ITS APPROVED HEIGHT AS APPROVED THROUGH HDC2018-33 AND THAT WORK TO COMMENCE ON BRINGING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE INTO COMPLIANCE WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THE CASE WILL BE REFERRED TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND APPEALS BOARD FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AS IS REQUIRED BY THE

LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. >> THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS? >> I RAISE THE QUESTION OF

HEIGHT AGAIN. >> RIGHT.

>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN? >> THAT I WOULD LIKE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE HEIGHT.

>> DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD MAKE IT A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL THAT IT HAS TO BE VERIFIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR.

>> YOU CAN'T ASK ANOTHER CITY DEPARTMENT TO DO WORK.

>> I AGREE. >> YOU CAN ASK FOR THE APPLICANT

TO CONFIRM THAT. >> IF WE MAKE IT, APPROVE IT AT THAT HEIGHT, AREN'T THEY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? THEN IF THEY'RE FOUND IN NONCOMPLIANCE, THEY'RE

NONCOMPLIANT AGAIN. >> MY QUESTION IS HOW WOULD THEY BE FOUND COMPLIANT OR NONCOMPLIANT?

>> MISS KOSACK, YOU'RE CORRECT. I JUST DON'T WANT TO CREATE ANOTHER PROBLEM. LET'S GET IT FIXED.

LET'S APPROVE WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE AND MOVE ON.

SORRY, I'M SPEAKING OUT OF TURN. >> SAL, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT STAFF RECOMMENDATION ITEM 2 OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BEING BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HEIGHT.

GIVEN THAT THE ALLOWED HEIGHT IS 24, IS THERE ANY LEEWAY IN THAT CONDITION THAT IF THEY WERE TO ADHERE TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT --

>> THAT IS A CONDITION THAT THE BOARD COULD GRANT.

CHANGE THAT HEIGHT AND ALLOW FOR THIS AFTER THE FACT CHANGE TO THE MAXIMUM WHICH WOULDN'T REQUIRE THE VARIANCE.

>> GOOD CATCH. GOOD CATCH.

>> I'M SORRY. I MISSED THAT.

>> PREVIOUSLY WHEN WE FIRST REVIEWED PLANS, WE APPROVED 22 FOOT 10 3/4 HEIGHT FOR ACCESSORY.

BUILDING, MAXIMUM ALLOWED IS 24. RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 25' 2".

[02:25:01]

IF THEY WERE ABLE TO WORK IT SO THAT IT WAS DOWN TO 24, WOULD

THAT BE ALLOWED? >> IF WE COULD GET IT.

>> WE CAN MOVE TO DO THAT, IF WE DO THAT.

>> GOOD POINT. >> OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SAL. MR. JONES, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING

TO ADD? >> SCOTT JONES 2057 HIGHLAND DRIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN RECOMMEND THIS OR NOT, BUT I WELCOME STEVE TO COME OUT AND MEASURE MY HOUSE. IF I SAY IT, IS IT OKAY? MY 29 FOOT 7 I BELIEVE IT IS IS AT THE TALLEST POINT.

I'M A FEW FOOT SHORTER ON THE BACK.

I'M VERY COMFORTABLE THAT IT'S WELL WITHIN THAT.

YOU HAVE MY BLESSING, HE CAN COME MEASURE IT, IF THAT'S OKAY.

CONDITION ON THE OTHER STRUCTURE 30 DAYS.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I DIDN'T SEE THAT ON THE PAPERS.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >> WORK HAS TO BE STARTED TO DO SOMETHING TO BRING THAT STRUCTURE INTO COMPLIANCE.

PUTTING IN THE PERMIT FOR REVISION WOULD SATISFY THAT.

>> IT WOULD BE BACK TO WHERE IT WAS.

>> YOU WOULDN'T NEED TO DO A REVISION.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IF I WOULD LIKE TO BRING THE PITCH TO A 312, WOULD I COME BEFORE YOU FOR AN AFTER THE FACT

CHANGE OR SOMETHING? >> MM-HMM.

YOU CAN DO IT NOW OR BRING IT BACK.

>> THAT'S THE SAFEST WAY. I NEED TO DO IT WITHIN 30 DAYS IF I CAN SAY THAT, YES, I'D LIKE TO BRING IT DOWN TO A 312 PITCH, I'D LIKE TO DO THAT. I'LL TAKE THE ROOF OFF AND HAND

BUILD IT. >> IF YOU THINK THAT'S THE WAY YOU WILL BE ABLE TO RESOLVE IT, THE BOARD CAN CONSIDER THAT AS

PART OF THE MOTION TONIGHT. >> THEY CAN MEASURE.

I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. AND I THINK THAT'S IT.

UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. >> JUST OCCURS TO ME THAT WORK TO COMMENCE. THE DAY I CALL MY ARCHITECT, THE WORK'S COMMENCED IN MY MIND. THAT'S NOT HOW YOU LOOK AT THE

WORLD, SAL? >> YEAH.

WE JUST WANT TO SEE THAT THERE'S MOVEMENT HAPPENING TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO

BE FIXED WITHIN 30 DAY. >> WORK TO COMMENCE IN MIND, IF YOU'RE TALKING TO SAL, YOU'VE COMMENCED WORK.

>> CONSIDER IT OR NOT. IF YOU DON'T, I'LL COME BACK FOR

A REVISION. >> IF MR. BECKMAN SO CHOOSES, WE'LL SEND HIM OUT THERE. WE DON'T TELL OTHER CITY

DEPARTMENTS. >> WHATEVER YOU WANT.

I DON'T CARE. >> WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 2019-47. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING.

BOARD DEBATE. LOOKS LIKE IT PASSED HERE.

>> I THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE IT AND APPROVE IT WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE MAXIMUM 24 FEET ALLOWABLE FOR THE ACCESSORY

STRUCTURE. >> JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR MR. JONES' SAKE, IS THE WAY HE'S DOING THAT IS REVISING THE PITCH OF THE ROOF, HE HAS TO BRING THAT BACK UP AS A REVISION TO

SHOW US PICTURES OF THAT? >> YEAH, WE WOULD WANT TO SEE A DRAWING OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. THEN IT WOULD BE SCHEDULED TO COME BACK. WE CAN SCHEDULE IT TONIGHT FOR NEXT MONTH'S MEETING IF YOU THINK YOU CAN DO THAT IN 30

DAYS. >> WHEN DO I HAVE TO GET IT IN?

>> END OF NEXT WEEK. THE DEADLINE IS ACTUALLY TODAY.

>> OR WHATEVER REVISIONS HE CHOOSES TO MAKE TO GET THE

HEIGHT. >> IF NOT IT WOULD BE IN TWO

MONTHS? >> YEAH.

THE BOARD CAN DO THAT. YOU WANT TO SET THE DEADLINE FOR

60 DAYS? >> WHAT'S THAT MEETING DATE?

>> MARCH -- >> 19TH I THINK WE SAID EARLIER.

>> 19TH. >> DEADLINE TO GET DRAWINGS IN FOR THAT WOULD BE FEBRUARY. FEBRUARY 20TH.

>> IS THERE A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

>> THANK YOU. >> I LOVE TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER HDC2019-47 PREVIOUSLY HDC2018-33 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.

THAT AN APPROVAL OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 29 FEET 7 INCHES AS

[02:30:02]

CONSTRUCTED AND THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE MAXIMUM APPROVED HEIGHT OF 24 FEET AND WORK TO COMMENCE IN BRINGING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE INTO COMPLIANCE WITHIN 30 DAYS WHERE CASE WILL BE REFERRED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND APPEALS BOARD. I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AS PART OF THE RECORD.

THAT THE CASE 2019-47 PREVIOUSLY HDC2018-33 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECRETARY INTERIOR STANDARDS AND OLD TOWN PRESERVATION GUIDELINES TO WARRANT APPROVAL. I DIDN'T INCLUDE ABOUT COMING BACK IN MARCH. IT'S SORT OF A SEPARATE ISSUE.

>> YOU CAN JUST SAY 60 DAYS. >> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO.

SCRATCH CONDITION NUMBER 3 TO READ WITHIN 60 DAYS INSTEAD OF

30. >> THANK YOU.

>> SECOND. >> I SECOND.

>> MOVE TO SECOND IT. MORRISON, HARRISON.

ANY DISCUSSION? >> DID YOU GET THAT?

>> MEMBER SPINO. >> YES.

>> MR. HARRISON. >> YEAH.

>> MR. MORRISON. >> YEAH.

[Item 6.1]

>> MOVING ON TO APPLICATION FOR ALTERNATE NUMBER TWO.

WE HAVE A PACKET. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> JUST FYI, WE'LL PROBABLY VERY BRIEFLY DISCUSS THOSE ITEMS AND PUT THEM IN A SPECIAL MEETING IN FEBRUARY. LIST OF CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.

>> OH REALLY? >> STRUCTURES AT RISK.

>> WE WANT TO TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY.

>> YES, SIR. I CAN'T STAY UP THAT LATE.

>> THANK YOU. >> I'M OLD, TOO.

>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT.

>> IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE'RE GOING TO ASK MISS ROBINSON TO COME UP AND SAY HI. THEN WE'LL GET THERE, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT WITH YOU. THIS IS MISS ROBINSON WHO APPLIED. SHE'S A FERNANDINA NATIVE.

WORKS IN JACKSONVILLE BUT LIVES IN TOWN.

>> YEAH. >> EXCELLENT.

>> SO TELL US WHY YOU WANT -- AFTER HAVING SEEN ALL OF THIS, ARE YOU SURE, ARE YOU STILL SURE --

>> FEEL LIKES A DAY AT THE OFFICE.

>> OKAY. BUT YOU DON'T GET PAID FOR THIS.

>> NO. I GREW UP HERE.

MY DAD IS FROM FERNANDINA BEACH. SO I WAS RAISED HERE.

I WENT TO SCHOOL HERE. I LEFT AT 18 FOR COLLEGE AND THEN DID A TEN YEAR STINT IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THINKING I WANTED THE CITY LIFE. I WANTED SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND BIGGER AND REALIZED THAT FERNANDINA HOLDS A SPECIAL CHARM AND THAT AT THE AGE OF 18 YOU DON'T ALWAYS APPRECIATE IT.

SO I ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN BACK AND FORTH THREE YEARS I PURCHASED A HOME IN FERNANDINA BEACH, MY FIRST HOME LAST YEAR.

ON VERNON STREET. I'M NEAR THE REC CENTER AND THE AUDITORIUM. IT'S A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS CHANGING. THAT IS GROWING AND I THINK WHY THIS COUNCIL APPEALED TO ME IS WORKING IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. I'M AN ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER FOR A GC. WE ARE IN A STATE OF RAPID GROWTH, WHICH IS A GOOD THING AT TIMES BUT IT ALSO CAN BE NEGATIVE. AND I THINK HERE IN FERNANDINA, YOU KNOW, BEING PROGRESSIVE AND GROWING IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK THE INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS TOWN IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE CHARM IS, WHY PEOPLE VISIT HERE. IT IS HISTORIC AND I THINK IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY IN THESE TIMES, TO UPHOLD THAT

AND PRESERVE IT. >> HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD?

>> NO. MY BACKGROUND IS CONSTRUCTION AND ACTUALLY, I WORKED IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY FOR TEN YEARS.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR APPLICATION.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME. >> CAN I ASK THE APPLICANT A

COUPLE QUESTIONS? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> YOU SEE THIS MEETING TONIGHT EVEN AS AN ALTERNATE.

I'M AN ALTERNATE. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO ATTEND EVERY MEETING. WITH YOU WORKING IN JACKSONVILLE, IS THAT A HARDSHIP FOR YOU TO GET HERE FOR THE MEETING TIMES? HAVING THAT AMOUNT OF TIME

[02:35:01]

DEDICATED TO IT? >> NO.

WE ARE ALLOWED TO LEAVE EARLY FOR MEETINGS AND WHAT WE CALL

COMMUNITY SERVICE. >> THIS IS COMMUNITY SERVICE.

>> I THINK WHEN I MOVED TO FERNANDINA LIKE 14 YEARS AGO DESIGNING YOUR OFFICES WAS ONE OF THE FIRST PROJECTS THAT I

EVER DID. >> OH REALLY.

>> SO IF YOU DON'T LIKE YOUR OFFICE, YOU CAN BLAME ME.

>> WE'RE NOT THERE ANY MORE. WE GREW.

I WILL SAY A LOT OF THE OG'S IN THE OFFICE MISS THAT OFFICE.

>> VERY SMALL WORLD HERE. >> IT IS.

>> VERY SMALL WORLD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT WE'LL CUT HER LOOSE. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR

APPLICATION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> SECOND ALTERNATE, ALTERNATES FREQUENTLY GET PULLED IN TO VOTE. WE ALWAYS DO APPRECIATE THOSE IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY WHEN THEY'RE HERE TO HELP US, EVEN WHEN THEY AREN'T VOTING. RIGHT?

>> THANK YOU. >> CAN WE MAKE A MOTION TO

RECOMMEND? >> YES.

>> TO MOVE IT TO THE CITY COMMISSION OR NOT.

>> RIGHT. YOU NEED A MOTION.

CAN YOU DO IT BY CONSENSUS? WE ARE RECOMMENDING MISS ROBINSON FOR APPROVAL SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED.

COURSE NOT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO

MR. HARRISON'S CHOICE. >> I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COMMISSION IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.

I WONDER WHAT PREPARATION WE SHOULD BE DOING.

>> I THINK KELLY AND SAL ARE WORKING ON THE AGENDA FOR THAT AT THE REQUEST OF CITY COMMISSION.

I HAVE ASKED THAT SOME OF OUR MORE INTERESTING PUZZLERS MAYBE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR THEIR INPUT SO THAT THEY COULD SEE SOMETIMES HOW IT IS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT CROSS THE LINE FROM SUBJECTIVE TO -- FROM OBJECTIVE

TO SUBJECTIVE. >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

>> I THINK THERE ARE CASES THAT WE LOOK AT WHERE WE HAVE TO MAKE DIFFICULT DECISIONS. I'M NOT SURE CITY COMMISSION UNDERSTANDS HOW DIFFICULT SOME OF THOSE DECISIONS ARE.

>> I AGREE WITH THAT. >> I WOULD LIKE THEM TO -- LET'S GIVE THEM SOME PUZZLERS. I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE.

>> I THINK YOU SHOULD GIVE THEM A 600-PAGE PACKET.

>> HAVE YOU RECEIVED A 600-PAGE PACKET?

>> I WILL SAY THE BOARD SHOULD DEFINITELY COME PREPARED, IF YOU'VE GOT ANY SPECIFICS THAT YOU WANT TO BRING TO THE COMMISSION. I THINK THAT'S GREAT.

JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 45 MINUTES FOR THIS

MEETING. >> I DON'T THINK THEY WERE ENTIRELY SURE WHAT IT WAS THAT THEY WERE ASKING, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. THEY WANT TO TALK TO US.

I WAS AT THE MEETING. WE HAD FIVE FOLKS FROM OLD TOWN COMPLAIN ABOUT INCONSISTENCY IN THE APPLICATION, OLD TOWN GUIDELINES AND THE LDC TO OLD TOWN APPLICATIONS.

>> I WAS NOT AWARE WHAT THE INCONSISTENCIES WERE.

>> RIGHT. IT WAS A TREMENDOUS IRONY ONE OF THE PEOPLE BROUGHT SOMETHING TO US ONE WEEK LATER.

ALMOST COULDN'T DO WHAT THEY WANTED AND DO THAT AT THE SAME

TIME. >> I'M SORRY TAMMI LEFT BECAUSE SHE COULD GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE. I HAVE HEARD HER SAY IN THE PAST THAT WE ARE NOT BOUND LIKE YOU ARE IN LAW TO ESTABLISH A

PRECEDENT. >> RIGHT.

>> THAT IT'S DONE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

>> CORRECT. THAT'S WHY WE ARE A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY. WE CAN'T TELL STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES WHAT TO DO, OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHAT TO DO.

WE MAKE A CASE BY CASE DETERMINATION THAT'S PRESENTED

TO US BASED ON THE GUIDELINES. >> THEREIN LIES THE CRUX OF IT, BASED ON THE GUIDELINES. I THINK TOO MANY PEOPLE, THEY SEE THE INCONSISTENT DECISIONS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE VAGUERIES OF THE GUIDELINES. I'M NOT SAYING THE GUIDELINES THEMSELVES ARE MISLEADING, BUT THEY ARE COMPLEX.

>> I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. >> WE SHOULD ALSO RECOGNIZE, I THINK, THAT A LOT OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT INCONSISTENCIES COME FROM THE BLOCK WHICH IS BOUNDED BY WHITE STREET, NEW STREET, 14TH. WHAT USED TO BE THE TRAILER

[02:40:01]

PARK. IT LACKS A LOT OF -- IT LACKS THE DEFINITION OF OTHER BLOCKS. THERE ARE, IN FACT, TWO BLOCKS THERE. WE VACATED TOWN GATE STREET, WHICH MAKES IT LOOK LIKE ONE LARGE BLOCK.

ALSO SUMMERELA STREET IS NOT DEVELOPED IN THE SAME SENSE THAT OUR OTHER STREETS ARE IN OLD TOWN.

FURTHER, AT THE EASTERN END, WE'RE COMING TO THE CEMETERY AND NORTH 14 STREET EXTENSION. THAT DEFINITION IS NOT AS CLEAR.

IT'S NOT AS LINEAR AS THE OTHER BLOCKS ARE.

I CAN UNDERSAND PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED.

I CAN UNDERSTAND PEOPLE DON'T RECOGNIZE THERE ARE TWO MEDIA LOTS HERE WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ONE BIG ONE.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE INCONSISTENCIES ARE AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WERE PERCEIVED AS INCONSISTENCIES SINCE I BELIEVE THAT THIS BOARD IS CONSISTENT IN THE WAY THAT IT REACHES ITS CONCLUSIONS.

>> I WAS JUST GONNA COMMENT THAT I THOUGHT THAT I READ THE COMMENT THAT WAS IN THE FERNANDINA OBSERVER ARTICLE.

I THOUGHT THEY WERE VERY WELL SET.

>> THANK YOU. I WILL TELL YOU -- AND COMMENT. MAYBE A LITTLE LESS FIRE AND A LITTLE MORE SUBSTANCE. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

>> I THINK THERE'S -- I THINK YOU MADE A POINT HERE THAT'S REALLY VALUABLE. COMPLEX PROBLEMS NEVER HAVE SIMPLE DECISIONS. FOR THOSE WHO THINK COMPLEX ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED SIMPLY, THEY'RE GOING TO BE VERY DISAPPOINTED. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.

I WOULDN'T TAKE THIS TO BED EVERY NIGHT IF I DIDN'T BELIEVE IT. SHOULD WE MOVE ON?

>> I GUESS THE QUESTION IS WHAT PREPARATION CAN WE DO FOR THIS

MEETING WITH THE COMMISSIONERS? >> I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU THINK ABOUT PLACES IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE THREE SET OF GUIDELINES THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE CLARIFY.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT SAM AND SAL ARE WORKING ON AN ANALYSIS.

>> I WAS ASKED TO PRESENT TO THE CITY MANAGER AND SHARE WITH THE

COMMISSION MY THOUGHTS ON IT. >> HAVE YOU TURNED THIS REPORT

IN? >> YES.

>> I'D BE HAPPY TO REVIEW IT AN OFFER SUGGESTIONS.

>> TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROCESS FOR THAT.

THAT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE. >> ALL I'M DOING IS KIND OF TAKING -- I HAVE GOTTEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND FEEDBACK OVER THE

[02:45:04]

LAST WEEK. THAT'S WHAT I SPENT A GOOD DEAL OF THE WEEK DOING IS ANSWERING CITIZEN QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, WHATNOT. .

I'M JUST COMPILING THOSE QUESTIONS THAT I'M GETTING.

WHAT I'M FINDING IS, PEOPLE THINK THEY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THOSE QUESTIONS AND A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE MISINFORMED ABOUT THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. IT'S NOT ONE COMMON MISCONCEPTION THAT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE.

I WANTED TO ADDRESS THOSE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND SAY HERE ARE THE THINGS I'M BEING ASKED. HERE'S HOW I RESPOND TO THAT.

>> YOU'LL CARRY THAT FORWARD TO MARTIN AT SOME POINT.

>> I HOPE TO HAVE IT DONE TOMORROW AT SOME TIME.

I'LL SHARE WITNESS THE BOARD AND CITY COMMISSIONER.

>> YOU'RE NOT EXPECTING A VIE. THEY HAVE NOT CHARGED YOU WITH DOING THIS AND SHARING IT. NOT WITHOUT US REVIEWING.

>> YES. >> THANK YOU.

>> WILL MR. MARTIN BE JOINING? >> I BELIEVE SO, YES.

>> THEY JUST REAPPOINTED ME AND HARRISON.

THEY HAD EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO GET RID OF US AND THEY DIDN'T.

IT'S ON THEM NOW. ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON. >> I'M SORRY.

>> GO AHEAD. >> THERE WERE QUESTIONS, TOO, ABOUT WHETHER THE HDC NEEDED TO CONTINUE TO EXIST.

AND WHETHER THE COMMISSIONERS THEMSELVES COULD DEAL WITH --

>> NO. I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT.

>> -- THESE MATTERS. I THINK, AT LEAST THOSE WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT, WOULD NOT WANT TO TAKE THE TASK ON.

I THINK THEY NEED TO BE INFORMED.

>> YOU CAN REST ASSURED I HAVE DEFINITE OPINIONS ABOUT THAT.

I WILL EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THAT IN THAT REPORT.

SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT CAME UP SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WERE, IS THE HDC A REVIEW BOARD.

THERE'S A MISCONCEPTION THAT YOU'RE NOT.

YOU ARE, BY DEFINITION IN THE LDC.

THAT THE BOARD DOESN'T HAVE ANY TRAINING? DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEIR ROLES ARE.

I ADDRESSED WE DO SIT DOWN EVERY TIME WE GET A NEW BOARD MEMBER.

WE HAVE A BOARD BINDER. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

WE CAN DEFINITELY DO A BETTER JOB, BUT WE DO HAVE TRAINING.

WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT OTHER WAYS TO DO TRAININGS.

NOT ONLY AM I GOING TO RESPOND TO THESE QUESTIONS BUT GET MY INPUT ON HOW WE CAN BETTER ADDRESS A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.

>> I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO KNOW, AT LEAST FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING UNIQUE TO THE HDC.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT ADVISORY BOARDS AROUND THE CITY.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE IT TOO PERSONALLY.

>> ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP WAS ABOUT APPEALS OF BOARD DECISIONS. WHO CAN APPEAL A BOARD'S DECISION? SOME COMMISSIONERS WERE TAKEN ABACK BY THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE OTHER BOARDS.

I HAVE BEEN EXPLAINING TO PEOPLE THAT IT'S PURPOSELY BEEN WRITTEN THAT WAY. THE APPLICANT IS THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN APPEAL THEIR DECISION. MY OPINION IS IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO OPEN IT TO ANY CITIZEN TO APPEAL SOMEONE ELSE'S BOARD DECISION. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE PUBLIC INPUT AT THE MEETING AND WE DON'T -- WE COULD, IN OUR BY LAWS, GIVE PEOPLE THREE MINUTES. THIS BOARD NEVER HAS.

WE WANT THAT FEED BACK. WE WANT TO KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUE. LIKE TONIGHT, WE SAW THOSE CONCERNS. WE WANT TO SEE THAT BEFORE A

DECISION IS MADE. >> SO THE TWO DIFFERENT POST CARDS MAILED OUT, THAT'S CORRECT.

>> IT'S INTENTIONAL. >> YES.

>> THAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED TO PEOPLE.

>> WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THAT. >> THAT'S A BIG PR THING.

>> IF YOU PLAY THIS OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT, OKAY -- I GO THROUGH THIS LONG PROCESS. I HAVE GOT DRAWINGS, RUNNING IT BY SAL. FINALLY GET IT ON THE AGENDA AND THE BOARD APPROVES IT. AND 29 DAYS LATER MY NEIGHBOR DOWN THE STREET WHO DOESN'T WANT ME BUILDING ON THAT LOT FILES A FRIVOLOUS APPEAL. IT TAKES WEEKS TO GET ON THE AGENDA. NOW WE'RE AT 60 DAYS OUT.

BECAUSE SOMEONE DOESN'T WANT THEM BUILDING ON THE LOT.

I THINK THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE LAW AND LAND DEVELOPMENT

[02:50:02]

CODE WERE WRITTEN THE WAY THEY WERE.

YOU GOT A PROBLEM, BRING IT HERE.

WE'LL ADJUDICATE IT. THAT'S OUR JOB.

>> WE'RE NOT DIFFERENT FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES TPHP IS MUCH THE SAME IN KEEPING WITH WHAT OTHER CITIES DO.

>> REMIND ME BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, APPEALS ARE ONLY -- STANDING IS GRANTED ONLY TO THE APPLICANT.

>> I'M NOT 100% SURE. THEY MAY HAVE A BROAD APPEAL

COURSE. >> COMMISSIONER ROSS WAS THE ONE WHO PARTICULARLY, THIS RESONATED WITH HIM.

MY GOODNESS, SHOULD PEOPLE BE ABLE TO APPEAL? AT THE OUTSET I THOUGHT, YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT.

THEN I STARTED DOING THE MATH. I SAID, WAIT A MINUTE.

I'M GOING TO TELL SOMEONE THEIR PROJECT IS GONNA GET HELD UP FOR 60, 90 DAYS FOR PROBABLY NO GOOD REASON.

>> IT'S NOT JUST NEW CONSTRUCTION.

THAT WOULD HAVE RAMIFICATIONS FOR STAFF DECISIONS FOR SMALLER PROJECTS. SOMEBODY PAINTING THEIR HOUSE AND SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE THEIR COLOR.

I THINK THE COMMISSION IS WELL INTENTIONED AND THOUGHTFUL ABOUT

THESE THING. >> THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE, THAT THE DECISIONS THAT WE GET ARE A COLLECTIVE DECISION BASED ON DISCUSSION AND BALANCING THE VARIOUS ARGUMENTS THAT WE HEAR.

IF SOMEBODY FROM, SOMEBODY OTHER THAN THE APPLICANT APPROACHES OR APPEALS AND STRESSES A PARTICULAR ELEMENT, THERE IS NO

ANSWER. >> RIGHT.

>> THEY HAVE TO COME TO THE MEETING.

THEY CAN BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING AND MAKE THEIR OPINION

KNOWN. >> EXACTLY.

>> THEY CAN COME THERE AND STAND UP AND TELL US I THINK XYZ IS WRONG WITH THIS PROJECT AND HERE'S WHY.

THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. IT'S NOT LIKE PEOPLE ARE DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN AND EXPRESS THEMSELVES.

>> WHEN DO WE DO THAT? >> THERE IS PUBLIC NOTICE.

THE PROPERTY GETS SIGNED. EVERY PROPERTY WITHIN 300 FEET OF THAT PROPERTY GETS THE POST CARD.

>> I UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION'S INTENTION AND WILLINGNESS TO TRY TO EXPAND THE APPEAL PROCESS AS THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THIS MIGHT AFFECT RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ALL THREE OF OUR AREA'S RESPONSIBILITY.

YOU THINK ABOUT IT. SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO BUILD A BUSINESS DOWNTOWN COULD LOSE TWO TO THREE MONTHS IN AN APPEAL

PROCESS. >> OKAY.

WE NEED TO MOVE ON. TAMMI IS READY TO GO.

SHE SAID SHE'S OUT, FOLKS. WHERE ARE WE, SAL?

[Item 7.1]

STAFF REPORT. >> STAFF REPORT.

SO, I DON'T HAVE THE END OF THE YEAR SUMMARY.

I'LL HAVE THAT NEXT MONTH. IT'S JUST THE NUMBER, HOW MANY CASES WE DID. THE OTHER ITEMS ARE ITEMS THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT AT OUR SPECIAL MEETING ON THE 18TH.

IF WE CAN GET THIS ROOM. I BELIEVE THIS ROOM IS AVAILABLE BEFORE OUR OTHER MEETING. I'LL DOUBLE-CHECK AND SEND THE E-MAIL OUT TO EVERYONE. THE ITEMS I PUT ON HERE, I JUST WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF FOR NOW AND KIND OF START LOOKING THROUGH THEM. FIRST IS ADMINISTRATIVE

[Item 7.2]

PROCEDURES. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL GET IN YOUR BOOK WHEN WE START. WE DON'T REALLY TALK ABOUT THEM A WHOLE LOT. I WANT EVERYBODY TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THEM. LAST TIME THIS WAS ADOPTED AND REAPPROVED WAS SEPTEMBER OF 2013.

WE NEED TO ADOPT THEM AGAIN AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY UPDATES.

I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME CODE SECTIONS THAT AREN'T REFERENCED PROPERLY. BUT IF THERE ARE ANY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WE WANT TO MAKE IN THIS, NOW IS THE TIME TO LOOK OVER THIS AND COME TO THAT MEETING WITH ANY RECOMMENDATION FOR ANY

CHANGES ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE. >> DO WE BASICALLY ADOPT OUR OWN

RULES? >> YES.

LIKE OUR BY-LAWS. THAT'S THAT.

[Item 7.3]

CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES LIST. AS YOU ALL KNOW, IN 2018, WE HAD A HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY DONE. THESE GET DONE ON AVERAGE ABOUT EVERY 20 YEARS. IT WAS DONE IN 1985 WAS THE FIRST ONE. WE HAD AN UPDATE IN 2007.

THEN 2018 WAS THIS NEWEST UPDATE.

AS PART OF THIS, THE LANGUAGE IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TALKS ABOUT HOW WE GO BY CONTRIBUTING AND NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.

IT REFERS TO THE LAYEST SURVEY AN SAYS WHATEVER THE LATEST SURVEY SAYS, THAT'S HOW WE CLASSIFY IF A BUILDING IS CONTRIBUTING OR NOT. THAT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE THE SURVEY, AS I SAID, ONLY GETS UPDATED EVERY 20 YEARS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US TAKE THAT LIST, WHICH STARTS ON PAGE 48, AND SEE US ACTUALLY ADOPT A FORMAL LIST AND CHANGE THAT

[02:55:04]

CITATION IN THE LDC WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THAT.

SO IF SOMETHING DOES CHANGE OVER TIME, THE BOARD CAN THEN REVISIT THAT LIST AND APPROVE THAT CHANGE TO THE LIST.

MAKES IT A LOT EASIER TO DO THAT.

IT'S TAKEN ME SO LONG TO GET THROUGH THE WHOLE 2018 PIECE OF IT BECAUSE I HAVE GONE PROPERTY BY PROPERTY AND EVALUATED WHAT THE SURVEY SAYS AS FAR AS RECOMMENDATION FOR CONTRIBUTING OR NONCONTRIBUTING. WE HAD A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES LOSE THEIR CONTRIBUTING STATUS AND HAD SOME OTHER PROPERTIES BEGAN CONTRIBUTING STATUS BECAUSE OF WORK THAT WAS DONE ON THEM. I AGREE WITH ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. NOW I CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY I AGREE WITH THEM. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US VISIT THOSE AND TALK ABOUT THEM AND ADOPT AN ACTUAL LIST.

>> ARE HOMEOWNERS NOTIFIED? >> ALL HOMEOWNERS WERE NOTIFIED OF THE SURVEY AND HOW TO FIND THE SURVEY BUT THEY WEREN'T INDIVIDUALLY NOTIFIED. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE YOU GUYS TO DO, STARTS ON PAGE 48. THERE'S A NUMBER OF TABLES IN THERE. JUST KIND OF REVIEW THOSE TABLES AND MAKE SURE YOU DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT STANDS OUT TO YOU.

ESPECIALLY PROPERTY THAT LOST THEIR CONTRIBUTING STATUS AND PROPERTIES THAT GAINED THEIR CONTRIBUTING STATUS.

THEN I'LL PUT TOGETHER A SPREAD SHEET AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT AT THE SPECIAL MEETING AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT OR WE'RE GOOD WITH IT, WE'LL ADOPT IT. NEXT IS -- AS YOU KNOW, EVERY

[Item 7.4]

YEAR I PUT TOGETHER A PROPERTIES OF CONCERN LIST AND GET IT TO THE CITY MANAGER WHO, IN TURN, GIVES IT TO THE CITY COMMISSIONERS. WHAT THIS IS, ONE OF OUR RULES HERE IS TO EVALUATE OUR PROPERTY AND IDENTIFY WHAT WE REALLY THINK ARE SOME ENDANGERED PROPERTIES OR AREAS WHERE WE HAVE OPPORTUNITY. SO THIS YEAR'S LIST IS A LOT OF REPEAT FROM LAST YEAR'S LIST, WITH TWO NEW ADDITION.

THE REPEATING PROPERTIES ARE THE TRENGALI PROPERTY FAMILY, FERNANDINA BEACH PUBLIC SCHOOL NUMBER 1, CH HOYT 1882 BUILDING, THE PINELAND BANK PROPERTY AND THE TWO NEW PROPERTIES BEING ADDED TO THE LIST ARE THE THOMPSON HOUSE AND FERNANDINA BEACH CITY HALL. IN THIS REPORT, WHICH WE CAN GO OVER AT THE SPECIAL MEETING, THEY'RE ALL ON THIS LIST FOR DIFFERENT REASONS, BUT IT'S JUST TO RAISE AWARENESS OF THESE PROPERTIES SO THEY'RE ON EVERYBODY'S MINDS.

THERE WAS AN OFFER ON IT. THE LAST DOCUMENT YOU'VE GOT IN

[Item 7.5]

YOUR PACKET TO TAKE A LOOK AT IS, I GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS BUILDING. IF YOU FOLLOWED THE COMMISSION, THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO CITY HALL IF CITY HALL MOVES TO THE POST OFFICE, IF SOMEBODY PURCHASES THE POST OFFICE, WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS SITE AFTER THAT, IF THIS GETS TORN DOWN AND SOLD? I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS SITE HAS A LOT OF HISTORIC IMPORTANCE.

AS FOR OVER 100 YEARS, IT HAS BEEN THE HUB OF GOVERNMENT IN FERNANDINA. SO I PUT TOGETHER THIS KIND OF JUST A PHOTO ESSAY, TO SHOW THE EVOLUTION AND EXPLAIN WHAT THIS BUILDING WAS, HOW THE CHANGES CAME TO BE, WHAT IT IS NOW AND SO PEOPLE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE HISTORY OF THIS BUILDING. IT IS A CITY BUILDING FROM 1904, ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T LOOK ANYTHING LIKE THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. HERE ARE THE PICTURES.

PICTURES TELL 1,000 WORDS. THAT IS THE BUILDING.

IT'S BEEN THROUGH A NUMBER OF RENOVATION.

NOT ALL OF THEM GOOD. I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO KIND OF BE AWARE OF THAT HISTORY OF BUILDING SO AS WE'RE DISCUSSING THE FUTURE OF THE BUILDING, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE HAVE HERE AND ITS EVOLUTION. AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT

AT OUR SPECIAL MEETING. >> WOULD IT BE USEFUL TO MAKE SURE AT THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING, MR. MARTIN HAD GIVEN THE CITY COMMISSIONERS OPTIONS TO THINK ABOUT FOR CITY HALL.

THEY CHOSE TO NARROW THE OPTIONS TO THIS BUILDING AND SOMETHING

ADJACENT NEARBY. >> IT COULD BE A COMBINATION.

[03:00:02]

WE OWN THE LAND NEXT DOOR. >> IT WAS INTERESTING TO SEE THEM GO AND NARROW THE FIELD VERY QUICKLY.

I DON'T THINK MR. MARTIN WU ACTING INAPPROPRIATELY AT ALL.

IT'S JUST THAT THEY CLEARLY HAVE IN THEIR OWN MINDS THEY THOUGHT CITY HALL SHOULD BE HERE AND NOT DOWNTOWN.

WE KNOW THE POST OFFICE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN GOING ON

BEFORE WE GOT HERE. >> NOW THAT'S DONE.

THAT'S OVER. >> IT'S NEVER OVER TIL IT'S OVER. THEY HAVE BEEN -- DESPITE MR. JACOBS BEST EFFORTS, LITTLE SEEMS TO BE MOVING.

SO I THINK THE CITY COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, HEY, WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT, CITY HALL NEEDS TO BE DOWNTOWN. THEY'RE WORKING ON THIS.

I APPRECIATE THAT. I WAS AT THAT MEETING, YOU MIGHT WANT TO HEAR WHAT I THINK I HEARD.

DID I GET THAT RIGHT? >> YES.

I WILL POINT THAT OUT. I KNOW EVERYBODY THINKS ALL OF OUR IDEAS ARE NEW. BUT THESE ARE THINGS --

>> TO THE CONTRARY. >> THESE HAVE BEEN DEBATED BEFORE. EVERY TIME CITY HALL RUNS OUT OF ROOM, THIS DEBATE COMES UP. HERE'S A QUOTE THAT SAYS AT THE JUNE 30, 1995 CITY COMMISSION RETREAT THE COMMISSION EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR RETAINING CITY HALL AT ITS LOCATION FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE THE EXISTING CITY HALL IS PROPERLY LOCATED, IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND THE HEART OF THE COMMUNITY.

IT IS NEAR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

IT IS APPROPRIATE AND DESIRABLE TO LOCATE MAJOR PUBLIC FACILITY SUCH AS A POST OFFICE, POLICE STATION, CITY HALL AND COURTHOUSE AND PRIVATE FACILITY SUCH AS BANKS AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. JUST AS A COURTHOUSE BELONGS DOWNTOWN, SO DOES CITY HALL. THAT'S A MEMO FROM THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER IN 1995. SO THEY WERE, NOT JUST ALTERING THE BUILDING BUT RECOGNIZING THE HISTORIC IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE IN KEEPING CITY HALL HERE DOWNTOWN.

[Items 8 & 9]

>> OKAY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING?

>> YES. >> MISS HARRISON? TALK TO US THOUGH. I GOT CHAST AOEUED.

>> I WANT TO THANK EVERY ONE OF YOU, PARTICULARLY SAL, OF WHAT YOU DO. I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU PARTICULARLY NIGHT FOR POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT RESIDENTS WHO SEE INCONSISTENCIES NEED TO REPORT.

NOW, THAT SEEMS TO HAVE FALLEN TO MY LOT LATELY.

BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE COME TO ME IN OLD TOWN AND TELL ME THINGS ARE GOING WRONG. THEY'LL COME TO A MEETING AND THEY WILL NOT SPEAK. IT'S CAUSING PROBLEMS. THE COMMISSION MEETINGS WITHIN OLD TOWN AND IT'S BUT A OF THIS REASON. PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO THINK THAT THIS IS ALL THE HARRISON, WHO IS REPORTING THINGS, MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO BUILD WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD.

THAT'S NOT VERY PLEASANT. I PERSONALLY DON'T SEE DIVISIVENESS IN OLD TOWN PER SE. THERE ARE ONE OR TWO PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY ONE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS HERE TONIGHT, WHO IS NOT WILLING TO GREET ME, REFUSES TO RAISE HIS HAND EVEN WHEN I SPEAK TO HIM. IT'S NOT VERY PLEASANT.

I DON'T THINK IF YOU COULD GET THE WORD OUT AT THESE MEETINGS THAT IT BEHOOVES EVERY RESIDENT TO SPEAK UP IF THEY SEE SOMETHING. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>> IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THEY DID THAT BEFORE THEY GOT THE

STICKS OUT OF THE GROUND. >> I'M PUZZLED REALLY WHEN THE PROBLEM COMES UP BECAUSE YOU WILL APPROVE A PLAT AND THEN WE SEE IT GO UP BUT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY WHAT YOU APPROVED AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS? WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? IS IT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE CHECKING THE HEIGHT? WHEN I SAW THIS BUILDING I WENT TO SAL. I HAPPENED TO CATCH WITH YOU WALK. AT THAT POINT IN TIME IT WAS THE TRUSSES. THE SIDING WASN'T ON.

I MAY HAVE SAID IT TO YOU, TOO, MIKE.

YOU MIGHT JUST WANT TO CHECK THE HEIGHT OF THAT BUILDING.

I THINK IF YOU CAN SORT OF JUST REINFORCE THE FACT EVERY CITIZEN

[03:05:03]

WHO CARES ABOUT OLD TOWN, WHO CARES ABOUT THE HISTORY, NEEDS TO SPEAK UP WHEN THEY SEE SOMETHING GOING ON.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE?

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> I JUST HAVE A QUICK --

>> WE APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK YOU GUYS DO -- I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE INCONSISTENCY THING.

I THINK YOU DO A GOOD JOB. I HAVE SEEN YOU WRESTLE WITH DIFFICULT THINGS. I WILL -- I WANT TO POINT OUT SORT OF THE PERSPECTIVE FROM THOSE IN THE COMMUNITY.

BECAUSE WHAT THEY TYPICALLY DO, WHAT I HAVE SEEN, IS THEY TYPICALLY, WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO DO A PLAN OR WHATEVER.

THEY LOOK AT WHAT'S OUT THERE. WHAT THEY DO IS SAY, I SEE THIS WAS DONE, THIS WAS DONE. THAT PREDATES YOU GUYS IN MANY CASES. SO THEIR PERCEPTIONS ABOUT INCONSISTENCY ARE SHAPED BY THE FACT THAT THERE ARE THINGS OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WERE DONE LONG AGO.

SO I THINK YOU SHOULD BE AWARE OF THAT.

SO DON'T OVER SORT OF SIMPLIFY THE PROBLEM THERE.

IT'S A COMPLICATED PROBLEM FOR THEM.

THE MEDIA THING HAS BEEN, AS YOU KNOW, DIFFICULT TO INTERPRET.

THERE HAVE BEEN INCONSISTENCIES WITH VISIBILITY CORNER.

THAT'S ANOTHER THING PEOPLE HAVE SEEN BEFORE.

THERE'S CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT WINDOWS ARE ALLOWED AND NOT ALLOWED. SOMETIMES MUTTONS ARE REQUIRED, SOMETIMES YOU REQUIRE MUTTONS BUT THE REQUIREMENTS DON'T.

FOUNDATION TYPES IS ANOTHER ONE. THEY SEE ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF FOUNDATION TYPES OUT THERE. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY SEE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT DRIVES THEIR PERCEPTION OF INCONSISTENCY. IT IS NOT JUST YOUR INCONSISTENCY AS A BOARD. THOUGHT I'D TELL YOU ABOUT THAT.

ONE LAST COMMENT. I THINK IT'S MAYBE IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO HEAD OFF THIS THING WITH RESPECT TO HEIGHT.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LOTS OUT THERE THAT HAVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF VARIABILITY IN THE HEIGHTS. I, FOR ONE, I'M AN ENGINEER IN MY BACKGROUND. I'M LOOKING FOR SPEC.

I COULDN'T FIND ONE. IN FACT, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU MEASURE FOUR CORNERS. I NEVER SAW ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I LOOKED FOR IT. SAL, YOU MIGHT WANT TO POINT THAT OUT TO PEOPLE BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE A BUNCH OF LOTS OUT THERE THAT SOME OF THEM HAVE PRETTY DRAMATIC DIFFERENCE IN HEIGHTS FROM THE LADIES STREET LEVEL AND DOWN.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF HEAD THAT OFF BECAUSE YOU MIGHT END UP WITH MORE PROBLEMS LIKE YOU DID TONIGHT.

>> I'M QUITE WORRIED ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.

HE SEEMS TO BE -- I THINK IT WOULD BE MOST PRUDENT IF HE WOULD GET SOMEBODY TO MEASURE THE FOUR CORNERS AND SAY THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO BUILD IT TO. I FEAR HE MAY STILL BE IN A NONCONFORMING SITUATION NOT THROUGH ANY FAULT OF HIS OWN, BUT JUST THROUGH A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING.

IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THE HEIGHT THING AS A WAY TO HEAD THAT OFF.

>> HDC CLARIFIES -- >> JUST HOW THEY MEASURE.

FIVE FEET IN FROM EACH OF THE POINTS.

>> DEFINITION OF THE -- DEFINITION OF HOW YOU MEASURE.

>> WHERE IS THAT DEFINITION? >> CHAPTER ONE IN THE

DEFINITION. >> IF HE APPLIES THAT TO HIS ACCESSORY BUILDING, IT WOULD BE EVEN HIGHER.

>> HE'S GOT SO MUCH ELEVATION CHANGE THERE.

>> ON HIS SURVEY, WE DON'T HAVE THE ELEVATIONS.

WE WERE NEVER GIVEN THE APPROVED AVERAGE GRADE ON THAT PROPERTY.

>> YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER A REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT.

>> CAN WE REQUIRE THAT? >> WE CAN PUT IT IN THE CHECK

LIST. >> PLEASE ADD IT.

>> I COULDN'T FIND IT. IT COSTS A COUPLE EXTRA BUCKS.

>> WHEN THE SURVEY IS BEING DONE THEY CAN PUT IT RIGHT ON THE

SURVEY. >> ANYWAY JUST A SUGGESTION.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANKS AGAIN FOR EVERYTHING

YOU GUYS DO. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTRI CONTRIBUTION.

>> OUR MOTTO OUGHT TO BE IT'S THE STINGY MAN.

>> QUICKLY, AS AN ARBCHITECT, ASKING FOR THAT EXTRA LEVEL OF INFORMATION IS AWESOME. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ADDITIONALAL WORK. IT REALLY REQUIRES A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT TO PROPERLY

[03:10:02]

ANALYZE IT, PROPERLY SHOW IT. IF YOU REFLECT BACK TO THAT ELEVATION WE WERE LOOKING AT OF THE PROJECT IN QUESTION, THE

GRADE LINE WAS SHOWN AS FLAT. >> IT WAS.

>> WHEN QUITE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE THERE.

THAT'S NOT RENDERED ON THE DRAWING.

THEIR OWN DETRIMENT. IT'S NOT REFLECT ON THE SIGHT PLAN OR SURVEY. THEY SAVED A COUPLE BUCKS THERE.

THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT THE PERSON PRESENTING NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF THE RAMIFICATIONS AND NEEDS TO AVAIL THEMSELVES OF A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL WHO IS CAPABLE OF TACKLING THOSE ISSUES AND PRESENTING THEM SO PEOPLE WHO REVIEW THE DRAWINGS UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING ASKED FOR.

>> ARE YOU SAYING WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW DO IT YOURSELF WITH THIS?

>> IF THEY CAN MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S NO PROBLEM

WITH DOING IT YOURSELF. >> THE PROBLEM IS THEY THINK

THEY ARE. >> THE ISSUE WITH QUALITY OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS A GREAT POINT.

I PUT THAT IN MY RESPONSE. THAT'S A VERY BIG ISSUE THAT WE'RE SEEING. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE BEEN ASKED IS DO PROJECTS HAVE TO COME FOR MORE THAN ONE REVIEW? THE ANSWER IS NO. CONCEPTUAL REVIEW IS GIVEN AS A COURTSY BY THE BOARD. THERE'S NO EXTRA FEE BY THE BOARD. I ALWAYS STRESS IT AND RECOMMEND IT FOR LARGER PROJECTS. BUT WE'VE SEEN SMALLER PROJECTS COME ONCE. IF EVERYTHING IS ON THEIR PLANS, THEY'VE DONE THEIR HOMEWORK, THOSE PROJECTS MOVE THROUGH QUICKLY, SMOOTHLY, FEW QUESTIONS BECAUSE EVERYTHING HAS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED IN A QUALITY SET OF PLANS.

IT'S THOSE PLANS THAT WE SEE THAT AREN'T AS GOOD THAT ARE HAVING ISSUES AND LEAVING MORE QUESTIONS AND GETTING CONTINUED MULTIPLE TIMES. AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ANSWER IS, HOW TO CHANGE THAT BECAUSE THE PLANS THAT WE'RE GETTING, TECHNICALLY ARE MEETING A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS.

THEY'RE NOT THE SAME QUALITY AND PRESENTED IN THE SAME WAY AS THE

BETTER QUALITY PLANS. >> I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMISSION.

PERHAPS WE COULD TAKE SOME OF THE MORE PRIMITIVE DRAWINGS AND PRESENT THOSE AN THEN SOME OF THE HIGH QUALITY ONES PRESENT TH THOSE.

>> SAL, CAN I GO BACK TO PROPERTY OF CONCERN AND ASK WHETHER THE TWO THAT ARE IN OLD TOWN, WHAT USED TO BE DORIS HOUSE OFF ESTRADA -- ESTRADA AND GARDEN, WHICH IS FALLING DOWN, AND THERE IS ALSO A BLOCK HOUSE ON SOUTH NINTH, 50, 60,

SOMEWHERE LIKE THAT. >> CODE ENFORCEMENT IS WORKING ON BOTH OF THOSE. THE ONE ON ESTRADA, THE REASON IT'S NOT ON THE LIST AS A PROPERTY OF CONCERN IS BECAUSE I HAVE EVALUATED THE PROPERTY MYSELF.

THE PROPERTY WILL NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED.

WE JUST NEED TO TAKE IT DOWN SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

IT HAS VERY SIGNIFICANT TERMITE DAMAGE.

IT'S NOT NEW. IT'S NOT ACTIVE.

BUT WHEN THEY PULLED THE WALLS APART TO INSPECT IT, ORIGINALLY WHEN THE CURRENT OWNER CAME TO ME, THEY WANTED TO USE THE PROPERTY AND REHAB IT. AS THEY GOT FURTHER INTO IT, THEY REALIZED THERE WASN'T ANYTHING LEFT.

I COULDN'T FIND A SINGLE PIECE OF WOOD THAT WASN'T HEAVILY TERMITE DAMAGED. THERE ISN'T ANYTHING LEFT IN THE

PROPERTY. >> SAME WAY YOU'RE RIGHTLY ASKING MR. JONES TO START WORK WITHIN 30 DAYS, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF TIME SCHEDULE FOR WHICH A PROPERTY IS EITHER GOING TO BE DEMOLISHED OR APPROVED.

>> THAT'S UP TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND APPEALS BOARD.

I HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED THE PROPERTIES AND PRESENTED THEM TO

THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT. >> THERE'S ONLY ONE BUILDER LEFT

IN OLD TOWN, NEW TOWN. >> DEMOLITION REQUEST CAME IN A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO FOR THAT PROPERTY AND THEY COULDN'T DATE THE PROPERTY DEFINITIVELY, BUT THEY THINK IN THOSE REPORTS, THE SECTION OF THAT IS THE OLDEST STRUCTURE IN OLD TOWN.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT CAN BE SAVED OF IT.

THEY EVEN WANTED TO TAKE SOME BEAMS OUT AND DECORATIVE ITEMS. I SAID I WOULDN'T TAKE ANY OF THE WOOD OUT OF THIS HOUSE

BECAUSE OF THE TERMITE DAMAGE. >> AND OTHER ONE?

[03:15:02]

>> THE OTHER ONE I HAVEN'T DONE A FULL EVALUATION OF.

I HAVE FORWARDED THAT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT.

EVEN IF IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED, SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO IT BECAUSE IT'S A DISTRESSED PROPERTY.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> ARE WE HAVING A SPECIAL MEETING? DID WE DETERMINE THE DATE?

>> FEBRUAY MEETING WE'LL DO THAT, 3:30 P.M.

5:00 WE'RE MEETING WITH THE CITY COMMISSION.

>> I WILL SEND OUT AN E-MAIL CONFIRMING THAT, HOPEFULLY TOMORROW. I HAVE TO CONFIRM THIS ROOM IS

AVAILABLE. >> WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO DRAG YOU IN FOR MORE THAN ONE SPECIAL MEETING.

>> I THINK THERE'S THREE SCHEDULED MEETINGS THAT WEEK.

>> THAT'S GOOD. >> THANK YOU

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.