[00:00:06]
ALL RIGHT. THIS MEETING, THE REGULAR COMMISSION.
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
CITY COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.NANCY. SIKES-KLINE. HERE. BARBARA BLONDER. HERE.
CYNTHIA GARRIS. HERE. JIM SPRINGFIELD HERE. JOHN DEPRETER.
HERE. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT DONE. WE WILL I WILL ASK FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE AND FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY VICE MAYOR BARBARA BLONDER.
AND DURING OUR MOMENT OF SILENCE, WE WOULD LIKE TO HOLD IN OUR HEART, HEARTS AND HEADS THOUGHTS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS A LOST HIS LIFE ON FRIDAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE RISE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG STATES OF AMERICA.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE MODIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR AGENDA.
[2. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS]
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY CHANGES? I BELIEVE YOU WERE CONTACTED BY AN INDIVIDUAL FOR ONE CHANGE.THAT'S CORRECT. CONCERNING RESOLUTION 2025-24.
YES. WE'D LIKE TO PUT THAT ON THE NEXT COMMISSION AGENDA.
SO ANYONE HAVE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA TONIGHT? ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE REGULAR AGENDA MOVING ITEM NINE B2 TO THE NEXT MEETING.
SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE. AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT THING WE HAVE, IT'S A VERY SPECIAL NIGHT TONIGHT.
[3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS ]
WE HAVE SOME VERY SPECIAL VIP PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.AND SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS I THINK WE WILL CALL YOU ONE BY ONE.
I SEE LYNNE WEEKS THERE. WHERE ARE WE ON THAT? SEE BILL LINEN. LET'S DO. LET'S START WITH BILL.
AND THE COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME FORWARD.
ALL RIGHT. OKAY. PLEASE. FRONT AND CENTER. AND I HOPE THAT YOU HAVE A FEW MOMENTS TO SAY A FEW WORDS WITH US. WE JUST WANTED TO PAUSE WITH ALL THE TALK ABOUT NIGHTS OF LIGHTS AND ALL THE ATTENTION THAT'S BEEN PAID WITH IT, IT CAME TO MIND THAT THERE WERE TWO PEOPLE, VERY SPECIAL PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHO HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH BRINGING US THAT EVENT.
THEY HAD THE VISION, THEY HAD THE COURAGE, THEY HAD THE STAMINA.
AND THEY. YES. AND HE CHUCKLED. AND I KNOW WHY.
WE KNOW THAT YOU WENT THROUGH A LITTLE BIT. IN THE BEGINNING, WE HAD SOME DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE, AND I THINK IT WAS SETTLED ON THAT IT WOULD BE WHITE LIGHTS HIGHLIGHTING ARCHITECTURE, THE UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.
AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS AGREED UPON. BUT IT STARTED OFF A LITTLE DIFFERENT I THINK WAS IT YOU HAD VISITED GATLINBURG? I REMEMBER YOU COMING BACK, YOU AND LYNN COMING BACK AND TALKING ABOUT IT.
SO WE WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU AND LET YOU KNOW THAT WE APPRECIATE WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, WAS REALLY LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BEGINNINGS OF IT.
AND WE WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE RECOGNIZE YOU FOR THAT.
[00:05:09]
WHICH GREW TO BECOME A SYMBOL OF SAINT AUGUSTINE'S HOLIDAY SPIRIT, A TRADITION THAT BRINGS TOGETHER HISTORY AND ELEGANT BEAUTY THAT HAS BEEN ENJOYED BY RESIDENTS AND VISITORS ALIKE. SO. YES. I'M SURE.WE'LL DO A PICTURE. AND THEN WOULD YOU WOULD YOU LIKE FOR A NICE PICTURE? COME ON UP, JUDY. COME ON. OH, YES. OH, NO, I, I THINK HE WANTS YOU IN THE PICTURE.
YEAH. NO, HE PROBABLY DOES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS? OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.
IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE.
I SEE WE STARTED LATE 31 YEARS AGO. SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT I FEEL REALLY HONORED TONIGHT, AND I'M SURE LYNN IS AS WELL.
WE'VE ALL BEEN THROUGH THIS SO MANY YEARS TRYING TO RAISE MONEY FOR PEOPLE TO OPEN THEIR BUSINESSES, GET THE LIGHTS FOR IT. BUT ONE PERSON THAT WE NEVER HEAR ANY MORE ABOUT IS THE MAIN PERSON.
THE REASON WE HAVE THAT, AND THAT'S JOE PALMER.
HE WORKED WITH US. WE WENT TO HIM AND HE AGREED WITH IT.
HE WAS A GOOD CITY MANAGER. HE TOLD ME WHERE TO GET OFF, WHEN TO GET ON, AND AND BUT THANK YOU.
THIS IS A REAL PLEASURE BEING HERE TONIGHT. AND I THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
STAY AMAZING. YEAH. GOOD TO SEE YOU. ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'RE ALL UP HERE, SO I'LL INVITE LYNN AND CHRISTY.
OH, CHRISTY. COME ON. YOU HAVE. YOU KNOW YOU'RE A PART OF THIS, TOO.
YEAH. HEY. OH, WOW. HOW ARE YOU DOING? YEAH. SO? SO REALLY? SO REALLY, I JUST I WANT TO SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT YOU. BUT I WANT TO KNOW YOUR SHOW US YOUR BEAUTIFUL PRIDE AND SPIRIT.
FEEL THE MAGIC KNIGHTS OF LIGHTS. FEEL THE MAGIC FOR HISTORIC SAINT AUGUSTINE.
AND I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT LYNN. LYNN IS ONE OF THESE GUYS WHO WOULD KNOCK ON DOORS BACK IN THE DAY WHEN SAINT AUGUSTINE ROLLED UP THE SIDEWALK AT 05:00, AND HE WAS ALWAYS A PROMOTER OF, LET'S FIND SOMETHING TO DO AT NIGHT.
I THINK FOR MANY, MANY YEARS IT WAS ONLY JUST CROSS AND SWORD.
YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE MILL TOP, YOU KNOW, LIKE THAT.
YOU REMEMBER. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DID THROUGH THE YEARS.
I DO REMEMBER, I HAVE MEMORIES OF YOU CLIMBING ON THE BRIDGE OF LIONS, HANGING LIGHTS GETTING CREWS OUT THERE KNOCKING ON DOORS. BOTH OF YOU AND LYNN. BILL, BOTH OF YOU REALLY WORKING HARD TO BUILD THIS INTO WHAT IT IS TODAY.
AND, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE JUST GET SO MANY AWARDS EVERY, YOU KNOW, AND SO MUCH RECOGNITION.
THANKS TO DAVID BERGMAN THE WORK THAT HE'S DOING.
SO WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S A GREAT EVENT AND THAT IT CONTINUES WELL, WELL INTO THE FUTURE. SO WITH THAT SAID, I WILL READ YOUR CERTIFICATE AND YOUR INSPIRATION, VISION AND LEADERSHIP IN THE CREATION OF KNIGHTS OF LIGHTS, WHICH GREW TO BECOME A SYMBOL OF SAINT AUGUSTINE'S HOLIDAY SPIRIT, A TRADITION WHICH BRINGS TOGETHER HISTORY AND ELEGANT BEAUTY THAT HAS BEEN ENJOYED BY RESIDENTS AND VISITORS ALIKE.
FINE BY ME. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YEAH.
OKAY, YOU CAN, BUT LET'S TAKE A PICTURE. GO TAKE A PICTURE HERE.
[00:10:06]
ALRIGHT, SO. AND I DON'T KNOW, LYNN IS CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO HAVE A WORD.SO HERE YOU GO. WELL, WE'VE BEEN LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS ALL DAY, SO HERE YOU GO.
SHE DID TELL ME TO KEEP IT BELOW 30 MINUTES. NO, BUT IT IS AS BILL SAID, IT'S A REAL HONOR.
I KNOW THAT BILL AND I HAVE BOTH SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING ON THIS OVER THE YEARS.
IT WAS HIS IDEA. I WANT TO GIVE HIM CREDIT. HE HAD THE IDEA.
I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE ASKED TO GO UP TO GATLINBURG WITH JOE PALMER AND JACK, AND THE FOUR OF US DROVE THE CITY VAN UP THERE, AND WE MET WITH THEIR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
WE MET WITH THE LIGHTING GUY, BOB CHISHOLM. WE SAW WHAT THEY HAD DONE UP THERE.
WE TALKED TO THEIR THEIR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PEOPLE, AND IT JUST SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT COULD WORK IN SAINT AUGUSTINE TO BRING DOWN SOME NIGHTTIME BUSINESSES IN SAINT AUGUSTINE.
AS YOU MAY REMEMBER, I HAD A RESTAURANT DOWNTOWN, THE FLORIDA CRACKER CAFE AT THE TIME, AND WE STRUGGLED TO FIND OUT WHY PEOPLE WOULDN'T COME DOWNTOWN AT NIGHT. AND IT WAS BECAUSE DURING THE SLOWEST, DARKEST TIME OF THE YEAR, WHICH WAS DECEMBER AND JANUARY, THE TOWN WAS DEAD. THERE WAS NO LIGHTS. PEOPLE DIDN'T FEEL SAFE, AND THE NIGHTS OF LIGHTS KIND OF CHARACTERIZED AND SOLVED A LOT OF THOSE PROBLEMS BY GIVING PEOPLE A REASON TO COME DOWNTOWN AND A PLACE THAT THEY FELT SAFER FOR, BECAUSE THERE WAS LIGHTS AND THERE WAS MORE PEOPLE DOWNTOWN, AND IT REALLY TOOK OFF. I WILL SAY THIS, I HAD TO GO BEFORE THE TDC AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND BACK IN THOSE DAYS, NANCY WAS ON THE PRESERVATION BOARD FOR THE STATE.
SO I WAS LIKE, WOW, THAT'S A HOT SEAT. BUT I HAD TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT NANCY JUST SAID.
WE WEREN'T GOING TO DO THE ANIMATED LIGHTS THAT GATLINBURG DID.
WE WERE GOING TO DO WHITE LIGHTS TO OUTLINE OUR CITY, AND WE WENT THROUGH THE PRESERVATION BOARD FINALLY, WITH SOME A LITTLE RESISTANCE, BUT THEY ENDORSED IT.
THE BOARD ENDORSED IT. THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ENDORSED IT.
SO I'M JUST REALLY HAPPY THAT IT TURNED OUT AS WELL AS IT DID.
IT'S GROWN WAY BEYOND MY WILDEST DREAMS, AND I'M SURE BILL'S TOO.
NOW, I DON'T WANT ANY ROCKS THROWN AT ME TONIGHT, BUT I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE RESIDENTS FOR PUTTING UP WITH THE LAST YEAR AND THE BUSINESSES. AND AGAIN, I WANT TO COMMEND DAVID AND HIS STAFF AND THE SAINT AUGUSTINE BUSINESS COALITION AND ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT WORKS. AND DAVID HAS REALLY GOT A GOOD PLAN AND WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT.
SO I KNOW THAT THIS YEAR AND FUTURE YEARS IS GOING TO BE EVEN BETTER THAN IT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST.
SO THANK YOU FOR THIS AND I LOOK FORWARD TO MANY MORE YEARS.
AND I JUST, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE CONCLUDE THIS, I JUST WANT TO SHOUT OUT TO FORMER COMMISSIONER HENRY DEAN AND HIS WIFE WERE HERE ALSO IN OBSERVATION. SO WE JUST WANT TO WELCOME THEM HERE.
THANK YOU FOR COMING. WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE YOU IN THE CHAMBERS.
AND HENRY IS STILL VERY, VERY ACTIVE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.
SO. ALL RIGHT. SO HAPPY BIRTHDAY, HENRY. HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY.
ALL RIGHT, SO THE NEXT ITEM WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS OR FOR AGENDA ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING]
AND I'M GOING TO READ THIS. DO I NEED TO READ IT OR HAS IT BEEN RUNNING IN THE DID IT RUN ON THE SCREEN TONIGHT? I THINK IT DID. DID IT NOT? OKAY. I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THIS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.AT THIS TIME WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MATTERS THAT ARE NOT SCHEDULED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S RULES OF DECORUM.
COMMISSIONERS WILL NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM SPEAKERS.
[00:15:01]
MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WILL REFRAIN FROM ANY CLAPPING OR DISRUPTIVE DEMONSTRATIONS OF APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF ANY COMMENTS.THAT SAID, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I DO HAVE SOME SPEAKER CARDS.
THE FIRST I'LL CALL TWO NAMES JUST SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THINGS RIGHT ALONG.
TWO NAMES AT A TIME SO Y'ALL CAN GET QUEUED UP.
ALI BURCHFIELD, FOLLOWED BY SCOTT YORK. OKAY.
OKAY. RIGHT. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. I'M HERE TO MAKE YOU AWARE, IF YOU AREN'T ALREADY.
RECENTLY, THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR A CREATION OF PERMIT PARKING ON THE WEST END OF ROHDE AVENUE.
THE CITY STAFF TOOK A POLL AND APPARENTLY HAVE RECEIVED THE REQUIRED 60% APPROVAL FROM THE RESIDENTS ON THAT PART OF THE OF THE BLOCK TO PROCEED WITH THE PERMITTED PARKING. I'M NOT CLEAR IF THE RESIDENTS THAT VOTED ON THIS WERE AWARE THAT THE PARKING WOULD BE REDUCED TO ONE SIDE OF THE STREET AND GO FROM AROUND 20 SPACES TO ONLY SEVEN. THERE ARE TEN PROPERTIES ON THIS PART OF THE STREET THAT WOULD BE SHARING ONLY SEVEN SPOTS.
I LIVE ON RODHE EAST OF THIS AREA, AND I'M CONCERNED THAT THE REDUCTION IN PARKING WILL FORCE THE RESIDENTS TO MOVE EAST ONTO OUR PORTION OF THE STREET, CREATING A NEW PROBLEM THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST.
I DO FEEL IN THESE CASES, STAFF SHOULD BE DOING MORE OUTREACH TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES, CONSIDERING THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THE DRASTIC REDUCTION IN PARKING. IN ADDITION, I'M AWARE THAT THERE ARE OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO CROSS THE THRESHOLD FOR THE PERMITTED PARKING THINGS, SUCH AS OBSERVATION OF A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF OUT OF AREA TAGS AND ALSO UTILIZATION OF THE PARKING IN GENERAL.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD PASS THOSE OTHER THRESHOLDS AS A BIGGER PICTURE.
THE PREVIOUS PROPOSED ORDINANCE THAT INCLUDED SAN MARCO WAS REVISED TO TRY TO SATISFY THE NEIGHBORS.
ONCE THE STREETS HAD SIGNED UP FOR RESIDENTIAL PERMITS.
THIS WAS STRUCK DOWN. THE CURRENT SITUATION ON ROHDE, I FEEL, IS ANOTHER STEP FOR CITY STAFF TO CHERRY PICK THE RULES AND REQUIREMENTS TO WORK TOWARDS THEIR OVERALL GOAL OF FORCING THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO ADOPT THE PERMITTED PARKING SO THAT THEY CAN PUSH, REDUCE THE AVAILABLE PARKING AND PUSH MORE CARS INTO THE GARAGE.
IF THE WEST ROHDE PERMIT PARKING IS DONE, THIS WILL SET IN PLACE A CHAIN OF EVENTS THAT WILL LIKELY FORCE THE ENTIRE STREET TO EVENTUALLY NEED THE PERMIT PARKING, WHICH WE CURRENTLY DO NOT. AS I HAVE STATED BEFORE, WE HAVE ISSUES WITH THE REDUCTION IN PARKING SPACES, AND ALSO WITH THE ABILITY TO HAVE COMPANY OVER AS ISSUES FOR US WITH THE PERMIT PARKING.
THIS IS A LIVABILITY ISSUE AND I'M LOOKING FOR YOUR HELP IN THIS MATTER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ACTUALLY, THAT IS THE ONLY CARD THAT I HAVE.
FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA. SO IF THERE NO ONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING THEY WISH TO SPEAK ON, I WILL CALL MISS BJ KALAIDI.
BJ KALAIDI WEST CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE. MAYOR.
I DID TURN IN A CARD REMINDER. FIREWORKS ON JULY 4TH ARE NOT ALLOWED IN CITY LIMITS OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, ACCORDING TO SECTION 1878. QUESTION. CAN THIS BE INCLUDED IN NEWS AND NOTES IN THE WCCRA AREA MEDORA AND PHILLIPS INDIVIDUALS MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THIS. TRESPASSING IS OCCURRING AT THE DROP IN PROPERTY AT 90 SOUTH DIXIE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IS A NO TRESPASSING SIGN. AND THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON.
SINCE FEBRUARY 22ND, VEHICLES CONTINUED TO PARK ILLEGALLY ON THE STREET AT 51 ANDERSON.
[00:20:07]
THIS SITUATION INVOLVES ONE OF YOUR STAFF. MR. BIRCHIM. THREE SEPARATE INCIDENTS AT THIS LOCATION HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION.SINCE SELFISH INDIVIDUALS CREATE UNSAFE TRAFFIC SITUATIONS IN THE WCCRA AND THROUGHOUT THE CITY, WHICH WE JUST HAD SOMEONE TALK ABOUT. IT MAY BE TIME TO INCREASE PARKING FINES.
PLEASE LISTEN TO OUR MEETING. JUNE 18TH, 2025 ABOUT THE 156 AVENIDA MENENDEZ ITEM.
THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT AT THE END OF THE MEETING, SINCE THE CITY'S ENGINEER WAS ONE HOUR LATE.
THE DISRESPECT TO OTHERS ON THE AGENDA WAS VERY RUDE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HEARD THIS.
BUT PROTESTERS IN SPAIN SHOOT WATER GUNS AT TOURISTS.
BARCELONA PLANS TO ELIMINATE 10,000 SHORT TERM LICENSES, SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSES BY 2028. IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS A PROBLEM ALL OVER, OR NOT, JUST IN THIS CITY ABOUT SHORT TERM RENTALS.
SO THEY'RE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO USE HOMES FOR HOMES.
AND THE BUSINESS PEOPLE ARE AND THE CITIZENS, REALLY THE RESIDENTS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE SUFFERING.
BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE A REAL PROBLEM THROUGHOUT ABOUT HOW SHORT TERM RENTALS HAVE EITHER HELPED OR DETRACTED FROM THE QUALITY OF LIFE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENTS.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. BIRCHIM.
[5. CONSENT AGENDA ]
MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCES, WHICH ARE TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR SECOND READING ON JULY 14TH.ORDINANCE 2020 5-0 TEN AMENDS AND ADOPTS THE CITY'S REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY PLAN AND ORDINANCE.
2025-11 AMENDS AN EXISTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AT 1500 ARAPAHOE AVENUE.
WE HAVE A REMINDER OF UPCOMING MEETINGS A JULY 14TH 3 P.M.
SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING, WHICH IS THE BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS.
THE JULY 14TH 5 P.M. REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING, FOLLOWED BY THE JULY 28TH.
3 P.M. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AND JULY 28TH, 5 P.M.
WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE IN 2026, SPONSORED BY MAYOR NANCY SIKES-KLINE. THAT'S PROCLAMATION 20 2519.
AND WE HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION FOR THE REDEEMED CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF GOD PAVILION OF POWER.
IN CELEBRATION OF 15 YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE GREATER SAINT AUGUSTINE COMMUNITY.
SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER CYNTHIA GARRIS. FINALLY, WE HAVE A BILL FOR THE EMINENT DOMAIN LAKE MARIA SANCHEZ PROJECT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR CONSENT AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I MOVE THAT WE PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE NO APPEALS. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY GENERAL PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS.
WE DO. SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT, WHICH IS ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS.
WE HAVE TWO SECOND READINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS.
OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT WILL SO WE WILL BEGIN WITH ITEM 8A1 ORDINANCE
[8.A.1. Ordinance 2025-07: Adoption of the City of St. Augustine West City Community Redevelopment Area (WCCRA) plan. (J. Perkins, Neighborhood Services & CRA Manager ]
2025-07, MISS PERKINS. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. JAMIE D PERKINS, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND CRA MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.THIS IS A BRIEF PRESENTATION HERE. I'M PRESENTING ORDINANCE 2025-07 AND ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE WEST CITY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN. THIS IS THE SECOND OR REQUESTING SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE.
[00:25:01]
DURING THIS PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR WEST CITY.I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS IN WEST CITY WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PLAN, AND I'D LIKE TO ALSO THANK THE WEST CITY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA, THE FORMER STEERING COMMITTEE, AND I'LL CALL THEIR NAMES DOCTOR ARTHUR COLBERT, WHO WAS THE CHAIRPERSON, DIANA MARKOWITZ, THE VICE CHAIR, WANDA SAMS, BROOKE BOHALL, JEANNIE MOLLER, BJ KALAIDI AND MISTER JEFFREY KEMPS.
IF THIS BOARD BE SO OBLIGE, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU TO OPEN THIS UP FOR SECOND HEARING.
I'M SORRY. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING.
AND HOPEFULLY A VOTE IN FAVOR OF ORDINANCE 2025-07.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT, SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN. I HAVE NO SPEAKER CARDS, WHICH SOMETIMES IS A GOOD INDICATION. SEEING NO ONE DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK? MISS GLADY, ARE YOU OKAY? ALL RIGHT. IN MCLEAN, P.O.
WE HOPE THAT THE UTILITIES CAN GET PUSHED A LITTLE FASTER.
AND ON BEHALF OF CARE, YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB.
WE LOVE YOU, AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT.
OH. THANK YOU. OKAY. MR. KALAIDI, I SEE YOU WISH TO SPEAK.
MR. MCLAIN, IF YOU DON'T MIND FILLING OUT A CARD AS YOU LEAVE.
THANK YOU. BJ KALAIDI, WEST CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S WITH THE CARDS TONIGHT. DON'T YOU HAVE A CARD FOR ME, MAYOR? I DO HAVE A CARD FOR YOU FOR ITEM 8A1. AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
OKAY. I THOUGHT YOU WERE HERE TO SPEAK FOR THE OTHER ONE.
RIGHT, THAT'S ALRIGHT. I'M GLAD YOU CAUGHT ME.
OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. THE WCCRA PLAN SHOULD NOT BE ADOPTED AS PRESENTED.
PAGE 65, QUOTE, ASSIGNING CITY POLICE OFFICERS TO PATROL ONLY WITHIN THE WCCRA WAS INFEASIBLE.
WHICH ALSO MEANS NOT POSSIBLE. THIS IS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING.
WORDS HAVE MEANING. THERE IS NOTHING STATING MAY HAVE POLICE.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM. ENFORCEMENT. CHOOSING THE US ONE IN KING STREET PROPERTY FOR ANOTHER GARAGE SO THE DOLLARS CAN BE USED SO THE TIF DOLLARS CAN BE USED WILL NOT IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE IN WEST CITY.
THE BUSINESSES ALONG WEST KING STREET CONTINUE TO VIOLATE CITY ORDINANCES.
AND THE CODES THAT WE'VE SAID, HOPEFULLY THE NEGATIVE EFFECT ON QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE CITY'S OTHER TWO CRAS WILL NOT HAPPEN IN WEST CITY. I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE PASSED AND WE WILL BE LOOKING VERY STRONGLY AT WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
I MAY NOT BE AROUND LONG TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS ONCE THIS GARAGE IS PUT IN, BUT THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON AND THE HELP THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BRING TO WEST CITY.
WE HAVE THESE BLIGHTED AREAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT CODE ENFORCEMENT.
WE DIDN'T HAVE THE STAFF TO DO WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.
AND I'M CONCERNED THAT IT IS NOT WRITTEN PLAINLY ABOUT THE POLICE BEING IN THAT AREA.
AND I THINK THAT IS NECESSARY TO ENFORCE OUR LAWS, AND ALSO TO HAVE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ENFORCE THE CODES AND HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THEIR PART OF THE COMMUNITY. AND AS PART OF THAT, YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO HELP OUT.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING THIS BACK UP BEFORE THE COMMISSION, BEFORE YOU GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS.
ANY DISCUSSION, ANY ITEMS? I KNOW WE KIND OF WENT THROUGH IT PRETTY THOROUGHLY IN THE LAST MEETING ON THE FIRST READING, BUT WE'RE AT SECOND READING. WE'VE HEARD THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
DOES ANYONE WISH TO MAKE THEIR STATEMENTS? WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO AROUND THE TABLE OR.
OKAY. WELL I USUALLY START OVER HERE, SO LET'S START OVER HERE.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THAT'S THE [INAUDIBLE] THING.
THE POLICE? YES, MA'AM. SO AND I DON'T HAVE THE.
[00:30:02]
OPTION TO ADD COMMUNITY POLICING WITHIN, SPECIFICALLY WITHIN WEST CITY CRA.IT WOULD BE UP TO THE AGENCY TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
IT DOESN'T SPECIFY IF WE WOULD HAVE ONE POLICE SPECIFICALLY IN THAT AREA, BUT YOU ALL COULD ADDRESS OR MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF HOW YOU WOULD LIKE THAT. I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY LOOK LIKE STAFF WOULD COME TO YOU WITH SOME TYPE OF PROPOSAL OR PROFESSIONAL OPINION OF WHAT THAT COULD BE, AND THEN YOU ALL WOULD ULTIMATELY MAKE THAT DECISION.
REGARDING CODE ENFORCEMENT, THAT IS A CITYWIDE EFFORT AND OUR AND OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT, AS FAR AS THE ORDINANCES POLICIES ARE DONE BASED OFF OF POLICIES AND GUIDELINES THAT ARE ALREADY ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION.
ISN'T IT ALSO TRUE THAT EVERY AND THAT'S MAYBE SOMETHING THE CHIEF OR THE ASSISTANT CHIEF CAN ANSWER THAT THERE IS DESIGNATED POLICE OFFICERS FOR EVERY AREA OF OUR CITY. THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE A QUESTION FOR CHIEF MICHAUD OR HER STAFF.
THEY HAVE THEIR AREAS OF THAT. THEY PATROL REGULARLY, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF SHE COME FORWARD OR CHIEF.
HE'S THE CHIEF CULPRIT HERE. I'M CLOSER, SO I'LL ANSWER.
OKAY. YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS MISS BJ'S CONCERNS, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE WAS POLICE.
SO I JUST WANTED HER TO KNOW THAT WE DO HAVE POLICE THAT DO GET TO OUR AREAS IN A QUICK MANNER.
THERE IS. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, AND I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PLAN.
OKAY. WONDERFUL. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE VERY THOROUGHLY VETTED THIS.
THE STAFF HAS DONE A FABULOUS JOB OF PUTTING TOGETHER THE STEERING COMMITTEE AND HEARING THEM AND REGISTERING THEIR SUGGESTIONS AND CONCERNS, AND I JUST I LOVE THE PLAN. I AM SO EXCITED TO BE SITTING ON THE COMMISSION DURING THIS MOMENTOUS TIME.
SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK. I'M VERY MUCH SUPPORTIVE OF IT, AND I AGREE WITH KALAIDI.
I MAY NOT BE AROUND EITHER TO SEE THE FRUITS OF THIS LABOR.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MANDATE IN THERE. BUT.
BUT, JAMIE, YOU DID A GREAT JOB. THE COMMITTEE DID A GREAT JOB.
AND I WANT TO SAY THAT I IN MY MIND, IT HAPPENED VERY QUICK.
AND THAT DOESN'T TYPICALLY HAPPEN WITH THE KIND OF THINGS WE DO FOR A LIVING HERE IN THE CITY AND WITH THE, WITH GOVERNMENT. AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF YOUR LEADERSHIP.
AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WONDERFUL.
SO MY COMMENTS ARE THAT I THINK THAT WE'RE MAKING HISTORY TONIGHT A NEW KIND OF HISTORY.
I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE BEEN SO WELCOMING OF EVERYONE'S INPUT, WHETHER IT'S HARD TO HEAR OR NOT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, LOVELY TO HEAR OR NOT.
AND THAT IS OUR JOB MOST OF THE TIME, IS TO HEAR BOTH SIDES OF IT.
AND I URGE THE COMMUNITY TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS, AND I'M SURE THAT IT'S ON THE MINDS OF OTHERS WHENEVER WE DO CREATE THESE NEW MECHANISMS. I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO STAY INVOLVED.
THAT'S HOW THE PLAN WILL GET BETTER. THAT'S HOW THE PLAN WILL ADAPT.
THAT'S HOW THE PLAN WILL BE EXECUTED. AND IT WILL BE EXECUTED ACCORDING TO THE WISHES OF THE COMMUNITY, NOT TO THOSE OF US, BECAUSE THAT'S WHO OUR BOSSES ARE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AND I, I'M BACK TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, A CRA IS ALL ABOUT.
AND I THINK THAT YOUR PLAN THAT YOU'VE PUT TOGETHER WITH THE COMMUNITY YOU SHOULD BE COMMENDED BECAUSE I THINK THAT WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU WILL BE ADDRESSING FOSTERING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND THAT IS THE MAIN THING THAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
SO WE AT THE VERY BOTTOM LINE, THAT IS IT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
SO WE CAN DO A LOT OF WONDERFUL OTHER THINGS IN IN THE PROCESS TOO.
SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THOSE WERE MY COMMENTS.
SO WE SHOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'M ASKING FOR A MOTION FOR ORDINANCE 2025-07 GO FORWARD.
[00:35:04]
SECOND. OKAY. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-07, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPTING THE WEST CITY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE OR PARTS OF ORDINANCE AND ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT.HEREWITH PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
CYNTHIA. GARRIS. YES. BARBARA BLONDER. YES. JOHN.
DEPRETER. YES. JIM. SPRINGFIELD. YES. THE MAYOR HAS JUST RETURNED.
NANCY. SIKES-KLINE. YES. SO SORRY. MY APOLOGIES.
THANK YOU. OKAY. NEXT ITEM WILL BE ITEM A8A2 ORDINANCE
[8.A.2. Ordinance 2025-08: Amendment to Noise Control Regulations. (/. Lopez, City Attorney) ]
2025-08. AND THAT IS THE AMENDMENT TO THE NOISE CONTROL REGULATIONS.ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE, HONORABLE MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS ANTHONY CUTHBERT, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE, SAINT AUGUSTINE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I'M HERE TONIGHT TO PRESENT THE COMMISSION, THE SECOND READING OF THE AMENDED NOISE ORDINANCE 2025-08.
ON JUNE 9TH, YOU HEARD THE FIRST READING FROM OUR NOISE CONSULTANT, ERIC ZWERDLING.
AT THAT MEETING, YOU GAVE FOUR DISTINCT DIRECTIVES REGARDING FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE NOISE ORDINANCE, WHICH I PRESENT TO YOU. AND UPON COMPLETION, I WILL AVAIL MYSELF TO ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS YOU MAY HAVE.
OKAY, SO AT THE LAST MEETING ON JUNE 9TH, YOU GAVE FOUR DIRECTIVES FOR THE THE NOISE CONSULTANT.
AND THAT WAS NUMBER ONE TO TREAT THE HOTEL, MOTEL AND THE B&B LIKE RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
YOU'LL TREAT THURSDAYS LIKE WEDNESDAYS AT 10 P.M., NOISE REDUCTION.
AND YOU'LL LEAVE THE LANGUAGE AS NEUTRAL REGARDING DOORS AND WINDOWS BEING OPENED OR CLOSED.
THEY'LL HAVE TO GO TO THE MANAGEMENT TO HANDLE THAT CALL. SO IN REGARDS TO DIRECTION NUMBER ONE, AND FOR THAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT A CHANGE IN 1187 A DEFINITIONS FOR DIRECTION ONE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFINING THE USE, OCCUPANCY, OCCUPANCY AND ZONING DISTRICTS, ALL PREMISES CONTAINING HABITUALLY OCCUPIED SLEEPING QUARTERS, INCLUDING TRANSIENT COMMERCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE SLEEPING QUARTERS, SHALL BE CONSIDERED IN RESIDENTIAL USE.
FOR DIRECTIVE NUMBER FOUR. YOU'LL ALSO FIND THAT IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH AT THE VERY BOTTOM.
COMPLAINTS BY INDIVIDUALS STAYING AT TRANSIENT COMMERCIAL SLEEPING QUARTERS, SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO HOTELS, MOTELS OR BED AND BREAKFAST WILL BE REFERRED TO THE COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT FOR RESOLUTION.
IF THERE IS A NOISE DISTURBANCE THAT ORIGINATES FROM THE SAME ESTABLISHMENT.
AND THEN FOR DIRECTION NUMBER TWO, AND THIS IS CHANGING THE TIME LIMIT ON THURSDAYS TO 10 P.M., TREATING IT LIKE A WEEKDAY, YOU'LL FIND THAT UNDER 11 - 88.
NO SOUND PRODUCTION DEVICE MAY BE PLAINLY AUDIBLE WITHIN THE RESIDENCE OF AN INFECTED PERSON. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 10 P.M. AND 7 A.M., AND FRIDAY AND SATURDAY AND HOLIDAYS BETWEEN 11 P.M.
AND 7 A.M.. SO IT DOES START WITH THE 10 P.M..
THE FIRST ONE ADDRESSES PLENTY AUDIBLE. YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THURSDAYS ARE 10 P.M.
AND THEN UNDER TABLE THREE FOR THE NOISE READINGS.
PERMISSIBLE SOUND LIMITS. IT ALSO SAYS THURSDAY IS 10 P.M.
AS DIRECTED. AND THEN DIRECTION NUMBER THREE AS REQUESTED.
THERE WAS NO CHANGE TO THE AMENDED ORDINANCE.
IT'S REMAINING NEUTRAL TO OPEN WINDOWS AND DOORS.
AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE. AND I JUST WANT TO THANK THE CITY COMMISSION, THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY MISS LOPEZ AND APRIL OWEN AND ERIC ZWERDLING FOR ALL YOUR INPUT AND DIRECTION IN THIS MATTER. ALL RIGHT.
EXCELLENT. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY. I DO HAVE SPEAKER CARDS THIS EVENING. THE FIRST SPEAKER WILL BE SCOTT MAYNARD, FOLLOWED BY MARC ALEXANDER.
[00:40:01]
MAYOR. COMMISSION. THANK YOU. I'M SCOTT MAYNARD, 59, OAK SHADOW POLICE.SAINT JOHNS, FLORIDA, ALSO WITH THE SAINT JOHNS COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
I SPOKE WITH THE MAYOR AND SHE SAID SHE HAD HAD VERY LITTLE COMMENT FEEDBACK ON THIS ORDINANCE.
I ALSO HAD TO VOTE ON A NOISE ORDINANCE FOR A UNIVERSITY THAT WAS WITHIN OUR WITHIN OUR CITY.
SO WITH THAT, AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THE BUSINESSES THAT THE CHAMBER REPRESENTS.
WE WOULD ASK A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE, TO POTENTIALLY EXTEND ONE HOUR ON THE NIGHTLIFE ORDINANCE.
SPECIFICALLY ON THE WEEKENDS. AND TWO, TO POTENTIALLY ALLOW FOR OPPORTUNITIES FOR SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER THAN JUST HOLIDAYS. SO IT MAY BE SEEING OUT LOUD FESTIVAL, MAYBE THERE'S AN EXEMPTION TO HAVE THE RESTAURANTS AND BARS EXTEND THE ORDINANCE BY AN HOUR ON THOSE PARTICULAR NIGHTS OR NIGHTS OF LIGHTS ON SELECTED NIGHTS AS WELL.
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT AND SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER.
SO WE APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THIS UP. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER IS MARK ALEXANDER, FOLLOWED BY SCOTT YORK.
GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. MARK ALEXANDER 234 COQUINA AVENUE.
I AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER HERE THAT I WAS ON THE COMMISSION WHEN WE ENACTED THE FIRST ORDINANCE THAT BROUGHT IN THE MACHINE THAT WOULD HELP YOU REGULATE NOISE. THAT WAS A REAL TOUGH ONE TO WORK ON.
AT THAT TIME, WE WERE HAVING COMPLAINTS NEIGHBOR AGAINST NEIGHBOR, TVS TOO LOUD THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT THE I DON'T THINK THE RESTRICTIONS ARE ANY HARDER THAN THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
WHEN I FIRST RECEIVED THE PAPERWORK ON THIS, I WASN'T QUITE SURE.
THE ONLY THING THAT I WAS WORRIED ABOUT IS COULD YOU TAKE THE NOISE METER RIGHT UP TO MY BUILDING? AS WE OWN THE WHITE LINE, COME UP TO MY BUILDING AND AND SAY, YOU'RE TOO LOUD.
BUT THE ONE THING THAT WE WERE HAD TO BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WAS THAT PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE SOMETIMES THAT THE DECIBEL READINGS, EVEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT 55 AND 65DB.
AND THE ONE THING THAT THE CITY DOESN'T REALIZE, TOO, IS THE THE PERSON THAT WE HAD TO COME DOWN HERE FROM MASSACHUSETTS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION ABOUT THE AIR CONDITIONERS ON THE CITY BUILDING HERE, HOW LOUD THEY WERE THAT THEY COULD ACTUALLY BE BREAKING THE LAW AFTER THAT AT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. NOW, I KNOW THIS DOESN'T AFFECT THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE MAKING.
I JUST WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE ABOUT MAKING NOISE ORDINANCE TOO RESTRICTIVE.
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY AFFECT A LOT OF THINGS TO REALIZE, AND AIR CONDITIONERS WOULD BE ONE OF THEM.
THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAD TO SAY. THANK YOU. OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE LAST SPEAKER IS SCOTT YORK. IT'S ALWAYS NICE TO SEE A FORMER MAYOR COME AND SPEAK. ALWAYS. SCOTT YORK, 29, SPANISH STREET, THE MOST CHARMING STREET IN SAINT AUGUSTINE.
HOPEFULLY AFTER TONIGHT IT WILL BECOME EVEN MORE CHARMING.
IT'S NOT COMPLETELY BUSINESS RESTRICTIVE, BUT IT DOES ALLOW OUR RESIDENTS TO GET SOME REST.
I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF EXTENDING ANOTHER HOUR AT ALL.
WE GAVE UP ALL OF THOSE HOURS DURING THIS TWO YEAR TIME.
THEY HAD TIME TO COME FORWARD. ABSOLUTELY NOT.
10 P.M. IS A DECENT HOUR FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO REST.
EXTENDING TO MIDNIGHT. ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE DON'T WORK IN A 9 TO 5 SOCIETY ANYMORE.
IT DOES ALLOW OUR NOISE COMPLAINT, NOISE COMPLIANCE OFFICER OR ANY POLICE OFFICER RIDING, BIKING, OR DRIVING BY OR WALKING BY A BUSINESS AND THEY CAN HEAR THAT FROM THE DESIGNATED DISTANCES TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THIS NOISE ORDINANCE.
[00:45:04]
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK.PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW. OKAY. PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
SO WE'RE BACK TO THE DAIS. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOLLOW UP? DOES ANYONE WISH TO FOLLOW UP WITH. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO YOU WERE THANKING EVERYBODY, BUT I WANT TO THANK YOU.
AND THE CHIEF AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH GETTING THIS DONE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE LIKE TO MAKE OTHER COMMENTS.
I THINK PROBABLY APPROPRIATE. GO AHEAD AND START.
I AGREE WITH MR. YORK. THIS HAS BEEN TWO YEARS.
AND I HAVE VERY GOOD REASONS WHY THIS TOOK A LOT LONGER THAN IT DID TO GET THE CRA GOING.
THIS IS A VERY DELICATE PIECE OF OF ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE EVERY EYE IS DOTTED AND T IS CROSSED, AND THAT HAS HAPPENED THANKS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY MAKING SURE THAT ALL THIS HAPPENED AND.
HE DID NOT WRITE THIS. HE HE PERFECTED WHAT WE REQUESTED THAT WE DO.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE BUSINESSES FOR SUPPORT BECAUSE THEY PROMISED THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
AND I THINK THAT LIKE EVERY ORDINANCE, THIS ISN'T THE END OF THE END OF THE ROAD.
EVERYTHING CAN BE MODIFIED AND IT SHOULD BE MODIFIED AS IT NEEDED.
IN THE FUTURE WE'LL BE GETTING MORE EXPERIENCE. BUT THANK YOU.
ASSISTANT CHIEF. THANKS, MAYOR. I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO SAY AFTER THESE TWO, BUT.
BUT I JUST WOULD JUST LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT QUALITY OF LIFE IS REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME.
AND I THINK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS IN THE COMMUNITY AND THE RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND I THINK IT'S TIME WE FULLY SUPPORT THIS. IT'S BEEN WELL VETTED.
IT'S GOT A LOT OF EXPERTISE IN IT. IT'S GOT A LOT OF TIME PUT INTO IT.
AND I THANK YOU FOR MR. CUTHBERT, FOR LEADING THE CHARGE ON THIS.
YOU'VE DONE A WONDERFUL JOB. YEAH, WELL, I'LL JUST ECHO WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID.
IT SEEMS LIKE I CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LATER, BUT FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN IT'S BASED ON SOME FACTS.
I THINK IT'S BEEN WELL VETTED AND I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO CHANGE IT.
AND I THINK IT'S AN EXCITING MOMENT FOR THE RESIDENTS.
AND I'D LIKE TO THANK THOSE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS. I KNOW MR. YORKE HAS WORKED ON IT. SO YEAH. ANY OTHER FINAL COMMENTS? YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO MY COMMENTS ARE I DO FEEL LIKE THE SPEAKER SAID MR. YORKE SAID IT'S NOT OVERLY RESTRICTIVE. IT PROVIDES FOR PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR A LIVING.
YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE I THINK WE TEND TO THINK THAT PEOPLE AREN'T REALLY LIVING DOWNTOWN ANYMORE, UNFORTUNATELY. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE LIVING DOWNTOWN AND THEY'RE AFFECTED AND PEOPLE LIVING ACROSS THE WATER LIKE ME, WHO ARE AFFECTED ALTHOUGH NOT NEARLY AS MUCH, AND CERTAINLY NOT TO THE POINT THAT ANY COMPLAINT THAT I GENERATE WILL PROBABLY EVER BE ACTIONABLE. BUT I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT EVERYBODY DID ON THIS, AND I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT IT CAME TO FINALLY TOOK FOREVER. FOREVER, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME.
BUT WITH THAT SAID I WOULD INVITE A MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ORDINANCE 2025-08, READ BY TITLE ONLY. I'LL SECOND THAT.
ALL RIGHT. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-08, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE FOUR OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS REGARDING NOISE CONTROL, PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ANY FINAL COMMENTS OR DEBATE? NO. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL JIM.
SPRINGFIELD. YES. BARBARA BLONDER. YES. JOHN DEPRETER.
YES. CYNTHIA. GARRIS. YES. NANCY. SIKES-KLINE.
YES. WONDERFUL. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
TWO MAJOR PIECES OF ORDNANCE. I THINK THOSE ARE GOOD LAWS.
I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE GOOD ORDINANCES FOR OUR CITY.
THEY'RE WONDERFUL. NINE A WILL MOVE ON TO 9A1 UNDER TWO FIRST READINGS.
[9.A.1. Ordinance 2025-10: Amends and Adopts the City's Required Water Supply Plan. (A. Skinner, Planning and Building Director) ]
THIS IS GOING TO BE MISS SKINNER AMENDING AND ADOPTING THE CITY'S REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY PLAN.[00:50:01]
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS AMY SKINNER. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT.THIS ITEM IS THE INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 2025, - TEN TO AMEND AND ADOPT AN UPDATED CITY WATER SUPPLY PLAN FOR THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE. FIRST ADOPTED A REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY PLAN AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE IN 2020.
THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN IS PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE REQUIREMENT FOR A WATER SUPPLY PLAN IS EMBEDDED IN FLORIDA STATUTES.
ALL WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA HAVE DETERMINED THAT PORTIONS OF THEIR DISTRICTS WILL HAVE INSUFFICIENT SUPPLIES OF WATER FROM TRADITIONAL SOURCES, TYPICALLY GROUNDWATER, WITHIN THE NEXT 20 YEARS.
IN ORDER TO ENSURE ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLIES, THE LEGISLATURE HAS ESTABLISHED A COORDINATED PLANNING PROCESS BETWEEN THE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLANS PREPARED BY THE DISTRICTS AND REQUIRED COMPREHENSIVE PLANS PREPARED PREPARED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE ARE THE INFRASTRUCTURE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AND THE CITY'S PROPOSED UPDATED WATER SUPPLY PLAN APPENDIX, WHICH IS BASED ON THE 2023 NORTH FLORIDA REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN.
THIS APPENDIX IS ATTACHED TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS ACTING AS THE CITY'S LAND PLANNING AGENCY.
REVIEWED THE PROPOSED UPDATE, HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, AND RECOMMENDED THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN UPDATES TO THE CITY COMMISSION AT THEIR JUNE 3RD REGULAR MEETING. SINCE THE JUNE PZB MEETING, STAFF FROM THE SAINT JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT HAVE ALSO REVIEWED THE CITY'S PROPOSED PLAN AND PROVIDED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
THE WATER SUPPLY PLAN ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE REFLECTS ALL RECOMMENDED UPDATES.
IF THE CITY COMMISSION PASSES THIS ITEM ON FIRST READING.
THIS IS INTRODUCTION IN FIRST READING, SO I'M ALSO AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ALL RIGHT COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS. THIS IS A FIRST READING.
SO WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. BUT ANYONE WISHING TO MAKE A MOTION.
I ACTUALLY HAD A COUPLE COMMENTS. COMMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE SECTIONS OF THIS WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES. AND I CAN'T OVEREMPHASIZE THAT.
AND A LOT OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THIS REVISED PLAN COULD BE ELEMENTS OF RECOGNIZING EXCELLENT LANDSCAPING AND PRACTICES.
I STILL SEE MY NEIGHBORS WATERING THEIR YARDS AT 11 IN THE MORNING DURING THE SUMMER.
SO I KIND OF. I WANT YOU TO. I DON'T WANT TO I DO HAVE A KIND OF A SIDEBAR TO THAT.
MAYBE AFTER WE VOTE ON THIS. IT'S JUST LIKE A FUTURE THING THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND I DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY, KIND OF A SIDEBAR. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THAT IN COMMISSIONER COMMENTS.
I COULD DO THAT IN COMMISSIONER COMMENT. SURE.
YEAH. YEAH, THAT WOULD BE FINE. YEAH. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WAS THAT A MOTION TO.
YEAH, THAT'S A MOTION TO APPROVE. ALL RIGHT. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-10, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCORPORATE CHANGES REQUIRED BY THE 2023 NORTH FLORIDA REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN. AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT, INCLUDING AMENDING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES, AND UPDATING APPENDIX A OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT.
[00:55:04]
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ALL RIGHT.ANY OTHER FINAL COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION? NONE.
MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. BARBARA BLONDER.
YES. JIM. SPRINGFIELD. YES. JOHN. DEPRETER. YES.
CYNTHIA. GARRIS. YES. NANCY. SIKES-KLINE. YES.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO 9A2. ORDINANCE 2025-11.
[9.A.2.Ordinance 2025-11: Amends an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) at 1500 Arapaho Avenue. (A. Skinner, Planning and Building Director) ]
THANK YOU, MISS SKINNER. YOU'RE HERE FOR THIS ONE, TOO.YES. WELCOME TO PRESENT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING AGAIN.
AMY SKINNER WITH THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THIS ITEM IS THE INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 2025, - 11, TO AMEND THE EXISTING PUD AT 1500 ARAPAHOE AVENUE, WHICH IS CONSIDERED THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SHIPYARD'S PROJECT.
THAT INCLUDES 55 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ASSOCIATED DOCK WITH BOAT SLIPS.
THIS PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AND REZONED TO A PUD IN 2023, THREE.
AFTER SEVERAL MEETINGS, INCLUDING MUCH DISCUSSION, THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEWED THE AMENDED PUD AND RECOMMENDED A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE CITY COMMISSION AT THEIR JUNE 3RD MEETING.
THE CURRENT PUD SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES SAVING TREES AND RELOCATING TREES AS THE EXISTING INTO THE EXISTING PART OF THE SHIPYARD'S PROJECT. THERE ARE NO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LIST OF USES OR LAYOUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWED BY THE PUD.
THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A PROPOSED TREE MITIGATION PLAN WITH CREDITS THAT EXCEED THE DEFICITS.
ADDITIONALLY, A COMPANION APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AT THE JUNE MEETING FOR A TREE PLANTING PLAN ON PROPERTY NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY THAT IS ALSO PART OF THE ORIGINAL REGIONAL SHIPYARDS DEVELOPMENT AREA.
THIS COMPANION APPLICATION WAS VIEWED AS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL TREE LOCATION PLAN, WITH THE PLANTING OF FIVE LARGE OAK TREES IN THE FUTURE TOWN CENTER AREA.
AT THE JUNE MEETING, THE PCB ALSO DISCUSSED AND AN EXISTING SHIPYARDS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT INCLUDES A PROVISION ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS THE EVENTUAL REDESIGN AND POTENTIAL SIGNALIZATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE INTERSECTION AT US ONE ARAPAHOE AVENUE AND IROQUOIS AVENUE.
THE SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION THAT IS APPROVED BY THIS PUD IS CURRENTLY NOT INCLUDED IN THE IN THIS EXISTING, AMENDED AND RESTATED SHIPYARDS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
THEREFORE, THE PCB MOTION TO POSITIVELY RECOMMEND THE REZONING ZONING REQUEST RELATED TO THE LANGUAGE FOR TREE REMOVAL AND TREE MITIGATION INCLUDED A REQUEST THAT THE CITY COMMISSION REVIEW THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO DETERMINE IF IT SHOULD BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE THIS PUD DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS AN INTRODUCTION IN FIRST READING, AND I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ALL RIGHT. AND JUST A REMINDER THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.
SO WE WILL BE LOOKING FOR EX PARTE DISCLOSURES.
WE'LL DO THAT FIRST, THEN WE'LL DO EX PARTE MR. SPRINGFIELD, COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD. I GOT A PHONE CALL TODAY FROM THE ATTORNEY.
AND HE LEFT A VOICEMAIL AND RESPONDED BY TEXT.
OKAY. VICE MAYOR DUNN I MYSELF HAVE NONE. I GOT A TEXT MESSAGE AND A VOICE, A VOICEMAIL FROM MR. WHITEHOUSE. BUT I DIDN'T RESPOND BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET IT IN TIME.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER, I DON'T RECALL GETTING ANYTHING FROM.
IF HE DID SEND ME A TEXT MESSAGE, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT.
OKAY, THEN. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S DISCLOSURE. ALL RIGHT, SO QUESTIONS OF MISS SKINNER.
ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS TO MISS SKINNER? OKAY. MR. COMMISSIONER. MISS SKINNER, I KNOW I HAD TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THE I WAS PART OF.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WAS PART OF THIS WHEN IT WAS FIRST APPROVED.
EXCUSE ME BY FOLLOWING IT ON THE VIDEO WATCHING THE VIDEOS OF IT.
AND AS I RECALL, IT WAS A SEPARATE THAN THE PUD REQUEST.
[01:00:02]
IT WAS A CONSERVATION OVERLAY DEVELOPMENT. DO YOU HAVE THAT DOCUMENT OR IS THERE ANY DOCUMENTATION OF THAT? I HAVE A GRAPHIC THAT I CAN SHOW YOU. MISS DUNN, CAN YOU? I WANT TO, I THINK PROBABLY IT'S BEEN RESOLVED.I JUST WANT TO GET IT IN THE RECORD SO THAT WE HAVE IT.
I JUST SAY, WELL, WE'RE SAYING THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO MOVE THE OAK TREES, WHICH FAILED.
AND THEN I HEARD THEY WERE DONE. THEY WERE MITIGATED IN THIS NEW PLAN.
SO TRYING TO JUST GET THAT DOCUMENTED FOR THE RECORD.
SO WE ALL ARE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THIS. I HAVE THIS THIS EXHIBIT, BUT I ALSO HAVE KIND OF A SERIES OF AERIALS THAT SHOW THE PROGRESSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO. TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER? I THINK IT'LL HELP. I MEAN, I THINK IT'LL HELP TO GET THIS ALL OUT SO WE CAN ALL KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
YEAH. YES. THIS IS A GRAPHIC THAT SHOWS DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE SHIPYARD'S PROJECT.
FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS THE INTERSECTION THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED.
IT'S AN AWKWARD INTERSECTION HERE BY THE DUNKIN DONUTS.
RESTAURANT AREA. THE MULTIFAMILY. IT WAS RECENTLY COMPLETED.
IT'S A LARGE BUILDING HERE IN THE CENTER. IT IS NOW OPEN FOR RENT.
THIS IS KIND OF CONSIDERED THE TOWN SQUARE AREA OR TOWN CENTER AREA.
THESE THIS IS A MULTIFAMILY SECTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THIS WAS ANNEXED AND ADOPTED IN 2023. THERE ARE FIVE TREES, OAK TREES THAT ARE HERE THAT WERE PART OF A RELOCATION PLAN AND A CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT RELATED TO THE PROJECT UP HERE. THE IT HAD BEEN INDICATED IN THE PUD THAT THESE TREES COULD BE MOVED AND RELOCATED.
RELOCATED INTO THIS NORTHERN PROJECT, IN FACT, INTO THIS TOWN CENTER AREA.
THEY'VE HAD SOME DIFFICULTY WITH THAT PROCESS AND WITH THIS RECENT STORMS THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THESE TREES ARE NO LONGER VIABLE, AND THAT IS WHY THE PUD IS BEING AMENDED SO THAT THEY CAN RECOGNIZE THAT THESE THESE TREES CANNOT BE MOVED. THE DEVELOPER HAS COME FORWARD WITH A MITIGATION PLAN THAT EXCEEDS THE CREDITS REQUIRED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PORTION OF, OF THE PROJECT. THE COMPANION APPLICATION THAT I REFERRED TO DID DOES RECOGNIZE THAT THE THERE ARE FIVE CEDAR OR FIVE OAK TREES, EXCUSE ME, THAT ARE GOING TO BE PLANTED IN IN THIS AREA, IN THIS TOWN CENTER AREA. SO THAT ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED.
SOME CEDAR TREES WERE MOVED ONTO THIS PROPERTY THERE IN THIS KIND OF LINE.
LINE OF CEDAR TREES ALONG THE THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY.
IT'S QUESTIONABLE HOW SUCCESSFUL THE MOVING THE THE PROCESS WAS TO MOVE THESE TREES.
IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE MAYBE DISTRESSED, MAYBE IN, IN A DIFFICULT, YOU KNOW, SITUATION, THEY DON'T LOOK VERY GOOD.
THE BUT THAT WAS PART OF A CONSERVATION ZONE APPROVAL FOR THIS AREA.
THAT WAS ONE OWNERSHIP, EVEN THOUGH THIS WAS STILL IN THE COUNTY AT THE TIME.
[01:05:01]
ENFORCEMENT ACTION WOULD TAKE PLACE DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE TREES ARE REPLACED OR YOU KNOW THAT THEY ARE ALIVE, THAT THEY'RE VIABLE BEFORE THAT WE FINALIZE THIS PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT.
THAT AGREEMENT, THAT CONSERVATION ZONE DEVELOPMENT WAS ALL DONE PRIOR TO THIS PROPERTY BEING ANNEXED IN, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS UNDER THE SAME OWNERSHIP AT THE TIME.
OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO GET THAT OUT SO EVERYBODY KNOWS MORE OR LESS THAT.
SO IT WOULD NEED TO MEET ALL THEIR REQUIREMENTS BEFORE THEY MOVE ON.
THANK YOU. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD AS WE MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU.
THE MAYORS HAD TO STEP OUT FOR A MINUTE AGAIN, SO I'M GOING TO STEP IN FOR JUST A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER GARRIS, DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS? QUESTIONS FOR MISS SKINNER? NO, I DID HEAR SOME OF IT WHEN I WAS IN THE BACK, SO.
I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD? YES. I WANT TO KNOW IF THE DEVELOPER MADE ANY EFFORTS TO GET ANY LARGE TREES OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY MOVED IN IN LIEU OF THOSE LARGE TREES THAT WERE THAT WERE DESTROYED IN THE HURRICANE.
I KNOW THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF PURCHASING THOSE TREES.
I SPOKE TO A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THOSE TREES ARE AVAILABLE TO PURCHASE.
THE THE THE LANGUAGE IN THE REVISED PUD CALLS FOR 19 NEW SOUTHERN LIVE OAK TREES IN THE COMMON AREAS OF THE PUD. A MINIMUM OF EIGHT CALIPER INCHES AT PLANTING.
YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE LIVE OAKS YOU BY NOW ARE NOT LIVE OAKS.
THEY'RE HYBRID. I LIVE OAKS AND THEY'RE STRAIGHT.
AND THE TREES THAT WERE MOVED WERE LIVE OAKS.
AND IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO BUY REAL LIVE OAKS ANYMORE.
I'VE TRIED. MY OTHER CONCERN IS THE INTERSECTION.
IS THIS DEVELOPMENT INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO HELP WITH THE INTERSECTION ON US ONE? THIS AREA IN GREEN, THAT IS THE PUD SINGLE FAMILY AREA IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
OKAY, SO OFF TOPIC THEN. WHAT IS THE RESULT OF THE FACT THAT THE ORIGINAL PERSON WHO SIGNED THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS SELLING OFF PARCELS? WHAT IS THE RESULT IF WE NEVER GET THAT INTERSECTION BUILT? IS THERE ANY PENALTY FROM FDOT? ARE WE HELD HOLDING THE GAP, AND DO WE HAVE ANY RECOURSE? IF THE DEVELOPERS DON'T PARTICIPATE, THIS IS EXCLUDING THIS CURRENT ONE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT INVOLVED.
SO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS WITH THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER AND BINDS ALL SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, MEANING ANYONE WHO OWNS LAND IN THAT ORIGINAL GEOGRAPHY IS ON THE HOOK FOR THE IMPROVEMENT.
I KNOW I HAVE A VISA BILL TOO, BUT IF I DON'T PAY IT, THERE'S PENALTIES.
SO WHAT? WHAT IS OUR RECOURSE IF THEY DECIDE NOT TO PARTICIPATE? THEY BEING THE LANDOWNERS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE TO HELP WITH THE INTERSECTION.
OH, THAT'S THAT'S AN INJUNCTIVE RELIEF THROUGH LITIGATION IN THE COURT SYSTEM PER THE STATUTE.
SO FDOT WOULD TAKE THEM TO COURT? NO, NO, NO, THE CITY FDOT IS NOT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IT'S THE CITY AND THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER. WELL, MY QUESTION IS, THOUGH, WHO IS REQUIRING US TO DO THE INTERSECTION? IS IT THE CITY REQUIRING THE DEVELOPER, OR IS IT FDOT REQUIRING THE CITY TO PROVIDE THE INTERSTATE? IT'S CITY REQUIRING THE DEVELOPER AS PART OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
OKAY. OKAY, THANKS. RIGHT. AS I RECALL, I WAS A COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME WHEN WE APPROVED IT, THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WE GET INTO AN AGREEMENT THAT WE DO A COST SHARE ON THAT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT.
[01:10:01]
AND HERE WE ARE YEARS LATER AND IT'S NOT DONE.SO THE CONCERN I RECOGNIZE YOUR CONCERN THAT YES, ALONG THE LINES OF PENALTIES.
WELL, WHAT IF SOMEBODY DECIDES NOT TO HONOR THEIR PART OF THE AGREEMENT OR IF THEY'VE SOLD IT TO SOMEONE ELSE? OR SO I THINK IT'S VERY RIGHTEOUS FOR US TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND WHO'S INCLUDED IN IT AND WHO'S EXPECTED TO STEP UP TO JUST THERE'S IT'S NOT UNREASONABLE TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION.
I THINK OF THAT. I THINK I TALKED TO REUBEN. IT MIGHT BE GOOD.
I WOULD THINK THAT MAYBE REUBEN CAN COME UP AND GIVE US A STATUS WHEN EVERYBODY'S READY.
OKAY. MISTER CITY MANAGER, WHENEVER I WAS TRYING TO DO THE TREES, AND THEN I WAS TRYING TO DO THE TREES IN THE INTERSECTION, BUT. SURE. RUBEN, CAN YOU COME UP? WELL, I KIND OF WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE TREES BEFORE THAT HAPPENS.
SO I THINK THERE ARE TWO RELATED ISSUES. AND I THINK WE NEED TO GET CLARITY ON BOTH.
I HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THE TREES. AND IT'S NOT PARTICULAR TO YOU, MISS SKINNER, BUT THESE ARE THIS IS KIND OF I'M TRYING TO PUT ALL THIS TOGETHER AND INTO ONE CONSOLIDATED PIECE SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IT LIKE THAT AND THINK ABOUT IT LIKE THAT.
AND THE THING I WANT TO SAY TO START IS THAT PEOPLE REALLY CARE ABOUT TREES IN THIS COUNTY.
AND SO I'M GOING TO REPRESENT SOME OF THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.
I MEAN, THAT'S PART OF WHY I WAS ELECTED. I WANT TO SAY THAT IN THE NARRATIVE ON PAGE 32 OR 47, THE THE NARRATIVE OF THIS AMENDED PUD PROPOSAL IS LITERALLY SAYS, QUOTE, THE TREES FELL OVER DURING A STORM, BUT THEY, THEY HAD BEEN THERE FOR A REALLY LONG TIME.
THEY WERE UP TO 50 INCHES OF DBH. THAT'S AN OLD DARN TREE.
AND THEY DON'T JUST FALL OVER IN A MINOR STORM, AS WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
THEY WERE THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO RELOCATE THEM.
I'M NOT SURE WHY IT FAILED, BUT THEY DIDN'T JUST FALL OVER IN A STORM.
SO THAT LANGUAGE HAS TO BE CORRECTED. AND THEY BECAME VULNERABLE BECAUSE OF THE WORK.
I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT THE THESE OLD OAK TREES WERE CLUSTERED.
AND THAT IS A DIFFERENT ECOLOGICAL ARRANGEMENT WITH OLD TREES THAT ARE AGING VERSUS DISPERSED TREES IN A NICE STRAIGHT LINE. THAT ARE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING TO A SUBDIVISION.
THERE ARE OWLS, THERE ARE EAGLES, THERE ARE BATS.
THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT WILL THAT DEPEND ON THIS TYPE OF HABITAT TO SURVIVE.
AND WE'RE LUCKY WE HAVE THESE ORGANISMS IN OUR URBAN COMMUNITIES.
AND I DON'T. AND EVERY TIME WE LOSE A LARGE TREE LIKE THAT, WE LOSE THESE ORGANISMS. WE LOSE BIODIVERSITY. THESE CEDARS. SIMILARLY IN THEIR DEMISE, FOR WHATEVER REASONS.
THEY WERE THE GOOD SIZED CEDARS. 9 TO 21IN DB.
WHEN I COMBINE THOSE FOUR OLD OAK TREES THAT WERE GOING TO BE RELOCATED ON THEIR AVERAGE DB WHICH RANGED FROM 45 TO 50IN THAT TOTAL IS 188IN OF DIAMETER.
WHEREAS IF WE WERE, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE REPLACING THE THESE OLD OAK TREES WITH THE 19 EIGHT INCH CALIBER DB, SAME DIFFERENCE OAKS, WE'D GET A TOTAL OF 152 INCHES IN DIAMETER.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTICE THAT THAT'S NOT WE'RE NOT TRADING APPLES FOR APPLES HERE TO BEGIN WITH.
AND THEN WE'RE LOSING GIRTH OF TREES AND WE'RE LOSING THE ARRANGEMENT OF THESE TREES.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME AND THEY CAN MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS ON THAT.
[01:15:08]
TO THIS PUD AMENDMENT. THAT'S IT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GARRIS.WELL VICE MAYOR BROUGHT UP SOME GREAT POINTS ABOUT THE TREES, AND THAT'S WHY SHE'S A SCIENTIST AND KNOWS ALL ABOUT THE STUFF, AND I, I WOULD HAVE TO CONCUR WITH HER THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO DO SOME MORE RESEARCH ON BEFORE WE MOVE THIS FORWARD.
ALSO COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD BROUGHT UP SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT THE INTERSECTION.
AND WE DON'T NEED TO BE CAUGHT WITH OUR PANTS DOWN THAT IT DOESN'T GET DONE.
OKAY. SO WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON MAKING SURE THAT'S MORE OF A POSSIBILITY TO OCCUR.
AND WE ALSO NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DO.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T EVEN SEE TREES ANYMORE. EVERY LOT THAT WAS BY MY HOUSE, THEY'RE GONE.
AND THEY HAVE PUT TWO HOUSES ON THOSE PROPERTIES.
AND IF YOU GO OUT STATE ROAD 16, THE TREES ARE GONE AND THERE'S DEVELOPMENT GOING EVERYWHERE.
AND WE HAVE TO KEEP SOME GREENERY BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED NOT ONLY BECAUSE WE WANT TO SEE TREES, BUT BY LAW, THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SO MUCH GREEN, GREEN ACRES, GREEN SPACE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M KIND OF LEANING IN YOUR DIRECTION.
VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ONE MORE QUESTION.
CAN I CLARIFY SOMETHING WITH MISS SKINNER? SO WE HAD THE FIVE OAK TREES.
THE FIVE OAK TREES WERE. I WAS THERE WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT CUTTING THEM. THEY PROBABLY JUST CUT THE ROOTS TO CLOSE, FRANKLY. BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THAT.
BUT THERE'S A CHANCE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. AND THEN THE TREES ARE [INAUDIBLE] MY UNDERSTANDING IS JUST CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT REPLACING THOSE FOUR TREES IS THAT. AREN'T THEY? THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF THEM GETTING BIGGER TREES BROUGHT IN FOR $40,000 APIECE.
IS THAT STILL THE OPTION, OR IS THAT IDEA BEEN REPLACED BY THE 19 EIGHT INCH TREES? THE 19 EIGHT INCH TREES ARE SPECIFIC TO THE MITIGATION PLAN FOR THIS PUD.
THE THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PLANTING FIVE LARGER TREES IN THAT COMPANION APPLICATION AT THE TOWN CENTER AREA. AND THERE'S SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT WAS WORKED OUT BETWEEN THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE SHIPYARD'S PROJECT IN THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ARTICULATE THOSE TREES. AND THEY ARE LARGER TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PLANTED.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC SIZE RIGHT NOW, BUT YES, THEY WERE.
THAT WAS A SEPARATE ISSUE. THAT WAS A COMPANION APPLICATION.
RIGHT? THAT'S WHY IT'S THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO GET ALL THIS OUT.
SO, SO SO THERE I REMEMBER DISCUSSION, AS YOU WERE SAYING, THAT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE PLANNING BOARD WAS LIKE, NO, THESE AREN'T THE SAME SIZE TREES. SO THERE'S DISCUSSION OF GETTING FIVE.
PLUS ADDITIONALLY THE 19 EIGHT INCH TREES, AM I WRONG, AM I RIGHT? NO, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY, SO WE GOT TO HAVE THAT CLEAR BEFORE WE GET TO THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE IN THE CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPROVAL. THEY'RE NOT BEFORE YOU TODAY THOSE LARGER SIZED TREES ARE ON THE OTHER PROPERTY AND ARE PART OF THAT CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE PERMIT THAT THE PCB APPROVED AT ITS LAST MEETING. RIGHT. SO THEY'RE NOT PHYSICALLY TO BE ON THIS PIECE OF DIRT SO THAT YOU'RE REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, THOSE TREES, THOSE TREES THAT WERE WE'RE DISCUSSING WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE THE ONES THAT WERE GOING TO GO THERE AT THAT SITE.
THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. CORRECT. NO, I'M TO THE O TO THE ORIGINAL SITE.
CORRECT. SO THE INTENTION WAS TO TAKE THOSE TREES AND MOVE THEM OFF THAT PROPERTY AND MOVE THEM TO THE TOWN SQUARE PROPERTY, WHICH WAS BECAUSE IT WAS ALL DONE, IS ONE THING.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THOSE FIVE TREES, THOSE LARGER TREES THAT HE'S GOING TO GET ARE GOING TO BE REPLACING THE ONES THAT WERE ORIGINALLY INTENDED AND CUT TO BE MOVED THERE, PLUS 19 EIGHT INCHES. THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. BUT THEY'RE IN TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
I'M NOT FAVORING THEM AGAINST. I'M JUST SAYING LET'S GET THE FACTS. OKAY. SO LET ME GET THIS CLEAR.
THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS THE TREES THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE MOVED IN THE CLUSTER THAT THE VICE MAYOR WAS TALKING ABOUT, WHICH WE CAN ALL SEE, THEY'RE JUST RAGGEDY AND DYING RIGHT DOWN THERE ON THE SOUTH END OF THE PARCEL ARE GOING TO BE MOVED TO THE TOWN CENTER THAT WERE TO BE MOVED TO THE TOWN CENTER, OR WILL BE REPLACED WITH NEW TREES OF SOME, SOME KIND OF COMPARABLE SIZE.
[01:20:01]
OKAY. YES. SO THERE'S THAT. YES. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SPREAD OUT ONTO EACH LOT THAT ARE WHAT DID YOU SAY THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THE COMMON AREAS AS I UNDERSTAND IT.THERE'S GOING TO BE 19 TREES, A MINIMUM OF EIGHT INCHES IN IN CALIBER, 19 AT EIGHT INCHES, IN ADDITION TO THE MITIGATION OF THE FIVE TREES.
THE FIVE TREES THAT DOWN THERE SOUTH OF TARGET.
AND I THINK THOSE AND I'M DOING THIS FROM MEMORY, BUT I THINK THEY WERE 18IN THE NEW LARGER OAKS.
YES, I BELIEVE SO. SO I UNDERSTAND THE LARGER OAKS AND THE CEDARS ARE ALL GOING TO BE LOCATED OFF SITE OF THIS PUD, AND THEY ARE PART OF A CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE PERMIT.
ARE THOSE THE ONE IN THE TOWN CENTER AREA? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO, YEAH. AND MAYBE MISS SKINNER CAN POINT SO PEOPLE KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING.
IT'S VERY COMPLICATED. AND I'M SORRY. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A MINUTE TO GET IT ALL OUT.
YEAH, BUT WE SHOULD ALL OUT RIGHT NOW. THIS IS OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MEETINGS RIGHT NOW.
THESE ARE THE EXISTING FIVE TREES THAT ARE DAMAGED IN AND ARE ARE IN POOR CONDITION NOW.
THEY'VE BEEN DAMAGED BY VARIOUS MEANS. OKAY. THE COMPANION APPLICATION THAT I REFERRED TO AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ADDRESSED THAT BY INDICATING THAT. FIVE OAK TREES OF SIGNIFICANT SIZE, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS 18IN EACH, WOULD BE REPLANTED IN THIS TOWN SQUARE AREA TO ADDRESS THE THE ISSUE THAT THESE ARE NO LONGER VIABLE TO BE MOVED. IN THE MEANTIME, THERE WERE SOME CEDAR TREES IN THIS CLUSTER THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN MOVED THAT EXIST RIGHT HERE. THEY WERE REPLANTED AND MOVED AND THEY ARE IN QUESTIONABLE CONDITION RIGHT NOW.
AND SO THIS THESE TREES, WE WILL MAKE SURE AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ARE, YOU KNOW, AS PART OF THAT CONSERVATION ZONE APPROVAL THAT THEY WILL BE REPLACED IF THEY ARE INDEED DEAD? OR CAN I SAY SOMETHING? OKAY. WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
OH, I KNOW, I KNOW. I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
YEAH, I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO. THE NEXT PIECE WOULD BE WHEN WE TALK.
SO WE GET THAT EXPLAINED, BUT THE NEXT PIECE IS WHAT ARE.
AND WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE HERE.
THEY MAY HAVE I DON'T I DON'T. NOT YET. NOT YET.
THAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S UP TO US TO CLARIFY IT.
I THINK IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT TO DO. THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. BUT I'M TRYING TO JUST UNDERSTAND IN MY MIND BEFORE WE GO ON WITH STAFF, WE THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THIS TO STAFF.
SO JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, THE OTHER PIECE OF THE MITIGATION IS THE 19 TREES AT EIGHT INCHES THE 18 INCH 19 TREES. THAT WILL BE, I'M SORRY, EIGHT INCH TREES IN THE NUMBER OF 19.
IN THE QUANTITY OF 19. A IN THE FRONT OF EACH LOT OR.
MATTERED AROUND THE ROADWAY. COMMON AREAS JUST KIND OF SPREAD OUT LIKE ALONG THE BOULEVARD.
THAT'S THAT'S THE DRAWING. THAT'S THE RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S THE THIS IS THE PLAN. THAT'S THE 19. THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, OR RECOMMENDED TO MOVE FORWARD AS A REVISED TREE PLANTING AND MITIGATION PLAN.
YOU CAN WITH THE X'S HERE YOU CAN SEE THE FIVE OAK TREES THAT ARE NOT ARE NOT GOING TO SURVIVE.
THIS IS THE PLAN FOR THE 55 UNIT SUBDIVISION.
AND IT WAS INDICATED IN THE TEXT THAT THERE WERE GOING TO BE 19 LIVE OAKS PLANTED A MINIMUM OF EIGHT INCHES AND THEY'RE GUARANTEED TO BE LIVE OAKS. THAT'S WHAT'S INDICATED IN THE IN THE PLANNED UNIT.
REAL LIVE OAKS BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST.
WHERE? OKAY, WELL, THEY SAY THEY CAN WE'LL HAVE TO KEEP AN EYE ON THAT, BUT OKAY. SO I DO I THINK I FEEL PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT THE TREES.
DO YOU. IS EVERYONE PRETTY UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION WITH THE REAL CONCERN? YES. THAT IT'S NOT EASY TO RELOCATE A TREE. PERIOD.
END OF STORY. AND KEEP IT ALIVE. AND THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY ATTEMPTED TO DO THAT TWICE NOW,
[01:25:07]
WITH BOTH SPECIES OF TREES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND HAS FAILED IN BOTH CASES.AND I WANT TO KNOW WHAT RECOURSE WE HAVE. WHO'S GOING TO MONITOR IT? WHO'S GOING TO COVER THE EXPENSES OF THE MONITORING, AND WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR CONTINUOUS REPLACEMENT OF TREES? I YOU KNOW, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS THAT ARE NOT.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE CEDARS? BECAUSE AS FAR AS IN MY MIND, ALL OF THE TREES ARE IT'S LIKE.
IT'S LIKE THEY'RE LEVELED, THEY'RE GONE. IT'S LIKE.
YEAH, IT'S AS IF WE'RE TREATING THIS RIGHT NOW AS IF THEY'RE ALREADY GONE.
WELL, THEY'RE ALL BUT THEY'RE CONNECTED BECAUSE THEY'RE REPLACING THE DEAD TREES.
BUT SOME OF THOSE DEAD TREES WERE NEW TREES. THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING TO.
IT WAS THERE WAS A BIT OF WE WERE EXCITED TO MOVE A BIG TREE.
SO IT CAME IN AND THERE WAS A GOOD CHANCE THAT THEY HAD A HIGH RATE OF SUCCESS.
I HAVE NOT BEEN ON THE BOARD SINCE THEN. I DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHY THEY FAILED, SO I DON'T WANT TO COMMENT IT, BUT I THINK THAT THE APPLICATION IDEA IS IT JUST RECOGNIZING IT FAILS.
I WILL SAY TALKING ABOUT THE TREES, I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
I MEAN, I'VE SAW THEM. SO GOING FORWARD, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, I THINK, FOR SECOND HEARING.
LET'S JUST GET A STATUS REPORT ON THE CEDAR TREES.
THE OAK TREES, I THINK. IS IT IN THE PUBLIC RECORD ALREADY THAT THOSE TREES HAVE FAILED? I MEAN THAT'S YES. YEAH. SO THEY FAILED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.
WE HAVE THAT WE JUST I THINK WE NEED THE SAME KIND OF STATUS REPORT ON THE CEDAR.
AND THEN GOING FORWARD WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. MOVING THESE BIG TREES CAN BE DONE.
DO IT A LOT IN JAPAN. I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S JUST DIDN'T WORK IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
THEY CAN IT CAN BE DONE. THAT'S MY CONCERN IS IT CAN BE DONE, BUT IT'S NOT BEING DONE WELL.
I THINK THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE IN HERE, IN HERE THAT SAYS ACT OF GOD THAT I THINK IT'S 4 OR 5 YEARS.
THEY HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFULLY TRANSPLANTED FOR 4 OR 5 YEARS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE IN THE FIRST ONE.
SO THAT'S THE MITIGATION TO THE FIRST PROBLEM IS THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE, IN THE EU THAT SAYS IT EXPLAINS THE ACTUAL STATUS OF THESE TREES. UNLIKE THE FIRST TIME, I THINK THE BOARD GOT THAT THEY DID THE WORK AND THEY SAID, OKAY, WE CAN'T HAVE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN. I MEAN, IT COULD HAVE JUST BEEN CODE ENFORCEMENT, $5,000 A TREE.
BUT NOW THE BOARD WORKED WITH THEM TO GET THESE THINGS TO COME.
AND I THINK THERE'S A THERE'S A DEFINITION AND I'LL SUMMARIZE IT.
MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN TO ACT TO GOD FOR 4 OR 5 YEARS.
AND I THINK THE IDEA IS AFTER 4 OR 5 YEARS, THOSE TREES WILL HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED.
YOU CAN TELL THAT THE TRANSPLANT ITSELF WAS SUCCESSFUL.
AND THEN THE TREE IS KIND OF ON ITS OWN, LIKE ANY OTHER TREE.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. SO IS THAT FAIR? OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT, MR. WHITEHOUSE. OH, WAIT. ONE MORE.
I DO HAVE I, I DO WANT TO HAVE RUBEN COME UP.
TALK ABOUT THE INTERSECTION. BUT I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT ASIDE AND WE CAN GO HERE IF YOU WANT TO. OKAY.
BUT ARE YOU HAVING SOMEONE ON YOUR TEAM OR A COUPLE OF SOMEONES? MAYBE WE CAN GET THEM SWORN IN AT THE SAME TIME.
SAY YOUR NAME. JUSTIN SCARBOROUGH 1500. MARK SHELTON 12 SEVEN, FOUR ZERO GRAHAM BAY WEST, SUITE 2350. JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR.
COMMISSIONERS FOR THE RECORD, JAMES WHITEHOUSE, SAINT JOHN'S LAW GROUP, 104 SEAGROVE MAIN STREET, HERE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER. I THINK I WANT TO START OUT WITH TALKING JUST FOR A SECOND ABOUT THE CONFUSION.
[01:30:03]
IT STARTED OFF WITH THE PROPERTY ON THE NORTHERN END WHERE THE SHIPYARD ENCLOSURE BUILDING IS NOW.AND THE RESTAURANT BUILDING IN GREENWOOD WAS THE OWNER OF THAT.
MR. GARY VOSE, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, AND I REPRESENTED MR. GARY, ACTUALLY, AND I GOT HIM ANNEXED INTO THE CITY WITH THOSE PROPERTIES.
AND I DID THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR HIM.
AND THEN HE OWNED THE PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH OF THAT.
AND WINDWARD CAME IN AND BOUGHT ALL THE PROPERTIES EXCEPT FOR THE RESTAURANT ITSELF.
THIS IS BEFORE THEY BOUGHT THE LARGEST PROPERTY.
AND THEN THEY CAME AND THEY AMENDED THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
AND THAT WASN'T ME. MISS AVERY SMITH DID IT FOR WINDWARD.
AND THAT'S WHERE THEY PUT SOME OTHER THINGS IN.
IT STILL HAD THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH I WAS PART OF FOR MR. VOSS ORIGINALLY. SO I KNOW A LOT ABOUT THAT. SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AFTER.
BUT THEN MISS LAURA'S PROPERTY ON THE SOUTHERN END WAS BROUGHT IN BY PUD BY WINDWARD.
SO THERE'S NOTHING WRONG THAT HAPPENED WITH THE MOVEMENT OF THOSE TREES.
THERE'S NO KEEPING THOSE TREES THERE. THERE'S NO ENVIRONMENT THERE WITH THOSE TREES. ALL OF THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS CITY COMMISSION. MAYBE NOT THESE MEMBERS, BUT THIS CITY COMMISSION. AND THE FACT THE MOVING OF THE CEDARS WAS ALL APPROVED BY THIS CITY COMMISSION THAT PUD WAS APPROVED FOR MOBILITY, ETC., BY THIS CITY COMMISSION AFTER REVIEWING TRAFFIC IMPACT AND MOBILITY IMPACT.
AS YOU KNOW, FOR EVERY PUD, ALL THE ONES I DO, I HAVE TO DO A STUDY.
AND THEY DID ONE AND SAID AND THEY FOUND THAT THESE 55 HOMES HAD WERE GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF WITH THE MOBILITY PROGRAM THAT YOU GUYS HAD PUT IN PLACE RIGHT. AND THE FACT IS THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ALREADY TALKS ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
IT SAYS THAT THIS TRAFFIC INTERSECTION, THERE'S A SPECIFIC SECTION IN THAT THAT WAS IN THERE WHEN I DID IT WITH MR. VOSE YEARS AGO. THAT SAYS THAT THEY WOULD GET CREDIT FOR THE MOBILITY FEES THAT THEY GOT CHARGED FOR WHATEVER COST.
THEY HAD TO DO THAT, THAT INTERSECTION AS WELL.
AND AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, THIS PROPERTY THAT WAS APPROVED.
IT'S IN YOUR PACKET. IT WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY IN 2019 AND THEN UPDATED IN 2021 BEFORE THIS PUD WAS EVEN OWNED OR BROUGHT INTO SERVICE IN THE CITY OR EVEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. AND THEN THIS CAME IN.
LIKE I SAID, WINDWARD GOT THIS PUD APPROVED FOR THE 55 HOMES ON THE SOUTHERN END, WHICH INCLUDED THE MOVING OF THOSE OAK TREES, THE MOVING OF THE CEDARS, ETC.. I THINK THE CONFUSION AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED AT PZB TWO, AND THEY REALIZED IT HALFWAY THROUGH THE LAST HEARING, THAT THERE WAS A SEPARATE APPLICATION ON THEIR AGENDA THAT TALKED ABOUT THE CONSERVATION ZONE DEVELOPMENT THAT ADDRESSED THESE WHERE THE TREE WHERE THESE OAK TREES WERE SUPPOSED TO BE MOVED IN THE TOWN CENTER AS WELL AS THE RED CEDARS AND ALL OF THAT IS ADDRESSED IN A DIFFERENT ORDER, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY OR THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT THIS PROPERTY OWNER ALSO BOUGHT ANOTHER PROPERTY IN THE TOWNHOME AREA, BUT AGAIN, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS PUD.
THIS IS THE MODIFICATION OF THIS PUD TO CORRECT OR TO FIND A WAY TO PUT INTO PRINT WITHIN ORDINANCE HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT THESE OAK TREES DIED WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO BE MOVED.
RIGHT. AND HOW THAT'S GOING AND ALL OF THAT NOW IS ADDRESSED WITHIN A CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT ORDER, WHICH CAN BE ENFORCED AGAINST THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER, NOT THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS THE MODIFICATION OF THIS TO MODIFY THE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT TALKED ABOUT THE MOVING OF THOSE OAK TREES, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T MOVE THOSE OAK TREES ANYMORE. AND SO ALL OF THE TREES THAT YOU SEE ADDED ON, HE'S GOING TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT IT ARE IN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO WITH MOVING THOSE OAK TREES.
SO NONE OF THOSE, NONE OF THAT WAS REQUIRED INITIALLY.
AND LIKE AND THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THIS PUD TALKS ABOUT CHECKING UP ON THOSE NEW OAK TREES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE POT, ADDED TO THE LANDSCAPE FOR THIS PUD TO TRY TO FIND A WAY TO ADD MORE TREES.
BECAUSE THIS DEVELOPER WANTS TREES, THEY KNOW THAT BUYERS WANT TREES WITHIN THE CITY.
THEY DON'T LIKE CLEARCUT AREAS. LIKE I SAID THOUGH, TO CLEAR UP THE MISCONCEPTION THESE TREES WERE BEING MOVED, THESE TREES WERE BEING MOVED UNDER THE APPROVALS OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.
AND SO ANYWAY, I THINK THAT AND LIKE I SAID, THE PCB, IF YOU IF YOU WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE LAST HEARING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HEARING, THEY SORT OF CAME TO THAT REAL THE ALL OF THEM CAME TO THE REALIZATION THAT, HEY, LISTEN, THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE FACT THAT THOSE TREES WEREN'T GOING TO BE MOVED, THOSE TREES WERE GOING TO BE MOVED.
THIS ISN'T ABOUT THAT OTHER PROPERTY. WE HAVE ANOTHER APPLICATION ON OUR AGENDA THAT ADDRESSES THAT OF THEIR PROPERTY. THIS IS ABOUT THOSE TREES. AND THAT'S WHY MIKE DAVIS AT THAT HEARING WAS VERY CLEAR TO SAY, HEY, LISTEN, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR 3 OR 4 HEARINGS NOW,
[01:35:06]
AND THEY DID EXACTLY WHAT WE WANTED THEM TO DO.WE WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR IN THE OTHER PROPERTIES OWNERSHIP, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT'S CONFUSING BECAUSE THAT OWNER OWNED THIS PROPERTY BEFORE THESE TREES DIED ON THAT OWNER'S WATCH.
NOT ON THESE. NOT ON THEIR WATCH. ON THE OTHER OWNER'S WATCH.
BUT THEY OWN IT NOW. THEY BOUGHT IT ABOUT A YEAR AGO OR SO.
AND THE FACT IS THAT THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY, REPRESENTING THEM.
BECAUSE THE OTHER OWNERS HAVE A SEPARATE LAWYER.
THE POINT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT THEY'RE HERE JUST ASKING FOR A MODIFICATION ON THE TREES.
YOU NOTICE THAT WITHIN THE HEARING, IF ANY OF YOU WATCHED IT, THAT THE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ASKING ABOUT THE TREES MOST STRENUOUSLY, MR. DAVIS SAYS THIS IS ABOUT THE TREES AND THEN NOT ABOUT THE TRAFFIC, BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC WAS ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY IN THIS PUD.
IN ANY CASE, LIKE I SAID, I CAN TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN A MINUTE.
I WANT THEM TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THE TREES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PLAN HERE. BUT LIKE I SAID, THERE'S THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. AND NONE OF THE NONE OF THE THINGS OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THOSE TREES DIED BY, AGAIN, NOT BY THESE OWNERS.
THEY TAKE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO WHATEVER ANYBODY DID BEFORE THEM AND THE OBLIGATIONS OF IT.
BUT THOSE TREES WERE WERE NOT WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THOSE TREES WERE NOT DONE BY THIS LANDOWNER.
THEY WANT TO MAKE IT RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. SO LET ME LET THEM COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THIS TREE MITIGATION PLAN THAT HE'S DOING, WHICH IS THE MAIN FOCUS OF THIS MODIFICATION. AND THEN I CAN COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MORE IF YOU WANT TO. GOOD EVENING.
THE ONLY THING YOU REALLY HAVE TO ADD TO THIS PLAN IS THE PLAN.
AND THE PD CALLS FOR 19 EIGHT INCH OAKS TO BE PLANTED AROUND THE COMMON AREAS.
SO WE'RE PUTTING A LOT MORE THAN 19. SO IS THAT 74 TREES OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I BELIEVE OAK TREES THAT WE WILL BE PLANNING A 55 PLUS THE 19 IN ADDITION TO OTHER TREES AND SPECIES. AND I JUST WANT TO COMMENT REAL QUICK ABOUT THE CEDARS IN QUESTION.
WE DID PURCHASE TOWNHOME PARCEL. WE DO RECOGNIZE THE CEDARS.
I HAVE AN ARBORIST THAT WE'VE HIRED AS A CONSULTANT.
HE'S GOING TO TRY TO ONE SAVE ALL THE TREES THAT CAN BE SAVED AND TREAT THEM.
BUT OUR INTENT IS TO MAKE THIS RIGHT BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
WE WORKED WITH PCB STAFF AND JUST TO GET THIS THING MOVING FORWARD.
WE HIRED AN ARBORIST THINKING THESE TREES WERE NOT HEALTHY TO BE MOVED AND PROVEN.
SO AT THAT TIME, THE WHOLE PARCEL WAS KIND OF OVERGROWN.
AT THAT POINT, WE DECIDED THEY WEREN'T FEASIBLE TO BE RELOCATED.
SO WE BROUGHT IT TO CITY STAFF'S ATTENTION THROUGH THE SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION.
AND WE WORKED WITH CITY STAFF AND WE WERE TOLD WE HAD TO DO A PUD MODIFICATION.
SO WE WERE UP FRONT. WE FOUND THIS SITUATION.
AND WE DO. WE HAD NO ISSUES WITH GOING WITH LARGER THAN CODE, MINIMUM SIZE TREES, BECAUSE WE DO APPRECIATE THE VALUE AND ECOLOGICAL VALUE THAT, THAT THESE TREES, LARGER TREES DO BRING.
SO AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO ADD IN, CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANKS. WE APPRECIATE THAT, MR. SCARBOROUGH. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING? NO, I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
OR LIKE I SAID, I HAVE SOME HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AS WELL, IF YOU'D LIKE. BUT I THINK THAT'S THEY'RE HERE TO ASK FOR THE MODIFICATION TO BE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF THE PUD, WHICH IS REALLY WHY THEY HAD TO COME BACK TO YOU, BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE SAID THAT THESE OAK TREES WOULD BE MOVED.
THEY CAN'T MOVE THEM NOW BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE THEY GOT THE PROPERTY.
AND SO THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE BEST OF THE SITUATION.
ADD AS MANY TREES AS THEY CAN IN PUBLIC AREAS.
[01:40:02]
LIKE YOU SAID, THEY'RE ALSO ADDING TREES ON THE PRIVATE LOTS AS WELL.SO THERE'S NOT JUST THOSE TREES THAT THEY MENTIONED THAT ARE IN THE PUBLIC AREAS.
AND AGAIN THE MOBILITY, THE THE MODIFICATION WAS NOT HERE TO ASK FOR ANYTHING MORE.
NOT FOR ANY DENSITY, NOT FOR ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, JUST TO DO THE SAME THING.
EXCEPT REALLY THEY HAD TO COME BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE SAYS THOSE FIVE TREES HAD TO BE MOVED, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS. SO WE'D ASK FOR YOU TO MOVE THIS TO SECOND READING. AND LIKE I SAID, I CAN ADDRESS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ON THE TREES OR ON THE MOBILITY FEES, ETC..
THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.
YOU MENTIONED YOU MADE A POINT TO SAY THAT IT GOING BACK THAT YOU WERE ISSUED CREDIT IN THE TEXT FOR MOBILITY FEES. I'M SORRY. WHAT? DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT? YES MA'AM. BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL THAT. YES, MA'AM.
NO. THE CREDIT FOR THE MOBILITY FEES IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE OTHER PROPERTIES.
BUT WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT.
AND AGAIN, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS OWNER.
BUT IT'S PROBABLY GOOD FOR FOR YOU TO KNOW WITHIN THAT AGREEMENT.
IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THE LET ME FIND THE PAGE.
PAGE FIVE AT THE BOTTOM, ROMAN THREE. YEAH. THANK YOU.
OKAY. YES. OWNER MAY BE ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR CREDITS FOR TRANSPORTATION OR MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS IF THE CITY HAS A SYSTEM FOR SUCH CREDITS AVAILABLE IN ITS CODES AND REGULATIONS AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING, NOTHING HERE IMPLIES THAT THE CITY HAS TO HAVE A MOBILITY.
BUT SO THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. SO THEY HAVE YOU CAN APPLY THAT.
BUT AGAIN THAT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID, BECAUSE I THOUGHT MAYBE YOU WERE CLAIMING THAT YOU WERE ALREADY GOING TO GET CREDIT FOR THOSE MOBILITY FEES. AND MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOBILITY FEE SYSTEM IS THAT THIS BODY DECIDES HOW THE MOBILITY FEES ARE SPENT.
YEAH. CREDITED SPENT, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.
SO AGAIN, IT HAS I JUST MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID. YES, I AND I DIDN'T WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.
AND WHEN THIS PUD WAS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION AND, AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, THERE'S SPECIFIC SECTION IN ALL PUDS THAT TALK ABOUT TRANSPORTATION IMPACT.
AND PART OF THAT WAS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY MOBILITY FEES TO TO MAKE UP OR TO TRY TO TRY TO BE THERE FOR THEIR IMPACT OF THEIR TRANSPORT FOR 55 HOMES.
YES, MA'AM. 55. CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? YES, PLEASE.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. I WAS BRINGING THAT UP. I SAW THE PAGE.
I HAVE IT CIRCLED. OKAY, THAT'S UP FOR DEBATE, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO YOU DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT YOUR APPLICANT HAS BOUGHT THE TOWNHOME SECTION OF THE WINDWARD PUD? IS THAT YOU CURRENTLY OWN IT, OR IS IT THE PROCESS OR YOU OWN IT? YES. SO YOU ARE NOW BOUGHT INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE THAT PROPERTY IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
SO DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP DIFFERENT. I MEAN IT'S THE SAME COMPANY.
IS IT THE SAME BUSINESS ENTITY THAT OWNS BOTH.
AM I CORRECT IN THAT YOU HAVE SAID REPEATEDLY THAT YOUR SOUL EGRESS AND INGRESS TO THE PROJECT, THE SINGLE HOME PROJECT I'M TALKING ABOUT. AND NOW THAT YOU OWN THE TOWNHOME PART IS THE ARAPAHO IROQUOIS INTERSECTION.
BECAUSE I REMEMBER HEARING THAT. YEAH. EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS. THIS IS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT UNDER OUR CITY CODE THAT'S CONSIDERED WITHIN THE WITH WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS OF THAT CORRECT ORDINANCE, WHICH IS THE PUD, THIS PUD INGRESS AND EGRESS IS ON ARAPAHO.
YES, SIR. SOLELY THIS ONE. THIS THING. YEAH. THE ONE THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
THE ONE THAT'S IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW. THE ONE WE'RE DISCUSSING.
IS THAT CORRECT? I WAS JUST CHECKING TO SEE IF IT HAD A CONNECTION TO THE TOWNHOMES.
THAT'S ALL I WAS TRYING TO. I DIDN'T WANT TO.
YEAH, IT'S HARD TO IT'S HARD TO GO BACK AND FORTH AND IT'S VERY CONFUSING. BUT I'M HOPING WE CAN WORK THIS ALL OUT. YES, SIR. YES, SIR. OH. SO I JUST RIGHT NOW, I WANT TO SAY THAT YOU'VE HAVE BEEN ON THE RECORD FOR THE PUD IN FRONT OF US NOW, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT THE GENTLEMAN HAS OWNED FOR A WHILE.
[01:45:03]
IROQUOIS. UNLESS I'M WRONG. YOU WERE GOING TO SAY.MAYBE ONLY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES ON THE SOUTHERN PART OF ARAPAHO.
SO OKAY. YES, YES, YES. THAT'S. YES. IS THAT CORRECT? I WAS JUST CLEAR. YES. SO EMERGENCY ONLY OUT TO ARAPAHO.
THIS IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THE TOWNHOME PROJECT. YES, SIR. OKAY. SORRY. YES, SIR. OKAY. NO, NO, NO, THAT'S. I'M JUST TRYING TO SORT THIS ALL OUT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. YES, COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD.
WELL, I'LL TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CAUSING THIS CREATION OF THIS CONFUSION.
I DID MENTION IT WAS OFF TOPIC, AND I REALLY WANTED TO BRING IT UP FOR US TO DISCUSS, BUT I SHOULD HAVE WAITED, SO I DO I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M PERFECTLY CLEAR.
THE THE FIVE TREES. WE OUGHT TO NAME THEM. SO WE HAVE A NAME.
GO WITH THEM. THE FIVE TREES WERE TO BE MOVED BY THE ORIGINAL OWNER.
HE TRIED TO MOVE THEM. THEY DIED. THEY BOUGHT THE DEAD TREES.
DID THEY BUY THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MOVE THE TREES BY BUYING THE PUD? YEAH. SO THEY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S GOOD. YES, SIR. SO THEY ARE GOING TO MOVE FIVE TREES TO THE AREA.
NOT NOW. OKAY. SO THEY. SO THE FIVE TREES ARE DEAD NOW, RIGHT.
SO THEY CAN'T BE MOVED. THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S WHAT THE. THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SPEAKING ABOUT, THE ARBORIST, SO HE CAN'T MOVE THAT. PART OF THE CONSERVATION ZONE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE OTHER PROPERTY. BECAUSE THAT'S THIS IS WHERE THE CONFUSION COMES IN.
BECAUSE IT WAS OWNED PREVIOUSLY BY WINDWARD. RIGHT.
AND WINDWARD OWNS THE TOWN CENTER AREA. RIGHT.
THAT IT'S PART OF THAT. AND SINCE IT WASN'T GOING TO BE ON THIS PROPERTY, IT WAS MORE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THAT IN THAT CONSERVATION ZONE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, WHICH NOW CAN BE ENFORCED BY THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IN THERE. WE'RE AMENDING THE LANGUAGE HERE TO SAY THAT THAT'S NO LONGER A REQUIREMENT OF THIS PUD, BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO IT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO PUT ALL THESE OTHER TREES IN THE PUBLIC SPACES.
RIGHT. IT'S ALREADY A ORDER OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE BECAUSE THAT WAS PASSED AT THE PZB.
YES, MA'AM. YES, SIR. SO INSTEAD OF JUST GETTING FIVE TREES, WHICH WE ARE GOING TO GET AND SOMEBODY ELSE'S PAYING FOR THEM, THAT'S NOT HERE TODAY. WE'RE GETTING AN ADDITIONAL 18 TREES.
YES, SIR. SO TECHNICALLY WE'RE GETTING FIVE LARGE LIVE OAKS AND 18 SMALLER LIVE OAKS FOR THE PRICE OF FIVE DEAD LIVE OAKS. YES, SIR. OKAY. EXCEPT THAT THOSE FIVE DEAD LIVE OAKS WERE A LOT LARGER.
I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, BUT, I MEAN. I THOUGHT IT WAS 19.
IT WAS 19. OKAY. OKAY. 55? YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. OKAY. AND I DON'T THINK THAT YOU WERE WRONG BRINGING UP THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BECAUSE I THINK WE PROBABLY IF WE ASKED EVERYBODY SITTING HERE AT THIS TABLE, WOULD WE LIKE TO MAKE THE.
IT WAS WE LIKE TO ALL BE. IT WAS ALL IT WAS GOING TO COME UP.
YEAH. THAT WE WOULD LOVE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON PARTICIPATING IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BECAUSE WE WANT THAT INTERSECTION IMPROVED AND WE WANT EVERYBODY'S FEET TO THE FIRE ON IT.
I THINK ONE OF THE POSITIVES OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE SAME OWNER THAT'S ALWAYS ALREADY IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE FULLY INVOLVED WITH THAT.
THEY OWN THE PROPERTY AND ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. RIGHT? WINDWARD ON THE RECORD STATED AT THE AT THE LAST PCB HEARING THAT THEY WERE PREPARED AND READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
I THINK YOUR PLANNING AND BUILDING DIRECTOR ALSO SAID THAT IT LOOKED LIKE THE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WAS WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO MEET THE CONTACTS FOR THAT INTERSECTION FOR DOT. PART OF THE ISSUE, TOO, BECOMES THAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH DOT.
IT'S A DOT ROAD, AND DOT HAS TO SAY THAT THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
BEFORE YOU GET THE DUNKIN DONUTS ON THEIR ENTRYWAY THERE WHERE IROQUOIS AND ARAPAHO COME TOGETHER.
TO TRY TO GET THAT MOVING FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
AND I KNOW THAT BECAUSE I MET WITH YOUR PLANNING AND BUILDING DIRECTOR PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE I REPRESENTED ANOTHER PROJECT ON ARAPAHO THAT'S IN THE COUNTY, RIGHT BY THE TARGET AND WAS LIKE TEN TOWNHOMES.
SO IT'S NOT VERY, BUT BUT SOMETHING RIGHT THERE.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE I WAS EVEN DOING THIS.
AND SHE SAID TO ME THAT THAT WAS WHAT I COULD REPRESENT TO THE COUNTY WHEN I WAS THERE.
AND SO I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS TOLD TO ME ANYWAY.
I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE FACT THAT IT'S A POSITIVE THAT THIS PARTICULAR OWNER, WHO'S A WELL-KNOWN BUILDER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA QUALITY PROJECTS AND ALL OVER THE STATE. AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT THEY ARE ALSO A PARTICIPANT NOW IN THE WINDWARD PROPERTY,
[01:50:05]
WHICH AGAIN, YOU JUST HEARD DURING AMY'S PRESENTATION THAT THOSE APARTMENTS ARE NOW ONLINE.AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THEY THINK THAT THE TRIPS WERE GOING ARE BECAUSE THEY WON'T LET US DO THE ART, NOT US. THEY WON'T LET THE INTERSECTION BE DONE UNTIL THOSE TRIPS START COMING IN AND OUT THERE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A HARD SITUATION RIGHT NOW.
IT'S A LEGAL DOCUMENT. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT BEING IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THAT'S WHY I POINTED OUT THE FACT THAT YOU GUYS NOW HAVE A MOBILITY SYSTEM.
AND YOUR MOBILITY SYSTEM SAYS THAT THESE. THESE LOTS WILL HAVE TO PAY A CERTAIN AMOUNT UNDER THE EQUATION INTO THAT SYSTEM, WHICH YOU CAN USE. THE CITY CAN USE WHEREVER THEY WANT TO TRY TO DO.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE. YES, MA'AM. OKAY.
SO SO LET'S LET'S WRITE IT ALL DOWN THEN. IF THEY'RE AGREEABLE, LET'S ALL DO IT.
LET'S ALL OF US. ALL OF US, INCLUDING WINWARD.
I MEAN, I'M JUST SUGGESTING I'M JUST BROACHING THE SUBJECT BECAUSE I SEE YOU SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
NO, AND THAT'S NOT A THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
YOU HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNERS OF THE PEOPLE.
NO, NO, WITH THE LANDOWNERS THAT ARE PART OF THAT.
AND AND IF YOU READ THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, YOU'LL SEE IT'S NOT JUST TRANSPORTATION.
IT HAS TO DO WITH TRANSPORTATION. IT HAS TO DO WITH LOTS OF THINGS THAT ARE IN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, NOT JUST TRANSPORTATION. AND THE FACT IS THAT WHEN YOU CAME TO THAT AGREEMENT AND WHEN I SAY YOU, I MEAN THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE CAME TO THAT AGREEMENT, YOU TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT OF WHAT WAS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE LANDS THAT ARE INCLUDED WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND WHAT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO DO.
WHEN YOU APPROVE THIS PUD, YOU, THE CITY AND I THINK YOU WERE ON THE BOARD, MADAM MAYOR, IN 2023 WHEN YOU APPROVED THIS, YOU SPECIFICALLY FOUND THAT THESE 55 HOMES, BASED ON THE TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT WAS SUBMITTED, WOULD BE REASONABLE UNDER WHAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED UNDER MOBILITY FEES FOR THESE HOMES.
SO NOW, TO GO BACK AND SAY, BECAUSE THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE TREES THAT WE HAVE TO ADD THEM INTO, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
IT'S NOT. THEY HAVE TO PAY MOBILITY FEES. CAN I, CAN I? THANK YOU. CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING? I THINK IT WOULD HELP.
MAYBE IF WE HAD A STATUS REPORT ON WHERE THE INTERSECTIONS AT.
I THINK MR. BIRCHIM ARE YOU READY TO CALL? MR. FRANKLIN CAN PROVIDE THAT QUICK STATUS UPDATE, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. WHITEHOUSE.
DO I NEED TO BE SWORN IN? SURE. IF YOU'RE PROVIDING TESTIMONY, YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR.
I DO. GOOD EVENING. STATUS OF THE INTERSECTION AT US1 ARAPAHO AND IROQUOIS.
WHICH IS REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT.
WE RECENTLY HAD A MEETING WITH THE CITY, FDOT AND THE DEVELOPER DEVELOPER'S REPRESENTATIVE, MR. MASTERS, WHO'S THE SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER FOR WINDWARD.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO DATE IS THEY HAVE FINISHED AN ICE ANALYSIS AND INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION, AND DOT HAS APPROVED THAT. WHAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET IS THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED A PERMIT TO DOT OR PERMIT TO THE CITY FOR THE ACTUAL IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION.
SO THE MEETING SINCE IT'S TWO DIFFERENT PERMITTING AGENCIES THAT HAVE TO APPROVE THE PLAN.
AND SO WE MET WITH DOT TO TALK ABOUT HOW TO RESOLVE THAT, BECAUSE IT'S TOO CLOSE FOR FDOT TO APPROVE, BECAUSE THE QUEUE BUILDING UP ON THE SIDE ROAD WOULD PASS THAT INTERSECTION.
AND DOT DID NOT LIKE THAT. SO WE JUST HAD A COORDINATION MEETING.
THEY HAVE SOME REDESIGN TO DO WHICH COULD TAKE ABOUT 2 TO 3 MONTHS ON THE DEVELOPER SIDE.
AND THEN THEY'LL SUBMIT FURTHER PERMIT WITH DOT.
THAT COULD BE A NINE MONTH PROCESS TO GET A PERMIT FROM FDOT.
[01:55:06]
AT THE SAME TIME AND ONCE THEY DO GET A PERMIT FROM DOT, WHEN DOT ISSUES THE PERMIT, THEY'LL HAVE A BOND.DOT WILL MAKE THEM BOND THE PROJECT WHICH WILL ENSURE ITS CONSTRUCTION.
AND THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE LEFT OFF. AND THAT'S THE MOST UP TO DATE.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS TO ME.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CITY HAS CONTRIBUTED COMMITTED TO CONTRIBUTE, CONTRIBUTING $500,000 TO PAY FOR THAT, TOWARDS THAT 1.5 TO $2 MILLION COST, AND THAT THERE'S APPROXIMATELY $400,000 IN MOBILITY FEES COLLECTED ON THIS WILL WILL BE COLLECTED ON. THIS DOES SOUND RIGHT TO YOU.
I DO KNOW THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT HAS THE CITY AS A $500,000 CONTRIBUTION.
I DO NOT KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER OF MOBILITY FEES.
OKAY ASK THE MAYOR. ARE YOU TALKING $400,000 FOR THE PROPERTIES INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? YES. OKAY. NOT OUT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE SO, AND IF I COULD, JUST TO REITERATE, WE WE DECIDE ON WHERE THAT MAYBE $400,000 GOES. AND IT'S NOT WE HAVE NOT COMMITTED TO.
NO. IT'S OKAY. IT'S OUR DISCRETION. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THAT I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. FRANKLIN. SO MR. WHITEHOUSE SAID THAT THE LATEST STUDY ON THE INTERSECTION WHEN THE PUD WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY HAD SAID THAT THESE 55 HOMES WOULD NOT CHANGE. THE CHARACTER OF THE INTERSECTION IN TERMS OF CAPACITY.
IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT STATEMENT? IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING OR.
I DO NOT KNOW THE PARTICULARS OF THAT. I CAN ANSWER YOU AND YOU GOT THE TIMELINE.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE TWO MONTHS, NINE MONTHS COULD BE 11 MONTHS BEFORE.
NOW, WHEN YOU MAKE THESE KIND OF AGREEMENTS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE THE RIGHT PERSON TO ASK. WHEN DO YOU USUALLY GET THE MONEY? WHEN BONDING. LIKE WHEN DO WE GET THE AGREEMENT IN BONDING OR A LETTER OR CREDIT OR WHATEVER INSTRUMENT WE'RE GOING TO USE? WHEN DOES THAT TYPICALLY HAPPEN? TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE AT THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT.
SO RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE TWO PERMITS THEY HAVE TO ACQUIRE.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE THEIR ENTRY FEATURE TO THE DEVELOPMENT, THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT. SO THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE A LANDSCAPING.
THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO LANDSCAPE IT AND AND DO THINGS THAT WE NORMALLY WOULDN'T DO. SO OUR PERMIT IS GOING TO HAVE A LANDSCAPE AGREEMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THINGS THAT ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY MAINTAIN AS PART OF IT.
SO, SO 11 MONTHS OUT IS PROBABLY WHEN THEY WOULD GO TO PULL A PERMIT.
SAY IF ALL THINGS GO WELL, WHICH YOU NEVER KNOW MAYBE.
AND THEN 12 MONTHS. YEAH, I WOULD SAY 12 MONTHS IS WHEN THEY COULD BE ISSUED A PERMIT FROM FDOT.
THEY COULD GET A PERMIT FROM THE CITY QUICKER THAN THE 12 MONTH PROCESS, BUT BOTH OF THEM ARE INTERCONNECTED, SO WE REALLY CAN'T APPROVE. BOTH AGENCIES HAVE TO BE COORDINATED.
AND THAT WAS THE POINT OF HAVING THE MEETING WITH ALL THREE FOLKS IN THE ROOM TOGETHER.
YEAH. SO IF THE IF, IF TYPICALLY THAT MONEY COMES UP, THAT'S 12 MONTHS FROM NOW, THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR SHARE OF IT OR BOND OR BOND IT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL OKAY. I GUESS WE'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS. A LOT OF QUESTIONS TO ANSWER, A LOT OF CLARIFICATION AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M VERY DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED IN THE TREES. YOU KNOW THAT THAT THAT I'M NOT TALKING TO YOU.
BUT ALL OF US HERE ARE DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED THAT THAT DID NOT WORK.
THAT WAS THE INTENT, AND WE ALL HAD GREAT HOPES FOR THAT.
I DON'T THINK OUR VICE MAYOR IS COMFORTABLE WITH IT JUST BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS KIND OF LEFT UNANSWERED, LIKE HOW DO YOU REPLACE THAT CLUSTERING EFFECT OF THE TREES AND THAT LITTLE ECOSYSTEM, MICRO ECOSYSTEM THAT OCCURRED THERE? AND I GET WHAT SHE'S SAYING. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I CERTAINLY DIDN'T CONSIDER.
THAT'S KIND OF NEW TO ME, BUT I THINK SHE'S RIGHT ABOUT IT.
[02:00:01]
AND JUST THE FACT THAT WE'RE REALLY NOT IS NOT REALLY AN EVEN TRADE AS FAR AS GIRTH OF THE TREES THAT WE'RE LOSING FOR WHAT WE'RE GETTING. SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO KIND OF PUT THIS ASIDE AND SEE IF WE CAN GET MORE CONCESSIONS. ON THOSE SCORES, MORE. I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE FROM THE DEVELOPER.LIKE, THAT'S ME. THAT'S JUST ME SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES OFFERED ON TREES. AND OF COURSE, I'M TOTALLY DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESPONSE ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS A SEPARATE ISSUE. THAT POINT WAS REITERATED, AND I'M DISAPPOINTED ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
WELL, I AGREE, I'M PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE TREE THING.
BECAUSE THERE WAS THERE'S ONLY I MEAN, THE TREES WERE IT DIDN'T SUCCEED.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. AND IF WE CAN GET MORE TREES, I DON'T I'M 100% INTO THAT.
MY REAL THING HERE IS TO DEVELOP A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
AND I WANTED TO SAY FOR THE RECORD, FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
ONE IS, IS THAT IF WE CONTINUE TO, TO ISSUE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND THIS GETS AHEAD OF THE INTERSECTION, IT DOESN'T LEAVE THE CITY IN A GOOD, COMFORTABLE POSITION.
BUT IT'S HARDER FOR US TO TO GRAB THAT BECAUSE THAT BURDEN WILL GO WITH WHOEVER OWNS THE PROPERTY.
SO I'D LIKE TO FIND SOME WAY THAT WE CAN WORK THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
AND SECOND CONCERN IS JUST A PUBLIC SAFETY. I MEAN, THIS IS A DANGEROUS INTERSECTION.
AND I, I HAVE HEARD THIS CONVERSATION THAT YOU HAVE TO GET THE 80% THING FOR THE TRIP TO FDOT.
AND IF THAT'S NOT EASY TO WORK WITH AND I'M SYMPATHETIC WITH THE APPLICANT.
SO I'M NOT REALLY ASSIGNING BLAME. BUT I THINK GOING FORWARD FOR THE SECOND HEARING, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SEE A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION ON HOW THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO WORK. IT SEEMS AS IF WE HAVE A PRICE RIGHT NOW.
IT'S BETWEEN ONE AND A HALF AND 2 MILLION. OF COURSE, WE DON'T WANT TO PULL THE TRIGGER ON THAT TOO MUCH, BECAUSE IF WE SAY, HEY, WE WANT SO MUCH UP FRONT AND IT COMES HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A LEGAL STAFF TO FIGURE THAT STUFF OUT.
AND YOU KNOW, REALLY ON THE TREES. I WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE US ARBORIST REPORT ON THE CEDARS.
IT'S A VERY SMALL DETAIL BECAUSE TO ME, THE INTERSECTION IS THE THING.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS I AM NOT PRETTY FIRMLY NOT CONVINCED ON IS THIS IDEA THAT THIS LANGUAGE IN OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HERE AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM NUMBER THREE.
AND I'M GETTING THE FEELING THAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO TAKE WHATEVER MOBILITY FEES THAT WOULD COME WITH JUST THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY TO HELP PAY FOR THE COST OF THE INTERSECTION. IF I'M READING THAT RIGHT.
I HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME WITH THAT BECAUSE HAVING WORKED ON THE MOBILITY PLAN, I THOUGHT THE FOCUS OF THE MOBILITY PLAN IS, IS TO BUILD ALTERNATIVES, MULTI-MODAL ALTERNATIVES TO OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
THAT WOULD BE ALMOST ABSOLUTELY. A SEPARATE THING.
AND WHAT ELSE HERE? WE'RE ALREADY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ISABELLE A QUESTION.
THE LAST SENTENCE OF NUMBER TWO SAYS FULL PAYMENT OF THESE COSTS SHALL BE BINDING REQUIREMENT OF DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT ORDERS OR PERMITS FOR THE PROPERTIES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME IN LIKE REAL TERMS? SURE. SO JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT IS NOT PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THAT. SO ALL ANYONE WHO OWNS DIRT IN THE GEOGRAPHY, WHICH IS AT THE BACKSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THERE'S LITTLE MAP. ANYONE WHO OWNS DIRT THERE IS BOUND BY ALL THE TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE THIS PARCEL. AND THAT PARTICULAR SENTENCE YOU READ BASICALLY SAYS THAT THE OWNER AND THAT'S
[02:05:01]
ANYBODY WHO OWNS DIRT IS REQUIRED TO DO THE IMPROVEMENT.THEN THE POSSIBILITY IS THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT ORDERS OR PERMITS BASICALLY WOULD BE WOULD BE ON HOLD. SO IT'S A BINDING REQUIREMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS FOR THAT DIRT, NOT THIS DIRT, DIFFERENT DIRT.
SO I THINK THAT FOR ME, THE CONFUSION, WELL, THE CONCERN IS THAT WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S BASICALLY DOWNSTREAM OF THIS BECAUSE WE'VE REALIZED THIS IS A ONE STREAM THING THAT'S COMING IN AND OUT, AND THIS TRAFFIC FROM THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL IS GOING TO BE USING THE INTERSECTION IS PAID BY THAT.
IF THERE WAS ANOTHER WAY OUT AND THEY WERE DOING IT, WHICH I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR, IT'S JUST RECOGNIZING THE REALITY THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE USING THIS INTERSECTION EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT LEGALLY BOUND BY THAT.
THAT IS A CONCERN FOR ME BECAUSE THAT INTERSECTION HAS TO BE READY FOR THIS TRAFFIC.
THAT'S THE NEXUS. I KNOW IT'S NOT A LEGAL NEXUS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE A COMMON SENSE NEXUS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH HERE. SO BEFORE WE GO TO A SECOND HEARING.
SO I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE APPLICANT TO SETTLE THAT.
SO WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR PEOPLE GOING IN THERE, THEY HAVE A SAFE AND EASY WAY TO GET OUT.
AND THAT'S THE PART OF IT THAT I'M KIND OF MISSING.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. SO THOSE ARE JUST MY OBSERVATIONS.
OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK TO THE TREES. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE TREES.
AS LONG AS WE CAN SEE DOCUMENTATION AGAIN THAT THE FIVE TREES ARE GOING TO BE MOVED AND THAT THERE'S SOME WAY TO HOLD THAT PERSON ACCOUNTABLE FOR IT. I SEE IT THAT WE'RE GETTING A PLUS ON THE TREES.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE WHAT WE HAD. BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE 19 TREES IN ADDITION TO THE FIVE PLUS THE CEDARS, CEDARS OUT OF THE QUESTION, THEY'RE GOING TO BE REPLACED.
SO I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT RIGHT NOW. SO LET ME MAYBE I MISUNDERSTAND.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE FIVE TREES THAT THEY SAY ARE DYING NOW AND ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT.
AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING THOSE TREES.
AND THEY'RE BIG TREES. RIGHT? THERE WON'T BE MOVED, THEY'LL BE PLANTED.
THERE'LL BE NEW BRAND NEW FROM A NURSERY. BUT THEY'RE BIG TREES.
CORRECT. I MEAN, SO THEY'RE BEING MOVED. THEY'RE BIG TREES.
I MEAN, NOT NOT NOT THE SIZE OF THE ONES THAT ARE.
NO, BUT YOU GAVE A NOT YOU GAVE A NUMBER. AND I BELIEVE IT IS 18IN IN DIAMETER.
AND THEY ARE NURSERY GROWN TREES, RIGHT? THEY WILL BE.
YEAH. NON LIVE OAKS. RIGHT. OKAY. NOT A REAL LIVE OAKS.
I UNDERSTAND. CAN I. I THINK THE REASON THEY PICKED THE 18.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE A HIGH RATE OF SUCCESS, RIGHT? I THINK YOU GET BIGGER THAN THAT. AND WE, AS WE FOUND THAT THEY DON'T ALWAYS DO IT, SO.
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING ME UP TO DATE.
WOULD IT? I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION, AND I CAN HOLD THE QUESTION IF IT'S IF YOU THINK IT'S BETTER, BUT I'LL JUST PUT IT OUT THERE. BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GETTING IT ALL OUT THERE.
OKAY. I THINK WE'RE GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT FIGURING OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT, PASS IT. OKAY.
I'M JUST CURIOUS THEN TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE FOR AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ADDITIONAL BURDEN OF THE TRAFFIC THAT THIS PARTICULAR PUD IN FRONT OF US WOULD ADD TO THE MIX.
AS COMMISSIONER DEPRETER HAD STATED. SO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAS ITS OWN PATH OF ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT, AND IT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU COULD JUST DO, [INAUDIBLE] IT'S GOT TO BE NOTICED AND SO ON.
SO THAT'S THE CONCEPT. AND IT IS A MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL TYPE AGREEMENT.
IT'S A CONTRACT ESSENTIALLY. THIS PARTICULAR PUD HAD TO PROVE WHAT THE IMPACT THE TRANSPORTATION
[02:10:06]
IMPACT WAS FOR THIS PUD. AT THE TIME IT WAS APPROVED AND THAT WAS REVIEWED BY PLANNING STAFF AND OTHERS, I GUESS TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, AND IT WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DO A SEPARATE PROPORTIONATE SHARE AGREEMENT OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. WE COULD PULL ALL OF THAT INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT HEARING, AND YOU COULD HAVE THAT AS PART OF YOUR PACKET OF WHAT THEY ANALYZED, WHY THEY DETERMINED IT DIDN'T WARRANT A SPECIFIC ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR PROP SHARE AGREEMENT FOR ITS SHARE, IF I CAN PUT IT THAT WAY, OF THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT INTERSECTION, THAT IS THE THE UNIVERSE THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, IS THIS PUD ALREADY REVIEWED THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS AND FOUND THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED TO BE PART OF A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THEY WILL HAVE TO PAY INTO OUR MOBILITY FEE PROGRAM.IT MAY BE SOMETHING OR MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN.
ASKING THE APPLICANT IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER PREPAYING WHATEVER THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE HOOK FOR.
THAT'S HELPFUL FOR YOU, YOU SAID. A SEPARATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IS THERE A WORLD IN WHICH THIS POD COULD BECOME PART OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN THE SAME, ESSENTIALLY DEVELOPMENT COMPLEX? ONLY IF THEY AGREED TO IT? THANK YOU. YES. AND THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED, APPARENTLY.
ALL RIGHT. INTERESTING CONVERSATION. IT'S THE SAME COMPANY AS PAYING IT ON THE ONE SIDE.
SO THE DOWNSIDE OF NOT PAYING IT NOW IS, IS THAT IF THEY START SELLING THINGS IN, THE INTERSECTION HASN'T IMPROVED AND SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT WE'RE LIABLE. THAT'S THE CONCERN THERE. FOR ME. THERE'S SOME COMFORT THAT THEY OWN BOTH PARCELS AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
I GUESS I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE SOME KIND OF A SCHEDULE, LIKE WHEN POSSIBLY THIS OTHER AGREEMENT IS GOING TO BE MET IN TERMS OF DOWN PAYMENT OF MONEY AND STUFF FOR SOME DETAIL, A MORE DETAIL ON THAT.
BEFORE, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW IT'S NOT PART OF THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THAT INTERSECTION.
SO THAT'S IT. INTERESTING. COULD COULD I ASK WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE TO BRING THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BACK TO US TO GET THOSE KINDS OF ANSWERS AT A UPCOMING COMMISSION MEETING? YOU CAN. YOU'RE ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE, SOMEWHERE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE REVIEWED BY YOU ONCE A YEAR, SO YOU COULD CERTAINLY ASK THAT.
BUT AGAIN, THIS APPLICANT IS NOT PART OF THAT.
I MEAN, REALLY I THINK THAT THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD.
SO WE WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVIEW THIS ONE.
AND WHEN WAS THIS ISSUED AGAIN? DOES IT HAVE A DATE? 23. OKAY. SO I DON'T THINK WE GOT ONE. YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S A MAYBE THAT'S THE WAY FORWARD.
I'M SEEING 21 MAY 21ST. OKAY. YEAH. I JUST I WAS GOING TO SAY, WELL, THREE OF US WASN'T ON THE COMMISSION IN 21, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPERATIVE THAT WE SEE THIS AGREEMENT SO WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING ON WHAT'S GOING ON.
WHICH WOULD BE FAIR TO THE DEVELOPER THAT WE ARE TOTALLY UP TO PAR ON THE AGREEMENT IN ITSELF.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE ABOUT THE TREES. BUT WE CAN'T LIVE IN THE PAST.
WE GOT TO MOVE FORWARD AND GET THE TREES. BUT AS FAR AS WE KNOW HOW FDOT OPERATES, WE HAVE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION GOING AROUND IN OUR COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S NOT DONE. AND SO TO MOVE FORWARD, NOT KNOWING THAT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER.
I MEAN, LOOK AT OYSTER CREEK, LOOK AT SAY, ROAD 16.
LOOK AT THE BRIDGE. SO WE HAVE TO BE MINDFUL THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER AREA THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT 55 HOMES THAT THEY CAN'T GET OUT OF THEIR INTERSECTION. AGREED. SO LET ME JUST REPEAT BACK.
WHAT I THINK I HEARD IS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE AN ASSURANCE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS, WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT GEOGRAPHY, ARE COMMITTED TO PAYING THEIR PROPORTIONATE, FAIR SHARE OF THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS.
THE CITY HAS ALREADY OBLIGATED ITSELF FOR A HALF $1 MILLION FOR THAT.
[02:15:02]
COMMITMENT TO PAY FOR THAT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT.IS THAT CORRECT? EXACTLY MY CONCERN. YES. THANK YOU.
WHAT WILL WE BE ASKING FOR? GOING TO SECOND HEARING? WELL, I'D LIKE TO. ACTUALLY, NOTHING RIGHT NOW.
BASED ON WHAT THEY'VE HEARD FROM ALL OF US. YEAH.
ALL OF IT. YOU KNOW, NO FORMAL NECESSARILY. NO FORMAL REFERENCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BUT IT COULDN'T HURT. OKAY, I HEAR NO SECOND TO THAT MOTION.
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? SO THE MOTION IS TO HAVE THAT AND HAVE WITH WHAT YOU JUST SAID WAS THAT COMMISSIONER BLONDER SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME LANGUAGE BY THE APPLICANT WHEN HE COMES BACK AT THE SECOND HEARING TO TALK ABOUT OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IS THAT WHAT ALL OF IT. ALL OF WHAT WE'VE EXPRESSED TODAY.
SO DID YOU MAKE A SECOND TO THE MOTION TO AMEND THE MOTION? I DID NOT. I WAS JUST MAKING A SUGGESTION. AMENDING HIS MOTION.
OKAY. THEN THEN I CAN. THEN I CAN CLARIFY BY SAYING THEN WE COULD WE COULD ASK THE DEVELOPER TO BRING BACK CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF TREES THEY'RE WILLING TO ADD, IF THEY ARE WILLING TO ADD ANY TREES. AND ALSO THEY'RE EXPRESSING THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF OUR CONCERN ABOUT THE THE INTERSECTION AND WHAT THEY MAY PROPOSE AS AN OPTION THAT THEY COULD PARTICIPATE OTHER OTHER THAN MOBILITY FEES.
I HEARD ONE OTHER REQUEST AND THAT WAS A HARBOR REPORT.
YEAH. LIKE AN ARBORIST? THAT'S PRETTY SIMPLE. ARBORIST REPORT. OKAY.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN ARBORIST REPORT. AND THEN SEPARATELY, WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT THE MORE ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SEPARATELY. I WANT TO SEE THE 2021 AGREEMENT.
DO I NEED TO SAY IT? OKAY. OKAY. SO SO THE DISCUSSION REGARDING A REVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS GOING TO BE AT SOME SEPARATE HEARING, HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS PARTICULAR TIME.
APPLICANT. BUT YOU DID WANT THE APPLICANT TO REVISIT SOME OF THE TREE GIRTH NUMBERS AND SO ON.
AND ADDRESS THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND PERHAPS ADDRESS IF THEY ARE WILLING TO DISCUSS THE INTERSECTION, WHETHER THAT'S PREPAYMENT OF OF MOBILITY FEES OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM.
IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE MONEY. IT'S THE PARTICIPATION BEYOND THE MOBILITY FEES.
OH, BEYOND THE MOBILITY FEES. OKAY. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO.
DO YOU THINK THE MOBILITY FEES ARE OR SHOULD BE USED FOR THIS? ONE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY BEFORE THE ARBORIST REPORT.
THE AUDITOR'S REPORT IS FOR THOSE CEDARS, RIGHT.
TO SEE IF THEY'RE STILL VIABLE. ALL RIGHT. MAYBE ONE OTHER THING.
MAYBE WE COULD ADD. WE DO. COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD.
OKAY. SO, COMMISSIONER. SHE'S STILL MAKING THE MOTION BUT PROCEDURALLY, WE CAN. YEAH. IT'S NOT. YEAH.
SO I THINK MAYBE IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND THEN HAVE THEM COME BACK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE TREES AND WHATEVER TREE MITIGATION THEY CAN HAVE.
AND FORGOT ABOUT IT. SORRY. JUST JUST TO CLARIFY, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT PART OF THIS PD.
YES. SO WE HAVE A STATUS UPDATE ON THAT. THEY WON'T BRING IT BACK.
RIGHT. WE'RE GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER UP AN ALTERNATIVE TO US, ADDING THEM TO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO UNLESS THEY AGREE TO DO THAT.
SO THIS IS A NEGOTIATION FOR US TO SAY, WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO BE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
THEY'RE SAYING, NO, WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, WE'LL BRING US SOMETHING IN ADDITION.
THAT SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM. NO, THEY SHOULD BE THAT. THAT'S EVEN THOUGH IT'S. YEAH.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT ON THEIR PROPERTY. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO ARE WE CLEAR ON THE MOTION? AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? I'LL SECOND IT.
[02:20:09]
OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1500 ARAPAHOE AVENUE. PARCEL ID NUMBER 1347800000. AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HERE IN AFTER TO AMEND ITS CURRENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD CLASSIFICATION, ADOPTING A NEW PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.ALL RIGHT. CAN I CAN I ASK ONE LAST THING? SORRY.
SURE. DEFINITELY. YOU HAVE TIME. ANYBODY BEFORE? I'M SORRY, BUT I JUST REMEMBER. I USUALLY ASK AFTER THE READING, I SAY ANY MORE DEBATE OR COMMENTS? SO THIS IS TOTALLY I REMEMBERED I WAS GOING TO ASK WE HAVE A LIST OF MOBILITY PROJECTS ON THE ON THE, ON THE LIST. I THINK THAT MAYBE THEY SHOULD COME.
SOMEONE SHOULD COME BACK WITH THAT TO SEE WHAT OUR MOBILITY PROJECTS THAT WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED FOR THE CITY ARE, AND THEN WE CAN SEE THAT'S REASONABLE CONVERSATION.
I AGREE THAT, MR. CITY MANAGER, WOULD YOU DO THAT FOR US? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I WANTED. I THINK THAT WAS A GREAT IDEA.
PASS IT. ARE THEY ARE THEY IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT? WE'RE CHANGING? NO, NO, NO. YEAH. WE'RE ASKING FOR THEM TO RESPOND.
OH, OKAY. THIS IS TIME FOR OUR VOTE. YEAH. OKAY.
YEAH, IT IS, IT IS. SO YOU'RE CALLING THE VOTE? ALL RIGHT, I'M CALLING THE VOTE. YOU'RE CALLING THE VOTE? OKAY, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. WE'RE THERE. JIM SPRINGFIELD.
YES. JOHN DEPRETER. YES. CYNTHIA. GEARS.
YES. BARBARA BLONDER. YES. NANCY. SIKES-KLINE.
YES. OKAY. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE WILL GO FORTH IN GOOD FAITH.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU AND GOOD FAITH AS WELL.
AND I THINK WE WILL GET THROUGH THIS. AND THIS WILL BE GOING TO SECOND HEARING READING.
RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THESE CONDITIONS. YEAH. RIGHT, RIGHT. YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION. OKAY. THANKS. YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. YEAH. THAT WAS A DOOZY. ALL RIGHT.
WE WOULD WE WISH TO TAKE A SHORT BREAK. IT'S ALMOST SEVEN BEFORE YOU BREAK.
WE HAD THREE BREAK IN THE CONSENT AGENDA ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE HAD IDENTIFIED SECOND READING FOR THIS ORDINANCE ON JULY 14TH.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT PUBLIC STATEMENT.
FAIR ENOUGH. FAIR ENOUGH. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK.
THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE LEFT, WE DID REMOVE THE RESOLUTION ON THE DEFINITION OF ANTI-SEMITISM.
AND THAT WOULD BE AT OUR NEXT MEETING, THE JULY 14TH MEETING.
SO WE WILL BE HEARING THE RESOLUTION ON LANDSCAPING THE THE UPDATE ON THE DROP IN CENTER AND THEN ORDINANCE BY CITY ATTORNEY, CITY CLERK AND CITY MANAGER. SO WITH THAT SAID, WE'LL TAKE A BREAK FOR TEN MINUTES.
EVERYBODY GOOD WITH TEN MINUTES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GOOD.
ALL RIGHT. SEVEN. 735. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO RESOLUTIONS IS 9B1 RESOLUTION 2025-20 APPROVES AN FDOT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
[9.B.1. Resolution 2025-20: Approves an FDOT Landscaping Maintenance Agreement for State Highways. (S. Slaughter, Utilities & Public Works Director) ]
AGREEMENT FOR STATE HIGHWAYS. AND MR. SLAUGHTER.YOU ARE WELCOME TO PRESENT. GOOD. GOOD EVENING.
GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR. COMMISSIONERS.
STEVEN SLAUGHTER, DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES AND PUBLIC WORKS.
IT'S A LANDSCAPING AGREEMENT. MOWING, TRIMMING.
DEBRIS REMOVAL. IT'S ON ABOUT A HALF A DOZEN ROADS IN THE CITY.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IT'S THE SAME AGREEMENT THAT WILL BE EXPIRING HERE.
LATER THIS YEAR. WE'RE BASICALLY RE ENTERING INTO THE SAME AGREEMENT.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS? MR. SLAUGHTER. MR. I HAD ONE QUESTION. IS THIS A YOU SAID IT'S AN ANNUAL AGREEMENT.
IT'S A THREE YEAR. THREE YEAR? YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT WE PASS RESOLUTION 2025-20.
I'LL SECOND THAT. OR IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I.
I. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. GOOD EVENING.
[10. STAFF REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS ]
[02:25:04]
AT 9092 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY. AND THAT IS MR. FOX.GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR. COMMISSIONERS. HOW ARE Y'ALL? GREAT.
I HAVE TO FIND MY. I DON'T SEE MY PRESENTATION, SO I'M GOING TO TALK YOU THROUGH IT REAL QUICK. SO THE DROP IN CENTER.
I HAVE MET WITH TWO GROUPS IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS.
THE SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE, IN THE AREA, AT THE SITE.
AND THEN I DID A PRESENTATION AT THE AT THE CONTINUUM OF CARE ON TWO WEEKS AGO ON WEDNESDAY.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD. YES. THANK YOU. SCROLL DOWN.
YEP. OKAY. SO I WAS ASKED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE SITE ITSELF.
SO CONCEPTUALLY, THE THE FIRST PHASE OF THIS WAS THE DINING WITH DIGNITY PAVILION.
AND AS WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT PROCESS, WE ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT THE SERVICES THAT WE COULD PROVIDE, THAT WE'RE NOT TRULY A REPLICATION OF SERVICES BEING PROVIDED BY OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS, BUT THAT WERE NEEDED IN THE COMMUNITY FOR THOSE THAT WEREN'T BEING SERVICED BY THE SERVICE PROVIDERS. AND THAT WOULD BE MORE OR LESS ALONG THE LINES OF LAUNDRY AND SHOWERS.
Y'ALL, YOU'VE I'VE TRIED TO DOCUMENT THE, THE THE EVOLUTION OF THE SITE.
YOU KNOW, THE SITE. IT'S GOT A BEAUTIFUL CANOPY OF I THINK IT'S LIKE 29 OAKS, 28, 29 OAKS.
THE CITY'S LEADERSHIP IS COMMITTED, AND YOU ARE COMMITTED TO KEEPING THAT THAT CANOPY IN PLACE.
THESE ARE THE PICTURES FROM THE SAME PRESENTATION THAT I GAVE YOU LAST TIME, AND I APOLOGIZE.
ON YOUR DIRECTION. AND AND MR. BERTRAM'S LEADERSHIP, THE VISION CHANGED FOR THIS PROPERTY MID-YEAR.
AND OUR CONTRACTOR HE CHANGED GEARS. RESPECT, RESPECTFULLY.
AND HE CONTINUED TO BUILD THIS, THIS FACILITY OUT.
CHANGE GEARS. AND HE'S DONE A GREAT JOB BUILDING IT OUT.
AND WITH THE CHANGES ON THE FLY, THIS IS THE BUILDING WITH THE ROOF.
I THINK LAST TIME I HAD THIS PRESENTATION, IT DIDN'T HAVE A ROOF.
IT WAS JUST WALLS AND BLOCK. THIS WAS THE BUILDING WITH THE ROOF.
THIS WAS THE TIN ROOF THAT WAS PUT ON. SOME CHANGES WERE MADE BY YOU TO KIND OF BRING IT.
BRING IT UP A LITTLE BIT. WE WENT WITH A TONGUE AND GROOVED CEILING.
WE WENT WITH SOME COLORED STUCCO ON THE SIDES.
THIS IS A SHARP COATING ON THE FLOOR THAT ALSO CARRIES OVER INTO THE FINISHED FLOORING ON THE INSIDE AND INTO THE SHOWER STALLS AND THE BATHROOMS. THIS IS THE COLOR HERE. IT'S FINISHED OUT. THERE'S THE ROOF LINE.
THE THE FANS ARE UP, THE LIGHTING IS UP, THE WATER IS CONNECTED, THE SEWER IS.
AND LIFT STATION IS IN. THE ONLY THING THAT TOOK US THAT SLOWED US DOWN WAS THE ELECTRICAL GETTING HOOKED BACK UP TO THE ELECTRICAL. SO WHEN WE FIRST DISCUSSED IT, WE DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO GO BACK IN OVERHEAD.
AND I THINK WE DISCUSSED THAT WE WANTED TO TRY TO GO UNDERGROUND.
WHEN WE COME BACK AND WENT UNDERGROUND, THE FPO CAME BACK AND THE PRICE WAS A LITTLE HIGH.
SO WE ASKED FOR THE OVERHEAD PRICE AND THEY GAVE US ANOTHER PRICE.
THEY WERE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. BUT WHEN THEY I THINK WHEN THEY FOUND OUT THAT PHASE TWO WAS IN DEVELOPMENT, IS WHEN THEY REALIZED THAT THIS THE UNDERGROUND WOULD BE MUCH BENEFICIAL FOR THEM AND US, AND THAT PRICE COME DOWN DRAMATICALLY.
AND WE GOT IN AT RIGHT AT ABOUT A, ABOUT A 10TH OF WHAT IT WAS.
SO WE WE DID. WELL, SO AND THEY WERE VERY RESPONSIVE.
FPL WAS VERY RESPONSIVE. SO IT WAS IT WAS A GREAT, GREAT PRODUCT.
[02:30:01]
SO THE DOORS ARE ON THE THE DOORS ARE ON THE PROJECT NOW HERE IS THE, THE UNDER CANOPY UNDER THE CANOPY TONGUE AND GROOVED. THE TABLES AND CHAIRS ARE ORDERED.THEY ARE SQUARE. YEAH. PICNIC TABLES ARE ORDERED.
THEY WILL BE A PLASTIC METAL A METAL THAT'S COVERED IN PLASTIC THAT YOU SEE IN CERTAIN PLACES.
SO FOR PURPOSES OF WASHING THEM DOWN AND AND BEING EXPOSED INTO THE THE WEATHER IN OUR ENVIRONMENT.
THE CONCEPT IS TO BE PHASED IN, IF YOU WILL. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO START WITH DINING WITH DIGNITY ONLY AND DO THAT FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS AND WORK OUT ANY BUGS AND ANY THINGS THAT MAY KIND OF SLIP OUR MIND OR THINGS WE DIDN'T IDENTIFY, AND THEN MAYBE WORK INTO LIKE THE SHOWERS AND DINING WITH DIGNITY.
AND THEN BY THAT TIME, WE'LL HAVE IT ALL WORKED OUT.
SO I HAVE 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT PLANS THAT ARE FOR BUDGETING PURPOSES.
AS THE EVOLUTION OF THE PROJECTS GO. AND I'M IN COMMUNICATION WITH, MR. BERTRAM AND LEADERSHIP OF THE CITY IN REFERENCE TO BUDGETING.
I DO BELIEVE WE'LL GET OPEN BEFORE THIS BUDGET YEAR IN, SO WE'LL BE WORKING ON THAT.
FPL SAID I GOT THE EASEMENT DONE. 14 DAYS AGO.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT LIKE MID AUGUST BEFORE WE CAN START LOOKING AT OPENING IT AND HAVING A HAVING A CEREMONY OF TYPES AND GETTING OPENED. BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE THINGS THAT I'M GOING TO WANT TO DO JUST BEFORE WE DO THAT.
KIND OF JUST KIND OF WALKTHROUGHS WITH PEOPLE AND SEE HOW THINGS WORK AND WHAT, WHAT ARE WE MISSING AND TRY TO TRY TO IDENTIFY SOME NEEDS THAT WE SITTING AROUND A TABLE, YOU JUST CAN'T, JUST CAN'T DO UNTIL YOU'RE ACTUALLY DOING IT THERE.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS. SO OH, I WILL MENTION COMMISSIONER SPRINGFIELD AND HIS GROUP, AND I DON'T. IT'S THE MORNING, SUNSHINE.
KIWANIS. KIWANIS. OKAY. THIS QANTAS GROUP HAS ARE BRINGING AN IDEA TOGETHER.
IT'S A HEALTH MONITORING KIOSK THAT'S PROVIDED BY MAYO.
WE PUT ONE AT THE AMERICAN LEGION IN WEST AUGUSTINE.
AND IT'S JUST A SIMPLE SELF-SERVE KIND OF KIOSK.
KIND OF LIKE THE ONE AT PUBLIX. AND SO WE WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT IT YET WITH THE CITY STAFF, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A ZOOM WITH MAYO, AND WE'RE GOING TO INVITE YOU TO BE.
YEAH. YEAH. KIND OF THING. YES, SIR. AND SO WE'RE WORKING ON THAT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THAT. IT TAKES SOME COMMITMENT FROM THE CITY.
SO SO YOU SAID YOU THOUGHT DINING WITH DIGNITY WAS GOING TO BE MOVING IN THE NEXT WHAT PERIOD OF TIME? I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN WE CAN GET OPEN BY MID-AUGUST VERSUS AUGUST FOR DINING WITH DIGNITY.
YES, MA'AM. AND I THINK MAYBE WE'RE DOING THAT.
YES, MA'AM. THAT'S GREAT. AND AND THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO EITHER SHOWERS OR LAUNDRY.
DEFINITELY THE DIGNITY FACTOR IS DEFINITELY THERE.
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING. YOU'VE DONE A REALLY FANTASTIC JOB WORKING THERE.
SO WE'RE CREATING ALMOST AS MUCH SEATING AS THE NUMBERS ARE BEING PROVIDED DOWN HERE.
BUT THOSE NUMBERS ARE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TIME FRAME.
AND WE'RE PROVIDING THAT NUMBER OF SEATING AT ONE TIME.
SO FANTASTIC. ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? GOOD, GOOD.
[02:35:10]
HOMELESS. SOME OF THEM WILL BE PARTICIPATING, HOPEFULLY IN THE END PRODUCT A YEARS FROM NOW.HE DID BRING UP ABOUT THE PROBLEM WITH MAILBOXES, AND THAT WAS ONE OF OUR GOALS, WAS TO HAVE MAILBOXES THERE AND ACTUALLY WENT TO A VENDOR WHO HANDLES MAILBOXES. AND IT'S A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT THING.
SO I HOPE WE CAN WORK OUT SOMETHING. BUT THE POSSIBILITY IS IS WANING ABOUT MAILBOXES, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY NEEDED IN THE COMMUNITY, AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.
BUT THE POST OFFICE REGULATES EVERY MAILBOX, AND THERE'S VERY STRICT WITH HOW THEY OPERATE IT.
SO HE BROKE THE NEWS TO COC THAT IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO OUR BEST, BUT IT MAY NOT HAPPEN. IT'S A IT. IT WAS A IT WAS A GREAT IDEA.
IT WAS ONE OF THE VISIONS THAT WE HAD. BUT THE FURTHER I GOT INVOLVED IN IT, THE THE THE MORE OF THE LITTLE ISSUES THAT STARTED TO POINT OUT, I'M NOT DONE WITH IT. I MEAN, I THINK WE CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN.
IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE I'VE GOT TO WORK ALL THOSE PROBLEMS OUT FIRST BEFORE WE GET IN, YOU KNOW, OTHER THINGS WE CAN OPEN UP AND WE CAN WORK THOSE PROBLEMS OUT AS WE GO ON THIS ONE, IT JUST THERE'S A THERE'S A LOT OF LITTLE THINGS THAT CAN GET REALLY HAIRY ESPECIALLY FOR US.
AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CONTROL THOSE THINGS.
AND WE HAVE ALL THE PROPER SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE THAT WE DON'T OPEN PANDORA'S BOX AND CREATE A MESS.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THAT. THAT'S THE ONE THING THAT I KNOW THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH.
YEAH, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IS AS FAR AS THE MAIL BOX GOES HAVING WORKED AT THE COURTHOUSE THERE'S LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS WHEN SOMEBODY HAS THAT, LIKE ON THEIR ID, A MAILBOX ADDRESS THAT YOU.
IT CAN GET REAL MESSY. IT CAN GET KIND OF MESSY.
THE POLICE CANNOT MAKE THEM LEAVE BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR RESIDENCE.
SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ON HOW WE HANDLE THAT.
YES, MA'AM. THAT MIGHT BE A WINDOW WHERE WE COULD PAY FOR X AMOUNT OF COPAY WITH WITH THE PERSON FOR SOME MAILBOXES AT THE POST OFFICE. I DON'T REALLY THINK WE SHOULD ATTACH MAILBOXES TO THE THE CENTER MYSELF PERSONALLY, BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITY. IF SOMEBODY'S ACTING A FOOL THERE AND THEY HAVE ID WITH THAT ADDRESS, THEY CAN'T BE HAULED AWAY. YEAH. AND THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF THE MORE SIMPLER ISSUES.
AND I KNOW THAT YOU YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH OTHER ONES.
THAT'S THEIR HOME. SO YEAH, THAT'S GOING TO BE A WHOLE THING.
SO WHEN YOU START THINKING ABOUT STAFFING AND I HAVE TALKED TO SOME BUSINESSES BECAUSE I'M REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT THIS HOMELESS THING AND, AND PEOPLE THAT ARE IN NEED. YES, MA'AM. TO PROVIDE MAYBE NOT EVERY DAY, BUT A COUPLE OF DAYS A WEEK, SOME KIND OF CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST, BECAUSE WE REALLY JUST CAN'T FEED PEOPLE AT NIGHTTIME AND THINK THAT'S GOING TO KEEP THEM OFF THE STREETS BEGGING.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS, BUT SEEING THE PICTURES BECAUSE I HAVE REALLY HAD TO FIGHT FOR NOT PULLING MY CAR IN TO GO IN THERE WHEN THEY'RE THERE TO LIKE WALK AROUND AND SEE IT LIKE NOW.
SO I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THE PICTURE SO I DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING PICTURES ON THE INSIDE, BUT THERE'S DOORS ON EVERYTHING NOW AND THERE'S NO ELECTRICITY TO IT, SO I COULDN'T GET THE PICTURES TO. YEAH, BUT I MEAN, I CAN SEE THE PROGRESS FROM THE FENCE, BUT NOT THE WHOLE THING LIKE YOU SHOWED LIKE THE FLOORING.
I'VE SEEN HER BRING PEOPLE TO MY CHURCH TO GET FOOD THAT ARE BRANCHING OUT, GETTING SOME TYPE OF HOUSING BECAUSE WE HAVE A FOOD GIVEAWAY AT MY CHURCH, AND SHE BRINGS SOME PEOPLE THERE SO THAT THEY CAN PARTAKE.
AND IT'S NOT LIKE THE BASIC FOOD GIVEAWAY. THEY ACTUALLY GET TO KIND OF GO GROCERY SHOPPING.
[02:40:05]
SO SO THAT'S A BLESSING THAT WE TRY TO DO. SO WE COULD PROBABLY GET A SCHEDULE SO YOU CAN GET SOME ASSISTANCE.YES, MA'AM. AND I'VE GOT SOME MOCK SCHEDULES AND THINGS WORKED OUT, AND I'VE GOT A MEETING IN THE MORNING WITH WITH LEADERSHIP HERE AT THE CITY TO TO GO OVER THINGS AND TALK ABOUT ALL THE OTHER OPTIONS, BECAUSE IT'S TIME FOR US TO START REALLY TALKING ABOUT THAT SO WE CAN START GETTING A, AN OPENING DATE FOR YOU AND, AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO GETTING EVERYTHING IDENTIFIED. SO. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH.
AND THEY'RE PART OF THE DINING WITH DIGNITY BECAUSE THEY KEEP ASKING ME FOR UPDATES.
SO THE LAST TIME YOU PROVIDED SOME PICTURES, THEY WERE HAPPY BECAUSE THEY SEEN THAT IT'S BECOMING A REALITY AND THEY WANT TO BE PART OF THAT GRAND OPENING. SO I WILL FORWARD JOE, WHO'S OVER THAT CONTACT INFORMATION SO THAT HE CAN LET THE WORKERS KNOW THEY CAN COME TO THE GRAND OPENING. YES, MA'AM. AND I'M SURE THAT WHEN WE GET THAT IDENTIFIED, WE'LL BE PUSHING IT THROUGH THE CONTINUUM OF CARE FOR ALL THE SERVICE PROVIDERS.
BUT ABSOLUTELY, WE'LL WE'LL WE'LL BE IDENTIFYING THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. VICE MAYOR. I DON'T HAVE MUCH.
AROUND THE ROOM AND BEYOND. THANK YOU. DID I ALREADY GO TO YOU? I DON'T KNOW. I SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU FOR DOING ALL YOUR WORK.
IT LOOKS BEAUTIFUL. AND THANK YOU. IF I DON'T KNOW WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THIS.
WHOLE CITY COMMISSION WAS. AND I KNOW HOMELESSNESS WAS A PROBLEM FOR A COUPLE OF ELECTION CYCLES.
THAT WAS THE ISSUE. SO A COUPLE MORE THAN A COUPLE.
MORE THAN A COUPLE. SO I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS HAPPENING.
YEAH, IT'S A GREAT. MR. FOX, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
YES, MA'AM. I THINK YOU'VE DONE THIS WITH ENTHUSIASM.
AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD FIT FOR YOU, SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
I THINK YOU'RE IN THE RIGHT POSITION AT THE RIGHT TIME.
SO YOU'RE THE MAN TO DO IT. SO WE APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. MA'AM. WE ALSO APPRECIATE MR. BIRCHIM KEEPING THIS ONE GOING.
DEFINITELY. AND CHUCK AND EVERYBODY ELSE. AND CHUCK AND EVERYBODY ELSE.
WE CAN'T FORGET CHUCK. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE APPRECIATE IT. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM UP.
[11. ITEMS BY CITY ATTORNEY ]
ITEMS BY CITY ATTORNEY. YES. THESE ARE JUST INFORMATIONAL ONLY.THE FIRST ITEM, 11 A, IS JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THAT A DEVELOPER THAT IS NOT INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, IT'S A PROJECT THAT IS ON US ONE NORTH ACROSS FROM NORTHROP GRUMMAN.
HAS ASKED FOR A STATUTORY EXTENSION TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED, WHICH IS 48 MONTHS.
IN ORDER TO PUT THE WATER AND SEWER LINES TO HIS PROJECT.
SO THAT'S JUST A NOTIFICATION. AND THE OTHER IS JUST A VERY SMALL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE.
THESE ARE JUST THE BILLS THAT WERE ACTUALLY SIGNED INTO LAW.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF FIREFIGHTER HEALTH BILLS AND FIRE MARSHAL BILLS.
BILLS REGARDING THE WAY POLICE DO ALERTS FOR CHILDREN WHO ARE ON THE SPECTRUM.
PARDON ME. AND OFFICERS WHO ARE INJURED DURING OFFICIAL TRAINING EXERCISES.
SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU'VE GOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
YOUR NEXT AGENDA WILL PROBABLY HAVE QUITE A BIT MORE.
THERE WAS SORT OF A BIG BATCH OF BILLS THAT GOT FORWARDED TO THE GOVERNOR.
SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WE IT'S BEEN EKING OUT AND PROBABLY THE NEXT TWO CITY COMMISSION MEETINGS, YOU'LL HAVE BIGGER BATCHES. SO THAT'S IT. OKAY, I GUESS I HEARD TODAY IT IS THE END OF THE MONTH, THE END OF THE MONTH. THE GOVERNOR HAS TO EITHER VETO OR SIGN OR LET BECOME LAW.
I THINK IT'S THIS AT THE END OF THIS WEEK, WHICH IS THE END OF THE MONTH.
RIGHT? SOME SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. RIGHT. YEAH.
I THINK IT'S SEVEN DAYS WHEN THE LEGISLATURE IS NOT IN SESSION.
AND HE RECEIVED A BUNCH OF BILLS LAST. SO BUDGET BY JULY 1ST AND THIS BUNCH OF BILLS PROBABLY BY THE TAIL END OF THIS WEEK, IF I'M COUNTING RIGHT ON A CALENDAR.
SO THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK. HOW'S THAT? WELL, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH.
SO. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM.
[12. ITEMS BY CITY CLERK ]
ITEMS BY CITY CLERK. GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.THIS EVENING, I HAVE ONE ITEM. FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
[02:45:01]
IT'S FOR TWO APPOINTMENTS TO OUR 1977 CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM BOARD OF TRUSTEES.SO RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF IS THAT THEY BOTH BE REAPPOINTED.
EXCELLENT. I'LL MAKE THEM. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REAPPOINT TYLER KORN AND JEFF HELMS. THE BOARD SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE. AYE. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU.
MADAM. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ITEMS BY CITY MANAGER.
[13. ITEMS BY CITY MANAGER ]
NOTHING TO REPORT OTHER THAN 4TH OF JULY IS COMING UP SOON, AND THE CITY IS PREPARED FOR IT.AND WE WOULD LIKE TO INVITE EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY TO COME OUT AND ENJOY THE FIREWORKS.
VERY NICE, VERY NICE. CONCISE. CONSIDERING IT'S 8:00.
ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. WE'LL START ON THIS END OF THE TABLE THIS TIME.
[14. ITEMS BY MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS ]
COMMISSIONER GARRIS OKAY. I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO BE LAST.I KNOW I'M TRYING TO SWITCH IT UP A LITTLE. OKAY.
JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS. THE LADY ALI BURCHFIELD THAT CAME UP TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING ISSUE THAT WENT FROM 20 SPACES TO SEVEN. AND SHE SAID THAT ONLY PART OF THE STREET GOT SURVEYED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE OF SOMEBODY IN THEIR STAIRS. IS THAT ACCURATE? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, BUT I WILL CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP.
AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE A STAFF REPORT AT THE NEXT MEETING TO GIVE YOU SOME MORE UPDATES ON THAT.
WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT WILL BE A PROBLEM IF YOU CLOSE ALL THOSE SPACES, THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO THE OTHER PART OF THE STREET, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I'D BE HAPPY TO COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING WITH THE FULL REPORT.
THANK YOU. OKAY. AND THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO BRING UP IS MISS KALANI.
MISS KALANI MENTIONED ABOUT THE PERSON PARKING ON THE STREET.
NOW, FIRST OF ALL THE STREETS ARE NARROW HERE IN THE CITY, AND THERE'S NO YELLOW CURBS.
I DON'T THINK THAT ANYBODY, WHETHER THEY'RE CITY STAFF OR JUST A RESIDENT.
IF IT'S, IT'S NOT EVERY DAY THAT WHEN YOU HAVE AN EVENT.
I KNOW I'D BE REALLY UPSET IF I HAD AN EVENT.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY WERE PARKED THERE, BUT I DO THINK THAT EVERY RESIDENT SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENTERTAIN PEOPLE AT THEIR DWELLING ON A REGULAR BASIS. SO I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK UP ABOUT THAT.
THE OTHER THING IS I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF, EVERYBODY THAT WAS INVOLVED FOR THE DROP CENTER.
YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN NAGGING ABOUT THAT FOR A YEAR, AND I'M SO PLEASED THAT WE'RE COMING TO THE FINAL STAGE WHERE THAT CAN BE A BLESSING TO OUR COMMUNITY. AND NOT ONLY DOES IT FEED THE HOMELESS, IT FEEDS LOW INCOME RESIDENTS.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT HOMELESS THAT GO AND PARTAKE OF THOSE MEALS.
SO PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING. PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING.
YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TWO THINGS AND IT'S OVER $20 AND YOU'RE LOOKING LIKE, DO I REALLY NEED BOTH OF THOSE THINGS? BUT, I MEAN, WE ARE LIVING IN A SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS.
THEY DON'T KNOW. EVERYTHING IS QUESTIONABLE RIGHT NOW IN OUR IN OUR WORLD.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW MORE INTENSE THE WAR IS GOING TO BE.
WE DON'T KNOW A LOT. THERE'S SO MUCH UNCERTAINTY.
AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE CITY STAFF BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE THE LITTLE ENGINES THAT CAN.
AND WHEN YOU GUYS DO GOOD THINGS, IT MAKES US LOOK GOOD TOO.
AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WHEN Y'ALL DO SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF CRAZY, WE GET TO HEAR ABOUT THAT TOO.
[02:50:01]
SO I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY. I WANT TO THANK ALL THE DIRECTORS.I WANT TO THANK ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T GET THE RECOGNITION LIKE SOLID WASTE.
MY CUSTODIANS, ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DO ALL THE GRUB WORK.
AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE CARE AND WE SEE THEM AND WE LOVE THEM.
YOU ARE IMPORTANT, AND I DON'T THINK THEY KNOW THAT ENOUGH.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONER I'D LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THE STAFF COME BACK WITH A REPORT ON OUR OPEN DITCHES AND CULVERTS. THE STATUS OF THESE THINGS IN THE CITY.
I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE WHEN I WAS CAMPAIGNING, CAMPAIGNED ON A BIKE.
DITCHES THAT ARE, THAT ARE CLOGGED OR ARE NOT OPERATING AS WELL AS THEY SHOULD.
SO AND WE ARE I FEEL LIKE IT'S A COMPANION IDEA ALONG WITH TRYING TO GET OUR COMMUNITY RATING.
PROBABLY BECAUSE I'M THE ROOKIE. I WAS THE GUY THAT SIGNED UP FOR HIM.
SO I'VE DONE FOR FOUR DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS.
I LEARNED A LOT. ONE OF THEM WAS MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER BLONDER MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE, BUT YOUR FOOT WAS HURT OR WHATEVER. SO BUT I'VE BEEN TO FLAGLER MODEL LAND LIGHTHOUSE, FULLER WOOD AND SPANISH QUARTER. AND THIS IS KIND OF WHERE I FEEL COMFORTABLE WALKING AROUND ON THE STREETS WITH PEOPLE.
I MEAN, I THINK IT'S MAYBE FROM MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DAYS WALKING AROUND AND TALKING TO PEOPLE, AND I REMEMBER HOW MUCH IT MEANT TO ME WHEN WE WOULD HAVE PEOPLE COME OVER AND WALK WITH US AND TALK WITH US.
SO I'VE BEEN TRYING TO CATALOG THEIR CONCERNS.
I MAKE A LIST OF NOTES. I OKAY IT WITH THEM, SEE IF THERE'S A CONSENSUS.
I TALKED TO CITY MANAGER ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT AND SEE, I CATALOGED THESE THINGS.
AND AS TIME COMES UP, I THINK GIVES ME A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CITY IS DOING.
AND I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL. AND SCOTT YORK'S BEEN A GREAT JOB OF ORGANIZING THIS.
YEAH, GREAT. VICE MAYOR. YEAH, I GET TO DO RAVENSWOOD ON WEDNESDAY.
I WAS JUST CHECKING. YEAH, YEAH. AND I'M HAPPY TO SAY THAT I CAN ACTUALLY WALK NOW.
SO WITH BOTH LEGS. SO LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.
THE CITY MANAGER AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT THIS MORNING ON THAT, AND WE HAD ANOTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT HE MIGHT HAVE TO CORRECT ME ON THE DATE, BUT THERE IS A A LOOMING DEADLINE THAT'S REALLY ONLY EIGHT YEARS AWAY.
I THINK IT'S 2023 JANUARY 1ST, 2023. OKAY. WHERE? NO, JANUARY 1ST, 2032. OH, IT'S NOT THAT SOON, BUT OKAY.
BUT IT'S 2032. BUT WE NEED TO START PLANNING NOW FOR THE FACT THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE LEGISLATED INTO NOT BEING ABLE TO DISCHARGE OUR WASTEWATER INTO A INTO AN OPEN WATER BASIN WHICH IS WHERE WE DO NOW, AND I'D THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME REALLY GOOD TECHNOLOGIES COMING TO BEAR.
I KNOW THE CITY STAFF HAS ALREADY STARTED LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVES.
BUT THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S SOME ALTERNATIVES THAT I THINK WE SHOULD START PUTTING INTO THE PIPELINE NOW AND OR GETTING A CONSULTANT TO HELP US WITH, BECAUSE THIS WILL BE A LONG PROCESS THAT WILL TAKE SOME TIME.
SO WE'RE PLANNING INTO THE FUTURE FOR SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR A LONG TIME.
THAT IS THAT WE WANT TO BE PROACTIVE ON. SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN I APOLOGIZE, BUT I'M GOING ON VACATION AND I WILL NOT BE HERE FOR THE NEXT MEETING ON JULY 14TH, BUT I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO THE MEETING ON JULY 28TH.
YEAH. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SMITH.
YEAH. I'M GLAD MRS. KALAIDI BROUGHT UP THE PARKING FEES.
I THINK I BROUGHT IT UP ONCE BEFORE. I THINK OUR PARKING FEES DO NEED A REVIEW ON THE AMOUNT.
THE $35 IS WORTH THE GAMBLE, AND SO I APPRECIATE HER BRINGING THAT BACK UP.
ABOUT THE SHORT TERMS I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THE SHORT TERM RENTAL.
[02:55:02]
FACEBOOK PAGE. JUST FOR FUN. AND I FOUND OUT THAT THEY'RE DISGRUNTLED BECAUSE THEIR BUSINESS IS WAY DOWN AND THEY'RE FOR SALE. AND THE ONE ON PARK AVENUE THAT I PASSED EVERY DAY.JUST PUT A SIGN UP TODAY. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE HOTELS THAT WE'VE ADDED AND THE REDUCTION IN SOME OF THE TOURISM WE'VE HAD LATELY HAS CAUSED SOME OF THEM TO SECOND THINK ABOUT THEIR INVESTMENTS AND THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK ON THE MARKET, HOPEFULLY FOR FULL TIME FOR RESIDENTS. AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT.
THE NUMBER ONE HOMELESS ISSUE THAT WE'VE DISCOVERED THAT'S ON THE RISE IS ELDERLY.
IT'S ELDERLY COUPLES WHO LOSE A SPOUSE AND THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE IN A HOME ANYMORE.
AND IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE OUGHT TO BE REALLY WATCHING OUT FOR.
THAT'S GREAT. WONDERFUL. SO FOR ME, I HAVE JUST A COUPLE THINGS.
IT RECEIVED A NUMBER TWO IN THE UNITED STATES FOR TICKET SALES OF VENUES LIKE THAT. SO THEY'RE AT THE TOP OF THEIR GAME, OBVIOUSLY.
SO I'D LIKE TO CONGRATULATE THEM. THEY'RE LOCATED WITHIN THE ANASTASIA STATE PARK, WHICH IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE. AND THEY RECENTLY RECEIVED A NUMBER TEN AWARD FOR THE BEST STATE PARK BEACH, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES BY USA TODAY STATE BEACH IN FLORIDA, IN FLORIDA.
SO ANOTHER AWARD WINNING. BUT THESE ARE TWO. THESE ARE TWO OF OUR GREAT ASSETS.
WE HAVE SO MANY. THE CITY IS BLESSED WITH MANY, MANY, MANY GREAT CULTURAL AND HISTORIC ASSETS, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSETS. AND I JUST WANTED TO CELEBRATE THOSE AT THIS MEETING AND MENTION THAT AND I'M GLAD THAT COMMISSIONER GARY HAS BROUGHT UP THE PARKING ON BRODY, BECAUSE IT IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR US.
THE THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM IS ESSENTIAL TO BE SUCCESSFUL, TO CREATE OUR MOBILITY PLANS THAT WE'VE MADE OVER THE LAST. WELL, EVER SINCE BEFORE I WAS A COMMISSIONER, I WAS ON THE PARKING AND TRAFFIC COMMITTEE WHEN WE PUT THE MASTER PLANNING TOGETHER ON THAT. AND THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PROGRAM HAS IT IS DIFFICULT TO EXECUTE.
AND A KEY PART OF IT IS THAT YOU GET THE PARTICIPATION THAT YOU NEED FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT.
BUT I'LL JUST SAY THIS. I HAVE A VERY STRONG POSITION ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO US TO CONTINUE WITH THOSE PROGRAMS. MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING ELSE. I DON'T KNOW, I WASN'T QUITE SURE, BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT REPORT.
WITH THAT SAID, WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.