6.a) PZB2026-0055 Lukaj & Oriola Aleksander - Applicant & Owner San Carlos Ave / PID #191930-0020 To approve the removal of significant trees within Conservation Overlay Zone 3.

[6.a) PZB2026-0055 Lukaj & Oriola Aleksander - Applicant & Owner San Carlos Ave / PID #191930-0020 To approve the removal of significant trees within Conservation Overlay Zone 3.]

APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS BE CONTINUED TO THE DECEMBER TO THE. THIS ONE ALSO TO THE JANUARY 5TH, 2027 MEETING. HOW DO I OPEN THIS UP? DO I JUST. ARE WE JUST

[00:10:06]

DISCUSSING THE CONTINUANCE? WELL, I THINK YOU'RE OPENING UP TO SEE IF YOU WILL GRANT THE CONTINUANCE OR NOT. I DO NOT KNOW IF THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT IN THE ROOM. I DON'T RECOGNIZE THEM. I DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE. I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF CAN SAY IF THEY'RE PRESENT OR NOT. OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT IN THE ROOM? HEARING UP TO US, OR ARE WE JUST APPROVING A MODIFIED AGENDA? WELL, LET'S JUST GO THROUGH THE PROCESS SO THEY'RE NOT PRESENT. I THINK THEIR NAME IS AND I HOPE I DON'T BUTCHER IT. LUCAS AND ORIOLA ALEXANDER, WHICH IS ON THE SAN MARCO AVENUE PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT? SAN CARLOS, SAN CARLOS AVENUE PROPERTY AND IT WOULD BE PCSB 2026-0055. SO AN APPLICANT CAN REQUEST A CONTINUANCE. THEY ARE NOT LEGALLY ENTITLED TO THE CONTINUANCE ONCE THE ITEM HAS BEEN NOTICED, AND IN THIS CASE IT WAS NOTICED. I DON'T KNOW IF IT EVER GOT NOTICED, BUT IT WAS CONTINUED AT PRIOR HEARINGS, WHICH IS ALLOWED UNDER THE STATUTE. AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS WERE THERE WHEN IT GOT CONTINUED. AM I REMEMBERING ALL THE FACTS CORRECTLY? SO YOU DON'T HAVE A LEGAL PROHIBITION IN SAYING, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. WE WILL HOLD THE HEARING AS SCHEDULED. THEY ARE DEEMED UNDER NOTICE OF THE ITEM BEING ON THIS AGENDA. SO THAT'S THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK. I WOULD PAUSE AND SAY THAT HISTORICALLY, THE PCB AND HARB AND OTHER BOARDS HAVE BEEN FAIRLY LENIENT IN TERMS OF GRANTING CONTINUANCES, ESPECIALLY IF SOMEONE ISN'T PREPARED TO BRING FORTH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY THE BOARD AT A PRIOR MEETING. SO THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD BE IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE DECIDING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HAVING THE HEARING TODAY OR GRANTING THE CONTINUANCE, WHICH IS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, OR AT LEAST THE THE CHAIR HAS PLACED THE ISSUE ON THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION. CORRECT. SO WE'VE OPENED IT UP. SO I WOULD TREAT IT LIKE A REGULAR. APPLICATION.

OR CAN WE JUST DISCUSS THE CONTINUANCE. MEANING USUALLY WE WOULD FOLLOW GET THE STAFF REPORT. WE DO PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT. YOUR FIRST DECISION IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE GOING TO GRANT THE CONTINUANCE OR NOT. SO YOU'RE NOT ARGUING THE SUBSTANCE OF IT. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. SO IN FRONT OF US, AT THE POINT IN FRONT OF THE BOARD IS THE CONTINUANCE. AND MR. BLOW, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I MY POINT IS THAT WE WE HAD A HEARING. THE FIRST HEARING WAS JULY THE 7TH, AND WE. THE RESULT OF THAT. AND I INVITE YOU GUYS TO REVIEW THE MINUTES, ESPECIALLY A NEW BOARD MEMBER WHO WASN'T HERE. BASICALLY, WE SUGGESTED THAT THEY THEY RETURN WITH A MODIFIED APPLICATION, IF I CAN SAY THAT. AND SO THEN WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT WAS IN JULY. IT WAS WE. YEAH. JULY THE 7TH. AND AND THE RESULT OF THAT HEARING WAS THEY WE CONTINUED IT OR THEY REQUESTED TO CONTINUE TO AUGUST. AND THEN WE, THEY CAME BACK IN SEPTEMBER. AND WE KIND OF WENT THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS OF. NOW WHAT HAPPENED IN SEPTEMBER. AND I DON'T KNOW, MISS LOPEZ MAY STOP ME DEAD RIGHT NOW, BUT THE THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR APPEARED AND TESTIFIED, WHICH WAS VERY INTERESTING. SO THE RESULT OF THE SEPTEMBER WAS WE CONTINUED IT, I GUESS, TO TODAY. AND SO. AND ONCE AGAIN IN SEPTEMBER, WE MADE THE SUGGESTION TO COME BACK WITH A MODIFIED APPLICATION BECAUSE. STOP ME IF I GO TOO FAR, BECAUSE THE BOARD BASICALLY SAID, WE THINK YOU CAN SAVE THE TWO TREES, BUT IF YOU RELOCATE THE HOUSE AND. AND WE INDICATED AT THAT TIME THAT WE WOULD ENTERTAIN VARIANCES TO SIDE YARD, REAR YARD IN ORDER TO, TO SAVE THE TWO TREES. SO ANYWAY, THE RESULT WAS IT WENT BACK TO IT WAS CONTINUED AGAIN TO TODAY BECAUSE I THINK THEY ASKED FOR 60 DAYS AND NOW THEY'RE NOT HERE. AND I GUESS AT SOME POINT TO ME, I MEAN, BASICALLY I IN SOME WAYS I THINK WE OUGHT TO COLLECT ANOTHER FEE FROM THEM. I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE PAPERWORK AND STAFF TIME TO CONTINUE TO, TO. PUT THESE PACKAGES TOGETHER. PLUS

[00:15:08]

YOU HAVE OUR TIME AND ALSO THE NOTICE TO THE RESIDENCES. YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S NOW TIME TO SEND OUT THE NOTICES AGAIN BECAUSE SO MUCH TIME HAS GONE BY. ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS. I MEAN, I HATE TO SAY IT. I MEAN, I LOVE SAINT AUGUSTINE, I LOVE OUR STAFF BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE SO EASY OR I SHOULDN'T SAY EASY TO WORK WITH, BUT YOU'RE REASONABLE.

OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT I CROSS PATHS WITH ARE NOT SO UNDERSTANDING. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY POINT. DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, MR. BLOW? WELL, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO DENY THE CONTINUANCE. AND NOW, I GUESS IF WE DO THAT, WE HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING. THEY'RE NOT HERE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S UP TO MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS ON HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED. WAS THE REASON OFFERED FOR THE FOR THE CONTINUANCE. LIKE THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING NEW PLANS AND THE ARCHITECT HASN'T FINALIZED THEM YET. NO, THEY JUST ASKED TO BE CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY 27TH MEETING. THEY DID SAY WE COULD REACH OUT FOR EMAIL OR CALL. RIGHT BEFORE I ACCEPT MOTION. ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? JENNIFER JUST REMINDED ME THAT WE GOT A.

AND I FORGOT ABOUT THIS. WE GOT A PRIOR EMAIL IN THE MORNING FROM SOMEONE THAT WASN'T THE HOMEOWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER SAYING NO ONE WOULD BE AVAILABLE. HOWEVER, THERE. WE DIDN'T HAVE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION FOR THAT PERSON. SO, YOU KNOW, WE SAID WE NEED TO HEAR FROM EITHER THE APPLICANT OR THE PROPERTY OWNER. AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER SENT THE EMAIL. SO THE ORIGINAL EMAIL, ASSUMING THEY REPRESENTED THE PROPERTY OWNER, SAID THAT NO ONE WOULD BE AVAILABLE. TODAY'S MEETING. THANK YOU. I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES. ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH OPINIONS ON THIS? YEAH. SO I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE, DO WE HAVE ANY PATTERN OF DOING THIS BEFORE WHERE WE HAVE CONTINUATIONS PILING UP, IF YOU WILL, AND THEN BASICALLY MAKING A DECISION, AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO RESTART THIS PROCESS BECAUSE WE'RE JUST KICKING THE CAN, SO TO SPEAK. WELL, WHAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST, JUST SINCE I SIT ON ALL THE BOARDS IS VERY, VERY RARELY. BUT WE HAVE HAD ONE INSTANCE THAT I CAN RECALL WHERE THE DECISION WAS, OR MAYBE TWO INSTANCES WHERE THE DECISION WAS ULTIMATELY TO HEAR THE MATTER. AND IN THOSE CASES, THE APPLICATION WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SO THE APPLICANT COULD REAPPLY WHEN THEY GOT ALL THEIR STUFF TOGETHER, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO FILE AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FEE AND THE PROPERTY WOULD GET RE NOTICED BASED ON THIS NEW MODIFIED PLAN. SO THAT I'VE SEEN AND AGAIN, THE REASON THAT WE'RE SO CAUTIOUS ABOUT IT IS BECAUSE YOU'RE SITTING AS A QUASI JUDICIAL BOARD. SO IN A WAY, YOU'RE SORT OF JUDGES IN THE CASE. AND IF YOU GO TO COURT, THERE ARE CONSTANTLY CONTINUANCES WHEN PARTIES CAN'T BE PRESENT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER, OR THEIR ATTORNEYS CAN'T BE PRESENT. BUT THAT'S BEEN SOMEWHAT THE MIDDLE GROUND.

IF A BOARD, AT LEAST IN PRIOR SITUATIONS, IF THE BOARD FELT, OKAY, WELL, WE WANT TO HOLD THE HEARING EVEN THOUGH THEY'VE ASKED FOR CONTINUANCE, WE'VE WARNED PEOPLE TO CONTINUE ASKING FOR CONTINUANCE IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY GRANTED. BUT WHAT THE BOARD CAN DO IS TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION THEY HAVE BEFORE THEM AND SAY, OKAY, BUT IT'LL BE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT A FULL YEAR TO REAPPLY. IF YOU MANAGE TO GET ALL THE BITS AND PIECES YOU NEEDED AND PERHAPS MODIFY YOUR APPLICATION. SO DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE? SOMEWHAT DOESN'T DOESN'T ANSWER. LIKE IF WE HAVE ANY SORT OF RULE OF THUMB, IF YOU WILL, OF LIKE HOW THIS GOES, WHICH IS FINE. WELL, THE RULE OF THUMB IS LENIENCY IN TERMS OF ALLOWING PEOPLE TO HAVE CONTINUANCES, OTHER BOARDS. I'LL USE HARB, FOR EXAMPLE, SO IT'S NOT SPECIFIC TO YOUR BOARD. OFTENTIMES THERE'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH IN TERMS OF LOOK AT THIS REDESIGN, LOOK AT THIS ASPECT. SO THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT BASED ON THE FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD, SOMETIMES IT'LL BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE TO TURN AROUND THE CHANGES, A COMPLETE HISTORIC REDESIGN OR WHATEVER WITHIN THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO RESUBMIT. RIGHT. AND SO THAT BOARD TENDS TO BE MORE LENIENT IN TERMS OF ALLOWING REPETITIVE

[00:20:06]

CONTINUANCES. BUT EVEN WITH THAT BOARD, AGAIN, THE SCENARIO TYPICALLY PLAYS OUT TO IF THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY MOVEMENT BY THE APPLICANT, IT'S A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE SO THAT THEY CAN REAPPLY IF AND WHEN THEY GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'VE GELLED A CONCEPT AND HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTS READY AND THEY'RE NOT PREJUDICED, THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO WAIT A WHOLE CALENDAR YEAR BEFORE THEY CAN REAPPLY. SO IT ADDRESSES THE ISSUE OF NEIGHBORS GET A NEW NOTICE, YOU GET A BRAND NEW APPLICATION WITH ALL THE BITS AND PIECES. SO IT'S A MIDPOINT. IF I COULD SAY HISTORIC, MY HISTORICAL VIEW ON THIS BOARD OF WATCHING THEM FOR YEARS IS MOST OF THE TIME IT'S CONTINUED. UNLESS THEY COME BACK AND DON'T BRING THE INFORMATION THAT WE KEEP ASKING FOR. IN THIS CASE, I CAN SAY I SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THEM TO COME UP WITH OPTIONS.

AND I CAN TELL YOU NOT BEING A BUILDER, BUT KNOWING THE PROCESS CAN SOMETIMES TAKE A WHILE TO GET AN ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER TO REDRAW. YES. MR. CHAIR, HOW ABOUT THIS IS I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE IT TO JANUARY THE 5TH, 2027, SUBJECT TO THE OF THE STAFF. STAFF'S WILLING TO DO THIS TO INCLUDE THE MINUTES FROM JULY THE 7TH AND SEPTEMBER 1ST, SO THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT IT AGAIN, OR ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC LOOKS AT IT AGAIN, THEY CAN SEE THE HISTORY OF THIS APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE'S, IN MY OPINION, SOME GOOD TESTIMONY IN THOSE PRIOR TWO HEARINGS, AS WELL AS IT DOCUMENTS WHAT WE'VE BEEN SUGGESTING TO THE APPLICANT OVER THE COURSE OF SIX MONTHS OR SO. OKAY. I'LL ACCEPT THAT MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. CARL. YES, YES. ZACHARY TUCKER. YES. WILLIAM TUNSTALL. YES. DAN KELLY. YES.

CHARLES PAPPAS. YES. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS PCB 2026-0093 PELICAN REEF DRIVE. THIS IS

[6.b) PZB2026-0093 Kevin Marks - Applicant c/o Shoreland Home Builders Michael Meyer - Owner Pelican Reef Dr / PID #158573-0100 To approve the removal of significant trees within Conservation Overlay Zones 2 & 3. ]

CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 6TH. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND YOU'LL BE SWORN IN. AFTER THAT, WE'LL HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. IF YOU'RE BOTH GOING TO SPEAK, GO AHEAD AND BOTH OF YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. KEVIN MARKS ADDRESS 794 CYPRESS ROAD, SAINT AUGUSTINE. YEAH. AND I'M MIKE MEYER. I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER.

OKAY. NOW SHE'LL SWEAR YOU IN. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO, I DO. OKAY, DO WE HAVE STAFF REPORT ON THIS CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THIS IS REQUEST FOR CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DEVELOPMENT TO REMOVE SIGNIFICANT TREES WITHIN CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONES TWO AND THREE AT PELICAN REEF DRIVE. THE APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION WOULD ALLOW FOR THE REMOVAL OF 26 TREES, 15 OF WHICH ARE SIGNIFICANT TREES, WHILE RETAINING EIGHT TREES, THREE OF WHICH ARE SIGNIFICANT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE NEWLY SUBMITTED APPLICATION PROPOSES TO RETAIN TWO ADDITIONAL TREES, WHICH IS TREE NUMBER ONE, A RED CEDAR AND TREE NUMBER SIX, WHICH IS AN OAK TREE. PELICAN REEF HAS REQUIREMENTS THAT EACH LOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIN TEN CEDAR TREES AT ALL TIMES ON EACH LOT. THE APPLICANTS TREE MITIGATION PLAN WILL RETAIN SEVEN CEDAR TREES AND PLANT FOUR WITH A POSSIBLE FIFTH. HOWEVER, OF THE SEVEN RETAINED CEDAR TREES, FOUR OF THEM WERE DECLARED DEAD BY THE ARBORIST REPORT. SO THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO RE PLANT OR RETAIN SEVEN ADDITIONAL CEDAR TREES IN ORDER TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT, AND THEN COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 25. SECTION 25-53D STATES THAT THE PRESERVATION REMOVAL OF TREES ON SITE MAY REQUIRE TREE MITIGATION. IF A POSITIVE NUMBER TREE CREDITS IS NOT ACHIEVED, ADDING IN THE SEVEN REQUIRED CEDAR TREES TO BE PLANTED. THE TREE MITIGATION PLAN IS STILL -7.5, SO THEY'LL NEED TO PLANT ADDITIONAL TREES TO GET TO A POSITIVE NUMBER OF TREE CREDITS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 25 REVIEW OF SECTION 1129 IS RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONES TWO AND THREE.

THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR US OR ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? WELL, WE WANTED TO DISCUSS THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED. ALSO SHARE SOME

[00:25:03]

ADDITIONAL PHOTOS AND THEN FOLLOW UP WITH A SITE VISIT THAT WE HAD OUT THERE WITH ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AS WELL. JUST TO CONTINUE THAT, GO RIGHT AHEAD. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. SURE, SURE. WE, AFTER LAST MONTH'S MEETING, WENT BACK AND REVIEWED THE SITE PLAN, REVIEWED THE ARBORIST REPORT. I CONSULTED WITH THE ARBORIST THERE AS WELL, JUST TRYING TO FURTHER IDENTIFY WHAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE IN THIS PLAN AND FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT AS WELL FOR SOME ADDED CLARITY TO HAVE ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD JOIN US OUT THERE TO WALK THE SITE, DISCUSS THE PLAN AND ANY POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS. CARL WAS KIND ENOUGH TO MEET US OUT THERE LAST WEEK AND DO SO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I THINK WE HAD A PRODUCTIVE MEETING. WHAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY. AS JENNIFER MENTIONED, THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL TREES THAT WERE MARKED TO SAVE, AND WE ALSO IDENTIFIED ANOTHER OAK WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE THIS PAST WEEK THAT WE THINK COULD BE SAVED AS WELL. LAST MONTH, THE CONVERSATION SEEMED TO CENTER AROUND THE DRIVE, WHICH WE HAD DEEMED WAS AN IMPORTANT ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL AND SERVES AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION TO THIS PROPERTY. SO GOING BACK AND REVIEWING THE TREES IN QUESTION IN THE FRONT ENTRY THERE, WE'VE GOT TREES NINE, TEN AND 11, AND THE ARBORIST REPORT ACTUALLY SHOWS THAT NINE AND TEN, UNFORTUNATELY, ARE DEAD. 11 IS A SIGNIFICANT OAK, 19 INCH OAK THAT MR. MEYER AND HIS FAMILY WOULD LIKE TO SAVE. AND WE AGREED THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE WORKED AROUND TO SAVE. FORTUNATELY ENOUGH, THE DESIGN OF THE HOME IS A STEM WALL FOUNDATION THAT ALLOWS US TO PLAY WITH THE ELEVATION IN THAT AREA A LITTLE BIT AND MODIFY THE DRIVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, AND THEN THE TWO CEDARS TO THE FRONT, MOVING A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THE DRIVE TO THIS EXIT POINT HERE, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT CLUSTER THERE THAT WAS A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION LAST TIME. IN REVIEWING THOSE AGAINST THE ARBORIST REPORT, EVERYTHING THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ON THE PLAN ESSENTIALLY REPRESENTS DEAD TREES. SO WE DO HAVE 50 TREES ON THE ARBORIST REPORT. THREE OF THOSE ARE LISTED AS GOOD. EVERYTHING ELSE ON THE PLAN IS EITHER DEAD OR IN POOR AND DECLINING HEALTH. OH, SORRY. SHORT THE. SO THE CLUSTERING QUESTION AT THE END OF THE DRIVE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. THOSE. THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHT INDICATES TREES THAT ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY DEAD ON THE PROPERTY. AND AGAIN, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW MORE THAT ARE, ACCORDING TO THE ARBORIST REPORT, IN POOR OR DECLINING HEALTH. SO WITHIN THAT CLUSTER UP THERE WE'VE GOT MOSTLY DEAD TREES AS WELL AS ONE SMALLER OAK THAT WAS AS A LAUREL, AND IT WAS UNDER THE SIZE REQUIREMENT FOR PRESERVATION. HOWEVER, TO THE LEFT OF THAT DRIVE, WE'VE IDENTIFIED A FEW MORE TREES THAT WERE WERE ABLE TO SAVE AS WELL. ONE THING I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, I HAVE SOME PHOTOS TO SHARE AS WELL. WE WENT OUT LAST WEEK AROUND THE KING TIDES AND THIS LIKE SO MANY OF THE LOTS DOWN THERE IN THIS FINAL PHASE OF PELICAN REEF, HAVE BEEN SUBJECT. WE'VE HAD THE CONVERSATION BEFORE ABOUT SORT OF THE BRACKISH FLOOD WATERS. THERE ARE ELEVATION BENCHMARKS ON THIS SITE PLAN, LIKE THE CENTER OF THE HOUSE, FOR INSTANCE, RIGHT NOW IS AT A 4.1 ELEVATION. THE KING TIDES CAME IN CLOSE TO SIX FEET LAST WEEK. SO THE PHOTOS THAT WE'VE WE'VE TAKEN OF THE PROPERTY, OOPS, ACTUALLY SHOW THIS WAS RELATIVELY CLEAR DAY, NO RAIN, BUT IT REALLY SHOWS THE IMPACT OF THE CANAL BEHIND THAT HOUSE AND THE TIDAL FLOODING THAT THESE LOTS HAVE. SO A LOT OF THE TREES ARE QUITE FREQUENTLY SUBJECTED TO THESE BRACKISH WATERS, WHICH IS THE REASON WE'VE GOT 16 OF THE 50 TREES ARE DEAD. SO THE PLAN HERE, IN ADDITION TO SOME PRESERVATION UP FRONT, IS TO ELEVATE A PORTION OF THE LOT HERE, JUST ENOUGH TO GET PROPER DRAINAGE AND THEN ENSURE THAT THE SAPLINGS THAT WE DO PUT BACK IN DON'T FALL VICTIM TO THE SAME FLOODING ISSUES THAT WE HAVE BACK THERE AS WELL. AND I DON'T RECALL, I THINK THE WE WERE AT A LOWER TIDE WHEN CARL CAME OUT AND DID HIS SITE VISIT, BUT HE WAS ABLE TO KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF, OF SORT OF THE EFFECTS OF THAT. THIS PHOTO IN PARTICULAR WE HAVE, WITH THE CITY'S PERMISSION INSTALLED A, SOME EROSION CONTROL OR SILT FENCE ALONG THE CONSERVATION SETBACK LINE ON THE BACK OF THIS PROPERTY. AND YOU CAN JUST SEE THE TOP EDGE OF THE FENCE THERE. SO THERE WAS ABOUT TWO FEET OF WATER ON THIS PROPERTY AT THAT TIME. SO OUR PLAN PROVIDES FOR, AGAIN, SOME SORT OF PRESERVATION OF SOME MORE OF THE TREES AND THEN INTRODUCING A REPLACEMENT NOT ONLY OF THE CEDARS, BUT TO REACH OR SURPASS THE NECESSARY TREE CREDITS FOR THIS PLAN. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING

[00:30:06]

TO ADD? NO, I'M JUST THE HOMEOWNER. AND REALLY, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. I WAS HERE YESTERDAY OR LAST MONTH AND I'M JUST A HOMEOWNER, RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR MY FAMILY AND COMPLY WITH ALL THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY IN PARTICULAR. I CARE ABOUT THESE OAKS AND CEDARS JUST AS MUCH AS ANYBODY ELSE. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS LOT IS NOT THAT BIG, AND WHEN YOU PUT A HOUSE ON THE LOT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME OF THE TREES CUT DOWN. SO I'M NOT HERE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE ANY OTHER STATEMENT EXCEPT FOR I DO CARE ABOUT SAINT AUGUSTINE. I DO CARE ABOUT THE TREES, JUST LIKE THE BOARD DOES. THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANY EX PARTE FROM THE BOARD? I'LL START RIGHT TO LEFT. NONE VISITED THE SITE. AS I SAID, I MET WITH THOSE FOLKS AT THE SITE. THEY ACTUALLY WANTED MIKE DAVIS, BUT MIKE COULDN'T GO SO THEY TOOK THE SECOND. NONE FOR ME. NONE. NONE. WE'RE AT SIX B. SINCE THIS IS CONTINUED, THERE WERE NO NEW LETTERS SENT OUT AND NO NEW RESPONSES. AT THIS POINT, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD AGAIN. I'LL START RIGHT TO LEFT. MISS JONES, I THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES TO BE REMOVED. I'M GOING TO WAIT TILL EVERYBODY ELSE IS LIKE KIND OF PROCESS THIS. I GOT A THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE STAFF, BUT FOR THE CEDAR SAPLING SIZE IS THERE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE CRITERIA IS ON THAT AS FAR AS THE MINIMUM SAPLING SIZE? I BELIEVE IT'S. TWO IT'S IN CHAPTER 25. I'D HAVE TO LOOK IT UP REAL FAST. IT'S FOR CHAPTER 25. THERE'S SOME CRITERIA ON THE QUALITY OF ANY LANDSCAPING YOU USE, WHETHER IT BE TREES OR SHRUBS. BUT I DO BELIEVE IT'S TWO. ITS CALIPER PROBABLY, BUT TWO INCHES. GIRL. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AS AS THE APPLICANT SAID, WE, WE MET OUT THERE ON SITE AND, AND THEY BASICALLY EXPRESSED THEIR, THEIR CHALLENGE WITH THE ELEVATION OF THE SITE. AND BECAUSE THAT I WAS THINKING MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOME TREE MITIGATION THERE TOWARDS THE SOUTH, BUT OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT AT A KING TIDE. IT'S GOT A COUPLE FEET OF WATER, SALT WATER OVER IT. SO. BASICALLY, I WAS IMPRESSED THAT THAT MR. MARKS IS HE'D LIKE TO SAVE THAT 19 INCH OAK, WHICH IS A PRETTY DECENT TREE. IT'S PROBABLY IT'S UP THERE IN THE RIGHT NOW. IT SHOWS IN THE DRIVEWAY CLOSE TO THE ENTRANCE AND THE OF ALL THE TREES OUT THERE, IT'S PROBABLY THE HEALTHIEST LOOKING ONE. AND SO HE. I GUESS THAT'S THE MODIFICATION FROM THE INITIAL APPLICATION WAS TO SAVE THAT ONE. YEAH, THAT. AND THEN WE IDENTIFIED A COUPLE MORE TREES ALONG THE DRIVEWAY HERE OUTSIDE OF THIS CLUSTER OF DEAD TREES. TREES NUMBER ONE. AND I BELIEVE 6 OR 3 ON THE. YEAH, I THINK ONE, THE 13 INCH OAK AND THE 11 INCH CEDAR. WE FELT THAT SHIFTING THE DRIVEWAY SLIGHTLY, THOSE WOULD BE SAFE. SO THERE WERE THREE ADDITIONAL WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY. SO. YOU KNOW, PELICAN REEF AND YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT. IT'S KIND OF A CHALLENGE IN THERE IN THAT THE LOTS ARE LOW. YOU'RE REQUIRED TO GET TO A FINISHED FLOOR OF WHAT, NINE, NINE MINIMUM NINE. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE LOOKING AT FOUR AND FIVE EXISTING ELEVATIONS. SO YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO YOU GOT TO GET THE PAD UP FOR THE FOR THE HOUSE. SO WE ALSO DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, TREE WELLS. I MEAN, IF THAT, THAT WILL, THAT MIGHT BE A, I MEAN, COME INTO PLAY.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, IS MR. MARKS, HE WANTS TO SAVE THAT OAK TREE THERE AT THE FRONT DOOR. AND YOU KNOW, THAT SHOWS MOVEMENT ON, ON THEIR PART TO TRY TO SAVE AS MANY TREES AS

[00:35:01]

POSSIBLE. SO. THAT TREE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S ACTUALLY KIND OF LEANING TOWARDS THE HOUSE. SO WHEN I WAS OUT THERE, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH THEY COULD PRUNE OFF OF IT WITHOUT DAMAGING THE TREE. SO ALL IN ALL, I THINK, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THEY, THEY, THEY, THEY, YOU KNOW, THE, THE HOUSE THEY WANT TO BUILD IS COMPARABLE TO THE OTHER HOUSES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO. AND WE'VE APPROVED OTHER APPLICATIONS SIMILAR TO THIS.

SO ALL IN ALL, I'M, I GUESS THE MAIN THING IS I WASN'T, YOU KNOW, I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THEY WANTED TO SAVE SOME OF THOSE TREES THAT WERE INITIALLY IMPACTED. BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS WHOLE AREA AT SOME POINT IS GOING TO BE UNDERWATER. SO, I MEAN, AS THE KING TIDE HAS SHOWED YOU, YOU'RE AWARE OF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING INTO AND WHERE YOU'RE BUILDING, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU BRING THE ELEVATION OF THAT HOUSE UP, THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE UNDERWATER. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE'VE TREATED THIS AREA A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY. KNOWING OF THAT SALTWATER INTRUSION IS GOING TO KILL MOST OF THE TREES THERE AS WE WE SAVE THEM. WE HOPE THE LARGER TREES LIKE THAT TREE NUMBER 11, THE 190 WOULD SURVIVE AS IT HAS SURVIVED THROUGH THIS. MY ONLY CONCERN IS TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE ACTUALLY MEET THE NUMBER OF CEDARS PLANTED AND WE HAVE THE CORRECT CREDITS DRAWN IN. AS MUCH AS I HATE TO SEE THE AREA DEVELOPED BECAUSE IT MAKES FUTURE GENERATION ISSUES, IT IS YOUR PROPERTY AND IT IS. IT IS YOUR CHOICE. I CAN'T STOP IT BY SAVING THE TREES BECAUSE NATURE'S GOING TO KILL THOSE TREES. YOUR PICTURES SHOW THAT WITH THE SALTWATER INTRUSION. SO. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. MISS KELLY, YOU MENTIONED THAT IN YOUR SPEECH THAT THE BRACKISH WATER TREES NEED TO BE REMOVED. I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES AROUND HERE THAT ARE IN OR NEAR BRACKISH WATER. WHY WOULD THOSE SPECIFIC TREES HAVE TO BE REMOVED IF THAT CAN HELP WITH OR FLOODING IN THAT AREA? WELL, THE ONES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW, YOU CAN SEE A LARGE PORTION OF THOSE ARE CLOSER TO THE CONSERVATION AREA. THE WAY THE ARBORIST EXPLAINED IS WE SEE MORE OF THE DEAD TREES CLOSER TO THE WATER AS, AS HE DESCRIBED IT TO US, AS A RESULT OF THOSE WATERS, THEY SEEM TO AFFECT THAT WATER SEEMS TO AFFECT THE CEDARS WORSE THAN IT DOES THE OAKS WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN THE LOWER CORNER HERE WE HAVE AN OAK THAT IS IN THAT LOW ELEVATION BUT IS FAIRLY HEALTHY. SO IT'S ONE OF THREE TREES ON THE PROPERTY THAT WERE ACTUALLY CONSIDERED TO BE HEALTHY. SO A LOT OF THE STUFF WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME OR IMMEDIATELY OUTSIDE EITHER ARE AFFECTED BY THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME OR HAVE ALREADY BEEN KILLED OFF. BUT AGAIN, REALLY JUST INFORMATION WE'RE GETTING FROM THE ARBORIST AND A LOT OF IT IS, IS THIS LOW ELEVATION CEDARS BEING REALLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO THAT, TO THAT SALT WATER. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME, MR. TUCKER. YEAH. SO THERE ARE THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE LAST LAST TIME ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIRES THE TO DRIVEWAY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D CALL IT NOT AN HOA REQUIREMENT, BUT ONE THING TOPIC OF CONVERSATION WHEN KARL WAS OUT IS THIS IS KIND OF AN INTERESTING LITTLE SECTION.

THIS FINAL PHASE OF PELICAN REEF IS JUST BEYOND THE MEYERS LOT AS A DEAD END, AND IT IS ESSENTIALLY A LEGAL, NONCONFORMING DEAD END. THERE'S NO CUL DE SAC THERE. THERE'S NO EASY ROUNDABOUT. THE WAY THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS SET UP AS WELL WOULD REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT OF AN AWKWARD TRANSITION OUT OF THE DRIVE EACH TIME. SO THE ROUNDABOUT IS MORE THAN JUST SORT OF ESTHETICS FOR THE HOME. IT SERVES AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION, AND THAT'S WHY SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES HAVE THAT AS WELL. IT'S JUST FOR EASE OF NAVIGATION ON AND OFF THE PROPERTY. AND I CAN APPRECIATE THAT IT'S ESTHETICALLY PLEASING. IT IS.

JUST CURIOUS. SURE, SURE. YEAH. IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT IT'S AN ACTUAL REQUIREMENT FOR THAT PHASE, BUT DEFINITELY SEEMS TO BE A PREFERENCE. WE'RE DOING IT ACROSS THE STREET. WE'RE DEVELOPING A 2001 PELICAN REEF RIGHT NOW, AND THAT'S BEEN APPROVED FOR A ROUNDABOUT DRIVE.

AND THEN LOT NUMBER TWO AS WELL, ACROSS THE STREET HAS THE SAME DETAIL TO IT. SO THE OTHER THING YOU KNOW ABOUT THE ELEVATIONS, YOU'RE SHOWING THE FINISHED FLOOR. WELL YOU'RE NOT SHOWING THE FINISHED THE CURRENT ELEVATION AT 4.1. YES. BUT FINISHED FLOOR WOULD HAVE

[00:40:03]

TO BE AT LEAST NINE. HAS TO BE AT LEAST NINE. AND WE'RE GOING TO GO SLIGHTLY HIGHER BECAUSE IT'S A STEM WALL FOUNDATION. WE CAN BRING THAT UP OUT OF THE GROUND TO ACHIEVE A HIGHER ELEVATION AND TRY TO MAINTAIN MORE OF THE NATURAL GRADE, ESPECIALLY AROUND THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AS WE'RE WHERE THAT OAK IS AS WELL. WE WANT TO BRING IN JUST ENOUGH FILL TO GET PROPER DRAINAGE, AND THEN TO ALSO PROTECT THE CEDARS ALONG THIS PROPERTY LINE THAT WE'VE PROPOSED PLANTING. WE'VE ALSO GOT ANOTHER ONE SHOWN UP FRONT THERE AS WELL, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE PROTECTED SO THEY DON'T KIND OF HAVE THE SAME FATE AS THE EXISTING TREES. DO YOU ANTICIPATE HAVING TO CHANGE THE SITE PLAN BASED ON THE FACT? NO, I THINK THE ONE THING THAT WAS THAT WAS COMMENT THAT CAME UP WAS THAT WE MAY BE SHY IN A COUPLE TREE CREDITS. SO OF COURSE, WHEN WE COME IN FOR THE FORMAL PLAN SUBMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE LANDSCAPE PLAN INCLUDES POSITIVE TREE CREDITS IN ADDITION TO THE MINIMUM TEN CEDARS ON THERE. AND YEAH, JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON, ON MY HANDOUT THAT I'M SHOWING THE TREE NUMBER 11. YES. SO WE DID. YEAH.

AND THIS WAS SUBMITTED THE COPY THAT YOU HAVE AS A PLAN. COPY THAT I BROUGHT IN RIGHT BEFORE MEETING WITH CARL. AND THAT WAS DURING THAT SITE ABLE TO IDENTIFY NUMBER 11 AND SORT OF RESHAPE. WE BROUGHT THAT ALONG TODAY JUST FOR SOME CLARITY ON THAT AS WELL. BUT THAT WAS DETERMINED AFTER THAT RECENT SITE VISIT. AND THE OTHER THING WOULD BE THAT IT'S LISTED AS 20IN ON THE I'M SORRY. YEAH, SORRY ABOUT THAT. THE OTHER POINT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT ON YOUR TREE REPORT, YOU'RE CALLING IT 20IN. AND ON THE SITE PLAN, YOU'RE CALLING IT 19. IT SHOULD BE. IS THAT ON THE ARBORIST REPORT OR IS IT ON ON THE MUST JUST BE A TYPO ON THE ARBORIST REPORT. YEAH. HE'S HE HAS SHOWN IT 20 THERE. I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. WHY THE TYPO? SIGNIFICANT DEFINITELY SIGNIFICANT TREE. AND SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT SEEING HOW I MEAN YOU'RE SAYING THE SITE PLAN IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE. BUT CURRENTLY THAT OAK IS WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY. SO THE DRIVE WILL WITH THE DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW, WE WILL SHIFT THE DRIVE. AND THAT WAS ONE THING WE LOOKED AT WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TWO SEATERS CLOSER TO THE ROAD THAT WE ARE PRESERVING, AND WE FELT IT WAS COMFORTABLE ROOM TO SHIFT THAT DRIVE, NOT ONLY BRING IT IN BETWEEN THOSE TREES, BUT THAT EXIT POINT THERE SHIFTED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY FROM THESE TREES AS WELL. AND IT'LL BE A PAVED SEMI-PERMEABLE DRIVE. SO THAT'LL HELP THE ROOT SYSTEM OF THESE TREES TOO. AND IN TERMS OF OUR ROLE AS A BOARD AND TRYING TO PROTECT THESE TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SAVED OR LEFT ALONE. I MEAN, IS THERE A PLAN FOR ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY PROTECTING THESE TREES, LIKE THEIR ROOT STRUCTURE WHEN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH CONSTRUCTION? SO WE DO PUT CONSTRUCTION NETTING SHOULD BE MAINTAINED AROUND THOSE TREES. WE DO PUT FLAGS ON THEM AS WELL.

JUST SO THE VARYING TRADES THAT ARE COMING IN UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE ARE BEING PROTECTED AS WELL. SO IT'S JUST KIND OF MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE SITE. I KNOW AS PART OF THE FINAL INSPECTIONS BEFORE WE GET THE CEO ON THESE HOMES AS WELL, THAT WE DO HAVE LOT GRADING, TREE INSPECTION AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED, HAVEN'T BEEN REMOVED FOR ANY REASON, AND THAT WE'VE PUT THE SAPLINGS BACK IN TO MEET OR SURPASS THOSE TREE CREDITS. SURE. THANK YOU. AND THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD FOR YOU, MR. BLOW, WAS THERE WAS DISCUSSION LAST TIME ABOUT SILT FENCING BEING SET UP. DID IT WHEN YOU WENT OUT THERE AND VISITED? WAS EVERYTHING LIKE, OH YEAH, YEAH. THEY HAD THE SILT FENCE IN PLACE. AND SO YEAH, I THINK THE, THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE WILL BE GETTING THE HOUSE IN THERE AND IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THE, THAT 19 INCH OR 20 INCH OAK SURVIVES. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WILL INVOLVE A TREE WELL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. WE DID BRIEFLY DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY, DEPENDING ON THE FINAL GRADE, THAT FORTUNATELY ENOUGH, AS YOU GET FURTHER OUT TO THE ROAD, WE GET TO A LITTLE HIGHER ELEVATION THERE. IT'S CLOSER TO SIX FEET AROUND THAT TREE. BUT BACKING UP TO THE HOUSE, WE DID DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING A PARTIAL WELL ON THE BACK SIDE OF THAT, JUST TO HOLD ANY DIRT BACK FROM AROUND THE STEM WALL OF THE HOME AND PROVIDE THAT. SO THE HOMEOWNER, I REALLY I REALLY WANT TO KEEP THAT TREE, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE WERE OVER THERE AND I WAS LIKE, THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL TREE WE NEED TO KEEP. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MODIFY THAT DRIVEWAY AND BRING IT IN. YEAH. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK THROUGH WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND THIS IS MY ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT IT.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M DOING IT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GOING FROM NINE FEET PLUS AND THEN YOU HAVE,

[00:45:05]

YOU KNOW, AT THE ROAD 4.5FT, I'M ALSO JUST WONDERING WHAT YOUR DRIVEWAY LOOKS LIKE GOING TO THE HOUSE AND WHAT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, SLOPES YOU MIGHT INTRODUCE ONTO THE SITE. BUT YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. SO ESPECIALLY THE AREA, THIS PORTION OF THE DRIVE COMING UP THE LEFT HERE, THAT AREA OF THE DRIVE ARE SIMILAR TO THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS THE HGTV HOUSE. THEY HAD A SIMILAR ISSUE TO ADDRESS WITH THE LOWER LOT GRADE AND THEN A GARAGE. THE GARAGE WILL ACTUALLY BE AT AN EIGHT FOOT ELEVATION, SO IT WON'T HAVE AS MUCH OF AN INCLINE IN, BUT IT'LL HAVE SORT OF A LANDSCAPE BLOCK TYPE RETAINING WALL TO PICTURE FRAME THE DRIVEWAY IN, SAME AS THEY DID NEXT DOOR ON LOT NINE. AND THAT ALLOWS SORT OF THE CHANGE IN ELEVATION.

SAME THING WITH THE HOUSE AS WELL. THE HOUSE WILL BE UP ON A STEM WALL, AND THAT WILL ALLOW US TO NOT HAVE TO BRING THE DIRT IN LIKE WE MIGHT ON A TRADITIONAL MONOLITHIC FOUNDATION. DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT POTENTIALLY IS? I'M SORRY, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT? WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A MAXIMAL HEIGHT. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF 35FT OFF OF AN EIGHT FOOT BASE ELEVATION THERE, BUT ON THE RETAINING WALLS, I'M NOT QUITE SURE. I KNOW WE DID HAVE A RECENT APPROVAL FOR AN EIGHT FOOT WALL ON THE BACK SIDE. THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN THE HOUSE, BOTH HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET IN THAT, BECAUSE IT'S A STEM WALL DESIGN, WILL BE ABLE TO KIND OF MAINTAIN, MUCH LIKE THE NEIGHBORING LOT NINE, A LOT MORE THE NATURAL GRADE, WITHOUT HAVING TO HAVE AN EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF INFILL. THANK YOU. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE TREE NUMBERS THAT DIFFER FROM THE PLAN WE HAVE THAT ARE BEING SAVED? I THINK THE ONLY ONES YOU SHOULD HAVE. THREE GREEN, I'M SORRY, FOUR GREEN DOTS UP IN THIS AREA ON YOUR PLAN. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS CURRENT. I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGED FROM THE COPY THAT YOU HAVE AFTER OUR MEETING WITH KARL WAS THE ADDITION OF NUMBER 11, THAT OAK.

AND THEN WE JUST WENT THROUGH FOR CONVERSATION SAKE AND HIGHLIGHTED THE TREES THAT WERE DEAD. OKAY. SO JUST NUMBER 11 IS YEAH, I THINK 11 IS THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. SO WHOEVER DOES A MOTION THAT'S GOING TO BE LISTED INTO IT. RIGHT. AND MR. TUNSTALL, YOU MISSED THE FUN WITH THE HGTV HOUSE NEXT DOOR. YEAH, YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. SO. ANY MORE COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? IF NOT, WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? WELL, GEE, I GUESS I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. PB 2026-0093.

CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE CONDITION THAT TREE NUMBER 11 IS TO BE SAVED AND. EVEN IF IT INVOLVES STEM WALL CONSTRUCTION, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD TO THAT MOTION THAT STAFF IS TO APPROVE THE FINAL LANDSCAPING PLAN PLAN SHOWING THAT TREE SAVED AND TO MAKE SURE THE TREE CREDITS ARE CORRECT. YES, SIR. I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. I BET STAFF HEARD THAT RIGHT, THAT WE THAT STAFF'S GOING TO APPROVE THE FINAL DRAWING TO MAKE SURE THAT.

YOU KNOW, 11 IS SAVED AND THAT THE TREE MITIGATION CREDITS ARE MEET OUR CODE AND TEN CEDARS.

RIGHT. WELL, AND OF COURSE, OBVIOUSLY THE TEN CEDAR TREES. ONE THING ABOUT LOOKING AT THIS LOT WHERE THEY'VE GOT THE TEN CEDAR TREES THEY'RE GOING TO PLANT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT THE LOT TO THE WEST IS KIND OF HIGH. AND IT'S GOT SOME PRETTY BIG LIVE OAK TREES ON IT. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE NATURAL GRADE IS FROM THE NORTHWEST TO THE SOUTHEAST. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S WHERE THEY WANT TO PLANT. THE CEDARS IS PROBABLY THE BEST SPOT. OKAY, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ANYBODY? DID YOU THERE WAS SOME CONCERN THAT ALL PRECAUTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PROTECT THE TREES WHILE BEING WHILE THE HOUSE IS BEING CONSTRUCTED, DO WE WANT TO ADD THAT INTO THE MOTION OR. WELL, DOES OUR CODE COVER THAT? AS FAR AS WE'VE EVEN GONE SO FAR ON THE HOUSE ON EAST PARK, WHERE WE HAD A ARBORIST SUPERVISE. WELL, I MEAN, WE COULD ACTUALLY, THAT'S NOT A BAD IDEA. IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO KEEP HIS. BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN ARBORIST NOW, RIGHT. KEEP THEM INVOLVED IN THE

[00:50:08]

PROCESS, PARTICULARLY WITH TREE NUMBER 11. THEY CAN GIVE US SOME GREAT GUIDANCE ON HOW TO PROTECT THOSE. OKAY. I'M COMFORTABLE WITHOUT IT BEING. I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP.

IT'S UP TO YOU. THAT'S UP TO YOU. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT. DO IT. YEAH. PUT IT IN THE MOTION. OKAY. AND ALSO THAT THE APPLICANT WILL MAINTAIN HIS CURRENT ARBORIST FOR CONSULTATION ON WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO SAVE TREE NUMBER 11. OKAY. MY SECOND STILL STANDS. IN THAT CASE, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. CARL. BLOW. YES. CHARLES PAPPAS. YES. ZACHARY TUCKER. YES. WILLIAM. TUNSTALL. YES. GENE. KELLY. NO. SUSAN. JOHN. YES. I APPRECIATE THE BLOW UP OF THE SURVEY WITH THE TREES. OH, IT WAS MUCH, MUCH EASIER. I HAD A LITTLE MORE. I KNOW LAST TIME MIKE COMMENTED THAT IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE OUT ON EIGHT AND A HALF BY 11. SO MOVING FORWARD ON OTHER PROJECTS, THANK YOU SUBMITTALS. THANK YOU. YOU'VE BEEN APPROVED.

AND JUST A REMINDER, IF YOU GET ANY FAKE INVOICES OR FAKE PERMIT FEES, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL HAPPENING HERE, BUT I SAW A DUVAL COUNTY COUNTY IS STILL GETTING THEM AND I SEE PEOPLE SHAKING THEIR HEAD. JUST BEWARE. I'VE BEEN WARNED. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

[6.c) PZB2026-0102 Ryan Carter - Applicant c/o Carter Environmental Services Toll Southeast LP Company Inc - Owner 1033 Pantano Dr To approve the removal of significant trees and tree canopy within Conservation Overlay Zone 3.]

OKAY. WHAT DO WE GOT COMING? NEXT UP IS ITEM 6CPZB2026-0102. AND I SEE MR. CARTER IS HERE.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU'LL BE SWORN IN. BRIAN CARTER, 36, BAYVIEW DRIVE, 42 MASTER'S DRIVE, SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO THANK YOU. AND WE'LL HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DEVELOPMENT FOR SIGNIFICANT TREE AND TREE CANOPY REMOVAL WITHIN CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE THREE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 1033 PANTANO DRIVE. THIS PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ON FEBRUARY 3RD, 2026, AND AUGUST 4TH, 2026 AND WAS APPROVED TO REMOVE 23 TREES TOTAL, INCLUDING FIVE SIGNIFICANT TREES. THE APPLICANT IS NOW ASKING TO REMOVE A TOTAL OF 40 TREES, INCLUDING TEN SIGNIFICANT TREES. THIS WOULD CAUSE A DEFICIT OF TREE CREDITS OF NEGATIVE ONE. THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO PLANT ENOUGH TREES TO SHOW A POSITIVE NUMBER OF TREE CREDITS. REVIEW OF SECTION 1129 IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PCB FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE THREE.

THANK YOU. AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? I WOULD THANK YOU AND THANKS FOR THAT SUMMARY. YEAH. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME WE'RE HERE FOR THIS LOT. AND THE REASON IS THE FIRST TIME THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE HOUSE FOOTPRINT. AND THAT WAS THEN APPROVED ON AUGUST 4TH. AND THEN THEY, ONE OF THE CITY INSPECTORS, I MENTIONED THIS LAST MEETING.

AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE, THIS IS IN MADEIRA, WHICH WAS APPROVED AS PART OF A PUD. AND THE CITY COMMISSION HAD PUT STRINGENT RULES ON TREE PROTECTIONS. AND SO EACH LOT OF THIS 56 LOT SUBDIVISION, WE HAVE TO COME IN FRONT OF THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL. AND FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME. SO IN ANY EVENT, WE, WE, THEY, THE BUILDER TOLL BROTHERS SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THIS LOT. AND THE CITY BUILDING INSPECTOR WENT OUT THERE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE TREES WERE TO BE REMOVED. AND THE INSPECTOR NOTICED MANY MORE TREES THAN WHAT WERE ON THE TREE SURVEY AND WERE APPROVED FOR REMOVAL. AND I MENTIONED THIS A LITTLE BIT LAST WEEK, BUT THIS IS THE PARTICULAR LOT WHERE THIS HAPPENED. THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE USED IN THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION WAS OUR ARBORIST WENT OUT AND IDENTIFIED EVERY TREE, EVERY TREE, FLAGGED EVERY TREE. THEN BEHIND THAT, THE SURVEYOR WAS SUPPOSED TO LOCATE EVERY TREE. THAT SURVEYOR WAS LET GO OF THAT SURVEY COMPANY AT THE END OF LAST YEAR. ACTUALLY THEY DON'T. THAT COMPANY DOESN'T EVEN DO SURVEYING ANYMORE. IN ANY EVENT, WE ASSUMED THAT THE PROFESSIONALLY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR LOCATED EVERY SINGLE TREE THAT WE IDENTIFIED ON OUR INVENTORY. SO AS WE'VE BEEN DOING THESE, WE USE THE TREE SURVEY AS OUR BASE FILE FOR EACH LOT HAS WE USE THE SURVEY.

WELL, THIS WAS THE LOT WHERE WE DISCOVERED THAT THE SURVEYOR AND THE SURVEY MISSED TREES.

[00:55:01]

THEY WEREN'T ON THERE AND WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT IT. IT WAS PERPLEXING TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR BECAUSE THE TREES WERE FLAGGED. BUT THEN THEY WEREN'T ON OUR PLAN AND THEY WEREN'T ON OUR PLAN BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ON THE SURVEY, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY. AND THAT GUY DOESN'T WORK THERE ANYMORE AND THEY DON'T HAVE SURVEYING. SO WHEN WE WENT BACK OUT, WE FOUND ADDITIONAL TREES, WHICH IS WHY, AS MISS THOMPSON SAID, THERE'S ADDITIONAL TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL. ONE OF THOSE TREES THAT WERE FOUND, I SAID, WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO SAVE THAT TREE, AND I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE THAT TREE IS IN A MINUTE. EVER SINCE THIS SURFACED, WHICH WAS SOMETIME AROUND MIDDLE OF AUGUST OF AUGUST, OUR NEW PROTOCOL IS PRIOR TO ANY SUBMISSION. AND I AGAIN MENTIONED THIS LAST WEEK OR LAST MONTH PRIOR TO ANY SUBMISSION TO THE CITY. WE AUDIT THE SURVEY TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO SURPRISES. AND IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN PRETTY RELIABLE. THIS MAY HAVE JUST BEEN AN OUTLIER, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING PRIOR TO EVERY SINGLE SUBMISSION. NOW IS AUDITING THE SURVEY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ACCURATE. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. SO THAT WAS IN THE COVER LETTER AS WELL. SO THERE WAS EIGHT TREES THAT WERE FLAGGED IN GPS BUT WERE NOT IDENTIFIED. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE NOW.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, FOR THE THIRD TIME WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THIS LOT. SO THIS LOT HERE'S OBVIOUSLY WHERE WE ARE IN MADEIRA. HERE'S WHERE THIS LOT IS IN THE ESTUARY. THIS IS THE ESTUARY SECTION OF MADEIRA. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T REMEMBER. SO THIS LOT IS IS OBVIOUSLY RIGHT HERE. GET A CLOSER VIEW OF THAT. SO. WE DON'T NEED TO SEE THAT. WELL NOW WE GOT THAT.

OKAY. I DON'T WANT THAT ON THERE. BUT YOU GET THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. SO. CIRCLED A COUPLE THINGS. FIRST THERE'S CIRCLED HERE. THERE'S THREE CIRCLES ONE THE TWO THAT I HAVE OUTLINED HERE. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE. THOSE TREES WERE PREVIOUSLY PROTECTED. THEY WERE TO BE RETAINED. AND NOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE MOVED. AND REMEMBER PART OF THE CITY COMMISSION'S MR. BLOW WOULD REMEMBER MORE THAN ME. 2004 APPROVAL WAS THAT GAVE US FLEXIBILITY TO REDUCE OUR SIDE YARD SETBACKS, TO MOVE THE HOUSE FURTHER THAN THE NORMAL SETBACKS. AND SO YOU CAN SEE, AND I'LL ZOOM THIS OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT. YOU CAN SEE ON THIS LOT, WE'VE SHOVED THE HOUSE AS FAR NORTH AND WEST AS WE CAN WHILE HONORING THE FLEXIBLE SETBACKS THAT WE HAVE, AND THAT IS OBVIOUSLY TO SAVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE. BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE IN DOING SO, THERE WERE THIS COUPLE SMALL WATER OAKS THAT WE ARE PROPOSED TO REMOVE IN ASSOCIATION WITH THIS. IN GREEN WAS A NEW TREE THAT WE FOUND THAT WE'RE RETAINING, OBVIOUSLY. THERE'S A NEW TREE RIGHT HERE IN THE JUST JUST TOO CLOSE TO THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE. AND IF THE BOARD REMEMBERS WHY I'VE COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD MANY TIMES FOR TREES THAT WE TRIED TO SAVE.

HOWEVER, WHEN THE BUILDING ENVELOPE WAS WAS CONSTRUCTED, THE. THE TREE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT A STRAIGHT POLE AND IT WAS LEANING OVER THE HOUSE AND THAT JUST WAS UNSAFE. SO WE HAD TO THEN COME BACK TO HAVE THOSE REMOVED. SO AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO GET BETTER AT THIS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THIS THIS NEW TREE HERE IS WE THIS TREE HERE IS THE TREE THAT I THAT WAS NEW FOR SOME REASON NOT ON THE SURVEY. AND I SAID, WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO SAVE THIS TREE AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT TREE IN A SECOND. AND I PUSHED THE BUILDER TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO SAVE THAT TREE. AND IT WAS SO CLOSE TO THE DRIVEWAY THAT WE ENDED UP PUSHING THE HOUSE AS FAR AS WE COULD TO THE NORTH. AND THEN THERE'S SOME GRADING AND WALLS TO PRESENT TO PROTECT THAT TREE AND THE GRADING PLAN. AND THEN THESE ARE THE FIVE NEW TREES THAT WERE FOUND, THESE RED X'S. AND OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T SAVE THOSE. THEY'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HOME. SO THIS IS THE TREE THAT WE ARE IS IN THE CORNER OF THAT DRIVEWAY. THAT WE ARE SAVING THIS ONE RIGHT HERE. AND THE, THE I ACTUALLY, I TOOK SOME MEASUREMENTS ON ANOTHER EXHIBIT, BUT FROM THE

[01:00:01]

DRIVEWAY, I THINK THEY MOVED IT. IT'S ABOUT 6.5FT AWAY. AND THEN THERE'LL BE A. YOU KNOW, I THINK A WALL TO PROTECT IT FROM HAVING NO GRADING ON TOP OF IT. BUT THAT'S A REALLY NICE TREE.

AND IT'S A, IT'S A 40 I THINK IT'S A 41 INCH LIVE OAK. SO IT'S A REALLY NICE TREE. SO IT WAS SO CLOSE THAT WE ENDED UP SAVING IT BECAUSE PRETTY MUCH I INSISTED MISS THOMPSON'S RIGHT.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THE UPDATED TREE REMOVAL SUMMARY TABLE FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT, THERE'S A DEFICIT. AND I TALKED TO, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR, IF YOU REMEMBER, THERE WAS A FELLOW HERE, NATE, FROM TOLL. I TALKED TO NATE ABOUT THAT. THEY OF COURSE WILL PLANT TO OFFSET THAT AND THEN SOME ON EVERY ONE OF THESE LOTS WHERE THEY'RE THERE WHERE WE MAY HAVE EVEN HAD A SURPLUS. THEY'RE STILL PLANTING. SO THEY HAVE A STANDARD. THEY'RE DOING FOUR INCH TREES OUT THERE. THIS IS A HIGH END COMMUNITY. SO THEY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE LOVE TREES.

THEY KNOW THAT. SO THEY'RE PLANTING EVEN WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO. SO IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT SOME OF THE NEWER NEW CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE, THEY MAY NOT HAVE HAD TREE PLANTING REQUIREMENTS. THEY'RE STILL PLANTING. SO WE HAVE WE'RE NEGATIVE ONE CREDIT. SO THAT WILL BE MORE THAN OFFSET WITH ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS. AND YOU COULD CONDITION IT THAT WAY IF YOU'D LIKE. BUT THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS. AND THEN. THIS IS THE OVERALL SUMMARY.

AGAIN THERE'S THE NEGATIVE ONE CREDIT. SO THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I'LL LEAVE THIS UP. THANK YOU. BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE LETTERS CAN YOU CLARIFY THE 41 INCH LIVE OAK YOU ARE SAVING NOW? YES, BECAUSE IT HAS AN X ON. NO. HERE, LOOK AT THE THE THE WRONG X. YEAH. IT'S A PURPLE X. IT'S HARD TO LABEL THESE. THE MAPS GET SO BUSY BUT THE PURPLE IS NEW. ONE SIGNIFICANT RETAINED. AND THAT'S RIGHT HERE. OKAY. YEAH. IT JUST DOESN'T LOOK. YEAH. BECAUSE X WOULD ALLUDE THAT IT'S BEING REMOVED. BUT YEAH IT'S A PHOENIX JUST DIDN'T LOOK PURPLE. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAD THREE LETTERS SENT OUT AND NO COMMENTS BACK AT THIS POINT. I'LL OPEN IT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ON THIS APPLICATION? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. AND I GUESS WE'RE WILLING. WE'RE ON YOUR MR. TUNSTALL'S. I HAVE NO COMMENT. CARL. WELL, THE I DID VISIT THE SITE. WHAT'S KIND OF UNIQUE ABOUT THIS LOT IS THERE'S A REALLY NICE PARK ADJACENT TO IT. SO BY SHIFTING THE HOUSE, THE WAY THEY'VE SHIFTED IT, IT'S SORT OF IT'S THE PARKS WOULD BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS LOT. SO IT, IT PROBABLY LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, SAVING THAT 41 INCH LIVE OAK, IT KIND OF FITS IN WITH THE CANOPY OF THE PARK, PARK, A LOT OF TREES IN IT. AND SO I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING. I HAVE TO CHUCKLE ABOUT THE SURVEYOR VERSUS THE CONSULTANT THAT THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL, THAT THE SURVEYOR MIGHT MISS A TREE OR TWO. RIGHT. MR. TUCKER? I'M NOT GOING TO BLAME SURVEY EVERY TIME. RIGHT. YEAH. HOW ABOUT THE OTHER ISSUE ON THAT REAL QUICK IS ON DEFINING JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS, WHERE THE CONSULTANT GOES OUT AND BUYS RIBBONS AND STUFF ON BRANCHES, AND THEN THE SURVEYOR IS SUPPOSED TO SURVEY IN THAT EXACT BRANCH ON THAT BUSH. AND YOU KNOW, IT'S FUN. IT'S FUN.

YEAH. AND IT'S CHALLENGING. SO, I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW I GUESS YOU CAN TOO, HOW THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE A CREW NOT THAT MOTIVATED AND MISS TREES, BUT, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THE, I GUESS THE, THE 21 INCH LIVE OAK. THAT'S KIND OF RIGHT BY THE, THE DRIVEWAY OR THE ENTRANCE DUE TO THE, IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, IT'S GOT A RED X ON IT, RIGHT. THAT'S GOT TO GO.

YEP. THE GRADING ASSOCIATED GRADING ISSUE THERE. THERE'S NO WAY TO. YEAH, IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE HOUSE. SO OTHER THAN THAT, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE, THE DEVELOPER OR THE IS PLANTING MORE TREES THAN THEY HAVE TO. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS, AND IT MAY BE BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT OWNERSHIPS, BUT THIS OVERALL PROJECT TO THE SOUTH THERE LIKE

[01:05:03]

NO TREES AT ALL. AND I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S SOME PUBLIC SPACES DOWN THERE THAT.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, DOWN THERE MAY NOT BE CONTROLLED OR OWNED BY TOLL BROTHERS. SO BASICALLY THEY'RE PLANTING PLENTY OF TREES, BUT ONLY IN THE SECTION THEY OWN. SO OKAY, I JUST HAD TO ASK. BUT NO, MR. CHAIR, THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU. I DID FORGET TO ASK FOR EX-PARTE. ANYBODY HAVE ANY EX PARTE FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE? VISITED THE SITE, WENT BY THE SITE. I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION. EXACTLY WHAT MR. CARTER HAD ALREADY EXPLAINED HERE PUBLICLY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED. NO, NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. I LOOK AT THIS, YOU KNOW, IN OUR THOUGHT PROCESS, WHEN WE FIRST LOOKED AT IT, WOULD THESE TREES MADE A DIFFERENCE IN OUR DECISION? AND LOOKING AT THE WAY WE MOVED THE HOUSE AND TRYING TO MOVE THAT HOUSE ANY WHICH WAY, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAVE. THE ONLY THING I WILL MENTION IS TO MAKE SURE WHOEVER DOES THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THEY MEET THEIR CREDITS AND STAFF ALSO APPROVES THAT MISS KELLY. I HAVE NO COMMENTS. MR. TUCKER. I GUESS. IS THERE ANY SORT OF REQUIREMENT ABOUT SETBACK BETWEEN OR DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE THE STRUCTURES BETWEEN ADJACENT LOTS FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? YES. THERE MUST BE. WELL, WELL, THERE IS CERTAINLY A SIDE YARD SETBACK, BUT IF THE CUSTOM SETBACK AND MISS THOMPSON MAY BE ABLE TO ELABORATE ON THAT. BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT IT'S THE SIDE SETBACK OF SEVEN AND A HALF OR EIGHT FEET, WHICH IS PRETTY NARROW. SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, COULD YOU DO THE SEVEN AND A HALF AND THE SEVEN AND A HALF? YEAH. I MEAN, I GUESS WHERE MY HEAD WAS GOING IS, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY NOW YOU HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE ACTUAL TREES ON, ON THE SITES AND. SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT THAT, THAT HICCUP THERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST THE IDEA OF SHIFTING, POTENTIALLY IMPACTING THE LOT NEXT TO IT. BUT THEN FURTHER THINKING, I'M THINKING OUT LOUD HERE, CAN'T REALLY DICTATE THIS LOT BASED ON THE OTHER ONE THAT'S NOT PLANNED OR BEFORE US.

IT'S, BUT THAT'S JUST WHERE MY HEAD GOES WHEN YOU START SHIFTING ONE THING TO ACCOMMODATE CERTAIN ASPECTS, ARE YOU IMPACTING THE LOT NEXT TO YOU? BUT AGAIN, CAN'T REALLY PREDICT THE FUTURE. YEAH, I CAN'T REMEMBER. IS IT SEVEN AND A HALF OR EIGHT? IT'S SEVEN AND A HALF. AND THEN ON LOTS THAT ARE GREATER THAN 85FT WIDE, IT'S TEN FEET ON THE SIDE.

HOWEVER, THE MADEIRA PUD DOCUMENTS DO ALLOW FOR SOME FLEXIBLE SETBACKS WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE TREES. SO WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO SAVE TREES, YOU CAN MOVE THOSE A LITTLE BIT. AS LONG AS I BELIEVE THE TWO STRUCTURES MAINTAIN A 12 FOOT SETBACK FROM EACH OTHER, IT MIGHT NOT BE EXACTLY THAT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

YEAH. THAT'S THAT'S ALL I GOT. MISS JONES, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS. AND I'M GLAD THAT WE ARE DOING EACH ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALLY AND NOT HAVING APPROVED AT ALL AS A ONE BLANK BLANKET APPROVAL AT THE BEGINNING, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE INCONSISTENCY IN THE SURVEYS. AND I DON'T REMEMBER IF YOU WERE ON THE BOARD WHEN WE MADE THAT, I MADE THAT APPLICATION AND WE SAID, WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT THIS WAY. I WAS YES, IT WAS. SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO BRING A MOTION FORWARD? I GUESS THERE'S NO TIME LIKE THE PRESENT. YEAH. SO I'M GOING TO NEED SOME COACHING THROUGH THIS. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PCSB 2026-0102. 1033. PANTANO DRIVE FOR THE APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF SIGNIFICANT TREES AND TREE CANOPY WITHIN CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE THREE. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE IT'S BASED ON THIS MOST CURRENT SITE PLAN, RIGHT? BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT SITE PLAN PRESENTED AT TODAY'S MEETING. AND STAFF WILL MAKE FINAL APPROVAL ON THE TREE THAT THEY MEET. THE TREE CREDITS AND STAFF WILL MAKE FINAL APPROVAL APPROVAL, ASSUMING TREE CREDITS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. YOU CAN PUT THE DATE ON THE SITE PLAN IF YOU WANT IT. SEPTEMBER THE 25TH 2026 BASED

[01:10:03]

ON SITE PLAN. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2026. THANK YOU. I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ZACHARY TUCKER. YES. CHARLES PAPPAS. YES. WILLIAM TUNSTALL. YES. JEN KELLY. YES.

SUSAN JOHNS. YES. KARL. BLOW. YES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YOU'RE AWARE. SO. UP NEXT IS

[6.d) PZB2026-0103 Patrick Stack - Applicant Patrick & Holly Stack - Owner 321 Minorca Ave To approve the removal of significant trees within Conservation Overlay Zone 3.]