commission meeting of the city of St Pete Beach today is Tuesday February 27th 2024 it is 6: PM let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance us congratulations to the of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stand One Nation God indivisible andice for all city clerk if you'll please do a roll call commissioner marot if you can please silence your cell phones thank you commissioner Philz here commissioner res Nikki here vice mayor Lorenzen here mayor patrill here we have a quorum thank you do we have any amendments to the agenda as proposed I was thinking would it be beneficial to do the resolution first so the folks that are here for the majority I assume are here for that and then get to the onesie TW Z business last or it's all consent so unless we're pulling anything from the consent there's no need to is with anyone like to pull anything from the consent no no not there's no point cool good can I please have a motion I'll move to approve the agenda I'll second city clerk if you'll please do a roll call commissioner filtz yes commissioner res Niki yes vice mayor Lorenzen yes commissioner marott yes mayor patrilla yes motion carries thank you uh next we move on to audience comments City attorney you any you want to make a um well okay so if you're going to have audience comments um on just general audience comments they cannot be regarding um item uh 4A which is the quas judicial resolution for the conditional use permit on the sarata uh where we left off on that was that we finished everything um except for your part which is the deliberation part and your vote um we had all agreed that the uh the public comment part had the public uh comment part had ended both the city and the applicant had made their uh presentations um and the commission had asked all the questions that of their experts that they uh wanted to ask so in my opinion that you know the public comment part of this agenda should just be strictly about something that's not on this agenda you know so keep it restrained to that so that we're not going to be taking any more public comment about the Sara cup application thank you city clerk do we have any audience comments we do Wendy frand Tom Rask if you'll please state your name and address for the record sure Tom Ras un Incorporated pelis County I will not be speaking about the cup I I don't I don't live in the city I don't have an opinion about it per se and even if I did because it doesn't impact me enough where I live I don't think it would be right for me to offer an opinion it it should be decided the people who should speak on it are the ones who are impacted by it okay so full disclosure last night Mr Dickman's aware gave him a courtesy copy I did file a lawsuit against the city alleging violations of the Florida public records law and the Florida Sunshine Law and uh also one aspect of the Sunshine Law given people be given the reasonable opportunity to speak that they are guaranteed by Statute so today um I wanted to talk about so I should also mention that I published a BL log I'm a small business owner um I'm a real estate developer in Manatee County I do other things but for me this is all about the process that the process be what it should be then everyone can live with the outcome I say that for those who don't know I publish a citizen journalism effort you can see it under Tampa bayu guardian.com and we did Cover the accusation of pervasive bias that was um brought against the mayor and the request to recusal and I want to pick up on that a bit and I want to display this document we can go to that which is the what I found on Mr deckman's own website I'm sorry I'm trying to make it straight here so what I want to show you is I've underlined it says Mr Dickman is the City attorney for the city of St P Beach and then has a role with another municipal government and then right after that it says his passion is for advocating for among other things Progressive urban planning clean water low low impact development personally I don't see how Progressive urban planning and low impact development go together but I want to you to note that this comes right after he States his professional responsibility if he said at the end of his bio that you know I enjoy biking reading long walks on the beach and uh low impact development Progressive urban planning I'd understand but my point is the argument could be made that he has a bias I'm not making that argument but if we want to go there then we get off the main issue the main issue is of course the cup which you'll be talking about and deciding on later so I'll remove this now and continue so I didn't find that I didn't make this up this is from his own website at the very least I suggest that you review this and look at it if I can direct Mr Dickman through the mayor look at how this is viewed by other people look at how it can be used to make certain arguments so I thank you for your time thank you next audience comment please jolen Lawson if you please state your name and address for the record good evening jolen Lawson uh 5407 leani drive and um just have a few comments um I I I think most people know that I am the director of protect St Pete Beach advocacy group and I just have a few thoughts to share um I'm on behalf of the group St Pete Beach is a treasure and it is our shared treasure we cherish the white sand beaches open Skies and familyfriendly laid-back atmosphere this classic old Florida character draws people from all over the world to call it home we know that there will be development and Redevelopment in St Pete Beach this is a fact and could be celebrated we are not fighting the idea of development we just want to do we just want it to be done right it is solely in your power to make decisions that ensure as our area grows what we love most about our community is not lost imagine a legacy that prioritizes environmental stewardship preserves our history and familyfriendly atmosphere when developers knock on your door we depend on our public officials to ask the right questions does it fit how is it this impacting the community how is it impacting safety how will it add to our character and way of life and who is it really benefiting and when developers make threats ask yourselves why since moving here several years ago I have been Amazed by the commitment of my friends neighbors and others in the community who have been standing up for the unique character of the community for over two decades the community's involvement with protect St Pete Beach advocacy Group which is in the thousands approaches the number of those who voted in the last St Pete Beach election when there is a consensus in the community that something is special it is important to take note will sunsets and sea turtles be replaced by concrete Canyons it's up to you thank you no clapping please to ask you out of respect please s your cell phones no clapping and please be quiet while they speak I want to hear from everyone we all do and if you're speaking over them clapping over them we can hear them so thank you thank you if you please state your name and address for the record my name is Teresa shef stead I'm at 555 Gulfway St Pete Beach um good evening Commissioners mayor and City officials in the years that I've watched some applications come before the city some of which I've had a minor involvement with I would like to respectfully request a suggestion to make a suggestion regarding the underwriting process there appear to be two major subject matters not thoroughly underwritten by the city when reviewing applications the first is as it pertains to the applicants there should be a full presentation of the applicants its entities and including its principles the underwriting should include no less than a presentation of the legal organizational structure financial analysis review a prior project objects and background of all parties including as to their character in any business transaction it is vital to know your partner I find the lack of this information is somewhat upside down when in your roles you are required to complete form six providing intrusive financial information about yourself yet similar knowledge of an applicant its entities and principles are lacking the second underwriting weakness is there appear to be a lack of financial reconciliation of the cost and purported offsetting benefits which are expected to occur including throughout the entire life of the project this should also be risk weighted my apologies if I have missed these two underwriting presentations on the applications that I have reviewed I appreciate you allowing me to present these suggestions and just one other remark as an objection um for the record I find it intimidating for the Sara sarata applicants to be sitting outside needs to be they're sitting outside of the audience and that's not not appropriate and an intimidation Factor thank you mayor once again I want to state that anything that's said here right now is not part of the cup serata application uh record and shall not be used for that purpose thank you City Clerk Deb shner evening please state your name and address for the record oh yes Deborah shner basa Isle Drive in St Pete Beach I have a little information if you don't mind if pass it out [Applause] Commission so that piece of paper I just handed you comes from a gentleman who is um over in Orlando and he is a chairman of the East Orlando Chamber of Commerce and he indicates that according to American Hotel and Lodging Association domestic travel stay an average of five days or nights foreign usually nine nights so for Orlando he goes into the you know it's obviously a lot more than we have and he my question this is what he's saying for this committee and other my other remarks public servants to consider this do tourists take showers when they visit do they flush toilets do they drive on streets do they rely on our police fire Emergency Services when necessary to they use the emergency rooms when ill these are just some of the few important questions that we have to ask ourselves and the reason I'm bringing this up is a bed Tac is only used to bring more tourists yet in many cities across the United States they're realizing they need some of that bed tax money for their infrastructure for their library for their water their purification and those statu were created over 50 years ago at some point in time we need as a city maybe to join other cities to maybe League of cities or something like that because it's very important for us to get some of that bed tax money and we St P Beach are a give much more to the state and to the county than we ever get back and that's fine I like my money to go to Social Services and and you know whatever else we need for the county but at the same time development shouldn't cost us and quite frankly it does I have a couple of minutes I just wanted to remind you that I've been involved in this for over 20 years countless meetings and never have the residents been more stronger than I'm seeing now especially the new ones who are anti- well not anti-development but anti- huge they want responsible and reasonable and this these have been the words for 20 years we're a beautiful city we love it here our beach is amazing I saw an old picture of Coney Island New York and when I tell you that people were this much you could even get a blanket down there I don't want our beaches to be that busy and they are already getting that busy so we really need to look at our fut future thank you Julie Cy if you'll please state your name and address for the record good evening I'm Julie Cy at 132 Puna Vista Drive I love St Pete Beach but I'm deeply concerned about the safety of pedestrians site bicyclists and motorists 35 miles an hour on Gulf Boulevard is too fast for as many pedestrians that will be crossing the street I have personally almost been hit using the crosswalk too many times to count when I worked at the Bell weather which is just across the street from my house I cross the street at 2:50 p.m. as well as 12:00 a.m. and later and people do not regard those flashing lights motorists don't know what to do with them so I do this often but tourists don't realize how dangerous it is I would like to propose the city do a density study based on the effects of building out the entire Resort District at full density how will that impact pedestrian safety traffic infrastructure and Emergency Services thank you for your time thank you Trisha Brogan if you will please state your name and address for the record yes Trisha Brogan 902 boaa and I would just like to make a comment about current traffic in the last year uh the island that we live on you have to go down 46th Avenue and pull out to get on Gulf Boulevard two times I've almost been hit trying to pull out and for anyone who travels it daily I am pulling on to Golf Boulevard and it just seems like right now if there's too if I can't pull out and the light hasn't turned then I'm turning to the right so currently it is very dangerous in the next two months we're going to get into spring break there'll be even more traffic so I do have future concerns about traffic and construction on our Island for almost a year we dealt with construction primarily right in front of our house so every day there were the guys working so I just want everyone to consider moving forward our future and what the current TR traffic is and how that does affect local residents thank you Terry Groot if you'll please state your name and address for the record Terry Groot 2841 Alton drive I'm going to apologize because I forgot my readers if you please just look closer to the microphone oh am I not enough okay I'd like to talk about the St Pete Beach Comprehensive plan which was in development during and sign just after the Great Recession and since insuance of the plan our county has en our country had encountered a national pandemic these events significantly reshaped the landscape of our community and its economic potential potential understandably the plan was based on the best available knowledge at the time there was no way to project that our country let alone our community would experi what our would experience after the pandemic for reasons ranging from weather to political response Florida Saw and continues to see and unprecedented growth which is accompanied by an influx of Revenue therefore we need to take the opportunity to pause consider and reshape our vision for the future this includes how we approach large scale development in our community I'm not advocating for scrapping the comprehensive plan or under the pretense that we can or should insulate St Pete Beach from Redevelopment I'm advocating a re-evaluation of our comprehensive plan which includes a holistic approach in reviewing and deciding on plans for the future Redevelopment of our community based on current population data the live local act which was passed at the state level by an overwhelming majority just last year is already under revision this year and to quote one of our state representatives he said I know with the passage of any large complex policy sometimes during implementation we learn about the need for minor adjustments the city's comprehensive plan is over 200 pages and is dated although we may have it may have have undergone a thorough review at the regional and county level at the time of issuance that does not discount the need for an updated review and potential modifications thank you for your time thank you commissioner renen you had a comment yeah I I just want how many cards do we have city clerk because I I I respect everybody's right to speak and we've certainly been listening for months but I feel like a lot of folks are kind of dancing around the issue that we're not supposed to be talking about with public commentary there are four more okay Thank you Lisa Robinson if you'll please state your name and address for the record get this right this time Lisa Robinson 7100 boa Sega Drive um I just want to know where our comp plan review stands because last year we were doing a review on the comp plan and I don't know where it stands at this point how far it's gotten along especially in light of the L local act that was enacted eight months ago so is that being taken into consideration at all in our comp plan review and then I question if we should have a building moratorium enacted so we can actually get real data for traffic for safety and other infrastructure we deserve that we deserve that thank you thank you Ruda H city manager city manager yes sir maybe we can add for the agenda for the next just a note as a discussion item an update on the comprehensive plan review since we've had a few comments on that and since we actually have a firm working on that maybe we can just have an update just so that we can update residents and kind of let them know where we are in the process that'd be great certainly thank you sir if you'll please state your name and address for the record brudah Hance 7711 K way when my family moved to St Pete Beach in the 1980s it looked like an elegant Resort town today where I live in District 1 we are starting to look like a third world country with water lines continually breaking and bubbling up through the concrete in our sidewalks and streets over the past three years we have not gotten a direct hit with even a minimal category 1 hurricane yet on at least three occasions over the past couple of years many of my neighbors homes and yards flooded with salt water some of them multiple times more than four beautiful large mango trees within a few blocks of my home that I am guessing must be over 20 years old all died due to the Salt waterer flooding these trees have been here for decades yet what was it about this past year that caused so much saltwater to stagnate and not drain out over half of the Landscaping in my neighborhood has been destroyed leaving us with nothing but dry weeds left from the saltwater and expensive Landscaping losses left to the citizens to pay for out of their fixed retirement incomes I don't see this sort of damage and flooding happening in the commercial District on Gulf Boulevard but I do know our City's underground piping and sewer system sys that the residents have are around 60 years old and badly in need of upgrading as our population gets more and more dense many of my neighbors can no longer afford to continually repair their flood damages or carry flood insurance please do whatever it takes to update the pumps and sewer systems and broken down streets where our residents live to the same standards that we see in the commercial District on Gulf Boulevard I am asking the City commissioners to remember your fiduciary duty is first to us the residents who you are supposed to be representing we are tired of just temporary patches being used to fix our underground systems please get let's get these issues fixed permanently and properly to Modern standards reflecting our previous reputation as a first class resort town thank you thank you Jame excuse me James Bailey John kersman Mr kurman since you I don't think you were here for the original instructions you may have a public comment on any subject and topic you wish except for the SRA conditional use applications public mentioned and I and and my my comment is is very general thank you sir uh it is about condition use you please state your name and address for the record John John kurman be beond Way South um I've spoken before about the fact that the um ordinance about conditional use was uh published as being about public security and I I had uh thought that was wrong and I did work with the city clerk and we did determin that it was supposed to say public scrutiny and um the intent was that uh conditional use is supposed to have increased public scrutiny and what I'm just trying to understand is how we can Implement increased public scrutiny for conditional use it's very important there's a lot of analysis that's supposed to happen and if public scrutiny is done if it still results in just three minutes of public comment regardless of the scrutiny if it only results in three minutes of public comment how does that actually turn into anything of meaning and we have other committees we have Beach stewardship committees we have planning board committees and it would be a shame if it all just ends up resulting in the finish line of of of it sitting on the laps of the city commission when we get to the trade winds and all these other hotels that will have come before you so I'm just hoping that at some point we can come up with a way to let increased public scrutiny turn this into something meaningful to help you thank you thank you Dana rich Rich please state your name and address for the record uh Dana Richardson 5830 Bahama Way South um I'm here because we are at the beginning of many developments and we need to make sure we have a cohesive look to our Beach Community many adjectives are used by locals and visitors in describing our Beach Community such as retro vintage quaint old Florida laidback or mident country because character at our Beach town is so important to us I think we need to form an Architectural Review Committee and I'm willing to volunteer to serve on that committee we need this to be involved in the city's decisions on what the character of our town should convey I would like to re mention a few Snippets from various blogs and articles when Steven Hansen bought the travel lodge plans to demolish and rebuild were strongly opposed by the community citizens eventually encouraged Hansen to renovate and preserve the historical Motel which is now the surfer chick Postcard Inn the St Hotel in St Pete Beach recently debuted with a fresh and modern concept that hearkens back to the property's 1950s Roots the hotel was originally a 1950s built beach motel that we completely renovated when considering the design we were inspired by that era and Incorporated retro touches that invoke the spirit of Glory Days even in the rain I love driving from the very southern tip of passag Grill all the way up to John's Pass business names like the undertoe beach bar the freaky TIY Surf Shack and Polynesian putter opened since 1967 in one of the oldest mini golf courses in Florida left me swooning with an undeserved Nostalgia for old Florida I was too young to Rel know but I love that about St Pete Beach St Pete Beach home to trip advisor's number one beach in the US in 2021 this friendly laidback Beach town is part family destination and part low key Haven for aspiring Beach bumps I just want to leave with this that we need an Architectural Review Committee comprised of uh citizens that are involved to help give a cohesive look to our community and I again say I volunteer for myself thank you thank you those are all the comments I have thank you next we have item three the consent agenda I did call I called um I called Wendy frand and nobody came up can I still come up yes please if you'll please state your name and address for the record uh my name is Wendy fruin I live at 636 6361 third P point I love the feel of our community to me St P Beach still possesses a small town feel I grew up with I've lived my entire life on St Pete Beach dealing with the shortcomings of living in a tourist Community the inconvenience is are such a small price to play to pay to live in than what others feel fortunate just to be able to visit I feel so much pride when I meet people that tell me how much they've enjoyed visiting our town and our our beautiful beaches our beaches are amazing each of you voting tonight on this cup have such power right now power in determining the future of our city am I not allowed to mention we we're not talking about the cup okay well let me skip over that um I do believe that the hotels need an upgrade am I allowed to say that if you'll please limit your comments to just general anything not um okay well the reason that our hotels continue to be full is because we have an amazing natural resource here which is our beautiful beaches um other people that see that are the developers that come and are blinded by the greed the power that each of you possess right now is not stopping development development is coming and we need it I'm sorry but we're very specific on the ground rules okay well let me skip down here to um I'm truly pleading with you to maintain our City's control over our future please do not be swayed by promises and' sorry I'm you're going to have to relinquish your time at this point okay let me just I'm asking I'm sorry we're this doesn't have anything to do with the developers I know but I've asked you now and I have a minute and a half left I'm just going to say I'm asking you to represent the people you are appointed to represent ma'am um okay we gave instructions at the beginning I'm sorry you weren't here for those I repeated instructions multiple times like I fit in there so I apologize if I don't thank you I'm just hoping that you can represent all of the citizens here city clerk do we have any other further audience comments we may have missed we do not okay thank you can I have please have a motion on the consent agenda I make a mo a motion to approve U 3A through 3D Second City Clerk if you please do a roll call commissioner Ros Nikki yes commissioner lorensen yes commissioner Marriott yes commissioner Philz yes mayor patrilla yes motion carries thank you next we have item 4A quasa judicial hearing resolution a resolution of the city Commission of St Pete Beach Florida approving a conditional use permit pursuant to sections 35.3 B1 and 35.4 B of the Land Development code to allow construction of a 290 temporary lodging Unit 10 story5 ft 6in tall hotel with rooftop features not to exceed 12 27 ft 6 in in total height from base flood elevation on the Northern portion of the site and 130 temporary lodging unit 8-story 88t 6in tall hotel with rooftop rooftop features not to exceed 100 feet 6 in from base flood elevation Hotel on the southern portion of the site along with ancillary and accessory structures and permit a rooftop dining and drinking amenity that includes the playing of out door music to parcel 06 32160 excuse me 80172 000000 0010 with addresses of 5300 5350 5380 and 5390 Gulf Boulevard incorporating the conditions outlined herein and providing for correction of scrier error and an effective date thank you City Clerk City attorney you had um yes yes mayor thank you very much um I just want to cover a few due process uh items in a minute I'm going to um request that each of the Commissioners just do another um disclosure of any ex party Communications you may have had or any independent research you may have done um since the time of the last hearing as you know that this was before you uh on the 21st February last week so I just want to make sure that that um time period is covered and that there aren't any issues related to that I do also want to um put into the record um the work that uh the city staff has done uh under the manager's direction to accommodate the public um not only in the chambers here but also upstairs in the conference room and outside of the conference room and outside in the parking lot um there were accommodations made for everyone to be able to participate in the public hearing that took place on the 21st um I want to commend the commission for their um their attentiveness uh this was a 10 and a half hour long public hearing I think everyone did a a really good job including the public um you gave plenty of time to the public to um speak uh hours in fact and in accommodating several groups to give them extra time to speak I believe the staff did uh a really good job of presenting the item and then the applicant had plenty of time to present um their application and then time for rebuttal so where you are right now um was that you uh had uh decided that all questions had been asked of the applicants experts and I don't think she has uh um they don't have their entire expert team here so that's why uh they don't have them here because you had already asked questions of everybody um staff is here if you have questions of them but where you are in the process really is just a time for you to wrap it up and decide amongst yourselves deliberate amongst yourselves uh on a conditional use your choices are to deny it to approve it or approve it with conditions and part of those conditions can be additional condition and the conditions that were um published in the agenda you can craft new um conditions that are within reason and that would entail some dialogue between the applicant um during that process and I see that um the applicants the the owner of the project are here with us via Zoom um so that right correct and in oh I'm sorry and I apologize sir and in person so um you know presumably if it were to be a an approval with conditions you know you would hope that they you would want to get um buy in on those conditions um on the record so um with that uh I'll happy to answer any questions but I do want uh each of you to do a brief disclosure of any ex party Communications or independent work that you've done since the last hearing so that it's disclosed and there's no presumption of prejudice I guess we'll go down the row mayor I have none just more emails and more conversations with people on the sidewalk you want to say something no go ahead okay um I spoke with um and this is after obviously since from one I spoke with um staff including um Mr Saunders Brandon Mike Clark Brett Warner Chief killpatrick um Fire Marshall Kelly um Jennifer McMahon um um I spoke with um several not not a verbally not a lot of residents but um I did speak with a couple um Mike Gordon who is from the C Mark um uh Deb rothenberger who is with um dun Savers I kind of mentioned that a little bit at one point with the landscape architect just to kind of familiarize the applicant as to whom that person is um uh several emails from residents a lot of the same residents who spoke today um did send emails um those in favor and those not in favor of the project just as a disclosure um I spoke with the state representative Linda Cheney um I had a couple of taxs but mostly ended up being emails because I asked them to email um I did move I did share all my emails um with um our our clerk so that that's on the record as well um uh I did speak with um oh sorry I did some research on um Senate bill um 102 as well thank you uh in addition to my previous disclosure I've um reviewed the package Land Development code comprehensive plan I met with uh several residents at my regular mayor's office hours and I received several emails uh from Resident staff and the applicant that I read and reviewed all right uh since the 21st of last week I've spoke to people in our community I've reviewed as many emails texts voicemails as I could I spoke to City staff uh reviewed the applicants packet uh reviewed comprehensive plan and Land Development code and reviewed the conditions um since the meeting last week I've spoken to uh numerous residents uh and business owners in St P Beach uh City staff and the applicants uh uh Council okay thank you thank you C the good I think we're ready to go um I think it's uh think I want to remind you know anybody who is going to speak here today you're still you were sworn in under oath um at the prior hearing so um there's they're still operating under oath if you have questions of anybody that spoke here yesterday I mean at the last meeting if they haven't if they were not sworn in then we can swear them in okay thank you all right so where we are now is we've we've heard um the information from from the applicant we've heard from the city we've heard from our residents we've heard from numerous experts we asked questions um and so all that remain remains for us at this point is to deliberate the merits of this uh conditional use application uh as the City attorney stated we essentially have three options we can say yes we can say yes with conditions we can say no um and I think probably the the first thing we should discuss is you know we we can't talk about conditions if we haven't settled the we we should move forward or not move forward and so I think that's that's the first part that we need to deliberate is um you know where do we see this project is it the project that we're you know feel has you know potential or is it one that we need to deny um and then we can have further discussion if necessary um open the floor and whoever has start would it be beneficial uh to fellow Commissioners um a lot was said during the last meeting uh I'm not sure how much of it was please do this or how much of it was think about it but the staff spent some time putting together some uh additional um conditions or at least draft conditions I think was really the main thrust for us to consider if we want to proceed with any of those so would it be beneficial to kind of look those over and you know thumbs up thumbs down or no we don't need that type of thing I think that implies that you want to move forward and so I I think maybe the first step we do is is it a yes or no and then if yes then we can look at conditions if no then we don't need to look at move forward with deliberations okay yes for me um and I know Brendan um worked really hard um and your staff um as well as the the city manager on a lot of things that were said at the last meeting um as far as moving uh forward and discussing it I do agree that we should move forward and discuss potential conditions um with this application um because um I I feel and it's not just feel I know there's things that I would like to see addressed that I've spoken to in the past not to mention at the last meeting hence a lot of these conditions that were were written but I would like to since we did not have the opportunity to Talk Amongst each other other um I would like that opportunity yeah um I just want to start by making a comment that I've spoken to and heard from a lot of people in our community as we all have up here uh people who are on totally opposite ends of the spectrum um regarding this project and regarding Redevelopment as a whole um I appreciate all of your comments and I especially appreciate those of you that do it in a polite and professional manner um with that being said to what we just talked about I I you know I want to hear everyone's opinions that's why we're here um also maybe some questions and clarifications on some of these conditions okay yes for me I think it we should be moving on to discussing potential conditions and if we can come to some agreement absolutely okay so anything in particular that you wanted to discuss as far as conditions do we want to go down the row that the staff has presented or maybe an easier way is I think we've all reviewed these hopefully my fellow Commissioners so are there any that you absolutely want to see in there I see some that I think are good ideas and I see some that not so relevant so that's my question well I've I've got a question on and I'm going off of the new numbers um 13 and 14 maybe this is a question for the applicant but do we know for a fact if it would be a JW Marriott if approved ask if you know for sure at this point that it would be a j it can be if we want it to be can it be a JW or am I sure of it is the question right and the answer is yes uh I have the documents to sign that I won't sign until we get an approval and I need these are all also leverage for me to with doing other things with on so they want this very badly and um and we're going to give it to them realistically and um yeah it's up to me they've already approved it okay I guess the question would be the same for the Hampton in just state your name for the record okay uh William young president Columbia Sussex he was asking if it's the same for Hampton Inn is it definitely a Hampton yes it's also definite with Hampton in okay thank you um just a question just so that we can kind of stay a little organize so we don't jump around would it be helpful and also for the staff because um if we're changing any of these conditions or adding any conditions while we're talking about it before a decision is made to kind of help them kind of stay in organize I know it's a lot um you know it's easy to go one no questions to and doesn't mean that you know what the overall but we have you know so we don't miss anything and also help them in the process as well so I want to make sure I heard you corck you want to go down every condition not just the on say reading them all but since we all I would assume all of us have looked through these that we would know whether we had anything additional to talk about or clarification kind of like a commissioner just did right now um to clarify something would that be helpful for you city manager as well I just I think all of you have this document it has some some red typing in it the red the red are things that were added or changed from the last meeting everything else in Black was direct same as it's been in last meeting so my you know we we tried to pick up what comments were made at the last meeting and and give yall something to start with if you want to add those things or change those things so I think the probably the best way to do it is as uh uh commissioner Lorenzen stated just uh start down each page and when you come to one of those red documents or red sections let's talk about that one do you want it do you not want it and and we can I think that'd be the most efficient way to handle it yeah so we can start on page five at the bottom my name is Jane Graham I'd just like to object for the record I think that this the public hearing is now closed and you're going through specifics and I think it goes beyond just the discussion it's it's getting into contract zoning so for the record thank you m gr okay okay so this change is adding a wind study and let before we go to that one I sen you said the bottom of five but like for number eight on the Telecommunications um I just wanted that one clarified and and Brendan you might be able to help me with this one too um that that is because I think there was discussion of whether is this the city that's going to look into this or is this the applicant that's going to look into um the effect of the building on telecommunications towers as drafted it would be an expectation of the applicant okay and I assume the applicant has a copy of this right and you've seen it okay that would have to be submitted to our staff for for review Commissioners I also want to remind you that so the step from here should this be approved with conditions uh it goes to site site development plan approval which is an administrative process so some of these um so there still is another step in the process and some of these conditions relate to to that you know like by site plan approval this will happen or so forth and so on on so um just wanted to make sure you understood that yeah and I I and I do understand that I guess because of the the comments from C Mark you know taking into consideration things that were spoken about before um this is a revenue source for this condominium um so with that review is having it written this way will that be taken into consideration um if let's say there is degradation of telecommunication services and this Tower needs to be moved somewhere else I don't think you can require that neighbors protect you know like if if if I buy a piece of property and my neighbor is doing something that's income generating and I do something that you I mean like I'm having a hard time coming up with a with a a comparable thing but I don't think that that it's our place to to regulate those things I'm not I'm not sure that's um I I mean that seems like we're impinging on property rights from a lot of directions that seems problematic to me I'm not sure if the City attorney has any input in that particular case I mean I I I think you need to take into consideration the C Mark itself for sure um you know if the applicant themselves want to profer a condition that has to do with uh aerating any effect to um this telecommunication issue but I would say that essentially you know that's a money-making private money-making operation that the C Mark has on their roof they're really a condominium they're not a telecommunication company and that would probably be a civil issue between people yeah I mean it would it would be like if I sold the side of my building as a billboard and then somebody built a building in the vacant lot next to me and I couldn't use it as a billboard anymore I don't think anybody would be expecting that person to pay me for my lost Revenue that just doesn't seem like how things are right yeah I agree so it's not an integral part of the condominium approval itself I mean I get that they need it as a revenue stream but um I think that would really just have to be something that the the applicant is capable if they want to profer something that they would look you know that they would take some care with that but you know I don't I don't know like I think I think the comments were so far I haven't heard from anyone saying that with telecommunication expertise saying that the network would be interfered with yet I haven't heard that I haven't heard yet um a definitive um then the only other thing and and I know at least you want to be able to come up and maybe say something but maybe you could add this too is that during construction right if this is going to Construction um and there is um degradation you know there's going to have to be something in the middle right like something has if we know at one height it's not going to work it's going to have to be moved you know how I don't know if it needs to be worded but just to make sure it's being considered at the point um if there is a potential degradation I I think that is I think that is addressed in this condition yeah so I think the bottom two sentences say they basally have to mitigate it during construction I don't it's during construction or after construction I'm not sure that's clear it's it talks about construction it talks about construction techniques so yeah I mean I would it'll it'll be throughout the entire time frame yeah because it when I read resulting from the construction that means to me yeah after so any so maybe I think does the applicant have any issue with providing Commissioners if you if you please Sor we're having this demographer having a hard time hearing so we're just going to make sure we each take one at a time and then again for the audience please just we got to keep it down we have to be able to hear thank you does my question is does the applicant have any issue of providing this study of paying for it and meeting the city's so procedurally um we have a modified condition for your consideration we do have we saw this Draft today just like you did and so we if if you want to go through them one by one we're happy to do that um Scott is more familiar with the Telecommunications issue U I do have copies of the modified condition if you would like me to hand them out Mr Mayor if that's acceptable to you certainly excuse me one of the residents has said that nobody in the audience can hear anything you're saying can we get it to turn up the volume a little bit please and I apologize Elise bats for the the record and I have been sworn good evening commissioner Scott gillner with kimley horn I've been sworn as well I I think it's one corre or correction or edit that we have um really what what we're talking about is in the let me just count the sentences I think it's the bottom of the first sentence where seark condominium building was struck and it's now city of St Pete Beach I think that makes sense because that was kind of the concern which is regarding the network that we discussed last week um but we're just referring to then um should the engineer find the strength of service so the second sentence really should be strength and quality for the city of St Pete Beach again at the time the hotel number one is done because it's really about the network not necessarily about that one thing and I don't want to get into the particulars of it but but really that was our only change which was if we're dealing with the c mark then the second sentence is a c Mark if you're dealing with St Pete Beach then the second sentence is St Pete Beach and I think that's the only change we had thank you okay next we have item nine full wind study questions comments I'm kind of neutral on this one I I mean there's a lot of buildings that all sit side by side throughout the country and and everybody seems to survive I I don't know I guess unless the applicant is interested in doing that would be my question yes or no the applicant um is not willing to do a win study um they have provided the letter from the engineer saying that there is no wind issues or degradation that's from a structural engineer um it costs a lot of money and a lot of time to do a win study and we already have a letter saying that that is not warranted in this situation number 19 so number 19 is the the construction of a boardwalk up close to the hotel is that correct that's the am I if I may real quick Matthew McConnell for the record um before we move on I think for staff drafting these when it comes to a condition if we could just get a kind of a consensus on what the applicant just said so that we can make our edits as we're going would be very helpful if you don't mind so before moving on to 19 the applicants just objected to nine if you all as a commission would like to leave it in I think that's helpful for us as we're drafting that's a good point procedurally so absolutely on the Wi on the wi I think I I just will backing up I mean I just looked at their um their going back to the telecommunication the only change that they had was just at the very last sentence if I'm if I recall right it's like instead of the C Mark rooftop facility property it's the city of St Pete Beach uh they just want to refer it to essentially considering the network because it's um that was you know is there an objection to that changing that I think it's essentially the same thing I mean because yeah I think that's fine I'm good are you okay yeah and then they just have a a global objection to doing a an additional wind study so I don't have a yeah I don't have a problem with that I I understand from the applicant I I understand the applicant's point of view on this one that if you have an uh an engineer who does a wind study saying that a wind study isn't necessary I feel like that should be adequate um I mean if we're going to if we're going to not believe the people who do this St I mean you know like that that seems to get into the weeds a little bit about you know are we then going to require three out of five win studies or seven out of 10 or you know so I I I think that I think that's an a reasonable request from the applicant I concur I I don't necessarily agree um a study isn't done with analysis so I I I don't agree with it um respectfully I mean it's our responsibility based on what the Land Development code says that when there are minimal impacts I think we should find out what potential impacts there could be right I mean that's part of why we're here is to look at these conditions and say can you hear me now yep yes oh looks it looks like it yeah I tried to comment once before but on beh of the develop I'm I'm sorry sir we're we haven't been called yet okay thank you commissioner I agree with Commissioners one and four districts one and four all right did did at least did your client want to comment on the Wind study or no we just we just it okay all right go ahead yeah so I'm assuming you can hear me we can hear you yeah okay good so as far as the wind study is concerned you have one person in that building who has decided it's an issue I understand why they thought it was an issue with the trade WIS because the trade winds was building a I'm going to show my ignorance here either a convex or a concave building which channeled the wind directly toward the uh C mark it made sense in two parallel buildings one of which is going to be I forget how much higher 30 40 ft tall taller there is no impact and you have an engineer that is um that only does these who I think if you read his letter says that it will have no impact beyond that when I asked them for a full wind study they said it would take somewhere between 9 months and a year for them to be able to build the models book the time within the um uh wind tunnel you know and get all that organized and quite frankly we've never done one I've also provided you with a letter from the architect that gave actual information uh or you know real life information in Chicago of buildings that were parallel and how there was not a wind issue there so I mean we've kind of beaten this this to death I've never had to do a win study before and I think that just because trade wins did one in a very different situation where they were channeling air towards the the building that you can't expect everybody to always do wind studies just because of that one situation and we won't agree to this because I would not delay this project the year to get a wind study that one person asked for let me also tell you this wind was never a big issue with camark until Ken Barnes got involved it's very much the same with Telecommunications I'd never heard the name Ken Barnes before until thank you okay okay all right we got okay thank you like the consensus up here was to to eliminate that 19 I think we're on okay so 19 is the construction of a of a boardwalk parallel to the Shoreline up close close to the hotel is that is I want to make sure I'm understanding that one correctly that's correct okay excuse me way it's uh excuse me mayor could you address the chatter in the room please it's extremely distracting please address the chatter we want to be able to hear everyone thank you and I'll add to that if if you'd like to speak amongst each other just please do it in the hallways thank you yes 19 is written WR where um you know the city has talked about a beachwalk for several years under this condition uh once the city would design and permit a Beach Walk not just for this for this property but for the the extent of the area that has been discussed in the past the um the applicant uh would pay for their share of of the beachwalk that that portion that goes along their their boundary okay so it's both the easement for the space and agreeing to pay for their chunk of it correct okay thank you I'm good with this one I am as well I think it should be in there okay uh we're in agreement for the easement an to build it at our cost okay thank you next we have item 21 I'll I'll come out and say I'm very I'm curious to hear other Commissioners opinions on the overall design and I guess that applies to this condition um a point I made in the last meeting was if this does go through it needs to look uniform you know so I'm just curious some of the other commissioner's thoughts just on design overall is that is part of the criteria that when um for my and I kind of spoke about this before at our last meeting um is that I do want a cohesiveness you know be between the whole site um and I'm I'm good with the language possibly a little bit added as far as quality of architecture um because we had a couple of renderings that were given to us um for example on the south side of um the property for the garage um so we have a couple of choices right and I don't think that this is the best place to go through all the choices and you know try to decide but I do want to be able to help help the staff um to have an idea of what it is that we're looking for for as far as cohesiveness of of um the resort with what we have um from what I seen from those renderings what what we're looking at is to have quality architectural design right not fall back on the least expensive to do um because you know that's how you get and I hate to say the the parking garage that looks like a storage unit um so the ones that um some of the couples that that were given to us at the last meeting show a higher quality um can't see all the detail so it's you know really hard to see in the rendering um but with that condition um that the staff going towards review are able to look at it in those eyes you know and and then maybe all of us kind of discuss of what what we see th this is a very subjective um condition you know I know we've heard a lot from the public a lot from the applicant a lot from myself um we live in a very eclectic Community um everyone can say what was old and what was new but it's very eclectic Pastor Grill is very different from Corey Avenue Cory Avenue is very different from the Donar neighborhood we are in a very eclectic Community um we have homes that are very in I guess the terms that you all use the modern Florida um style there's houses built like this currently um so it's a hard one um but the cohesiveness of the property itself I couldn't see and that's one thing that I think um you know really kind of I want to say irked but you know I couldn't see it you know and kind of even the boardwalk which I'm very pleased that you would agree to do it that provides for me personally that cohesiveness of the property that people from the south end to the North End of the property are able to walk um um together you know um not just those sidewalks which I know we all kind of talked about this provides to me that kind of cohesiveness of the property um um back end um and hopefully we can accomplish the same on the front end commissioner is I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying so you're good with most of this draft are we speaking about the parking garage facades are you talking about the entire complex um well it's the whole complex right that you've got you're you're anchored with the JW which has an architectural design then we present it with um a South um design of or a couple of designs on the southern end for the parking garage really don't know what the Sarat and I mean serata meaning the Center building um how that's going to be cohesive right is the colors changing are there architectural right and I'm just kind of mentioning because that at the point of last week I couldn't see that whole final rendering of what it would look like but that we are assuring that there is cohesiveness in the whole property color architectural um elements that that go throughout you know the the property I understand Surat is very different that is the old part for all of those out there who want it to look like the old days right that is the old days but we need something cohesive in that property so those kind of elements need to be placed you know I'm not the architect but I think I personally want to make sure that that instruction is put forth right and that the staff understand what it is that we're looking for when they are reviewing this um before permitting obviously right so so what we need is something that can be addressed at the at the site plan stage that gives enough objective criteria to staff to be able to make a determination and I do have one quick question um just so that to make sure I understand on the draft of condition 21 um where it says utilize planners and this might be a question for Brandon also utilize planners in front of the hotel 3 parking garage to match the hotel one parking garage and then beneath that it says utilize Hotel 3 Park and garage facade chosen including specified details and so I'm assuming that's an either or like that's a a Planters if it's Planters or a not if it's not I can address that if you'd like to um you know the 21 a well the main portion and a and b were were General as as commissioner eniki was talking about and and that gives our staff direction as we go into the detail plans but item C is the one that we really need to get something definite on because if you recall at the last meeting there were four or five different uh examples for the parking garage and I think I think that is the one that we need to specifically look at again and for the commission to say you at least this one or at least one of these uh two or so uh but we need to be specific on that garage design because that's been an issue all along T night yes sir my wife says I can't even dress myself you want me to pick a parking dress all right but I think yes uh but that would I mean I mean I think our staff is going to be very diligent in meeting the intent of what we've heard but but I think there were I don't I think four different designs possibly than and they were different four different designs and I think that would be good for yall to look at those four renderings again and decide among yourselves that yes at least this one or or at least narrow it down to a couple that that would be acceptable does anybody have those yeah oh you do thank you yeah I think the applicant has those designs that can be displayed for you cuz they they were not included in your packet well while we wait on those we got a couple of things to add to 21 so I I agree in consistency I think overall the project gives me warm fuzzy East block curtain Iron Curtain vibes from where I was born um I'm not sure how much money was spent but I Echo former commissioner fow's sentiment when I say is this the best that we could do um particular concern is I'm not sure what the fascination with walls is um but we have looks like a it's hard to tell from the renderings 15 20 foot wall that goes around the the property um no I mean that is a hard no I mean you look at where you are now and this was actually the planner when she was up here she says we need to protect the view for the residents she said pedestrians tourists am I putting a giant 10 12 15 foot wall across all of Gulf Boulevard we're s not doing that um so I would want to see language uh that eliminates that wall in fact prohibits any wall in the future um we've seen this on several projects now I'm not sure again what the fascination with that is Mayor can you clarify because there's two right so you have the wall and I know you're talking about the JW Meritt there's a wall that had you know the sign that says JW mared up in the front and then there's the living wall right that has like a I believe it's a water F I know the renderings are hard to well one is one is one is more think of it in terms of a fence an actual barrier across the front mhm behind that is then the building which then also has a giant wall right what I'm talking about is you know the actual barrier the the concrete fence or whatever it is you want to call it it's a wall of concrete across the front and it see seems to be Crossing from one end to the other minus the uh cutouts mayor if I may on page 99 of our booklets there's a good picture of what the mayor is referring to I don't have a page on mine unfortunately no I'm saying where I'm looking it's just the tabs you said 99 y yeah that's the one yeah and just to to further that you know I think this is animportant I think this is an important piece um that lines up with our Land Development code you know Bo both in um both in division division four for conditional use permits and criteria for review and then also when we're talking about in division 39 uh for community redevelopment districts just in general and that it should be inviting from the street level should be inviting and it should not be easily identifiable as a Park parking garage which both of these are quite easily identifiable as parking garages plus the requirement of any that's Street facing correct me if I'm wrong city manager but isn't supposed to be 50% uh transparent or glass or I'll have to refer to defer to Brandon on that question yep that's for street level facades there are certain zoning districts in the city specifically through the comprehensive plan where there's a requirement for street level facades that generally applies to the districts that have the build two lines the ones where they have to be five to 15 ft off the um front property line so what you would see in a typical downtown district like you know Cor know the windowed frontages um with something like this the the standard about the needing to screen the garage is is definitely in effect here so if you feel that that it's not effective through the Landscaping that they're employing if there's other conditions that you feel are you know necessary to make that work that's that's definitely appropriate thank you Brandon did you have some renderings for us or we have we have all the garage renderings um with respect to these they're it's not a wall all the way across by the way that's one it's actually just where to screen where the delivery trucks go in and out so that the people don't see the trucks going in and out um and of course with the JW Marriott we don't want them on the C Mark side so they have to come in front and that is just to to Shield the public from that and then have landscape in front um I would suggest suest that if that's an issue we could draft a condition that talks about the Landscaping with the exception of the sign area having to cover the wall right so that those species we could craft something like that if the if it's that the wall is not aesthetically pleasing but from that perspective the idea is to build that pedestrian path with a 10t so um but but those are specifically for you know the the folks that are going in and out so you're not seeing that from the street level try to go backwards for you so this was one with a screening element along the side and that mosaic tile um it is inlaid mosaic tile and um you know there's the Marco Island JW Marriott has this in their facade it's hard to see the detail here but just so that you know it is inlaid um like glass mosaic tile police as we go through these could you possibly just label these as ABC or something that way and obviously the side here is a treatment you could pick one front with run side they're not mutually [Applause] exclusive there's another another one this hold on this was a different kind of treatment along the side but the it's a small as Jim described it Jim the architect it it moves with the Wind sort of a shimmery effect along the front um again you could take a piece of one and a piece of another but I'm going to call that the shimmery front I know our architect is turning over with the way I'm calling these but you get the idea this was the one that was created by our architect and commissioner fris lowski that front the idea was to make it look like a different use so I'm going to call it the different use if somebody unless somebody has something different but but obviously this you can see that there's various options along the sides to make sure you can't see that it's a parking garage and then with respect to the front you know different different use facade just so I'm understanding are you are you looking for feedback on these as you show them when she's done yeah I think that the city manager had indicated that he wanted to sort of find out the feedback so that staff yes thank you you know city manager sir should this project be approved it's going to go to the next stage right yes sir one of those stages actually includes a community meeting with common cards where the applicant could present this information to the public and maybe we could have some public input then we can amend this language to say subject to public input or something else along those lines where we don't have to have five people make a design decision for the other 8,000 9,000 of us which that's still a long still some time out and certainly do it that way yes sir sometimes it's easier for five people to make a decision than 200 though I understand but if you just put it up on a vote then you it it takes however long it takes and that's an OP I guess we can do that you know since it's a condition add use I uh as as a as a business owner here in the city it concerns me a little bit that you know next time I paint my building it might have to go up for for a public vote for for what color I get to paint it so I'm not sure what kind of precedent we would be setting there with with having a public vote on on any facade in the building we decide we want to have a public vote on um I mean I'm not horribly opposed to it I'm just concerned for my own future I guess I mean it's this is a specific requirement and condition for conditional use applications where you have a site review with input from the public that the city staff and the applicant are supposed to take into consideration so it it's not if if you had a restaurant and no one's asking you what color the paint you're building but for conditional use applications there's a different standard well not not yet anyway but maybe not use the word vote but like to have input for I mean we're just kind of discussing this right now right so but there is and I agree with the mayor um because we do have a community meeting um before site review that this could be the full rendering right could be presented to um the public for comment um it you know it's hard to take a vote depending on how how many people actually participate right so so I guess it's um but to hear people's comments and not everybody has architectural design in their background either I think commissioner Lorenzen already said he can't pick out his own clothes um so um you know God knows how many other people would be the same but I would I do agree that we should have some type of comment but um not some type we should have Comet um but I don't know if the word vote you know like how do you vote for something like like this I was simply saying we can because I haven't seen this designs you haven't seen the designs I'm not really I'd like to take a look at them and consider them rather than just make a snap decision and since that could take another hour just looking at designs when it's we're we're quite a ways from that stage we can just leave it for the Architectural Review part right can I say something because it's quite irritating to see Miss Graham behind I need you to take a seat and and I apologize it's just you know this is really serious and I and you need to respect the person up there I don't think we're taking public comment right now and you're not a party to this so please take a seat um you're not going to make this any better so please take a seat I don't need comment or if not I I request the mayor to please ask for someone to be remove because we are not going to be able to move forward you know with discussions if we're going to have to do this every single time sorry I apologize miss m Graham please do not ask me to put you in a position put me in a position where I have to ask the sheriff please don't just take a step back take a seat if you're not happy with the outcome you you have remedies available so as your client I appreciate all the effort I appreciate all the passion that everybody has from the applicant from the community from everybody miss Graham please thank you I was going to make an objection for the rec thank you there was one more Mr Mayor if you want me just to label that just so that you know what the the final one was sure I would like to see all of them oh yes sir this is the last one um there were many it but these are the the last that include all sides and and um this was to try to create consistent gentlemen I apologize but I can't hear Miss Batel I'm sorry we can hear you over the mic Too Close uh we have a suggestion for you we understand what you're saying uh with it's hard to you're just seeing these four you don't have copies of them it's obviously be hard for y'all to say yeah this one I think it's a great idea to have the public comment and I'll ask uh our attorneys to comment on this but I I believe we could have a condition that says that you will present those options at the community meeting and then we would actually bring it back to the city commission for that one item to make a decision after you've heard the community input thank you sir Mr Mayor if I could my only concern with that is are we going to have anything else that we're asking the public to not vote choose whatever word you want to use does anybody else foresee anything else because otherwise this is going to get kind of unwieldy I don't think there's anything else in what we've provided that would would any come anywhere close to having that situation or maybe an online poll after the meeting just a thought all right I'd like to comment on on that too my understanding is we're making a decision on all this and a big part of that is aesthetic and architecture correct MH yes sir yes okay so I guess the challenge I'd have with that is how we going to make a choice tonight and then leave an aspect of that for some time down the road I think that's well I think what we were saying was the one thing that you would leave for down the road would be which one of those looks would be the garage that's that's the only issue is just the garage you know we you've got four four or five different ideas for what that garage was look like and what I've heard is some of you are not ready to just pick one of those which would be the easiest thing to do tonight would just say pick one or or say yeah these two are okay whichever one the applicant wants to do you know that certainly be an option but you know the the sugest the suggestion I made if you want public input you can at that public meeting those could be displayed people could put their you know their little red buttons up on each one you way you're doing a lot of things and then you would come back at a public meeting and the commission could take into account what you heard at that at that public review and make that decision from a staff position we would prefer youall to make a decision tonight and say you this is the one or at least one of these two that's the simplest way to do it and and the way to move forward but if you want to go that other route that's aailable a to you unless unless the attorneys have a different an objection to that you know I I mean from my point of view I mean it's it's pretty straightforward if that's the route you want to take if you want if you want Community input in this process of picking a facade or a combination of facades as the man as the manager mentioned and I'm sure Council has been involved in these types of shetes or different ways that people can vote on different things and it it would basically be Community input that would help you make the final decision that doesn't stop them from moving forward to the site development review phase it would just be this part of just only this part this very narrow part of all the various different um because I agree I'm not an architect either and Elise is probably going to hear from her architect at some point like butchering the uh the style of these designs but it's just another way of like getting more information on what the Community would prefer and you're going to have a community meeting anyway and and it would be a very narrow decision um I agree with the manager if you can come to a consensus on the two that you like the most that would help um I know probably the city does amongst its various contracts have an architect in one of the the firms that can sit at the uh at the design review board as well to help you know work with staff on on making sure that um that part of the the garage elements work from an architectural point of view because uh unfortunately we don't have a design review board and we don't have an architecture review board we have to do it that way so I don't know if um Miss fatall has a suggestion sure I understand what you're trying to accomplish we have big concerns about having an open-ended Community vote per se on the architecture of the project um we would look to for objective criteria and if we are going to move forward with some kind of community meeting where there is a shet because Andrew and I work on those a lot we would want it to be incredibly defined because the problem becomes you get people saying we'll do this we'll do this and they're basically spending the developers money and I can't agree to something tonight that hasn't been presented here or that we know would be economically feasible for the project so um it if we can craft something in a very limited way for the community meeting and I can think about that as we're talking about other issues um I will run it by the client but again it would have to be objective criteria and it would have the only way we would want to agree to that is if it was looking at the garage facades that we've presented tonight um but but not opening it up to any other architectural issues or anything else and that was my intent of my comments we would take the ones that that you've already been shown and and that input would be limited to to those I think it's four and that that would be it there would be no it would be here they are you know and and that's it or it' be nice if you could narrow it down to two but as I said earlier it be okay though still city manager to have all of those right because it sure we're talking about that those are for for Quality um designs or renderings right and that that's what we're really like just say me because I'm speaking for myself not for the group but we're looking for Quality design that that you're not going to go any lower than what we see understood and and we want to modify the condition regarding the architecture being consistent saying subject to this review because if you chose something that the you don't feel is consistent but it came out of that meeting then we would want to make sure that that condition reflected that you want it consistent with the exception of what the community input may be could we take in in doing this well the mayor brought up the the wall you know like if that element was changed um my concern is we're starting to redesign the whole project and I have grave concerns about at this stage trying to redesign the project from the dis so I I I do have concerns about that if we're limiting it to the garage I think that that would be okay with the developer but as we you know we could redesign this we could redesign that and I just I feel like that is something that we can't agree to okay and something that maybe we all could talk or discuss because that's why I asked the mayor you know what wall he was looking at right we're talking about the wall that's in the front on the sidewalk versus the living wall which I think the purpose of that living wall was to hide you know uh the truck loading area right that's where the side of the building where all the trucks would load and unload but where whether it were necessary to use a wall as opposed to maybe unlike the souths side rendering you have more of a buffer of um vegetation um you know I don't know if that's something mayor that you were thinking of or were you thinking that it's just open like nothing there this wall that has the JW Marriott name on it that goes across and then the rest of the the middle of the property do you know mayor if that goes across all the way the property cuz that's why I wanted to see the full rendering because I'm not sure if it does go across the whole property or just in front of the hotel one property because when you look at hotel three you see a buffer of landscaping not not that it does not go across it is specifically a screen wall for the delivery areas yeah I mean I feel like we're at that point where we've still got a lot of more to go through and I feel like we're kind of getting stagnant here with facades over a parking garage that in my opinion in five years from now if approved nobody's going to even remember um so I like the idea of picking a couple now or let's Punt and give it to the the board during the citizens input thing but I think we need to move on would be my thought yeah I agree I think that we could easily get into the weeds of trying to trying to you know it's it's hard to know where to stop once you start going down the path of could we do this could we do that and and uh I think their renderings show the screening wall specifically in front of the JW Marriott um at site plan I think that could be addressed we could potentially put in a condition that says that that reiterates that there cannot be a wall across you know across the project other than the screening wall for delivery trucks um you know which which I think is already in the which is already in the code so that should be addressed by staff at site development stage um so I'm not I'm not sure we need to get how much more specific we need to get on that part of it it's not about specific but it's about cohesiveness of the property so you've got a North End of the property that has a wall the south end of the property does not have the wall um and if you want the property to be cohesive and and we could use simply the word that there is a cohesiveness in elements on across you know from the south to the middle to to the north right that there that this is one Resort sure not visibly seen as three separate entities um that that I think is important to say you know I don't think that's a specific detail I'm not saying what color what you know what kind of concrete or stule you're using I'm talking about cohesiveness of the design yeah absolutely and and and so um is that is for I guess for staff is that enough of a objective criteria to be addressed at site plan or do you need more specific Direction I believe we have enough there I we actually our staff actually wrote that that comment uh and I think we have the direction we need and certainly from the comments made tonight to make that cohesive across the front I think we have the direction we know what y'all are looking for on that I've got a comment on it um looking at the Land Development code section 397 street level facades uh section c is talking about parking structures and how they should utilize architectural details and Design Elements such as false recess Windows Archer arches planner Boxes Etc I'm not going to go through all of it um but what it says is it will be designed such that the function of the building is not readily apparent apparent except at points of Ingress and egress so I guess my question for the other Commissioners would be with that in mind do you feel it is I apparent that is it is a parking garage or not based on those designs I I think between the four maybe I don't know if we ever got to the fifth design but I think between those four I could find one that I think fits the bill which one which one I kind of like the Planters but again you're asking a man mind putting that back up please because it's hard to visualize the tile thing you're talking about are you able to put it up next to the yes did you did I hand you that I'll find it now I understand everyone up here you want to keep it moving but this is important at least for me personally to see this and understand this no problem do you like any of them commissioner while you while she's looking of of the ones showed this would be I suppose my top pick of the of the ones that we've seen zo visualize there this one was actually um with those integration comments in mind was made to mirror more the same kind of design elements as the JW Marriott with the Planters and then some you know modest screening on the side so that it's screened you don't see the levels but at the same time it's tried to blend in more with the development again there's a whole Landscaping plan that's going to tie all this together and we're required to do that so as the landscaping and foliage all grows up you know the The Pedestrian experience becomes all all one as well um the condition as well if you look at I think it's subse B they talk about the modifications to the Sara so that that was done so that there's actually going to be some physical changes to the front of the sarata building based on this B I'm sorry not B uh a a yes um basically taking updating the current trim to basically match and removing the Manards and other details that made it seem very old we're also with a consistent color palette the idea is what can you do with an old building in order to make it seem a little modern and fresher and tie in with the rest of the development so that was the intent with this architectural condition and the question on the image to you which would be your left if you're looking at it on the table so is there a screening on is there a screening on I guess which would be the east side of that garage or would you other side this side yes we would do on not the souths side the East Side the one that we're seeing in the picture with the Planters is there anything above the Planters are we going to be able to see Vehicles well the idea is that the guard rails go up and the Planters hide that there's that there's things inside now it's not totally closed it's an open air garage from a functional perspective um even on the side where you see screening it it allows the air to come out because obviously that's required for all the fumes okay all right thank you you're welcome I'll keep these handy all right are we good on 21 yes 22 so did we settle on a a a community meeting this decision or did we settle on the planner boxes from my understanding I believe what we said was that um it would still be part of the community but with or presented to the community with with just those specific right because we don't want to open it up to absolutely a hundred other choices or things that people are going to be bringing um to the table yeah absolutely I just wanted to make sure I understood we were moving on right now I don't I'm not saying that that yay for the planners you know um I'm I I would still like to see the co I would like to see it you know I got to see I want to say wow right this doesn't let me say wow right because it's hard to see without seeing the whole picture and it's and again I know we're we're talking about the wall um you know I'm not trying to play I know this is money right so but if the South End had planners and I'm not saying that this is what um the mayor is asking for but that there's that it's leveled right like there's a balance not a level but it's balance between the South and the north you know because there is no balance right you're you're looking at this rendering right now and the colors are different on the south right the bottom part of the south parking lot has this like orange brick color and then we're still seeing the current color of the Sara and then you're seeing the you know the north end it it doesn't you you need to see it you know what I'm saying so it's really hard the elements of maybe Planters I like that idea but to say that's the one I I don't want to say that's the one so we're going to put all four up to the community vote is that what we agreed on again I don't think we're saying vote we trying to narrow open it up to further additions I think that's what maybe we'll limit we'll limit it to those four that we that you all have seen tonight have input on those four from the community and then it'll be back to y'all for the final decision great and that will amend that 21c to uh to that to that comment so it'll say chosen by City commission after input at the community meeting correct perfect I guess I have I have a question for the applicant are you comfortable with those four options being your only options yes okay thank you mhm all right are we good on 21 yes okay 22 questions comments nope none for me Brandon I have a question please and I kind of have after you by all means go ahead and and I and I did speak I think with Brendan on this one in particular because I know that the commission has been talking in the past on sign ordinance changes and this one is still confusing in my mind that um you have three signs or potential three signs let's just say um on this one site um when and again I know this is not an ordinance yet but with the discussions of what was had in the past that there would be one Monument sign you know with let's say the three options right if each individual one is called whatever it may be called that it's on that one Monument sign so I don't you know that's my question on based off the current Land Development code and and this again is a point of clarification for maybe the public as well you know this is allowed it I want I want that cloud is it allowed or not allowed or can we prefer to go with the mo Monument if at the time the commission talked about the prior commission talked about this that was a direction that we were kind of headed sure so the sign code specifies that the you know the purpose is to limit it to this the minimum number of signs to identify the purpose of the the property or the business currently as written each business within the large resort district is allowed up to two freestanding Monument signs we wanted to cut that down to one um there three entrances no more than one sign um if the city commission feels that's excessive in this case um you know we're open to considering otherwise but I I that's that's why we limited it to one we didn't want you know two Monument signs one on each end of the entrance that just seems excessive for identification that was my question you have the the wall that has JW Marriot written on it would that count as one of the monument sites it would and actually based on I know sometimes architectural Liberties taken with those signs but or with the renderings but um that would probably count as two just based on the size of the JW Marriott we would have to look at it when it comes in for permitting but it they would be limited to a certain portion of the sign that's used for the JW Marriott text or any other kind of logo um that would all count toward the sign area that was my question as well all right are we good on 22 mhm yep 23 questions comments questions comments we're fine with the acceptance of 23 as is if that helps the discussion okay I'm good and and 24 and 25 to the extent that that helps facilitate your discussion yeah I I have the information I need on that one um mayor I'd like to request a recess if possible let's um let's finish 23 okay let's see how many more we have here one two three okay let's finish 23 I think in 23 we should also at including any kind of not sure what you would call them motorized vehicles right anything with engine electric or otherwise internal combustion thinking in terms of um you know any kind of vehicle on the beach as well as vehicles from the beach into the water are you are you just are you talking about Vehicles outside of what they need to maintain property or including those that needed to maintain property no that's for maintaining properties they have to apply for a special permit anyway correct um I'm thinking so if we're not going to have any attractions okay you know so I think the serata currently has somebody who maybe does uh like Paras sailing or something from you know has a has a concession with the hotel to do things like Paras sailing and renting paddle boards and that sort of thing off the back of the S would you be intending to eliminate that sort of activity I mean to go along with the other activities we're eliminating I don't I don't know if you could do that that's that's in the water we're not talking about I'm talking about on the land okay I thought you were saying yes sorry I'm having some of those things have to come on the land so that they can go on the water versus a Paras sailing woodn't correct so so I don't think there's access I'm not sure if there's access because there's only certain parts of the beach overall that have the capability to to land on the shore um I think trewin has one I know the dawn had one I I don't think every I'm in Europe we be more specific I'm sorry I'm not following what kind of things you're trying to restrict wave Runners for example wave Runners I mean that's a mized something that would be on the land and then go again to the water Mr Young do you rent wave Runners today third party does third party do all the hotels name bu I know the scooter issue was a hazard issue I I don't understand you know part of what you wanted was an integrated Resort amenities and these are the amenities that people come to when they come to a beach resort so I'm trying to understand how limiting the scooters which pose a danger and limiting wave Runners I just I'm trying to follow the concern can you explain the concern yeah safety it's we got a lot of people on the beach and you've got Vehicles going back and forth into the water out of the water as people are trying to cross but a wave runner only works in the water I I think he referring to when they're pulled out and maintained like cuz they don't stay in the water at night you know so they I think you're if I'm correct you're referring in between customers they come on land yeah then they go back on land and they're not they're not being operated on land I I've got a question on this so my understanding is there's currently a third- party service out there now who's operating this so are we talking about removing that service or or allow or saying we don't want them to add anything in addition to that it's a great question I'm still trying to understand what we're trying to accomplish my my biggest question is are we trying to eliminate all of that as part of the property are we trying to not allow any additional to what is currently going on there now with the third party because I I don't know if it's our place here now to eliminate what they already have going on with the third party I'm template rating this it talks about inflatable structures that seems to single out a specific property and you know and we seems like we don't want more of that and so if we want to have a nicer safer Beach if we're going to double the number of people on the beach we should also do that with safety and concern in mind I would not be in favor of taking the third party service like Sun Coast water sports who's a local business run by a local guy who's been here for decades and and you know removing I'm not sure what percent of his business model without him having any input or being able to speak for himself I think that seems like not the right thing to do to a small local guy I'd agree with that I I would be a third on that but I'm I'm fine putting in that they can't add additional or add their own okay go ahead M Brandon Brandon I just wanted to point out the city already prohibits any new motorized Water Sports on on the beach side so that that's a default thank you all right let's take a 10-minute recess we will be back at 8:05 Sharp next we were on item 24 questions comments no no questions comments on item 25 oh then I hope they can fit in the garage preserve I guess you'll find out I'd like a little further explanation on when viable and available I'm sorry which which condition 25 just what that means exactly in other words okay two components one is if the city takes up most of the garage we wanted to be clear from the last meeting that we're that the city Vehicles emergency vehicles skip first choice and so if there's extra available they would go to the residents the other thing is when there's an mandatory evacuation um the they we will want to get all of the people out of the garages before people start coming in so the idea is fine to park the cars there but you know there we need to have some kind of protocol to make sure that safety is followed um I did not draft that so I think that's coming from staff but that was our intent our in our intent is not to limit the residents from coming in after the city um but I think this stems from safety ISS isues but Brandon can speak to that I agree with that um that coordinates with the later condition that speaks about the need for them to begin evacuation of guests at the hurricane watch instead of warning stage as the guests are getting out of the hotel city the city would be moving the vehicles in and then you know residents would have the ability to bring their cars in as well okay thank you any f questions on 25 next we have 26k do you want to go by letter or because I that's just the next that's the next red item oh sorry got excuse me Mr Mayor it seems like that conflicts with 22 um just it seems it like it was a leftover um so I just wanted to address address that as a housekeeping matter Brandon the signs signs so the reason for 206k is um currently the serata has non-conforming signage uh it's specifically the monument sign is Too Tall um and it's too large in terms of sign phas so we would ask for the compliance of all the signage on the site that's non-compliant at that stage that would be an addition to the application of the signed standards currently in the code thank you so Brandon you're saying that that it would take out whatever grandfathering the Sarat the current serata Monument sign has essentially is what you would be saying correct correct okay any further comments questions on this item for 26 overall yes 26 K yeah well not k like just 206 I have I'm I'm just going through the red leathered stuff yeah um my just a question we can look at all of them I'm just no I don't want to look at all of them I have other ones outside the red that I felt was not addressed um from the last meeting that I wanted to just clarify I mean these are the staff suggestions once we finish that then we can go to whatever other individuals we may each have is that what we're going to do yeah go back then we can do whatever we want at this point we're deliberating right we're just right I don't I want to kind of to that point I say let's keep moving forward with the most recent adjustments which is the red and then any others because there are a couple that you want I'd bring up as well yep okay okay so next we have item 28 questions comments on this okay next we have item 31 questions comments on this one I I guess my question is why are we asking them to change Hotel one to Silver where' this come from from from last week it came from um the discussion of uniformity all this you know if if one is silver why not all is silver and I'm assuming this is what the staff were taking notes from um that's what was brought up last week okay so the we designed and um budgeted in accordance with the code to provide two different levels of lead certification which is what your code requires all of the programming with respect to our performas has to do with the two different levels that we've committed to to add both of them as silver is a substantial cost and so we we do not agree to that change um it's very expensive Brandon can I ask um with with all the things that have been discussed or because you have written or you know some of these Redline items from from your knowledge do you know that do you know if some of the things that are being asked of will up the points needed for the overall property to have that certification or is there another certification outside of lead that would still meet um you know that vision of what the comprehensive plan is you know being a city um with that green standard there are other options in the Land Development code that apply to Temporary lodging uses um the State of Florida has a program um called the I'm blanking on it now it's it's more oper operationally focused instead of design focused um there's another one called the through the Florida Green Building Coalition I believe um like the applicant said those are different distinct standards um I think when we I originally spoke with the applicant about this last summer and um you know that being the two certification standard silver of course is the higher than the uh the certify which is the base level um I I can't say offhand there are elements that are being asked for and confirmed through conditions that will definitely award points for example the the water reduction above 20% that does award lead credits some of the outdoor um Landscaping improvements I believe will also probably award some credits but if they add up to be a lead silver like the applicants I I I don't know I wouldn't be able to tell so thank you I guess I don't know why we're asking them to do this would be my question what what interest do we have in that humor me because maybe I don't understand the point thing it's one of the on the comprehensive plan it's it's one of the stipulations in the comprehensive plan what the purpose of the comprehensive plan is one of it one of the reasons cited for the all the all the things in the comprehensive plan is you know Green sustainability you know keeping in mind where we are on the Barry Island and so on um I mean this was one of the things that I had in my notes you know we're I'm still not 100% sold on the fact that we have that we're keeping a building when the comprehensive plan and Land Development code very clearly seems to talk about tearing down and rebuilding new so one of the things that I was looking at it's like okay well if you're going to keep an old building it's got to make sure that it's up to today's standards whether it's being consistent in design whether it's being consistent in lead certification whether it's being consistent in in FEMA certification whatever it is the whole point is to have something new better more resilient something that could sustain more something that is better for the environment going forward and I don't see any reason why we shouldn't bring all three buildings to the same level of I'm not sure that it's possible to bring some old buildings up to the the lead standards I'm I I think there would I'm sure somebody smarter than me could could tell you that for certain but I think some of the requirements for those certifications um aren't possible for an older building so you could certainly say that as a way of saying you have to tear the building down um but if if we're not prepared to to be saying you have to tear the tear the building down I think we need to you know be be clear on the consequences I guess that was my my question was if you're treating it as a whole is a certification for the whole regardless whether you have an older building that's being renovated in the middle um as opposed to saying Hotel one is going to be this hotel 3 is going to be that can that and again I don't know the application process for lead can it be as a whole you know because you're if it's by points and we're improving the whole then does it improve it overall for all three I don't know the answer to your question I do know that um we can't bring the sarata up to lead standard you'd have to tear it down and start from scratch well the staff put this here could you help us out with your thought process and asking for this this was just our interpretation of what was one of the ideas brought up at the meeting last week so um I think there was some concern and this again going way back talking with the architect last summer about whether different quality standards could qualify as two of the eight criterias required in the Land Development code we just put that second sentence in there to say that if this was something that were required it would fulfill that intent certified Hospitality certified and Hospitality silver are just different quality levels of the same certification so that's just to you know if that were the direction you were to go so the original condition is what was seen to fulfill the the comprehensive plan and the Land Development code as it's written correct correct that the minimum is is lead certified um which is a out of 110 points it's it's 40 points um to achieve lead silver is a step above that it's it's 50 points and those vary there are site improvements that qualify um they actually get points for things like um the headways of the sunrunner and things like that but there are building requirements as well so and so the the where where it says Lead version 4 BD plus C Hospitality that's the basic lead certification for a transient lodging is that correct they would both be Hospitality um but one is Hospitality certified that's almost like a bronze level and then silver is the next step up from that and are there any steps lower than that uh certified is the is the lowest okay could you explain sorry could you explain the points thing to me again I'm not getting it where these points go what do they do and I only have a basic understanding of it I'm not certified through lead or anything like that but it's um there are 110 points available to a development um 110 being the maximum number of points and there are different categories that those points are awarded in um water efficiency is one of them Energy Efficiency um site improvements reduction in landscape reclaim water use things like that those all qualify toward the development um so some are operationally related some are development related and um they earn points based on certain improvements to the property or to the development that that result in you know efficiency savings so what whatever that point total ends up being is the level that they would end up with for their certification so they get a certain amount of points they get like a cool plaque on the wall I'm being funny here so so what I guess I'm I'm asking what what do these points mean in the real world well and and going back to the water certification standard that was one that that that's condition 28 that was added in that's an actual realized benefit they are there's a federal Baseline for water usage and Lead requires at least a 20% % reduction and they award up to they award points for up to 50% reduction the applicants proposing and committing to 35% that would be a commitment through this condition so they would receive three points out of those 40 that they need to meet by having a 35% reduction in portable water use below the Baseline I must be I must be having a synapse failure here okay points what does it mean though who I think the idea is that the excuse me we need one person at a time so they can hear and they can record so commissioner go ahead and then M go ahead oh I I just okay I get it you get a certain amount of points what's the tangible what does that actually mean what does that do for any of us does a lot um yeah so I think I think the idea is that it's a way of scoring a development on Energy Efficiency and water savings and um uh um you know other ways to be lighter on the environment and use less resources and and and and and then that falls into into line with the comprehensive plan of trying to be a a forward-thinking green City yes and I and I think there's a whole probably a whole slew of things that get you recognized as a green City that I'm not aware of but but it's all the the Energy savings water savings got it thank you that's what I was looking work I just want to say that this is very to me personally maybe and maybe there's other people up here as well that is extremely important because it's page 51 on our comprehensive plan green mission statement right the purpose and for all to hear is that the city overall is leading an effort towards resiliency protecting The Limited water that we have in this city potable water as well as in penel County by doing these kind of things um which is hence why it's important to have like the water use uh waterwise um Plumbing or um equipment or whatever may be storm water um runoff uh you know pollutants all these things are these points that we're talking about so having the higher standard means that that's that's our expectation as a city that this is what we're looking for for large development so to me personally it's important one of the questions that I uh and I don't know if we have an answer to it because we have to realize if they were just remodeling the sarata we wouldn't be talking about this right this remodel is Administrative it wouldn't be here so we have an opportunity to addressing something that is big for the city it's a large um development right my question was whether it benefits the whole site it's a development site you know so maybe it's not just for the old building because the whole site could the whole site I guess is the question get this certificate you know cuz then you're getting points across the site not just the individual building that's that's building I hope that kind of helps but I don't I know we don't have the answer but how do we craft it to meet that goal commissioner resik I I understand your concern um when you look at those General provisions of the comp plan like you're talking about youve this not this board but the board has put standards in the large resort District you have those standards ards in here that we're meeting those two types like the comp plan talks about generally the city shall encourage right and through their development of Land Development regulations you've developed those Land Development regulations and the large resort District specifically says for large Resorts they want two types of lead certification and that's what we programmed in if you go in and you want that for the future you can change those regulations and then when a developer comes in they can say wow how much more is that going to cost me to build in the large resort District but I just I think you need to consider that as you think about this this particular provision um and again we'll just voice that we are in agreement with two leads um because of the additional expense or two silver but the two different that we've already committed to we're totally in agreement with in accordance with your large resort District regulations and Miss Bessel do you again I know that we don't know whether the whole development could apply for it right so part of the problem described by our architect is these buildings aren't completely architecturally done yet so a lot of the certification that you're talking about deals with types of faucets and all of that we have no idea right um we and you can't we I talked to a lead our lead guy today based on a couple of these conditions for example the condition was the water condition was 35% or three stars he said it's the same thing 35% is three stars so we didn't have a problem with your language because it says exactly what did before just in a different way um but again a lot of these lead issues until you have your architectural plans and you start to go vertical with your construction I can't answer your questions even an architect up here we could not answer these questions today because we're not that far along in the project I hope that's helpful I think commissioner you bring up a good point that is one of the base it's one of the fundamentals in the comprehensive plan this is why the comprehensive plan was put in place one of the things that it affords the commission is the ability to put in conditions as we see fit and necessary to help achieve that mission and if we're going to be green and sustainable if we're going to be leading the future I think we should start now I'm not certain it serves us well to to have in our comprehensive plan and our Land Development code options for lead certification um particularly on something that that has to be such a big part of the planning of a building from early stages through the end stages and then um it it it feels a little bit like changing the rules Midstream and and we can absolutely do that right because as you've said the conditional use gives us the ability to do that um but in a in the in the interest of of General Fair dealing it that seems like something we should be telling applicants upfront or or direction we should be giving staff that when they very first meet with a developer to say hey you're going to be held to the highest lead standard um you know before they spend a lot of time and money on designing projects and and and and absolutely we can do we can do whatever we want to do clearly um yeah I mean there are a lot of things that we're asking above and beyond what's required right we ask for 50% Florida native plants above what is required I'm probably going to bring something up in a few minutes talking about 100% for than native plants who knows um but the point is we have a Baseline and then we can set conditions that we feel are important and right now I'm looking at it and saying we're we're being asked to give up a lot and we're not getting much in return and every time we ask for something we're getting a lot of reasons why something can't be done especially when it's one of the big mission statements in the comprehensive plan I mean it's front and center I I think that there are a number of ways that the city is getting a fair amount but uh um I'll save that some of that for later but uh um you know I I think that that we could very easily say well we would be happy to approve this project but we're going to make conditions that make it economically not viable to make sure that it doesn't happen um and so I think as we're going through some of these conditions in addition to making sure that the city gets the maximum benefit that we can get um I think we still need to be looking at it a little bit as as as the project as a whole and and if the base level is that on the whole we're probably getting a lot of benefit from this project and it's going to be a good thing then I don't know that it's worth putting conditions on it that make it economically not viable for the applicant now if we're saying that you know on the whole I don't think this project is a good thing so let's put a bunch of conditions on it that make it not economically viable we can do that too um you know I would prefer to be upfront about what we're doing rather than you know find places to say well you say you're not going to do that so we're going to require it I mean this is something that came up up and about through our last conversation on Wednesday that we then instructed the staff to go back and they came back and put as part of the other things that we discuss and and they've been talking about it for a year so it's not like a huge surprise to anyone right they've been talking for a year that they have to reach two different levels and they had the ability to do that and that was built into the plan so so that that's where I feel like it's a little bit of a of a unfair changing the rules halfway through the game but but if we feel like that's the right thing to do we absolutely can do it I mean the rules haven't changed the rules state that the commission may add conditions that's those are the rules sure yeah absolutely um I just want you know um there's obviously an unknown right we we're not sure of the certification um sorry of of we're sure of what certification but what I'm saying is whether one is better than the other silver is better than not silver right what is the highest level um but because of other conditions that we're seeking or potentially seeking that we might not have discussed overall there may be meeting more of the green Mission you know um we haven't we don't know the landscape design you know I as well would like to talk about the Florida native plants like all these other things that we may be talking about in a little while that without knowing could improve that level of lead right because we I guess we're looking at you both the applicant and and the staff we're not sure right like maybe it does but if we're saying is this the minimum is is having one hotel Silver and one hotel not silver but with everything else that we may be adding with the unknown that maybe it is going to overall be silver I I don't know maybe right um because I don't think none of us up here know or or in the audience know um but that is what at least personally myself I'm striving to do is to to put that standard way higher right because the this development is increasing intensity and density right and this is different than say your business um at smaller magnitude which should be also doing similar things but maybe not because you know you're not putting in as much intensity right um on potable water for example right so and that's why this is important um you know I I can't say what I don't understand lead I've never had to apply so I don't know so I was you know hoping that maybe somebody could explain but I want to maintain a high standard I don't want to say okay well then let's forget about lead you know and forget about the mission that we have on the compreh ensive plan we wrote it for a reason to protect the environment right so um and our resources as well Brandon the city uh staff concurred with the original writing correct correct that's what we spoke with the applicant about um the higher certification for the Southern Hotel uh last summer so you spoke with them but you still gave a recommendation to the commission and the planning board that certifi for one and silver for the other was acceptable I correct I mean that that does meet or exceed in the case of silver the minimum certification required um and there are other you know again not not being a someone with lead certification um there are other conditions in here that I think kind of speak to the environmental benefits the what was brought up before the Florida native plannings and things like that they may not result in lead points but um they provide an environmental benefit so I I tend toci side with commissioner Marriott on this one I feel like we're to me there's a bigger picture question here and you either like the size and scope and density and height of this proposal um but I think when we start getting into the Weeds about would we personally like to go higher um I agree with commissioner Mar I think it's a little late in the game for that particular thing if if we feel that's important and that should be in the comprehensive plan as a statement thou shal we've we've got it two and two so I mean I have the information I need on on this point to move forward to the next Point okay we've got to come to consensus on it so yeah would you mind telling us what that is are you okay with the language as is or we not you're saying amended as is yeah the language as is in 31 today I I think as a whole there's efforts made as far as the the green mission statement to our comprehensive plan I'm I don't know much about the lead C ification that besides listening to everyone here today so that's what I'll say on that I'm prepared to move forward with the information we have now to the next point so you would be okay with the original language of that condition versus the amended language yes be fine with either one I'm fine with the original language that's what staff recommended in their report and I'm fine with that okay I'm deferring to the staff on that one so just so we're clear with all due respect to the staff they make recommendations but it's ultimately our responsibility to look at the comprehensive plan to make those interpretations moving on 32 questions comments i' I'd like staff to come up and maybe read through these a little bit more sure and this was intended to apply specifically to any ornamental um non-essential aesthetic feature on the outside of the structure there is a water wall next to the landscape wall on the front of the screening wall for the um truck docking area and um just to make sure that the applicant is using features that cut down on any kind of need for pable water use for Less essential features on the site you know more the aesthetic features um we just I just provided a list of what I'm aware um you know can can reduce on uh you know the need for replenishment of portable water um if there are specifics the commission would like to see you know we'd be happy to look into it but that this is just a general condition this one I don't know why it just comes across to me as a little bit nebulous um but if if the applicant has no issues with the language yeah so these are those additional efforts to be environmentally friendly um we did look at this with our architect and we can comply with this and we're accept we will accept this is no problem for us okay I'm good anything further on 33 sorry I'm 32 questions comments on 33 Commissioners questions comments on 23 on 33 okay actually I did I apologize how is how can pavers asphalt or concrete be permeable I'm a history major so bear with me this is one we have a modified condition for you um this is Scott gilner he's our civil engineer he's more appropriate to talk about this one good evening commissioner Scott gilner with kimley Horn uh commissioner lorenzza so typically we'd use perious pavers and what you would do is there's a gap between the pavers and rock um concrete can actually be made porous enough that the water will go through it and you'll actually put like a washed 57 stone so that there's rock with void space underneath it um and actually you can do the same thing with a with an asphalt section now most likely we probably wouldn't use concrete or asphalt in the areas um it would probably be perious papers um but but all three are options okay thank you we H we have a clarification it's not really a a red line or maybe it is a red line but it's more so a clarification just to make sure we're clear on this um our issue with the condition is more so that it's not in the vehicular driveways like where valet is and there would be ruting or uneveness of pervious pavement pervious pavement is a good thing in parking spaces that don't get a lot of use but if you're constantly running traffic over them you can create issues that are safety hazard so we had a comment I think you handed out so it's two words or two hyphenated words it's just open air surface parking areas just because we we want to make sure it wasn't for under the garage I think that kind of defeats the intent um and then the second one was for non-traffic rated surfaces so for instance you know if you're doing all the walkways they pedestrian walkways totally understandable um or you're around you know decking areas that makes sense but when you go to you know vehicular valet areas we want to make sure that was clear you know probably some of those areas are going to be concrete elevated uh t t tables that we've talked to staff about so we want to make sure we just clarified some of that thank you can I mayor I just want to be clear here because it it looks like comparing these you're just adding in um proposed into 33 it says and what staff has written says all pedestrian Pathways but then you say all proposed three three words all all proposed right just to make sure that we've gotos um pedestrian Pathways cuz this is about the C the existing ones well most of them are coming out so just want to make sure we're not ripping up existing only to put back new so you know we're going to we're all proposed cuz we rework everything um and then open air surface parking just because I didn't I just want to clarify like the the bottom level of the JW Marriott garage is kind of open air parking or or Surface parking but it's not open to the air and then non-traffic just before non-traffic rated surfaces okay thanks that was just for the valet area I think your St would be fine with that anything further on 33 no questions comments on 34 yes uh at least fatel um so we have a problem with this condition and I want to explain why uh we we didn't talk about this during the meeting but we have proposed having solar on the top of the JW Marriott building um and so if we do any kind of green Roofing We cannot put those solar planers panels up that's number one number two um I'm going to read this because this is more of a technical answer we cannot place a green roof on top of the ballroom area of the JW Marriott because Florida green roofs require because of their local type and plant size a deep 12in soil tray that puts tremendous weight loads on a building structure typical soil trays in other parts of the country are approximately 3 in deep this issue is exacerbated by the fact that this Ballroom area which is the top floor has nearly 100t clear spans so that the ballroom doesn't have a lot of columns in it so that with respect to all that added weight just just doesn't work for a green roof but I did want you to know that we intend to put solar um and and that just never came up during the conversation because it wasn't directly related to a conditional use criteria what what will the what will the solar be used for I I don't know that let me ask Mr Young [Music] electric okay for for the whole building for to offset and supplement you know what what is required so it goes towards a port running a portion of I don't know that they know which portion but it will use be used as partial electricity for that building okay so as a supplement as a supplement understood thank you now outside of the ballroom area are you still considering other areas that not not in that situ I mean obviously not all the roofs are under Ballroom space so um in the areas that are not in that situation um are you all considering it I have to email our architect I don't believe so um but let me check on that they did just mentioned obviously we have the top of the garage we have the pool and then we have the tower where there's the ballroom there's no other roofs there um and there isn't contemplated for the the select service hotel it is not no and for the parking garage there's cars on the top of the parking garage okay because on you know again on the renderings you can't see you know what it is um yeah the elevations show but obviously you probably haven't dove into those but parking is all the way up to the roof okay I I feel like in light of what we just heard there's really only one building that could have it and I'm not sure that's going to make a big difference in a heat island type of scenario and I also feel like it's kind of like that other issue we're kind of adding something um that really isn't addressed specifically in the like in a quantitative way in the comprehensive plan it's just kind of a we'd like to see it type thing so I'm not in favor of making them go through all that for that one building I don't think it's going to make a spit a difference it is mentioned on the comprehensive plan heat Islands um I guess what I would ask is there any any percentage you know are there any other options um you know like planners on the side of the the garage right like is there a way to reduce it without putting a 12 in soil tray um uh partial or percentage wise I and I don't know maybe staff or a city manager might know of things that you've seen in the past or or elsewhere I mean I know I've been to certain places like like in Connecticut you know that offer an amenity because it is also an amenity for um your customers right to be able to have a walk an area you walk through um a garden you know um I can think of Hartford Museum you know for example um where I've seen that and it's not a soil tray you know it's more of a a garden feature that they have to reduce heat Islands um so that's just the thought um and again it it is on the on the plan you know of trying to reduce heat Islands could we perhaps address some of that maybe under the Landscaping section to require some amount of Landscaping on the top floor of the parking garage I mean I think that might that might be kind of what you're talking about is you know if on the you know I'm not sure what the area of the top floor of the parking garage is in relation to the you know to the total area um you know but there there may be some Landscaping that could happen you know Landscaping Planters or or or trees or or something like that on the top floor of the parking garage that could work towards that same type of of effect I don't I don't know if that's a something to be addressed in landscaping or or or something to just be addressed at the site plan level to give staff some guidance of of uh um you know maximizing landscaped area or something like that and this you know number 34 doesn't say what percentage it it also does say or utilize another technique right so is there I I don't know what techniques the applicant might have looked into but what other things can we do again you know we're we're trying to be a part of this community and and what we're trying to do as a city so what can we do to help improve it and set a high standard at to some degree of what we're looking for when developments are coming to our table if I could offer uh one suggestion there you know instead of being specific about install green roofs I think you take that out and utilize other techniques demonstrated to produce heat island effect and improve thermal performances I think I think that way we could work with the applicant to accomplish that and just clarification my comment you I was specifically talking about the roofs the green SPAC is I'm with you completely on that stuff we're fine with that condition provided that it's okay with the city commission just a note too remember we're exceeding the green space and the prvious the perious requirements without all the prvious papers that we just added so there is a lot of green there's a lot less pavement on this project already just just to and and I appreciate that but like I said we really want a high standard right this is an increased intensity and density and and we want a high standard but I am I am good with that language um if you all are okay anything further on 34 questions comments on 35 we're actually we had already programmed in after this meeting a better standard than what your staff put in so we wanted to offer that for you um basically in addition to you you were worried about um oh I'm sorry I grabb the wrong if you recall this was regarding the poret area so we had already planned to do two things to put a wall which will be 120 ft wide by 16 ft tall as well as a green screen to make it look not like a wall in front of it so this just adds that additional layer and we want to offer that as a modified condition if it's it's okay Mr Mayor to pass that out certainly yeah sure no problem I'll take care of it for you thank you you're [Applause] welcome you go [Applause] thank [Applause] do do you have a rendering where you can point this out or I know you obviously don't have a rendering of what you're proposing but maybe in the meanwhile we can discuss [Applause] 42 I'm good with with that one and I think that's an improved amenity for for the public especially with the difficulty um of the utilities um in that area or potential Utilities in that area and we do have a modified condition on this one and if it's okay I'd like to explain um so the issue is not the undergrounding of the utilities it's the overhead utility lines we can't install canopy trees that conflict with the overhead lines we know that obviously once they go underground we don't know when that's going to happen it's a different situation um so our our Landscape Architects indicates that they have programmed trees and Palms based on the required offsite criteria that prev V the utility company from coming in and butchering the tree canopy they said what really happens in reality is that no tree canopy should be within 10 ft of the overhead utility lines because the utility company in their easements has the ability to come in and trim them back and they said what they do is they come in and hack them and the coal canopy dies and so that's really counterintuitive to what what you're trying to do here um and unfortunately they destroy that that tree's canopy um with respect to installing the shad structures I think that came from staff I we think that's a little unreasonable to install a shade structure every 100 ft particularly when you're trying to keep an open pedestrian path so we do have a problem with the shade structure but we have no problem with uh a modified condition and it basically talks about we shall install inground canopy trees adjacent to the expanded Frontage sidewalk as viable and to the extent not in conflict with overhead utility lines that's the the Vision that we added in there in locations where inground planting would cause recurring conflicts with underground utilities the applicant shall install above ground Planters with canopy um and canopy trees shall be planted every 30 ft so we just account for the overhead utility lines and remove the shade structures [Applause] yeah thank [Applause] you this is really small this is really small but I don't think you can see it very well um they they can they can Okay can do you touch the phone so it lightens up yeah just there you go I'll stand here okay that's so that's modified condition 35 correct so there would be an actual you know wall as well as Greenery in front there um just to add an additional layer so it's not just Greenery or it's not just a wall okay for both sound and visual mitigation thank you anything further on 35 anything further on 42 I'm I'm good with 42 and in hopes that the undergrounding is going to happen before more this this we I don't know what the the stages are you know and when the sidewalk is placed in and when Landscaping comes in but hopefully the universal lines and you know everything is undergrounded Mayor if I may Matthew McConnell just to clarify for 35 is the consensus when you say nothing further that you're okay with the language proposed by the applicant now that you've seen the wall for 35 yes and then for 42 proposed by the applicant yes same yes thank you okay now there there are no more there are no further Redlin items I gather that Commissioners you may have additional thoughts on conditions who would like to go first I think he had said he had some before mine so hold just give me a moment here M you're ready go ahead so I've got a question regarding condition 40 your question is for Brandon could you just explain that that one please sure so the the default side buffer in the large resort district is 30 feet the commission is able to reduce it up to 15 ft it's not a variance it's something you can consider as part of the conditional use permit process the language used in the code is that um in consideration of any Superior alternatives for the buffer would be part of the justification for the reduction in that depth or width sorry um the applicants proposing 15 ft we did speak to them early on about this I understand it has to do with the um accommodation for the um access on on the North side one of the things that had been asked of Staff early on was that we look into achieving more um beach access where were possible and um in talking with the applicant it seems like with that being a 15t with it looks like it could still accommodate the Landscaping plus an encroachment of an expanded Beach Walk there so we've recommended three feed so I guess my my question is you know there's a proposed public beach access on the south side of the property there's proposed one in the middle of the property MH the one on the North End of the property that's out outside of the property the Brightwater Beach Estates one um my my question is would the applicant be willing to add regardless of what Brightwater Beach States decides to do add a public beach access there because there really isn't a clear one from upam Beach South I'm curious of the other Commissioners opinion on that I think that um last week we um the city manager I think also emphasized or let us know that they were going to do the research as a city on the beach the private property right if it's private property I don't have a copy of the deed so I'm not quite sure how Brightwaters um plays with this but that that research was going to be done and from what I believe from what the applicant had said that if if there is an agreement that the applicant would offer three feet to the four feet right to make it a seven foot wide and again if we're thinking about Open Spaces and Views to the gulf and you know that you know a lot of the comments that we've heard from the public I think we'd be accomplishing that if if um I want to say accomplishing but heading towards that right that that we have this open um space that would provide a a much nicer beach access for all so I think that was something that you had on your I say to-do list right it was I don't have a clear answer for that I believe it's an easement at this point uh Brandon can you address that further the Bright Water um piece I believe is an easement and if we want to use it as a beach access that's a potential I I don't have an answer for that right now I'm sorry I think there's quite a bit more investigation you'll have to be done to be to be exactly clear but I I think that is the situation to answer your question whether it's buffer or beach access it it's it's open space and we whatever the commission directs if you would like a public beach access there just to give a little more background there too the there were a lot of balancing that went on on the North so in that green space we'd put as much vegetation as would have gone in in we we made it more dense um and so we would just you know take some of that out to put the beach access there you just need to let us know how wide you would need and Scott you would need to just see how much space we have there okay and I guess what I'm getting at is adding another beach access to your property absolutely my hesitation or concern would be speaking on the on behalf of Brightwater Beach Estates they may not want to combine it I have had we've discussed the applicant actually met with them they don't want it combined at least that was what they told us I know that Jennifer and McMahon with the city had met with them several times to try to get that um we're happy to add a condition that says you know once we start installing all of that we kind of want to have a direction um but maybe prior to some kind of construction approval to the extent I think we already have that in there don't we well I mean the other concern is right now I believe don't quote me on it but there are just bushes AB buding that walkway on the south side of it so you know if those are on our property or theirs I don't know I think it's on your so then then brings up the question what are you planning on putting there you know if you do put a a public beach access are you going to put and it is bright what if we find out it is indeed Brightwater Beach Estates and they don't want to combine it will there be a divide in between it I have to ask ask I mean I think we could build it either way but let me ask our civil engineer to Scott gilner with kimley horn again um for the record um so the the four I believe it's a four foot sidewalk it's a four foot strip and Brightwater owns it is my understanding I have to go back and look at the survey but from recollection I I believe that's correct that's my understanding as well and um I I think my concern is with with them not wanting it it and it has a public beach access sign now so people are using it because it's public beach access you know they don't know who owns it at that time I think we'd kind of create confusion if we were to do one immediately adjacent to it or even 5T away from it and it kind of become a thorough fair that they may not want um that would be my concern just thinking about like how we plan it um and so I I think we're certainly happy to do it I just I feel like we've heard them loud and clear about what they liked or didn't like I don't I feel like we'd be kind of putting it right next to them and creating a lot of issue if we did so but yeah I mean I I feel like the best thing to do for everybody would be to have their four feet we add three feet to it we have a nice 7ot walkway that's much wider you know as I commented before you have wagons pulling in each direction that would be a nice walkway that would be good for everyone I think but um obviously we need their buying to do so right okay and since we were talking about that easement I don't know if it was on number 26 maybe I I missed it but is it mentioned there I know when it was presented last week it wasn't one of the red arrows you know that we were pointing in one of the um exhibits I don't I would have to go back onto my computer and look for which one that is but there was no arrow pointing towards um the north end of that hotel so is that something that should be ritten now even though we not sure whether we're going to have the easement or not I mean be a potential easement I I don't know if it has to be there or not I'm where are you referring to I'm sorry um so in number 26 you know we talk about the 15ot beach access um the one that's on the south end and I'm trying to look really quick to see if it's set it I know I brought it up last week um when we had the diagram that had all the easements that were going to be offered um to the city but there was no indication on that exhibit showing the North End of the property for for this particular reason that we're talking about right now right we didn't at that point in time right it's a contingent condition that if they agree we would add it in so that would be in addition to what you saw obviously we we didn't have that labeled did that answer your question I'm not sure it did I guess it's like a question maybe to city manager or to our City attorney whether it has to be written or or just because we know you're doing your homework right you're going to do your homework and find out is that enough well I think as long as we have the condition in there we're covered okay yeah the language will control what whatever I mean has to be submitted subsequently to this okay so so just so I'm understanding as the language reads regarding this North part of the property unless Brightwater Beach estate says we're open to adding in the the pathway then there are no plans to add a beach access because potentially it could look weird or be odd to have two next to each other we were just complying with the buffering required by your code so so there weren't any plans but again I mean if you would like a public beach access we can add another public beach access I don't think other than the conflict you know we're just pointing that out for the commission because you're going to hear from others other than the people in this room on that we just want to be clear but whether it's green space buffer or whether it's beach access I don't think that we are married to what goes into that area so just let us know how you'd like us to proceed yeah my concern with having them add a beach access there without having the approval of Brightwater Beach Estates is we're putting we're essentially combining them with not act actually combining them if that makes sense in layman's terms right no and I agree I mean aesthetically it won't look nice having a wall in between and to be honest I'm not even sure if sarata owns that wall or if it's on the property line for the so so it's on there so you're going to have a wall regardless you know I'm not saying let's just go up knock down down that wall and and make it wider I'm not being intrusive by by any means on that yet the wall just to clar clarify the wall is on the North End of the Brightwater Beach Estates pathway which is on the south end of the sea Mark so it's between it's it's on the property line between the beach access and the the north property cor so it's not it wouldn't be on their property it's not on the applicant's property correct picturing it correctly but okay I'm good with that as it reads now so yeah are we giving the city flexibility is this what we're trying to do is give the city flexibility to decide whether um to have an expanded beach access by getting some kind of agreement if it's necessary with Beach water or to leave it as is and use buffer is that what we're doing so if if I may Andrew um Matthew McConnell for the record so number 40 actually says that the city when requested by the city they will provide the easement if it's before the permit for hotel one if it's not then they'll use it as a buffer understood so there's the language is already in there like the moment we request it once we determine what we're determining internally they're going to provide it to us based on that condition I just wanted to clarify understood okay I can move on from that one thank you and and since you went to 40 because I my my question on 40 was because it says a 15ot buffer and and I do want this to be the discretion for the city but to um if with a 15ft buffer and let's say we widen that path then that 15 foot buffer of of landscape is now no longer 15 foot right because you have now um a path right so you're reducing it by 3 feet maybe a little bit more depending on what we're using if there's a wall or whatever it may be so I would want that number to change depending on the scenario that happens you know I don't know how much um you know I'm trying to reduce the impact on the Northern property um C Mark right with um a greater density um or um with you know if it's say you know because we have this discretion from 15 to 30 or even more right as as a commission so this is all about reducing the impact on the Northern property so how can we word it so there is flexibility increased that impact you know I again we were brought today even with that wall um to help with the the loading and unloading of Gest you know on the North End so all that is you know is a good way to minimize that impact so I want to make sure we're doing the most that we can to minimize that impact on the Northern property U for the record um we can plant just as much vegetation in 12 feet as 15 ft so while it is be it will be 3T less you can have the same same amount of vegetation that we would have um the extra dense vegetation we can fit it in it's just going to be very you know it'll be a lot more crammed in but but we can do that our engineer just confirmed okay because we I think it was mentioned a standard standard B I think I wrote read somewhere um what is a higher standard than that I guess and maybe you would need to explain that um standard sure so it doesn't necessarily apply in this buffer type but generally speaking the city has a b and c buffers and C is the highest C is when you would have a commercial building next to a single family home you would use a c buffer which is a 10 to 15 foot width and a very dense buffer the applicant based on what they're currently showing is generally between a b and a c depending on where you are in the property there's no specific standards for these buffers but if we made it equivalent to something where it was a required situation that's about what they would land in and I believe on the North side it's it's closer to C just based on density of planting so it is a higher higher density buffer Brandon before you sit down sorry um we my my other question is regarding 44 so not to get into a whole crosswalk pitch but crosswalk safety is very important thing um I I think our crosswalks need improvements in in certain ways my understanding is the safety study that's part of what it's looking into is that correct correct I I don't know that there are any identified improvements to cross walks in front of this property um I believe I have a print out I could possibly bring up if you give me a minute or two so I'm just trying to understand what it's referring to in 44 for or potentially what it could be referring to in terms of actual improvements um I I would have to look that up okay I I'll look it up I'll get back with you all right thank you for um 26 um I where we're talking about the um Dune restoration um I know we had a a rendering or diagram not specific I think I saw maybe 15 foot if I if I remember correctly on the depth um and and I felt that it was important to be sure because I mean we mentioned restore the dunes right well we're not bringing it back to what Mother Nature had obviously so what do we mean by restore what's the actual depth of of this Dune um being proposed dner with kimley horon Associates again um do you mean depth from I'll say I'll say yeah uh I'll call it from the boardwalk area out it's approximately 100 ft depending on where you are so roughly 100 ft of Dune area as you work out obviously it jogs along sometimes I think it's 80 sometimes it's 110 120 okay and again is this just something that we need to have written to make sure that this this is what we're looking for well this is a part of the record okay it just doesn't say that that's why I want to make and maybe I missed it because we're talking about when the 10- foot that I was seeing is I guess a 10- foot wide path for Access and the 15ot wide um you know path for the fire you know um access so so I know it's the record but it's not specific that's my thing is is that to scale just just because there there is language in the it is yeah so so there's language in the conditions that talk about substantially similar to what's being supplied okay so if this is to scale staff can take a measurement from that and get if it's 198 whatever it it also has all the acreages on it so there's actually a coverage associated with it so you know let's just say for instance when we go to fdp um they want us kind of round out the ends and make them wider and maybe it's more narrow in the middle or vice versa um we're still trying to provide that acreage to you and coverage so I mean I think you have a couple different measurements we're happy to provide ask Ryan I believe that's L chart below as far as the excuse me that's listed in your chart yes sir yes sir that's existing dunes and proposed Dunes we show that um Ryan can you please zoom in I think it's five and six that talk about the you know the plans being specific and etc etc okay yeah and you can actually see each doing areas called out like 7350 Square ft in the top one 14275 ft in the middle so we try to do by acreage just to see how much we're providing obviously that's a little flexibility as you Contour that and figure that out okay thank you and then the other one on this particular um number and it might come out elsewhere CU um on storm water um one you know one of the things that um I did do a little um further talking on after last week was um a I know Swift Mud and fdot so this is probably going to come back to you or both are going to review this but as a city overall um you know I personally would like to add not as a city by myself and and as a city what I'm when I'm thinking of green Mission this is what it comes to I know we don't have a um a number a percentage um a rubric if you want to call it a rubric that makes it a more but um my concern is that this Vault that was proposed which could change you know we we don't know what what um Swift Mud or fdot are going to say um because this hasn't been taken there but that we want a higher standard and the reason why I'm saying it now is because we won't be a part of this later that there is some type of pre-treatment before going into the Vault and some treatment when it sheet flows out into go forward on a seasonal high on a rainy day on every summer when that WTS to capacity which could happen um again not knowing the exact the exact measurement can we have a treatment and again fdot might be putting this but for a need to for a criteria to govern um a new system for us this is new overall I would say for this particular city um I think there's only one now that I've seen that we're that's being proposed right that we have um a pre-treatment um a greater level of pollutant removal um should there be storm water runoff and I don't know how to how to CFT so you're probably getting more treatment than any other Vault I'm aware of um basically if you go back to what we talked about last Wednesday you only have about 12% in the largest largest storm event so in a 100-year Swift Mud storm event every single drop of water that goes into that ball is treated never discharges from the site in a 100-year storm event so typically in a treatment situation and city manager can assist me with this but you're typically treating an inch 2 in usually and you're going to Swift Mud criteria but about 4 Ines of rainfall is about the most you would treat typically um you're treating every rainfall up to 10 12 in you're treating the entire thing and and we're treating it through the sediment you're treating it through percolation of the ground which is correct so therefore and I'll just be fous you know if there's a an oil rig out in the Gulf of of uh on the Gulf of Mexico that spills oil are you okay with oil percolating through the sediment on the shore because you know we're not treating it you know I'm just being over you know over so are we okay with that when we know in that same website stormtrap there is always an option for pre-treatment right so I'm just trying to say cuz it is a possibility that it could sheet flow into no um you I I'm sure you won't guarantee it 100% for me when you say no but there that in an event that it could happen um and why not treat it you know so so so treatment so for instance we'll go to the pre-treatment version one of the ways you would do pre-treatment is you would put it into a landscape area right and I'm assuming this is what you're thinking landscape area you you put a drain a little bit higher than everything it percolates into the ground and then if you have any extra rainfall it drops into the drain goes into the Vault well what is that drainage soil it's percolating into the ground correct not saying that's but but that's what pre-treatment is MH so whether you're percolating into the ground there or you're percolating in the vault you're still treating it I I understand what you're saying a a lot of times when you're discharging offsite so you you pre-treat to go into a Swale and a lot of times they do a treatment train so they'll do U first thing it'll go into a curb Island and it'll go into the rain Garden then it'll go into you know maybe an exfiltration trench and then it'll go to the pond and that's a treatment train as it's taking out but in the end that's going out to a pond system or out into the bay or something would this because of the amount ofum volume you're storing on on site and you're discharging into the ground you're you're you're pre-treating and treating pretty much every storm event you're talking about doesn't the vast majority of all our storm water go directly into the bay or something not treated that's I think that's how all our storm water cor but most of your system within the city now and that's why you have this code because most of the city was built before the code existed is that you have undersized storm pipes and not a lot of treatment systems even anywhere around and so they discharge basically directly into the bay or into the to the dot RightWay um that's exactly what we're not doing in this system I I understand what you're saying but we're accomplishing exactly what you're saying already commissioner Fels I I have an answer for you um again this is in draft form it's nothing nothing's confirmed yet um but it's looking like primarily median improvements in front of the property there is a recommendation for a potential mid block Crossing down at 50th um but nothing in front of this property just to add to that as part of the Scott gilner again with kimley horn it's not part of that condition because I think that was a condition that staff wrote based on the safety study and we're happy to comply with whatever was in front um but we're also doing the mid block Crossing as part of our fdot preap meeting minutes which is we have the one at the southern end and then we have one that basically aligns with the 15ot beach access in the center of our site so in addition to what's in the safety study we've already met with FD uh client was very happy to have that beach access so that immediately where that big 15ot beach access is there's also a mid block Crossing that we're adding so it would look like any of the other ones out there with RR rrfb you know the reflective beacons um and then we would have the island and then the exact kind of crosswalk setup that you have out there and is it with like you push a button yeah it's one of the ones where yep okay they're called rfbs I'm losing the Acron acronym right now but understood okay thank you thanks Brandon for um 36 the the percentage for the trees for the native um plants um I know we had conversations um or I did personally with the the landscape architect um you know I would definitely would want that percentage higher um I know know in in talking with with him you know we also talked about making sure that and I'm sure it's written here someplace trying to read through it really quick about the um not use of invasive the if let's just say 70% were Florida native the 30% would be non-invasive exotic plants that you know could do harm making sure that um the rear and I know we said it somewhere else um the um west side of the property line wouldn't have any um you know so I I just want to kind of clarify to make sure let me expand on that based on that meeting that we had the trees that we submitted as part of the conditional use those are the trees that you requested the non-aggressive the not I I don't know what how what they're called but but those so that's why we provided that pallet so that you have comfort that these are the trees that we're going to use and that they meet those criteria so rather than drafting a condition we actually presented to you the exact type of trees that we'd be using on the property to meet that that criteria with respect to a higher percentage I and I want to bring this up for the whole Commission because it's something that we talked about if you increase that percentage it starts to not look as nice so it's always our balance and one of the reasons that we put the the more full along Gulf Boulevard right is so that when you're looking down the street you see the prettier trees and then we take the greater percentage of the Florida native zero at the line and you sort of weed them out so that the more native less attractive in most situations plants are on the beach side um but if you do increase that we have concerns and our landscape architect had concerns about the visuals and so we just want it to be transparent that it is not going to look nearly as pretty the higher you go above 50% now is it possible to have a range you know like I think something that we talked about was in working with the staff again I'm not here to decide the landscaping design um because I haven't seen it but working with the staff that the goal is to try to increase as much as possible and I think I've mentioned even with with your um landscape architect and I know I spoke to the city manager about this that in some cases where the another concern was the availability um of certain plant species because of heights you know let's say uh an 8ft shade tree was required by the code but we're able to find um you know a s foot tree um for it would would we be able to compensate for that knowing obviously it's going to grow another foot um but because you need to meet that code because we're trying to exceed this that it would be allowable um and I don't know how we can do that or if it's possible um I don't know if you you thought about so just to give you a little background on that because I think it's helpful in your discussion one of the things landscaped architect was really concerned about is there the Florida native vegetation that grows higher and gets bigger is very limited and even if we put in there um certain types sometimes it's incredibly hard to get those at at that type of maturity from the nursery and so one of the reasons that he was comfortable with the condition as it's written is it allow it accounts for those kind of you the last thing we want to do is agree to something and then we can't find the trees to put in um of that size that are Florida native so we are comfortable that we can accomplish the 50% we're not comfortable with all of those parameters we're willing to put a good faith effort or something I mean we absolutely will try to work through that um but again that's going to be really constricted by what's available and also the Aesthetics um and when you only have a certain amount of trees to choose from it starts to look very monotonous and it doesn't look beautiful and full along Gul Boulevard so just things for the commission to consider answer your question though you know when we review it we'll have to meet the standards that are in our code for the size okay and it and um is it possible um Mr Sanders to know whether there is some flexibility I know we got to meet the code and it's kind of hard but we're trying to exceed it um the Florida friendly I'm talking about that if working with you and and the staff you're able to get closer to a higher percentage because you know I I'm not going to do the work for you I know I've talked to people there's a lot of um distributors in the State of Florida um that do that have that specific goal to increase the maturity of native plants availability for developers um you know I'm not other than know that it exists I know it exists so how do we help you know increase it is what you're asking to draft something into a condition that says that if we are able to achieve greater than 50% staff would have the ability to wave up to a certain percentage of the size of the trees in order to accommodate that you're basically saying is there flexibility for us to try to get there if we can't get because of the vendors yes I think that's where we're headed right and I'm not talking about a Seedling obviously you know something that we know it's in feet versus eight feet or something that's something we could work with the landscape architect on you know when we get there okay just a point of clarification we have to meet the code so I think we need some condition that allows staff to wave portion of the code to meet that goal otherwise we there's no legal mechanism I don't think unless this board agrees to that now for us to not meet code when we go through and get our permits yeah I agree there needs to be some exception there and there are other conditions that speak to this but maybe the city commission could affirm what was just talked about if if it's something that you're on board with but there is language in the code alternative designs for required buffers may be by the city manager if they meet the intent of the code if you're finding that this does meet the intent of the code they plant more Florida native or Florida friendly Landscaping in exchange for some kind of a waiver on the height or caliper that might be that I I think that would be covered we can do that administratively correct cor correct and it would you know just because it's it's a determination that the alternative design meets the intent of the regulations and sound Landscaping practices just if there were an affirmation that whatever conditions placed in would would do that and mayor I think you had I think you wanted to talk about this as well I don't want to no consider anything that you you might have been thinking you've got it covered on on the plans yep and then there was one that I didn't see here and i' I'm just trying to look for it really quick from the print out that I got right um today for this meeting for um in reference to improving the safety on Gulf Boulevard um the sidewalk right and and I think you all know that I talked about the curb cuts um before and the reduction which is in um our comprehensive plan right we're looking for a reduction in curb Cuts I know there's three existing curb Cuts so um keeping what is there makes it seem like we're just keeping what is there but anybody who's lived here long enough knows that the three weren't used all the time right so something that you know I would like again and this is improving safety um we know there's traffic we know there's I know personally there's going to probably there's potential issues with either people coming north or south on Gul Boulevard where they're going to turn bikers Walkers and and so forth that having a main entry which I read also a lot of fdot documentation and panel's forward that that is something that um they look for that one be the main and one be um ancillary if you want to call it ancillary one that allows for loading and unloading for trucks you know if you think of the one on the North End um uh you know whether you have a a bar or or something that only allows for loading unloading trucks or for fire EMT and if you're all familiar with this they all have you know fobs basically that are given to them so they could open um these Gates along G Boulevard um that is something that that I um would like to see if I may um we did meet with fdot we will meet with them again if you would like we will make a commitment to meet with them again we feel really confident that they're going to tell us the same thing about these entrance points and the redundancy points and the safety points but we we talked about this as a group we will be happy to meet with them again and sort of propose this but the only thing we would ask in return is if they do make a change based on what we say that we can make those administrative changes during site plan approval but but we will affirmatively you can put a condition in there that within you know you know 60 days or whatever we will meet with fdot it's hard to get a meeting with them so give us 60 days please and I don't know what you all think about it I mean it's just me talking I don't know if you thought about this um at all I've thought through it all in De for two months I I would defer to fdot on that one I think I think I mean I think that's what that's what we have to do anyway correct like I think they're the the ultimate decider on what happens on G Boulevard so I I think if they're if they can meet with them again and um and this is for the city manager um is that something that you participate as well um knowing the goal of what written in the comprehensive I want say it's the goal I'm sure it's written as a goal but on on the comprehensive plan of reducing curve Cuts is this something that you participate in um because we know it will be an administrative decision but I just want to make sure that the city is involved in this yes the city's definitely involved with the dot discussions on on any projects for the record Scott gilner with kimley horn I just for commissioner res Nikki I just want to kind of show you I I think what you described makes sense you typically have one primary access and auxiliary access one primary access and auxiliary access I think that's exactly what we're doing here we have the JW Marriott to the north the northern driveway is your primary access the center one is really your auxiliary access it's where your service trucks come out it's also where your emergency fire access goes in to get to the beach access that goes out through the 15ft beach access the main access for the two hotels to the South is the southern access so we actually I think kind of exactly how you described it is kind of what we have we have primary access for JW the northern one the auxiliary access really the center one and the primary access for two hotels to the South is the southern access and and then and again and I can't see that on this because I don't I didn't see that I I saw it as three in total um preferably the center would be your main right because remember what I'm what I'm also thinking is about the Southern and Northern properties Belle weather has um a curve Cuts fairly close to the property line on the south end of this property C Mark has another one that's close to the Northern end of this property actually they have two right that that are fairly close to each other and when you're talking about pedestrian safety that's what I'm trying to address so I I hope that's what you know again this is could be administrative but I want to make sure that that's part of the discussion is it's not just this property but the effect on both the northern and I'm sure fdod will do this too that's how but I again that I want to make sure on the record that this is what we're trying to accomplish is the safety of the pedestrians the vehicles on the road the bikers as an added you know and and that the staff are tasked with that in making sure that we accomplish that thank yeah I think we we have REM marching orders on that I think we do May I'd like to request a recess brief one all right let's uh recess until 9:50 11 minutes back in session okay where do we leave off commissioner is Niki um let me just go through something since I have it in front of me because I think um some housekeeping things before I forget um one some of the wording and and you'd have to do kind of like a search through all the documentation on specifically on the staff report wherever it says request um for it to be required um and this is the teacher and me um I I would ask that as a housekeeping and also where um on a resolution um where it says where as and then we have the applicant Derek Hut again as a housekeeping for this to be um clarified Alan Smallwood um and I don't know if possible um I know there was we we talked with um Mr Young who spoke last week and um making sure I don't know if it needs to be on writing um but that Sussex is um in order to protect the city can it be in writing that they're behind this LLC you know the and that and that's just a question um and that that would go to the City attorney as well um but those were some of my kind of housekeeping that that I wanted to address yes that's actually a good catch with the um uh Derek how who's no longer there so that should be updated to the current um signatory with respect to a confirmation we have said on the record Colombia Sussex how they own the property and that they are the parent company I'm not sure what else you want with respect to confirmation I defer that to the [Laughter] attorneys I mean I'm sure you can supply whatever have you already supplied that information or I mean an org chart showing that they're coming down that they're app parent it's it's going to show I can put a letter in to say this will confirm that Columbia susex is the parent company of CP St Pete Beach LLC if that makes you comfortable yeah something to that effect with your signature I think as a member of the Florida bar you're yeah okay and then just the request to require this yeah so I mean I guess there were some some verbage that says the city requests I I looked through I didn't see where that was Brandon can find it but yeah I don't know if there there was one other housekeeping matter that I forgot to bring up um when we talk about and this is probably for the city manager as well as Brandon we talk about prior to the issuance of the building permit for hotel one we're assuming that is the vertical building permit for the buildings not like a demo permit or and we just want to clarify that for the record because technically permit could mean a lot of different things I'm pretty sure that's the intent but I just want to make sure okay thank you very much Brandon do you have any I mean the requests because I did try to scan for that I only found one requests in there there were several times in the staff for report where we asked where we had requests and that was for information that we that's what I meant did I me probably sorry staff report okay well the staff report's not going to control it'll be this the conditions I think isn't it there had been times where we had asked for information if it was available things like debris Recycling and other things that are promoted through the code or comp plan but aren't necessarily part of the conditional use permit criteria but there was one item in the resolution that was pertaining to the water features we had requested that but we changed that to a sh so that's a that's a mandatory requirement M does that cover everything okay got it and is it Allen Smallwood so is alen yes I think that's what it was I've got the alha David that you sent me yeah it is Alan okay okay good so well go ahead go ahead I go by all means I think overall there's a lot of good with this project um I think a lot of efforts have been made in areas where um you know it's it's my job to follow the code and I may not agree totally with everything that's in there um but it's my understanding that's that's my job with with this conditional use permit along with other things of course but and there's just a couple items for me like I brought it up earlier section 397 street level facades and C where it's talking about the parking structures and where it ab ab buts a public road and it to will be designed such that the function of the building is not readly apparent except at points of Ingress and egress and I'm curious you know it's as I asked the applicants Council the four renderings we saw is that what you wanted to to limit yourself to as far as you know what you were submitting so I guess my question to the other Commissioners is do they find those acceptable well you know and again I think it's this is coming back to the staff I think when we're talking about um architectural design or elements or like the curb Cuts or um the shades the shade trees the um Landscaping um Arch U Landscaping architecture um you know I think this is something that we're going administratively address I think there specific one on the the r ings we saw I think I think it was a consensus that those will be presented at the community meeting uh to get input and then that would come back for the commission to decide which one you want yeah I think that was the way that was a consensus of of the four of the four that were supplied correct correct okay and you guys are good with that yep I am no I think that it's um you know we live in a world of parking garages that are built to similar codes and so I I don't know that any of us is not clever enough to see a to to recognize a parking garage when we see one even if it even if it's designed to look as little like a parking garage as possible so I think on the one hand it's very easy to look at those renderings and go this isn't supposed to look like a parking garage but it kind of looks like a parking garage but it's also I think because so many parking garages are built to similar codes where you know it doesn't really look like the parking garage at the airport but it looks like all the parking garages downtown um so I for me personally I think it's a reasonable compromise and then good I'm not sure I agree right um it says it's not supposed to look like one I'm not sure how you make a nine-story garage on the main road in front of everybody not make it look like one but as you said it's not on us to decide whether we like to code or not but to apply it and that is the standard and that is what it says yeah and you know I think to your point commissioner Marriott maybe not so much as does it look like a garage but has the applicant done everything possible to make it look as nice as possible right yeah I think that's that's more my question um and then the other one which we haven't brought up yet under criteria for review section 412 is 9B the proximity of any adjacent residential and I brought this up in the prior meeting residential building to the Florida CC SE line and degree to which the proposed temporary lodging use and or any accessory use or structure maintains an open view of the Waterfront from neighboring properties and this item along with other items in reading this is subjective um do do those units in the C Mark will they be able to look over the and again this was address addressed last meeting we talked about it will they be able to look over the Sur a property anymore some of those units that are level seven and up no but will they still have a view of the beach front yes they will so that's subjective um quite frankly but that's just another point you know in reading through this and giving this thought over the past few days that I kept coming back to so I was curious of the commission's opinions on that one you boy you read my mind that that's one of my sticking points um and I specifically asked that question you know can you define view is it 20° is it 90° and from what I've heard from the staff and others there's not an answer to that so it's kind of open interpretation is the best I could come up with yeah and I'll um I mean just a personal example I live across from the large resort district and long before I ever even thought about getting involved with this um and when I purchased my house I notice I could walk at the end of the street and I could look across and see the sunset almost to the beach but I was aware that there was a hotel there I'm aware that Redevelopment is is part of cities um you know so I've given that consideration as well specifically with 9B and and you know thinking of those unit owners who and I understand some have owned in there for a long time but others others haven't um you know so that that comes to mind as well just just being aware of the environment that you're purchasing in um or living in but again that one's a little bit subjective to me with how it's written and quite frankly I can see both sides of it I'll I'll just say it is it is a hard one um you know throughout the city where you you have homes right um and and I'll speak for myself I I live in the Donar neighborhood right so when I first moved there there was a drawbridge right so in in that year 2010 there was a drawbridge now there's no longer the drawbridge now we have a new bridge did my view change absolutely did I have to endure construction absolutely did the view improve well I could say now maybe it improved a little bit I'm not saying a building is the Same by any means but but we were met with that you know at a time before I lived there there was no Bridge you know I don't remember all the residents coming to the donar's defense which I know through historical documents that there was a large group of people against the drawbridge okay people lost waterfront property okay so it is difficult don't get me wrong I hear the residents I understand the frustration I went to see Mark I did see the view now not only towards the beach but you could see the Skyway Bridge um from many of those balconies okay so then it goes back to um what you know commissioner Lorenzen just said what's that percentage it's not written in the code so are we losing 100% are we okay with 30% are we okay with 70% it is very subjective you know can you lose 100% yes I've come to board of adjustment meetings because a property owner in our neighborhood bought a house that had an empty lot next to it now it has a four story home and they're at foundation so um and they're on waterfront property um so it is difficult it hurts people in in many ways it's it's very difficult to answer so you know I I don't see what we're trying to decide here um as easy it's difficult um but it's happening everywhere you know do you say stop development overall including homes including commercial um because of what could happen we get used to something for a very long time um but how do you justify it and it's not just you know it's property rights um it it is in our code we've got to maintain a view but that it's hard what what is that view what percentage is that view can we control our neighbor or how can we be better neighbors again why I emphasize how we improve the impact to the neighbor you know we're talking about C Mark I'm deferring to the applicants attorneys knowing that they have spoken to the bellweather because they represent them but I would have asked the same things to them and that owner and how what's the impact because there's going to be one um so it's happening on both ends so it is very difficult um so I can't give you a here's the rubric here's how we could say yes or no because it doesn't exist um so it's just difficult and for me fair and I appreciate I appreciate that input you know a lot of those thoughts for thoughts I have been having as well um but again I'll you know I'll say it again I think there's a lot of areas where they went above and beyond um and I I guess my question is did they do the same thing with the design of the parking garage did they do the same thing with the design of the JW with the views so Let Me Pitch into this particular discussion um I think when you look at it let's take the view issue right you're not going to like me saying this but you have to be able to say yes or no right it's not making a decision is not an option right so as much as we would like to say well it's a tough decision we got to make a decision right and no matter which way you decide you're going to have to explain to them why you made that decision right so in the case of saying we're going to proove the project then you have to be able to explain to the cmark residents here's why we made that decision yeah it's going to kill your view it's going to kill your property values but here's why I made that decision anyway the SEC the criteria that I use is with a reasonable person come to the same conclusion or if I was a c Mark resident would I make the same decision and that's something all of us have to be able to answer if you lived in that building would you be okay with your view gone and your property value is being decreased by whatever amount it is conversely if a reasonable person a reasonable average resident from out in the public if they were here to make the same decision would they make the same decision knowing the impact the negative impact it will have on the immediate residential property values and that is something that is specifically covered in Our Land Development code and our comprehensive plan because of discussion with views it isn't an arbitrary thing in fact it's mentioned three times it was important enough to reiterate how important the preservation and the maintenance of views in Vistas is in fact it was so important that they took the time to write it out three different times in three different sections right and so it is part of our you know of our duty here to say well yeah it's a tough decision of course it is it should be a tough decision right somebody's not going to be happy the end of the decision right but we need to be able to look at the Land Development code and the comprehensive plan and say well based on what this says here's how I'm basing my decision and with the views it seems to be pretty straightforward right you got to maintain them you got to preserve them you got to protect them I'm not sure that this project is doing that in fact I'm not seeing any attempts to mitigate that in fact if we go back to the December 5th meeting and commissioner Nicki if I can pick on you again just because you you quite often like to ask for renderings right and I understand for me as well it helps me when I see things maybe not everybody operates that way but certainly is helpful and December 5th I asked you know what are the views like today cuz they said well this is what the views will be and oh my God it could have been like this but don't worry we're going to give you this and I said well can we see what they look like today oh we don't have that I said well can you bring it for the next time two months they had and when we asked them last week again do you have them no it wasn't deemed important enough for us to be able to see what do they have and what will it cost them and the views that they will lose it's not important enough right they're dismissive of the residents right when when you know the applicant came and he talked about the way that he talked about those residents you know those gosh darn pesky residents always bothering us about their views in their cell phone towers that's somebody's livelihood that's somebody's biggest most important asset and how to be so callous and so dismissive anyway I don't think that's necessarily the the only in the biggest issue right because we talked about in the beginning and said hey okay before we look at what conditions we're going to apply and I mean I I brought a list of things that I looked at it as I'm reading through the conditions and say well if it does get approved at least the residents should we should try to get a fair deal for the residents cuz I'm not sure that we're getting a fair deal for the residents you know you've got the freebie or the multimodal transportation I think we need to look at a different amount and different time frame they've talked about a discount program for the residents well we'll do something what we'll see we ask for parking for the residents not just during a storm situation but in the conversation about you know um you know president discount well we'll see we'll we'll we'll get back to you I don't see it anywhere on today's list you know we talked about you know um the restrictions on the Lots right they want to have three properties even though the comprehensive plan and Land Development code quite clearly talks about a single integrated development this is not that this is three different hotels one sort of a resort one an old building and then one new one that's as the applicant keeps calling it a limited service um hotel and so to me I look at and say well I don't really subscribe that that is the right way to do it I can see the argument for it but then when I asked the staff about this in December 5th they said no if you were to split these three lots you could not get what you are asking for today right which then tells me a reasonable person would have to say well should you be allowed to split the Lots at some point in the future because that would then make them non-conforming to the comprehensive plan Land Development code and then we get some kind of answer by like well you know what we really do is we need to do it this way so that we can Finance it fine Finance the structure however you want as far as your llc's and your loans and your mortgages that's fine but there needs to be language that says you will never ever be able to subdivide this property and make it non-conforming because you're required to have an integrated resort with here's a list of amenities and you're not giving us that you're giving us three separate hotels right um so we couldn't you know another condition I would look at you know everywhere else in the city we have a 10:00 curfew right for noise and everything else so why is their pool open until 11:00 you know that should be a restriction we talked about you know I think you the sub commissioner about transportation and offsetting and shuttles to the airport but we have three airports and the conditions only mentioned one right we've got equidistant from where we are located almost virtually the same distance you've got Sarasota and Tampa almost the same distance Clear Water St Peter is a little bit closer by a Seven Mile Bridge right well do people only come from in fact the plan has the pie Clearwater Airport which unless you're flying allegian no one else is right so why not have a shuttle from the Tampa Airport and the Sarasota Airport which are more likely to be of much higher impact so these are just some of the shortcomings that I look at and say well you know we had you know we had opportunities to ask for something that is reasonable and valuable to Residents and and didn't you know but it goes back to the first question and the first question is WEA right we we talked a lot about if and how but before we talk about how we proceed we really should decide if we're going to proceed now I'm gathering by the discussion we've had for the last almost did we go over time we did we are out of time and nobody caught it I will entertain a motion to extend I'll make a motion to extend the time to should we say 11:30 to be on the safe side certainly a second city clerk if you'll please do a roll call vice mayor Lorenzen yes commissioner marott yes commissioner filtz yes commissioner res Nikki yes mayor patrilla yes motion carries okay so going back to the weather or not right should this project move forward or not and at the expense of reading you a short paragraph and believe me nobody likes to be lectured none of us like to be lectured but I think it is important just as a reminder to us all you know when we look at the Land Development code section 41 where we talk about conditional use applications right and it states by saying certain uses are conditional uses rather than uses by right now I asked myself why do they put this sentence in here first sentence in the first paragraph talking about conditional uses well somebody must have thought that was really important because it sets the tone for everything else that comes after that and as a reminder that what we're talking about here it's an application you're coming to ask for permission as it states here it is not a use by right but rather you have to go through this process right because some things will can have a significant adverse effect on the environment Public Services the desired character of an area and may create nuisances a review of these uses is necessary due to the impact that they may have on surrounding areas and neighborhoods the conditional use review provides an opportunity to allow the use when there are minimal impacts minimal impacts doesn't say no impacts it says minimal impacts I think that's an important distinction and to allow the uses but impose mitigating measures these are the conditions right so if there is a situation and we look at and say you know what this doesn't quite fit I think this may have a negative impact but here's how we can offset this right here's how we can make some concessions from the developer so that it does benefit the community it does benefit our residents even though there may be a potential negative impact and then further it says or to deny the use if the concerns cannot be resolved so here's a funny thing and I've sat through this presentation now three times I think I have a total of close to 20 hours looking at just in session at this particular ular project and we've heard from the applicant we've heard from their experts we've heard from the city staff and we've heard I mean I have over 2,000 pages of emails from residents needless who says we've heard from everybody and what's really interesting is they don't agree on almost anything right but they agree on one thing that the impact of this will not be minimal that this development will have a major impact on our community on our city on the Neighbors on Gul Boulevard and not just for today but rather from now on until perpetuity and so what the code tells us is in the situation where you can mitigate the situations get conditions and do that now a lot of these conditions talk about we want PL we want this we want so on but what no one is looking at and saying okay here are the issues that we've created for the adjoining properties for the neighbors for the neighborhood and what was done to mitigate it that in fact I look at it and in many instances the exact opposite was done of mitigating but rather their situations for example take the north building Hotel one that's called so you have the proposed new hotel here and to the north of it you have the C Mark property if you wanted to minimize the impact and when you go back into the Land Development code it talks about noise pollution nuisance dust all sorts of other things if you want to minimize the impact on that property where would you put the entrance well you wouldn't put it between them you would put it on the opposite side now we've heard many reasons why we can't do this because of but maybe there's a different reason right but what you haven't done is you haven't mitigated the impact you haven't minimized it you've actually created a situation where you've made it far worse for the neighboring property than what it was than what it is currently and then what it could be right so I've stayed at many many resorts all over the world most recently we were with the Florida League of cities in Orlando we stayed at um one of the Hiltons whatever the equivalent that d j w is and there was a valet stand just like that with a U-shaped driveway just like they're proposing and the five days that I was there the cars were out all over the portic caset around the corner non-stop 24 hours I mean 247 it was just constant backed up backed up and then imagine living next to that you're you've got a balcony overlooking the entrance to Major Resort you think there's not going to be any lights from Cars you think there's not going to be honking any yelling any screaming any kids running around any valet yelling each other back and forth going on 24/7 of course not that's going to be happening and so again I look at and say well how could you have minimized the impact on the residence well you could have moved the entrance over this way or why not take the really tall building and put it next to the other really tall building where there's a hotel put the shorter building next to the C Mark right so you're not impacting their views but again not particularly wored worried about the impact on the residents you know I look at it and see we've had several conversations tonight we've asked about conditions that are spelled out in the comprehensive plan right the emphasis on green and sustainability and every time we ask for a condition that actually furthers the goals of the comprehensive plan and you know to miss bassel's credit this is what the comprehensive plan is today this is what we're going to deal with and one of the things it asks for is sustainability in green but every time we ask for it nope it's too much it's too expensive right can't do that I mean it's one of the goals but we're not going to really worry about the goals and furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan but when the residents say too much right when the neighbors say hey you're going to have it's going to be too tall it's going to be blocking too much of my view it's going to be too noisy it's going to be too loud there's going to be too many lights too many people screaming too much impact you know there's going to be people looking into my balcony from across where right now I don't have anyone I'm not losing my privacy every time somebody from here says too much what's the respond well that's too bad that's the response we've seen it from this Podium this missive saying that somehow you know people's opinions are not valid right the fact that you might lose the value of your property somehow is of no great concern to anyone a couple more things and then so when I look at that and when the Land Development code says hey if you cannot resolve the concerns you've got it deny and that's where we are today the concerns that our residents have listed the concerns that were identified by staff the concerns that any of us looking at this project have seen and almost none of them have any resolution and so if there is no resolution how can we say move forward with this project would a nice JW be nice I think so I've stated a few of them right would nicer buildings and renovated buildings be nice absolutely would it be nice to take a not going to say anything but the current situation of the property but it could be an improvement but does it conform and it does not and the applicant and their experts have not in any convincing way you know shown that it does and they certainly have met their burden of proof just going back at a couple more things so section 4.4 this of the Land Development code part of it is whether the application will have significant adverse impacts on the livability and usability on nearby land due to noise dust fumes glare from lights late night operations ODS vehicular traffic trucks delivery trucks all of those things right and what I see is that there are ways that this could have been done where it minimizes the impact but instead we're focused about minimizing the impact on the the tourists and the visitors here don't put the entrance in the middle don't put the tall building next to another hotel right we got to make sure we protect that but we're not going to worry about whether we're going to have negative impact on on the users and on the current uh people that live there um part of it is supposed to improve Gul Boulevard supposed to improve health and safety supposed to improve traffic I'm not seeing anything that shows us where it's actually improving it but rather we're seeing a lot of negative impact and so commissioner Marriott I not going to single you out I'm I'm simply referring to something that you mentioned earlier where you said well we're getting a lot I think we're being asked of a lot and what we're getting in return which I have a hard time putting my finger on is certainly not Apples to Apples or commensurate with what we're asked to give one can clearly see where the benefit is to the applicant um but I have a hard time seeing where the benefit is to our residents especially when we cannot mitigate the issues the issues are what they are another thing when you look at especially at the neighbors whether it be the C Mark the boka grand or the other ones it says there's is supposed to be no unreasonable or disproportionate negative impacts are imposed upon nearby or adjacent properties that's in 412 but what it's happening here is rather than minimizing the negative impact is we're actually Maxim maximizing the impact right by the way that the property is designed and then the way that it's positioned so to me when I look at this in its entirety when I look at at the project and this goes back to something that commissioner R Niki asked a few days ago because you referenced your experience with the Don CeSar right and you mentioned about how in that negotiation because there actually was one right in that discussion how the hotel came to the residents and how you discussed some potential options and I'm not sure that you actually got what you were looking for but maybe you got more than when than if you hadn't been talking to them and I'm not sure that they Hotel was happy with the outcome but maybe they got a better outcome than if they hadn't had that conversation and so I think you asked a very interesting point which is why has this particular development been so polarizing I guess right now I've seen all the emails so I can tell you exactly how many have been in favor and how many against it's not even in the same Universe um but I think I have a I have an answer as to why it's been so polarizing because again on the face of it I think that a project like this has merits it could be a nice project it could be a huge Improvement for the for the area but does it fit does it fit the criteria sadly it doesn't but could it have been designed from the beginning as a project that does fit the criteria and I think the answer is yes but I think the way that the approach was was simply here's what we're going to do that's it right we had two Community meetings for this particular development one of the requirements is to collect common cards and questions so that this is you know again from the Land Development code and comprehensive plan you're supposed to collect those with one specific thing in mind so that you can use it to go back and design the project and put conditions into place that benefit the residents so where were those cards well they disappeared first we're told they don't exist then three months later they appeared after the TRC meeting so after the point where the staff is supposed to sit down and say hey what conditions can we put in based on the resident input well the resident input was nowhere to be found I think part of the other reason why it's been so contentious is and this was just you go back to just last Wednesday the dismissive attitude um the condescending attitude the and we saw this in December as well we maybe it's just me but I asked multiple questions that were just ignored by the experts I asked about views it's not important enough to show you what it looks like we talk about curb Cuts can you show us can you be more specific we asked about renderings for this or the other we we talked about traffic numbers give me numbers give me data couldn't answer it wouldn't answer it you know and and I think part of the reason that again this has been the way it has been this contentious is because we're we didn't get the residents involved we didn't get the community involved and nobody came and said look we're a family company we want to be part of this community for a very long time how can we come and contribute how can we come be part of this community and be here for a very long time where we're providing benefits to the community yes it's certainly going to benefit us from having a close to half a billion dollar project right but that's not the way this was presented and so now it falls back on us the commission and say well where do we go from here right are we improving say I mean here's the most latest thing that we did with forward pelis right this was in the package Vision zero right we're committing to a goal of zero Transportation related deaths approach limitated Transportation related death minimize right it's one of the commitments that we have as a city just like we have all the goals that we have in a comprehensive plan and saying hey if we're moving forward with this are we accomplishing the goals of our city are we accomplishing the goals that we have committed to as a community and the answer is no the answer is no and so those are my thoughts on the merits of what I think the merits of this project are I think there's an opportunity for the applicant to go back to the drawing board sit down with the community get the community engaged bring a project that the community can say you know what we love it we're proud of this we'd love to have this where the neighbors are probably already lining up to get legal advice right and so again to me I look at it and say with a reasonable person out in the audience if they were sitting in my chair would they make the same decision if I was a resident of the C mark would I make the same decision and so to me that's those are my thoughts I'd like to comment stle so would would the views like I said before they still will have views of the water they won't have the view over the property so again as I'll say again I could see both sides on that one and quite frankly if any of the other commission members see that the project as a whole is is good enough to vote Yes for it with the conditions you know I I I can see where you're coming from on it um and I want to be clear I think there's a lot of good in this and I think there's been a lot of efforts made but with the aesthetic and Architectural features that's where I have my biggest questions the parking garage that was a question from the prior commission um as I disclosed in my ex part I met with Council I met with the architect I gave examples of parking garages and made recommendations there's there's I just feel everything wasn't done to really I don't want to use the word hide it because that's not what it is but to with the goal in mind of bettering it and if I may use the Land Development code I think what you're looking for is mitigation measures that's it's it's looking to minimize the impact of that building and the looks of it and you're supposed to mitigate what it looks like so it's not so obvious right so it's not a glaring eyes sword that's that's part of it yes but the other part of it is make making it I mean it says aesthe part of the criteria is aesthetic and Architectural features of the development I'm just I have a question still as to if they did everything possible to make it look one as aesthetically pleasing as possible and to as which part of that is hiding it um but again to just like I said about the views if any other commission members up here feel that the project as a whole is is good for the community um you know I can certainly see your side and I just I you know I just want to say I put my name in the Hat to do this job because I care about the city it's not for votes quite frankly I don't even know if I'm going to run but I care about the city um and you know I'm just applying what I see in the code and that's a big one I have a question mark on and there was a question mark on it from the prior commission as well so well thank you um I think uh everybody's added some great thoughts and mayor you you gave me some things to think about I have not considered so it's a good thing to listen to others um look this is a big moment in um St Pete Beach I don't think the cities fac anything like this in decades as far as I can tell um so what we've got on one hand is a the Columbia Sussex group that came in put down over $200 million to purchase the sarata and they're indicating that they might put another 250 million into redeveloping that property um the comp plan basically is begging developers to come in and redo the large resort District 0 point9 miles of it on the other hand is a very sizable group and it's hard to measure exactly how many um I know we have numbers um that have spoken out against this and uh a lot of it's been kind of qualitative not quantitative like reasons why it doesn't meet the cup in my opinion a a lot of it seems to be based on uh fear or emotion which has its place as well and I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing hear me out um it's very difficult to know in my mind how many people are for this I've met with some people that own small businesses some people that are for this they think it's time the city moved down to a different phase away from the 50s and 60s stuff we have going on along the beach but they they're kind of quiet I found they like to talk about it they don't want to get into it with the neighbors and the small business owners don't want to put it out there because of fear of of uh folks not want to do business with them good or bad that's that's what some of them told me um so we have a comp plan and it asks you know it lists how many tlu you can do they want to increase revenue from hotels and what's major in the comp plan is trying to fix that 80/20 ratio between residents paying taxes and Commercial prop properties paying taxes via the bed tax um so there's that to consider that's the reason we have a large resort development or District excuse me and that's what the comp plan comp plan is asking for uh as far as traffic you know I think it's game over already for traffic I mean St Pete is exploding uh everywhere we look there's apartment buildings going up all along Tyrone down 19 and where are they all going to go to the beach they're all coming here and in my mind there's one way they're all getting here and it's on the Bayway and I think it's just going to continue to get worse so I look at the 264 additional units that are being proposed so let's say that entire built out hotel is full okay I don't know how often that happens but let's say they're all full of that 264 worst case double occupancy maybe 132 cars and then I'd say well how many of those are really going to be on the road each day day I know when I go to Resort I like to park it and enjoy the resort so I don't see that as a big factor as much as I do all the people that are coming in here and are going to it's only going to get worse I mean pass the grill is a mess now not just in season it's just a mess every weekend um for the C Mark folks I get it I believe me I totally understand um that the upper floors would lose a good chunk of your view um the cell tower issue I I think that's going to be easily resolved um I own a property and pass a grill that I knew when I bought it we had a little tiny Cottage next to us and one day that thing is going to get destroyed and it's going to be a three- floor Tower next to us and we're going to lose our views I knew that when I bought the property so um there's also the issue of residents versus business owners I'm all for the residents but we also have to respect the rights of business owners in town and those that want to build businesses so it's to me it's not just a one group it's it's both groups We're Not Elected just to take care of residents we're elected to take care of everybody business owners and residents um having said all that to me the Achilles heel in this entire thing and I'm probably preaching to the choir mayor but is a comprehensive plan I mean when I read that thing I would never ever approve that I mean I I think it's got things in there that um that allow too much for the residents but you know it's the guiding document that we have here today we can't change that that's what's in print 2012 and you know I don't even want to go through the whole history of crg versus the other group versus referendums versus lawsuits um a lot of work went into that and I have to assume there was good reasoning why they put those numbers in there um but I hope whatever comes out of this that there's a strong movement to take a hard look at that comp plan and see what we can we can fix in there so some closing thoughts I'll tell you I've sent crews in the Cat 4 hurricanes with easier decision making than I have on this thing I have been torn on this 5050 since the first day I watched that December 5th video you know I can see points on both sides um I've watched a planning board video I I bet I've done a 100 hours of research on this thing and I kind of came in here still with a 50/50 mindset which to me is a good thing I'm trying to listen everybody and really think it through um so at the end of the day the comp plan is there the city staff has said we recommend approval the planning board has recommended approval I also understand the outcry from the residents a large outcry and I'm sitting here going okay it kind of meets the requirements do I love the look of it and the size I don't particularly personally so when I look at that scale between a large group of residents that are unhappy and one ownership group that wants to do something the scale kind of is wobbling and that's where I'm at so I'd like to hear some other comments from the other Commissioners and get this to a vote tonight one way or another if I may if I I'm not going to it'll be 10 seconds and I just I I just want to say this so that you hear me I can't tell you how much forget as a mayor as a resident I appreciate appreciate you hearing the amount of time you spent going back and watching that stuff I mean that to me speaks volumes not sure if we'll end up at the same decision the same whether we'll agree or not but I do respect and I do appreciate same for you sorry it's okay so I think uh I I I think that all of us and a large number of residents and the applicant have have put in a lot of hours and a lot of of sleepless nights and and a lot of trying to figure out what the right thing is to do um I think that and the mayor mentioned that I had said I see some benefits to the city and and there's a couple of of benefits that really haven't been talked about tonight that I think are um that you almost can't put a value on and those are the beach easements and the beach access and and you know having to prove a customary use or go through that process to get you know significant long-term beach access behind any of the private properties on the beach is a is as the City attorney has said on previous occasions is a is a very challenging thing and getting these beach access and the beach easements both for the boardwalk you know just seaword of the dunes and also uh landord of the high tide Mark or you know landord of the wet sand you know for for a property that wide to get that kind of Perpetual Beach easement um along with the restoration of the dunes is quite valuable in my eyes and and valuable to the city for an extended period of time um and so I I think that that's I think that that's worth keeping in mind that that those are you know those are things that if somebody develops um without having to get a conditional use we have no chance of getting you know and so there's big chunks of that large resort District where if if applicants and futured PE people who are coming into this with a future idea of doing any kind of development if they come come into it thinking like man that conditional use process is probably not going to happen so we're going to do a smaller scale development where we don't have to ask for all those permissions we're never going to get those Beach easements um and and I think that's a I think that's a practically a Priceless thing that we're getting on the beach um I think that uh you know it's a it's a funny thing because for me personally I I you know it's it's not my kind of resort I'm a I'm not a resort girl I'm a camp in my van in the Walmart parking lot girl but uh um but having a diversity of of lodging options for people and for tourists and for residents who live here to have their family come to I think is a good thing um and then I think one of the most important things that that we all need to remember and I think it's true for government at any level is that we don't have the power to compel Behavior you know we can't we can't tell somebody what they have to do or how they can feel about it or dictate their behavior all we can do is tell them what they can't do right that's that's government's only power at the end of the day and so we can tell them that they can't do this what we can't do is tell them what we wish they would do and you know I mean I I I think that that private property rights and the rule of law is so fundamental to what this country has built on and you know the mayor said what would a reasonable person sitting in our chair do and and I I think we are all reasonable people sitting in these these chairs you know the four of us were reasonable people sitting out there just a few months ago and uh and so to me my reading of the comprehensive plan and the Land Development code says that they have done they have followed the rules and the staff who is our professional hired help has said that they have followed the rules and I am a bit concerned that if we say you know thanks but we think you can't do your job that that's that's uh a difficult position to put the staff in and particularly when you're in a city that is missing a lot of key positions I think that makes it a very difficult position to put the city in or our city manager to try to hire future employees if they think the city commission is going to assume that they are not qualified to do their job and so I in this case am very comfortable feeling like they have the applicant has followed the rules according to the comprehensive plan and the Land Development code based on our professional staff that we employ to do this job thinking that they have done those things and so so that's where I land I I think that for the Neighbors for the the folks that live in the condos across the street and the SE Mark and and you know the the neighborhoods nearby do they wish it wasn't happening of course they do like absolutely um but none of us get to dictate what happens on our neighbors properties and you know I I live I'm the last house on a street that's bordered that has a commercial building next to me and you know there is any number of things that could happen with that property not a single person who lives adjacent to that property bought their property when there wasn't a hotel there and so you know I I uh I understand their frustration and I understand that it's not what they wish would happen but it comes back to our only the only Power that we have is to say no we can't tell them what we wish they would build there or what they have to build there that's not that's not in our power I think you make some great points oops excuse me I I've got a question for my fellow Commissioners for those that I'm sensing or against this project is there a hotel resort complex in your minds that well that would work for us that would work for the city and the residence so I think commissioner Marriott has a has a good if interesting point to the to what is Our Land Development code say right what what are our options right we can say yes we can say yes we conditions can say no doesn't tell us no but come back with this right that's that's not an option that doesn't mean we I think your question is if we were to say no can we provide some guidance and guidelines and say okay if you wanted to reapply maybe here are some things you could look at I I thought about this particular question a lot right and I think to me it goes back to what's required of us right is to make sure that so if you go back to the comprehensive plan one of the things I found really interesting is it's 45 times it says protect protect the views protect this protect the environment protect the turtles the skimmers and so on must have been really important to them to include that so many times because I think they recognize that what we have is is extremely valuable it's valuable to us as residents it's valuable to the applicant um and so I look and say well what are the what are the areas that to me looking at the Land Development C comp plan okay where do they fall short right where where does it not mesh up where and I I'm going to disagree with you on one and to say that I think the staff got it you know it's I have full confidence in the staff that's not that we trust them but that doesn't mean we can't come to a different conclusion right right because I think they look at it and say okay well here's how we would mitigate these issues but somebody else might look at and say well I don't think you can mitigate the issue right you're you're not preserving The View you're killing the view right so I think one of the ways just and I'm not giving anyone any ideas with if you get denied come back with this it'll get approved I'm not saying that at all I'm simply thinking in terms of you know I think if you had eight Acres right if you had a property in the middle rather than two big ones on the side where you're impacting the neighbor right I think that certainly would minimize the impact you're having on the views and so on right when you're putting all the traffic in the middle whether it's through curb Cuts or something else where you're directing traffic away from the residential area rather than you're steering the traffic into the residential area where it will have Maximum Impact the exact opposite of what's I think there's a way to redo that where you're you know you have an integrated Resort just like the comprehensive plan says um and I think there's there's ways to do it I think what might have happened in this situation is what's the most we can squeeze on this lot right for the least amount of what's the biggest bang we can get for a buck so we're going to keep an old hotel we're going to tear on derc property we're going to clean up this other one but other than that there was very little effort to minimize the impact there was very little effort to minimize the noise and the everything that comes with that the light pollution and so on there's also not as a Land Development code says this is a it is not a use by W you get 30 units per acre by right you go apply for a permit you build anything you want to 30 units right beyond that it's it's a it's an application process you have to come before the commission you have to present your case and then you know if you feel that the applicant has met their burden you approve it and if you feel that as the Land Development code says you know if they have if the concerns cannot be resolved you have to deny right and I think there's a long laundry list of concerns there will not just not resolved but they were just dismissed out of hand like why are we talking about this this is not important right and again put yourself in their shoes if you were a resident living those areas would you say yep I would vote for this right now as an incredibly strong believer in private property rights I would say yes I would vote for it even if I live next door so it I had this this conversation with the county commissioner last year and he said he's a strong believer in property rights and I said so am I but whose property rights are we talking about because to their own property sure and the neighbors next door would say that they have very strong property rights that they're willing to fight for and protect and that our Land Development code and comprehensive plan says it's our responsibility to make sure that those views and Vistas are maintained right so that as to not one of the other things that it talks about is having a negative economic impact right and this is going to have a significant negative economic impact I mean I've got 20 some OD years as a real estate broker commissioner you've got a few as well I mean I can't with a straight face tell you that yeah you block My Views it's not going to impact my house value at all come on no absolutely it will impact your house value it will have a detrimental impact on not just the quality of life the quiet enjoyment of those residents but it will also have an immediate negative impact on their property values never mind the years of construction at least you know that comes to an end eventually but that view once it's gone it is gone and you know we've talked at the last meeting about well what happens if they don't follow something right well you can't unbuild a building right we can we can find them we can send them we can do whatever we want but once that conditional use has been issued can't be revoked I mean in certain instances music that kind of stuff right you can revoke that but once the building's built it's built now what are they going to say go ahead and find us whatever right now I will agree with you that Dune restoration is important I would venture to say that if the applicant thought it was that important they would have done it in the last year year and a half that they've owned the property right if it's going to help with resiliency if it is really important I mean it certainly is but to me I look at it and say well I'm not going to wait to do something that's really important to me until something else happens no I didn't say it was important to them I said it's important to the city no absolutely but it's also important to them if they want to protect their property right and they've told us I mean Scott's been up here multiple times telling us how that's huge how that's important how that you know they love doing it and I say well if you love doing it you should do it anyway whether you get this approval or not and I also will say you know I think getting the easement along the water line is important um it's good I don't know that it does what Land Development code says and it offsets the concern in a different area IT addresses a problem that we currently don't necessarily have now you know I think anybody wants to go back and look at the time stamps from the last meeting on Wednesday counselor said you can put your chair and your umbrella in front of the building I would be shocked if that happens right so we'll have an easement but I would love to see where we are in three or four years if there's a wall of people if that's really how it's going to be perceived or whether it's just you just get across as fast as you can which we already all already do I think the other thing that's important to to remember when we're looking at this and and the comprehensive plan and the Land Development code is to remember a little bit about about where some of the some of the idea behind the comprehensive plan came from and and I moved to St P Beach right at the end of all that being settled um but you know the the serata property as it currently sits is non-conforming so they can't tear down the serata and build a new one without a conditional use and so the idea behind the 75 units per acre and the the greater height was to give an economic incentive for properties to redevelop to Give Them Enough density and intensity to redevelop at to make it economically viable so that properties would redevelop instead of just a property owner saying well I could never rebuild what I have because it's not conforming and so I'm just going to keep putting lipstick on a pig until the big hurricane comes and so I think that's another important thing to keep in mind when we're thinking about this because again we can't compel them to do anything right we can we can be comfortable with the application with the conditions that it has which which you know of which I only listed a few a few of the benefits but I think there are many you know we have we're getting you know a half a million extra dollars we're going to be getting increased adum taxes we're getting a wider sidewalk we're getting improved Landscaping we're we're getting a lot of good things and and if if we don't approve the application for the conditional use we lose the ability to negotiate on a lot of those things depending on what they decide to do because we can't compel them to come back with another plan for a different conditional use we can't compel them to do the project that we wish they might do they they have the right to do with their property property what is allowed and a number of the things that are allowed and and and by a number of the things that are allowed I mean even building a smaller Resort that doesn't require fire conditional use remove our ability to get some of those benefits and and and if we take away the economic incentive to rebuild it makes the resort owners more likely to just keep limping along with an old building that's not to lead standard that's not green that doesn't have all the benefits that a new building has that doesn't have resilience that doesn't improve the storm water runoff and so I think we need to be to be cognitive of the potential out of all of the potential outcomes including keeping an old hotel limping along without any Improvement and so you know on the balance I think that we need to look at what are the overall benefits what are the overall you know what what is for the good of the city what is for the good of the residents what is for the good of the small businesses what is for the good of all the property owners and and on the whole does the project have more pluses or minuses and if you start looking at you know what is the cost to what is the cost and benefit to one specific person or a small group of people next door although to them the costs may be significantly worse than the benefits but our job isn't to look at what is the costs and benefits to a subset of people in the city it's to look at what is the cost and benefits to the city as a whole if I if I may commissioner just one second because that is actually the opposite of what the Land Development code says where it says in section 412a that no unreasonable and disproportionately negative impact are imposed on adjacent and nearby properties if there is anything that can't be disputed is that the impact on the C Mark and the two across will be disproportionately negative that is one of their requirements that they're supposed to mitigate and they are not because there is a clear unreasonable and disproportionate negative impact on them well in all fairness the condos are off the table cuz they're not adjacent um right and then when we look at the C Mark it's really only the south facing units that are down low everybody facing to the west north and east are still have the same views they've had so I just want to clarify that that's half the building h that's half the building I don't think it is it's there two units on each side so it's this and this is the same number of units I I guess it's I got to ask this question one more time because I I hear what commissioner Marriott's saying um and I have this fear too that we're going to send out this signal that yeah we got this large resort district and yeah we want to change the tax code and yes we're begging for uh Redevelopment but if we're not careful I mean I got to make sure everybody's sitting here in this commission is okay with something going into these spaces because the serat got a unique situation they've got an old hotel in the middle if they drop that and start all new construction then they're out of they're out of income for years I don't know how long it takes to build something like that but so that's kind of a unique situation I look forward you know and I've heard about the domino effect and believe me I understand that you know you look at what the trade wi's asking I peaked at that last night that's out in public record already for the planning board and you know they're going to be building in proposal anyway right up on the other side of the C mark with that curved high-rise Tower um so they they've got a lot more land to play with the serata I think has a a pretty small I would call small but they have a parcel that's kind of unique that they would have no income for years if they just tore that thing down and I mean I love the idea of Shifting over to the middle but I'm not sure it's feasible economically they I mean I think there's a way to do it right it's looking at the current rental rates I'm not sure that the purchase price necessarily makes sense if you don't have the Redevelopment so I I imagine that Redevelopment was on the table from day one and probably even a requirement to make the project feasible longterm and so you know whether it's 6 months or a year additional without Revenue because I think based on the timeline that they've given us is roughly about a year and a half from tearing down and breaking ground with just a JW so imagine the same amount of time you could build something else in the middle I I don't think I don't think the signal we want to give is like we don't want any development because we do some of these old properties do need to be you know torn down and revitalized and that's again in the comprehensive plan multiple times they talk about demolishing rebuilding tearing down that's now what's happening is we're remodeling an old hotel that has low ceilings and the infrastructure of a very old hotel rather than giving you know again looking back at what does the plan want right it wants Redevelopment because it recognizes we have properties from the 7s from the 60s even the 50s right and some of them are you know treasured and deer properties but some of them are just old and functionally Obsolete and they do need to be redeveloped and that's not that's not what's happening here there's an opportunity to do that but that's not the route that was chosen right I think there's a way to do this project nicer and better um but again we're not here to to provide I I mean this in the the least snarky most respectful manner possible and I'm sure it's going to come off wrong and my husband later will tell me that I should have just kept my mouth shut but but but anyone who feels that way that that there is a much better way to do this project and that there's a way to do it better that has less impact on the neighbors and that that the residents would love and that everybody would really get behind should buy one of the properties and borrow the money and do it you know I I I uh I think that the a as a as a small business owner I think that sometimes it gets lost in the mix how much risk and and you know vision and heart and soul goes into a project like this and so you know you can you can take any any business owner and you can like their personality or not like their personality or you know want to do business with them or not want to do business with them but but they're the ones who are willing to put up the money put up a lot of money up front to come up with the design take the risk take all the risk about whether they're successful or not and and so I think that that for me as a much smaller small business owner I I understand the frustration that can come from other people telling you what you should do with your property and your money and so you know I I think that that it it's it's always more fun to tell other people what to do with their money you know that's I love doing that too I I love playing that game of what I would do if ran the zoo but but at some level we have to we have to move forward with what we have before us and we have to decide to vote on it one way or another and so unless anybody has anything else that they would like to discuss I would make a motion to approve the resolution with the amended conditions as discussed tonight in the interest of getting this going I'll second city clerk commissioner res Nikki do we want to make sure we have V yes commissioner lorensen yes commissioner Marriott yes commissioner Phil no mayor Pat no motion carries 3 to2 still have things on the agenda right does everybody still have energy to talk about pass the grilled garbage collection or do you want to put that off did you keep Mike around for that we want to was GNA yeah you want to we want to just make sure that we've captured uh all of the Amendments cuz you your motion was with the Amendments we want to make sure that we go through these so that we're not missing something um that was talked about Matthew I think starting off right off about we're switching the the fifth whereas Clause the recital um from Mr hot to Allan Smallwood that was one Amendment fifth whereas Allan with two ends is what I have yes Smallwood Matthew McConnell for the record um so moving on to the conditions if we could okay exhibit a we can pause for a minute you have 18 minutes we may need to extend it unless we can get through this in 18 minutes yeah it's you can you can talk fast you young I definitely can can you hear me okay yes go to eight okay so I'm just going to run through them from the top no changes to one 2 3 4 5 six and seven first changes to eight as proposed by um staff we added or te telecommunications Le C we took out the word C Mark condominium replaced that with city of St Pete Beach did the same thing in the last sentence based on the applicant's request correct number nine was removed based on the consensus consensus from the commission which was the wi study moving on 18 um that's the condition that I have access ways must be approved by fdot applicant will meet fdot will meet with fdot and essentially whatever fdot suggests will be administered administered and improved administratively prior to site plan which number is that 18 I don't think that's at or that has to do with the north entrance I believe has to do with the three the the entrance right right yeah we can always move it around but I figured 18 was a good spot for it gotcha okay um condition 19 was the beachwalk approved as provided um in staff's update next change was 21 it's kind of a morph uh staff presented some language the only difference was in some sub paragraph C we said utilize the hotel 3 parking garage facade chosen by the city Commission comma after receiving Community input from the neighborhood information meeting the applicant will be hosting prior to site plan approval period okay did you repeat that one Matt I'm sorry absolutely utilize the hotail 3 parking garage facade CH chosen by the city commission comma after receiving Community input from the neighborhood information meeting the applicant will be hosting prior to site plan approval and they'll be the four they provided tonight thank you for that um after receiving Community input from the four examples four examples yes and and then from there based on community input we will get a final back to either approve or deny is that correct strictly for the garage Forcade correct okay that was what was agreed to okay Matthew just declar the garage facade you mean like the whole front right is this what we're talking about like we're going to see the whole to be able to this is just the garage Hotel three correct yeah the one where the applicant showed four versions The renderings that were placed down there there were a b c d and I think that was it right those I'm saying is that when it comes back to us we are going to see the full rendering right because if not I would have decided right now right because it's the same ones but we're going to see to be able to get that architectural designer element you're seeing the whole front not we need as many renderings as possible to be clear with the understanding that you're be picking right now if you if we're just to give me back the same garage renderings that we have I think with the understanding that the only decision you will have is based on the facade of Hotel 3 garage I think what commissioner R Niki is referring to there's two separate things one is we requested a cohesive look of all three buildings with renderings and part of that should show the two garages and then from that we can pick one of the four designs for the garage correct that's what I that's what I understood yes when you were talking because if not I picking right now it's not in the same was Community input it's yeah but it's two different sections in here she just put themp it's it's in two different sections yes I think it would be beneficial for the applicant to show that yes full view but the only decision decis excuse me decision that the commission will be making that night will be on the facade of the garage correct correct so it's 21 the first part is the cohesive unified design and then then second part is picking a facade and I'd just like to comment on that one more time I I hope our input that we provided tonight of those option is options are considered can I get one clarification I just want to get a clarification just to make sure that we're giving you what you need back so I understand that you asked a question that said will you limit it to these three I thought that's what you were asking before so we will take that input and we will show the rendering and show what each of those different based on community input and based on those four facades we'll bring that back to you so you can see how it integrates into the site yeah my question I asked earlier was are you limiting yourself to those four I thought you said would you to make a decision based on that that's cool and that was the consensus it was to the four thank you commissioner Riki does that answer your question her her she's gonna bring it and she's going to use nice honestly this is video recorded so you can always rewatch it okay um 22 we added a comma subject to overall permitted sign regulations in the Land Development code AS amended that was suggested to you 23 was approved as provided to you by staff in the updated version 24 was approved as provided to you by staff in the updated version 25 was approved as provided to you by staff in the updated version moving down to 26k staff provided sitewide property compliance that was approved as is 28 was approved as provided to you in the staff update 31 was reverted back to the original condition which clarified certified Hotel one and silver Hotel 3 32 was approved as provided by staff 33 there were three words added all proposed pedestrian Pathways open air surface parking spaces and other paved non-structural or non-traffic rated surfaces shall be installed with permeable pavers 34 deletion of install green roofs so that after that comma it reads the applicant shall utilize I put other techniques demonstrated to reduce the heat island instead of another 35 based on what staff provided you was completely replaced to read not withstanding conditions five and six applicant shall provide a solid wall and landscaped screen of at least 120 ft wide and 16 ft in height to mitigate sound and visual impacts on the abing C mark condominium period Landscaping species shall be similar to the screen walls located along Golf Boulevard to provide visual consistency now there was a comma in the one provided to you but I think the last paragraph I don't know if that was just a suggestion in the condition that you provided there was a parenthesis I mean my apologies okay all right so I think that meets the intent it says the parentheses the screening will be similar to the screening walls along Gulf along Gulf nor northernmost portion of the poret at least 100 there was a open-ended parentheses in there I think I'm sorryim yeah yeah there was no close um that's okay we understand I think the intent was to we got it Greening wall similar to what yes um the new 36 offered do staffs we can work on the language here but essentially the language is going to read as is with the understanding that the city can wave height and caliber to meet the great a greater percentage of Florida friendly Ground Covers based on the um Land Development code language that will be administratively approved by the city manager the new 37 remained unchanged 38 remained unchanged 39 remained unchanged 40 remained unchanged 41 remained unchanged the new 42 the applicant shall install inground canopy trees adjacent to the expanded Frontage sidewalk as viable and to the extent not in conflict with overhead utility lines in locations where inground planting would cause recurring conflicts with underground utilities the applicant shall install above ground planters with canopy trees canopy trees shall be planted every 30 ft within this Zone period 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 all are unchanged numbering based on what staff presented you those are all the changes I have thank you Matthew okay we good yeah the vote's been taken we were just clarifying um the exact verbage to make sure that we got it right thank youly uh commissioner lenen are you okay with tabling the discussion on the passag grill alley garbage pickup until next commission meeting I believe Wayne's going to give us a quick talk on that you one minute uh we are our Target date is March 11th Which is less than two weeks from now we will be back uh with Ali service 20 2nd down to 16th and also behind this the uh what's the name of it I'm sorry behind the seahorse seahorse it's only the Western alley yeah uh so we'll be uh we'll be back on that's our Target date we don't see any reason we won't meet that and we're already working on the second group uh of where we have some other obstacles we got got to take care of so great thank you thank you way staff reports city clerk um I have notes that commissioner Marriott and commissioner res Nikki will be unable to attend in person the next meeting on 3:12 no sorry I'm sorry I should have let you know I will be here you will be here will be here and was there a request to appear to for you okay thank you any objections to that no okay city clerk anything further thank you thank you city manager no sir City attorney only the fact that um it's true as Mr Ras mentioned to you he has filed a lawsuit relating to items that I'll I'll be sending to you in an email we received it today he's representing himself he doesn't have an attorney at this point um we've already notified the insurance carrier just because that's the protocol that we have to follow um so I'll give you further updates on that in the future okay do we need to schedule a another date for another shade meeting to discuss anything else that's on the we're waiting for a written confirmation from um the attorneys that represent red white and booze um and so we're we're supposed to get that this week hopefully but I don't want to bring you into a shade meeting until we get something in writing I just knew since we have another two weeks before we can schedule and I have to ask for it here yeah I know but I don't have anything concrete to be able to ask for that okay but thank you for reminding me of that perfect District Four I still don't have a planning board representative although I may have one so I will know in a couple days and I just want to express my gratitude to everybody on the commission I know there's a lot of lot to think through and I don't think any of us took this one lightly so thanks for all your input District three um nothing to report over the the district um been to to many Association meetings I think I'm pending one more up and coming but I don't have a date so I can't really announce the date um and I also want to thank um the staff um city clerk um the applicants and everyone um the attorney city manager um the planning board technical review um just all the work that that goes into this um you know wish we did have a rubric as a teacher to be able to um outweigh some of some of what was discussed um but overall um I I do believe that what we're doing is to help the city overall in their comprehensive plan so again I just want to thank everybody and everybody here and all the words that you've said because you know I was listening intently um and and I appreciate it District Two U as far as as far as any updates I'm still looking for someone for the Parks and Recreation advisory committee and um I also just wanted to say thank you to City staff for all all the work you've done um regarding the cup uh and for answering many questions that I had and uh also thank you to all my colleagues up here for all the work you put in I know it's been a lot it's been a top priority for me and I have a business and a baby district one uh likewise I really appreciate all of your wellth thought out words and all of the time that that you have all spent thinking about this and and uh it's been a pleasure having this discussion with you all and and uh and having this discussion with people who have thought it through very critically and are very passionate and I really appreciate it all right thank you everyone we are adjourned