e e e e e e e e e e good evening welcome to tonight's LPA meeting uh first thing on the agenda is roll call please sh culon pres Patrick fley Tony H here Susan rap Fidel here Jean TR here Vice chair Lorie vand here and chair Deb Gillis here we have a COR thank you um Bart would you lead us in [Music] pledge to the flag of the United States of America the stands indivisible andice all thank you is there any uh additions and deletions to the agenda this evening got awfully quiet I guess not I'm asking anybody okay uh public comment uh public comment is strictly for items that are not on our agenda do I have any general public comment we have V Caden good evening ladies and gentlemen I'm van Caden head from Al Morado and I just wanted to comment on something that we're going to talk about later at the uh council meeting on tomorrow night or probably the night after that the second night for land use and the word is fronting and it we've gone through all kinds of uh gations about what fronting means and how it can be interpreted and this that the other thing and to me that's one of the reasons that we're not getting anything done or we're getting things done in a very slow fashion because it to me it's a very obvious uh word and uh it it means one thing is when you come over Whale Harbor uh on the on your left is waho that's fronting on us one you go down a little bit further there's the church that's fronting on US1 um fronting on US1 uh was made uh one of the prerequisites for affordable housing which good reason and uh just because someone is a lawyer or a land use lawyer or has a special interest and U changing the definition of fronting to fit his property or her property um should not be uh the reason for this body to get tangled up for hours of discussion and the and the council to get tangled up for hours of discussion fronting is is an it's obvious it does not mean ajoining it does not mean uh adjourning cuz apparently uh I read the the uh agenda for uh Thursday and uh it they didn't spell a joining right they spelled it a journey but um I really hope that we can get through this and that you will support uh the the true meaning of fronting which is uh the one one part the front part of the of the property fronts along us one that's what the the the uh decision was made to uh open up affordable housing for that reason and I hope you will stick to that reason and uh not let it be um misconstrued in any other way thank you very much thank you van I think we had that on our agenda last month so um any other public comment anybody on Zoom no one was their hand up all right thank you uh next is the consent agenda it's the minutes from our last meeting there's one um correction I have to the minutes um the comments I made concerning uh I said it's sitting on page three the property down at whatever we're calling the key south of Buton Mary's is it says Cheryl said Cheryl Culbertson spoke about the negative environmental impact of the Bone Fish I spoke about the negative environmental and economic impact the Bone Fish the economic impact was the most important part of it it's um just above item D yeah um top of the page on I think that's nine down there but I can't I don't think her pages are the same as ours so my print's different it's just above number D it's the uh uh the one that says Cheryl yeah it starts with Cheryl there's two in a row how would you like mean to re just add in negative environmental and economic impact because they're equally important okay and I have one also um it's slightly above that below where it says Patrick Foley um I'd like to add that uh we had I brought up the fact that the property was purchased in 198 three and at the county level when they purchased it it was um a form of uh commercial fishing are we on C mhm we're still on C yes okay it's it's like two above where you were okay any other Corrections seeing none do I have a motion MO to approve is modified and you want a second Tony O second show coveron yes Tony hman yes Patrick FY yes Su rill yes Jean Ry yes Lorie Lon yes and Deb Gillis yes motion passes 7 to zero okay moving on to uh the public hearings um the next two items are related uh they're um uh for the applicant Lynn Bell uh is there any objection from the applicant or any objection from here hearing them together and voting separately all right okay hearing that um Roger yes absolutely uh good afternoon everyone my name is Roger poe just want to make a reminder so this is an ordinance um of Isa marada Village of islands Florida considering the request of Lyn lbell to amend The Village's future land use map from residential medium RM to to mixed use mu for the subject property located on upper matacumbe key with real estate number 004 4730 0 0 as legally described here in providing for the transmittal of this ordinance to the state department Department of Commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the State Department of Commerce an ordinance of Isa marada Village of islands Florida considering the request of ly lbell to amend the official zoning map from settlers residential Sr to Highway commercial HC for the subject property located on Upper matum Bay Key with real estate number 04473 0 00000000 0 as legally described here in providing for the transmittal of this ordinance to the State Department of Commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the state department of Commerce thank you Jennifer thank you good evening LPA Jennifer deob and planning director I'm here this evening um for the application for an ordinance Amendment for the future land use map and an ordinance Amendment for the zoning map Amendment from ly lbell um for the property located at 8123 Overseas Highway it is um the future land use map is currently zoned residential medium and they are requesting a change to the mixed used future land use map the zoning is currently settlers residential and they are requesting to go to Highway commercial zoning District the property is comprised of 18385 square ft um the properties to the South are designated flum the flum designations are semi public semiu service the properties to the East are designated residential Med medium and the properties to the west across Overseas Highway are designated residential high and mixed use the character of the area is mixed use with residential uses commercial uses and institutional uses the subject property has the existing senator's residential zoning District designation and the adjacent property to the South is designated public semiu services to the north the adjacent property is designated s residential the properties to the west across Overseas Highway are designated multif family and tourist commercial and to the east is Settlers residential and again the character of the surrounding areas of mixed use with a collected of commercial uses institutional uses and single family residences the property is scarified the property is not recognized as a habitat to any state or federal listed animal species and is not within the state's conservation Recreation lands boundary or critical habitat area pursuant to The Village's GIS data and Records the parcel was identified as scarified areas designated as mixed use on the future land use map recognized the prevalent and historical mixed use pattern of development within the vage Village the mixed use mixed use designation shall accommodate a mix of commercial and residential uses which may be located in the same building limited public and semi-public uses recreational facilities schools marinas tourist facilities and supportive Community facilities ancillary to permitted uses pursuant to the standards in the comprehensive plan and de development regulations the proposed F mment would alter the development potential of the subject property the following there is a table in your uh pack that outlines specifics the maximum residential density if approved the proposed fum would amend the amendment would result an increase to two market rate residential dwelling units or up to six deed restricted affordable residential dwelling units and the maximum non-residential intensity the F the proposed mixed juice flum category non-residential intensity of0 25 F and up to 35 f for areas in inside the village Activity Center working water funds or through utilization of transfer of development rights in your packet is the impact analysis on all public facilities as well as the compatibility with the comprehensive plan and the state areas of critical concern based on that um for the flum we recommend uh adoption that it meets all the criteria we recommend that approval of the map the flum amendment at this time time as far as the zoning Amendment goes uh pursuant to section 30- 696 the purpos of the highway commercial zoning district is to accommodate the existing businesses along US1 and to provide opportunities for new commercial retail shops and services that typically are autod dependent and are used by people on a less than weekly basis or to accommodate the building and services trade single family or multif family residential uses and educational uses are an option to commercial use though not proposed any future development of the subject property would require ire sa plan application approval this will ensure that the subject property meets the standards of review of the comprehensive plan and the Land Development regulations including but not limited to requirements for a minimum of open space habitat preservation concurrency management and level of service standards for transportation infrastructure Wastewater storm water and other public services off street parking and internal circulation required setbacks Landscaping dedicated conservation uses for existing habitats on-site and offsite improvements and designed amenities required Reed to achieve land use compatibility for surrounding uses and Zoning districts procedes for zoning Amendment pursuing to section 30-41 d4b of the code of ordinances The Village Council must find that the application is consistent with the comprehensive plan and then the applicant has complied with all procedural requirements of the section and that the maintenance of the existing zoning in the property does not accomplish a legitimate public purpose The Village Council shall make the determination on a finding of legitimate public purpose based on one and more of the following factors demand for the proposed zoning District in the village in relation to the amount of land currently zoned and available to accommodate that demand pursuant to The Village's GIS data and Records there are approximately 538 Parcels that are designated Highway commercial which represents approximately 7.56% of the total 7,18 total Parcels within island marada of the 538 Parcels of within the highway commercial zoning District 85 vacant which equals approximately 15% 15.79% of the total Parcels number two compatibility of the site's phys physical geological hydrological and other environmental features with the uses permitted in the proposed Zony designation the site is currently scarified and vacant the sound rounding uses are compatible within the zoning District data errors including errors in mapping vegetative types types and natural features described in the comprehensive plan there is no evidence that there are any in the village GIS data records or other resources new issues The Village has accepted 300 additional affordable housing units according to the Department of Commerce there is an additional need for commercial space space in conjunction with those units five recognition in the need for additional detail of comprehensive or comprehensiveness at this time there is no additional need for additional detail because there's no proposed changes to the subject property number six compatibility of the proposed district with the property surrounding the site requested reason zoning and any applicable neighborhood Redevelopment plan as presly indicated subject properly currently has existing settlers residential zoning designation the adjacent property of the South is public semiu services the north is Settler's residential the West is multif family and tourist commercial and the East is s's residential and again the character of the surrounding area is mixed use with the collector of commercial uses institutional public uses and single family residential uses based on the review of the application staff has reviewed the zoning Amendment request and at this time it determines it meets the criteria and therefore stack recommends the approval of the zoning map Amendment thank you you're welcome any discussion or open it to the applicant applicant okay you have anything Don for the record I'm Don Horton I'm the agent for the applicant and uh no not really I'm just just here to answer any questions I want to thank staff for the work that they've put in this and the review of our application and finding us in compliance with the comp plan and recommending approval but I'm here for any questions we can call you back up if you thank you okay to the table I am familiar with the property since I knew Ellen M was on the phone with ell McCandless a couple of times uh it's sad to not see all the fruit trees that used to be there but Irma made sure there would be no more fruit trees there so it's it's just not going to happen if you think look at whatever it was Sodom and Gomorrah got salted here's what happened on that property so anyway it's it makes sense because with everything else around it it's inconsistent it's not inconsistent it's consistent with what's going on down in that section of town makes better use of it Patrick okay I I I tend to agree with that I just had one question because I know that in there there's different rules with respect to settlers residential and replatting and whatnot have you confirmed that this site is a formal that we're not looking at because all we have is the property appraisers website have you looked to see that this lot is in compliance with those rules with respect to it being actually itself a single platted lot if if if it is actually a platted lot I agree with Cheryl we just didn't have that piece of information in our packet um I did not specifically look at that but I can do that prior to going to council and confirm that is that not Strat and subdivision it's part of Strat and subdivision okay I just looked at the property appraiser and it said subdivision of lots 3-4 which sometimes that means that the property appraiser has has subdivided it and sometimes it means it's an official subdivision I just didn't we didn't have that information and Settler's residential in particular has some restrictions to it it does well well that when you look at the the the D to it it's a meets and Bounds legal description which is the other which is the other question about that so you know it doesn't necessarily have a lot number it is described with the meets and Bounds questions I've looked at that piece before I've known Chris Woody and Elanor my whole life and in uh a knew that area when Woody had his plants out there and I've looked at it even before the village was incorporated it was that was the way it was plotted so I'm assuming that it's been that way all along but we just need to double check I'm sure before the village was incorporated that's the way it was Jimmy uh I have no questions I'm good sorry did you have anything else okay I didn't have any questions either it seems pretty straightforward and if you if you take a a a step away from Step farther out not just the immediate neighbors it's so obvious that that's all commercial there um uh that you know when you if you keep it real tight it it might look like well see you're not matching anything but if you take one step away from that uh it it's obvious um any other questions okay in that case I I need a motion for The Flume change from um on the wrong tab sorry I move to approve that we accept each one of these we haven't done public comment thank you there is no public comment offici go ahead and did you did not put in public comment and there are no hand on for the interruption go ahead no I yeah it slipped by mind Tony you want so I move to approve the um application for the zoning map Amendment change for The Flume do we have to do each one individually you have to do them individually I guess we have to go with The Flume first correct right so I move toe the uh change in The Flume for this particular piece of property as requested two mixed juice right yep okay I have a first second I have a second roll call Tony Hamman yes shill C yes Patrick FY yes Susan Rafel yes Jean TR yes Vice chair Lorie laand yes and chair Deb Gillis yes motion passes 7 to zero okay now I need a motion for the uh zoning change I move to approve the zoning map change the amendment from settlers residential to Highway commercial okay I have it first second Tony Hamond yes Sher cson yes Patrick Foley yes Susan Rafel yes James fry yes for VI chair Lorie band Yes and chair Deb Gillis yes motion passes 7 to zero thank you very much all right moving on to um item C uh it's a buffer standards want to read the title for us an ordinance of Isa marada Village of islands Florida amending Chapter 30 Land Development regulations amending Article 5 schedule of District use and development standards division 6 landscape standards section 30-8 one6 to specifically amend buffer yard standards relating to zoning District buffer yards providing for penalties providing for the repeal of all code provisions and ordinances inconsistent with this ordinance providing for severability providing for inclusion in the code providing for transmittal of this ordinance to the Florida Department of Commerce and providing for an effective date upon approval of this ordinance by the Florida Department of Commerce Danel welome good evening everyone um so for this one uh back at the February uh council meeting uh Council directed staff to amend the code to remove the requirement of a residential property um having to install a District boundary buffer when it abuts uh commercial property so uh this item is at the council's Direction it's not staff generated um for the analysis it's pretty straightforward by um making this amendment it is going to reduce the amount of landscaping required on a residential property when it buts a commercially zoned property um and in doing so we just added a subsection to the current um section 30- 816 zoning District boundary buffer yards so we added a subsection F and that reads where a District boundary buff where excuse me where a District boundary runs along a residential and commercial property the residential property shall not be required to install a district buffer yard and that language kind of mirrors the rest of that um that section of code so um we are recommending uh approval of this amendment as it is per the direction of council okay and just as a clarification although I I think it comes without saying is that the commercial is does not relieve the buffer on the commercial side of that line it does not relieve the commercial property correct thank you all right any discussion at can I ask a question sure does it remove just is it because it would be a double buffer that they're wanting to remove it because commercial is usually more what about on the other side if they're adjoining a residential lot does it eliminate it entirely so they have a bigger FR point on which to build or is it just on that side that that is a boundary line with a commercial property in most circumstances is both propert well whatever property is being developed has to do a 20ft wide buffer yard in most scenarios that this is covering so the commercial would need 20 if they developed and then if the residential on the same adjacent to that same would also do a 20 so you'd end up a 40 total um but the the council thought that was kind of a burden on the residential property that it' be a 20 foot buffer on their side um so it's not always a 20 foot but it just eliminates the requirement when it a buts commercial that the residential has to I think part of your question was if I've understand you have a commercial no I'm sorry if you have a residential next to a residential is there a buffer yes and it varies by which residential zoning District it is even with this amendment yes if if so if you had a commercial property vacant on which a a residential is going to be built residential for that Center property is the buffer entirely eliminated or is it just eliminated where it is a buffer to the commercial where the property what does the language say it covers it pretty well in the language when the District boundary runs along a residential and commercial property so it's only residential and Commercial line not resident boundary okay perfect thank you so the the other three would still be in or two whichever way you want still be enfor I think one of the things that you're talking about which is another subject we get to another time is one of the subjects we need to address as F is for area ratio for an elot which would is another subject entirely that we can go down that P that's Rabbit Hole one other day right that's not today okay all right any other questions from here you know I ask this periodically but I guess my question is is there a story behind the story other words why are we doing this I would ask that you go back and watch the video of the meeting okay there was a property involved I I can think of one what's that I can think of one okay really what it what it boiled down to is that there was a lot that was uh kind of long and skinny and then requiring a buffer would the council thought was an undue burden to the owner of that property and that it would reduce the amount of area that they were able to build on the one I'm thinking of it was in front of council at that time yeah you going to have any other questions any public comment we have V cenan followed by Don Horton I'm not in favor of reducing any buffer yards that we're already requiring um while I was on the LPA this came up that uh uh the driveways on a piece of property that was being developed had to have buffers between the driveway and the property line so I'm just wondering how that's going to affect that particular ordinance that is already on the books and uh the the fact that it's it's inconvenient for the the property owner to uh adhere to what the the uh uh Village regulations are and and not have enough room to develop um I I you're you're once again making a whole village ordinance for one piece of property and the convenience of one property owner and I just don't see that as being the way to operate and and uh I think we should have uh if it's a 40 foot buffer and you don't think you need a 40ft buffer you got 20 ft on the commercial side why not maintain a 10-ft buffer on the residential side that would be a you know a compromise but to eliminate a buffer on the on the residential side I just uh I don't see that as being helpful in any way except to the person that owns that property and for you to to uh make a change an ordinance that could be uh uh done all over the village in any number of other properties under development I think is a real serious mistake and I think uh uh to eliminate buffering uh that is already on the books as being required the reason it's been required is for the privacy and and for the noise and for the the U good of the village so I would urge you not to do this at all and if you do it uh make some some provision that the the uh buffer is not completely eliminated in other words if a 10-ft buffer is required then require a hedge or a five- foot buffer or something on the on the residential side because the commercial side is is pretty much set in stone that they have to put in some kind of a buffer but I you know just to to allow the residential uh developer to develop more area I don't think that's a real good idea to remove the buffer for that thank you very [Music] much looks still go ahead thank you madam chair uh so I had this discussion with Daniel when I saw this item come up and and uh I had this code part of this code changed uh probably about about 15 years maybe 10 years ago time flies um I had a client that uh had a piece of property with a Village Center zoning and a marine youth zoning sat next to each other uh he simply wanted to put in a slab to be able to put in an a a back whole house backup generator uh at that point he had a piece of property that was about 500 ft deep and the village code was written to where he was going to have to put in a 20ft buffer all the way down his property thousands and thousands of dollars much more than what the cost of that slab was so we had the the code changed back then and uh as I recall um Ed konus was the planning director at that time um and it it allowed for a structures of of less than I think 200 ft or less they didn't require this buffer but this buffering requirement has always been a very ridiculous buffering requirement um in particular instances in some instances it's necessary and it's right but um the council has granted variances in the past for residential that abutted residential uh conservation property now the residential conservation property uh was as it says a conserved piece of property uh this owner was going to be required to put in a 20ft buffer to something that was acreage of buffer already across the fence line from them uh so the council granted a variance and they've granted a couple of variances in the past for that I personally don't see the rationale between requiring buffering between residential uses and residential uses I can see a requirement for there to be a a buffering between let's say tourist commercial and and a residential use but yet at the same time you're putting the illness on chances are the tourist commercial property is already developed and so somebody wanting to build next to that that has has already said that they wanted to build next to the airport so to speak and they're going to have to put in some 20ft buffer um so I think this buffering requirement that's always been in the code has been just a little bit onerous on the residential property owner uh because the commercial properties are are pretty much uh already developed and in most instances they don't AB a residential use uh you wouldn't you don't require commercial to commercial buffering um so I I I just think that maybe instead of the council once again pie mailing a little piece of of of the the whole section uh maybe if the uh LPA deems it wise maybe they the message they should send back to the council is let your staff go in and logically look at the entire section of the buffering section of the code and maybe look at changing the whole thing instead of one little piece here and one little piece there cuz that's where we usually end up with a problem but thanks for the consideration anybody else no one on to either okay any other comment I'm just here if you guys have any more questions okay Daniel I do it's pretty simple uh it says here staff recommends approval uh are you in favor of this change it it it's my job to uh do the will of counsel it's also you're good answer nice nice answer but I'm not buying it so you're a biology guy so is this a good move for the village of the islands and for the environment it's hard to have a one-sized fits-all change to the code there's some residential properties that but commercial properties that are either large enough or in such a configuration that some buffering would be nice um but in more more often than not I think your you know your r1s and your r1m flum properties you know you're your 80 by whatever Lots I think a 20ft buffer is a little uh large for that size property so what I see that the staff recommends this change who does that represent does everybody on staff get together Jennifer is that you is that you're in your office or is this a whole group of people I'm sorry but I just I I you know I got to get it out on the table I think it's a combination of Daniel and myself you know having conversation about what the council requested from us and what we felt was the best way to address their concerns and and out of all the things that you know we could think of this would be the best way we felt would address their concerns so the recommendation is we would recommend this to address their concerns that that that I think went back to Daniel's very well put I answer um spun differently and I understand why you did so so I appreciate that but I've also understand that the there's currently uh efforts underway to look at the totality of the um municipal code in particular the ldrs what I also understand and and this is my question to you for the for the story behind the story of this one particular lot it would be capable of getting a variance if Council approve the variance to alleviate that particular lot's hardship right at the meeting that that spurred this direction that the applicant was in for a variance for the landscape requirement okay so given that they're that purportedly imminently how how long out imminent is is yet to be determined but in light of that I know that you've done this at at Village Council Direction but I think that those that come up in between now and a comprehensive over overhaul of the ldrs make sense which would be able to address all of your concerns both um the particular ones that you just mentioned as as well as the Village Council being able to alleviate hardships you got any comment I do kind of have thought you know I I tend to to feel that a 20 foot buffer on a residential side side is is is excessive and I also think that if if a person purchases a residential parcel that is adjacent to a commercial parcel they're already aware of the fact that that's a commercial parcel and the commercial should have the burden to place the buffer on there and not so much the residential um side and then but still at this point even if we did approve this we're not precluding a residential property owner from installing a buffer if they so to to do so we're just simply stating that the commercial side of the property that has already installed a buffer is sufficient to to meet the the buffering needs between the two Parcels but they allow lar develop that I mean it is there is beyond this one story behind a story which I understand which is why the the a variance procedure exists to address those ultimately what you were doing is allowing for larger residential structure by eliminating as as compared to what everybody else was able to build because they went next to a commercial maybe that's fair maybe it's not it's not our policy decision for this amendment to make but it certainly is a benefit to that residence it will now be able to be that much larger um and still meet all of the requirements no I am that but that's that's an option for a property owner just because they have the ability to do so intensity and density but just because they have the opportunity to do it doesn't necessarily mean that that's what their intention is not everybody wants to build larger and bigger there are there are people there are new construction homes that are not larger and bigger on the on Lots there we have we have a number of them I will definitely agree that but that's not 100% of property owners who are developing something are not building to their maximum capacity you're just assuming that they're going to do that and in all likelihood that's not going to be the case th000 so my question is is we're talking buffers but there's also setback requirements that's not necessarily a buffer correct corre yeah okay so we still we haven't eliminated the setback from that line yeah no the setbacks are the same but in most scenarios the buffer is going to be wider than a setback requirement okay and how realistic is that that's not really right doesn't match up to me if the if the setback is is seven and a half on on the property line then why should the buffer be larger than S and 1 half feet I mean I'm just taking if we had to average it s and a half on one side and seven and a half on the other but most people usually do five and 10 but why should we require a buffer that's larger than the setback it depends on the for these it's it's to to buffer zoning districts from each other and that was that's the intent of this whole section if you choose to build a residence next a piece of commercial property and you want to look at that commercial piece of property go with God I agree have a nice view I I agree with that also and and if they sell the house and the next person doesn't want to look at it they can always plant at $1,000 a tree because I'm too old to wait on them to grow yeah you're going to spend some money on it go with God but but it's it's not like it's back to what I was just saying it's we're not eliminating no the setbacks we're only reducing the buffer or eliminating the buffer so they there's it's they're not going to be allow elting the requirement that they placed buffer we're not precluding them from putting it a buffer that's right of some sort it's the requirement of it right my grandparents liked looking at the C Clair station next morning sometimes it's nice to know what's coming at you that's how old I am all right any more conversation did I call for public comment I did we did have done okay so now I'm calling for a motion motion to approve is presented second I have a first and a second cson yes V yes Patrick Foy no Tony Hamman yes Susan Rapido no James Ryan yes and CH de Gillis yes motion pass passes 5-2 all right moving right along um item D is Shoreline setback um adjustments an ordinance of Island marada village of islands Florida amending Chapter 30 Land Development regulations article 7 environmental regulations division 2 Docks and Shoreline uses section 30-1 1542 of the village code providing for severability providing for inclusion in the code and providing for an effective date uh Miss Jennifer good evening again um this is another um ordinance amendment that was direction of Village Council um based on a uh Pro a application um before the council for a um appeal of a variance denial for uh somebody that had a wasn't was n exactly a tiki hut it was more of like a canopy structure that had been destroyed and they rebuilt a large Tiki Hut without a permit um they came in for a variance request um because they were within the shoreline setback we denied that variance request they appealed to council at that time the council requested that staff take a a look at how we would allow um tea Huts um on docks and within the shoreline setback as in a lot of neighborhoods that's a common practice uh to put your Tiki Hut I guess on your dock um in the setback so um we bounced around a couple things and we thought that the easiest thing would be uh to make the change to the Shoreline setback under non-water dependent accessory uses and structures on altered shorelines and canals basins and channels um I do have to point out that in the section um which is number four under that that is the additional um we will be removing the words perpendicular to the Shoreline so it will just read structures limited to non-enclosed gazebos and te Huts not to exceed 15 ft in height on dos shall be permitted within the 10t set back from the mean high water line so that was the um change that we're proposing um based on the uh scenario I just presented um and at this time staff recommends the adoption of the ordinance okay public comment first comments here first public comment do I have any public comment death van Caden head when this was Van Caden head again uh when this was before the council it was brought out that uh people on both sides and up and down this canal had Tiki Huts or some kind of shade structure on their docks so it wasn't anything out of line what was out of line was was this uh shade structure was like that was destroyed in the hurricane was essentially a a canvas tent Affair and what they put in was a really nice U seol type mikasuki Tiki Hut and uh the problem being is they put it too close to the water now it came out in the discussion which I think you ought to take into uh consideration this evening is the edge of the man's dock that this is being uh uh considered for uh extends into a public Waterway so where you measure how far the setback is it's not the edge of his dock because the edge of his dock is encroaching into a public Waterway and I would ask that uh if if you're going to make spot zoning at least make sure that the spot that you're zoning is fully understood about what is there and what is on it because this man's concrete dock uh extends over his property line extends into a public Waterway so where you're going to measure the setback from is pretty much up in the air and I don't think you should once again spot Zoning for a single uh single uh situation uh he asked for a variance if you want to give him a variance you can do whatever you want to you can recommend anything you want to but I'm just saying uh he did it he applied for an after Thea permit for an illegally placed Tiki Hut and rather than move the tiki hut could be moved back he's got room to move it back uh 10 ft if you wanted to cut it off and crane it back and more toward his house he could still be legal with what he's got but to leave it where it is and allow him to measure the the setback from the edge of his dock which is not the the uh edge of the water the edge of the water belongs to the people it belongs to that that whole section of canal in there has a line that that uh demarcates a public canal and his property his dock extends into that public Canal which is a point I'm trying to make that I hope you'll consider thank you very much we have Don Horton uh good afternoon again um so you know when I was the building official of the County uh the County Commissioners passed an ordinance that unenclosed gazebos cheekies and similar structures didn't even need a permit and uh uh it did matter if I argued with them or not they just said you don't need a permit at that time there were a lot of um shade structures Tiki huts and fish cleaning canopies that were built on people's docks at that point so there's a lot of them scattered throughout the village actually throughout the whole County um a lot of them were you know after the village Incorporated and changed its rules was considered non-conforming but yet the village still allowed cheeky Huts of no more than 100 Square ft at the end of a a pile supported dock uh going out into the water so this only makes sense that you would allow if you're still going to allow them to be out on a pile supported dock 100 feet out into the water that you let somebody put a cover over their fish cleaning station on their dock thank you I think this covered more than just one uh it was brought up concerning one property but it was determined that there was several properties that if their Tiki cover whatever had been destroyed oh looky there oh yeah that's just a couple that that it would um that they would have the same problem and and that's where the request came through council is that okay we've only got one in front of us we could handle the one but potentially we have a lot more coming forward um so I think that's where the request came from um they they did look at the fact that there was not just one um what else gentlemen well I think we're simply tasked with the idea of approving that they go ahead and follow this procedure and then it becomes a village council's responsibility to decide what that's going to look like if I understand this correctly well the re well the recommendation is for the ordinance change that's in front of you this evening which is to add the the number four under uh section 30-15 42 D2 which would say structures limited to non-enclosed gazebos and Tiki Huts not to exceed 15 ft in height on dock shall be permitted within the 10t setback from the mean High waterline um okay the county only allows 12 ft is there a reason we picked 15 um all of our accessory structures are uh 15 ft in height okay in the code and and we and the village does not allow the terminal platform structures anymore is my understanding correct not in canals not in canals yeah okay we have a clarify based on what based on what Don was talking about I was just looking for it is there still a 100 square foot limmit on what can be out there so that we're not looking at the mikasuki reception Center out there on pier style docks in Open Water we allow up to 100 square fet at the terminal platform but that but that's the cap MH okay and the as I understand it because this was a problem at one point on our Canal is that the roof line may not extend past the cap on the wall whatever it is the the roof line of this structure cannot extend into the Waterway when you come around the corner you do not want your rig Outriggers to run into somebody's rlly coming around the corner on the canal I don't know that that's specified in the okay I I will say that that typically they do extend a foot on each side call the dri I think that needs to be addressed because you do not want to run your Outriggers into somebody's roof line if there's somebody else coming out of the canal especially if both of them are sport fishermen and it it happens I will say due to the the nature and I'm not to bring up the county again but they do allow that one foot drip edge to extend needs to be in the edge that having seen the Outrigger in the roof line was you could sell tickets to it so there you're trying to say that that's a a poor Captain what was the last part isn't it would it be the captain's a captain's error from to get his Outrigger stuck in somebody's Ticky structure just don't have it out there first place I was under the impression you shouldn't extend a roof line out over the water anyway so are but are we considering a foot uh over the he was saying that the county I thank God like any any fish cleaning table you know I don't want to speak for them all but they all have like a little there's a little hangover on them there's a little hangover usually it's right at the edge of the table you you tend not to see it but having looked down the can having watched them come down the canal which it was extending and see the Outriggers and everything else get caught when boat when you've got one boat coming out one boat going in was not pretty okay there was a lot of shouting always a lot of shouting I I remember this I remember this item coming up before Council I remember in public testimony there was some pretty animated negative testimony if I remember correctly from people around that so I I I do think we need a good thorough look at this and I'm not I'm not sure even how to make a comment on it other than the fact that we certainly don't want to make this change just to meet this one need for sure just I don't think we are right all right and Jennifer you you all up a notebook those are tell me what that is exactly so the um applicant for the variance that was before the council and part of their response to my denial of their variance did um uh a tour so to speak mostly of lower mumi and upper medicum I think um and came up with over 50 um Tiki huts on docks that potentially this would impact that was going to be my next question was how many over 50 it says uh they revealed that over 50 structures are out of compliance with the rear property setback line regulation of the village I didn't count them specifically but but when they were constructed and we were count Incorporated I think the county the county would allow us correct Incorporated so we do have a provision in our code that requires is that if something is damaged more than 50% of the cost of the item they then have to bring it back into compliance with today's code so if they were to get damaged and say a hurricane they would not be able to rebuild that structure today and I think that was the point okay any other discussion I need a motion I make a move to I make a motion to uh approve the ordinance as stated as presented to us I'll second I have a first and a second okay lond yes Cheryl yes Patrick FY Noy hman yes Susan Rafel yes James Ry I I apologize we but it's going to be approved with the comments that Jennifer made right or it's as stated as stated okay um yes and chair Deb Gillis yes motion P passes to one all right moving right along to item e it's a moratorium on accepting new administrative relief applications good God an ordinance of Isam marada Village of islands Florida establishing a temporary moratorium within the village on the acceptance of new administrative relief applications providing for exemptions providing for procedures for vested rights and judicial review providing for a term providing for separability providing for conflicts providing for transmitt of the ordinance to the State Department of Commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the State Department of Commerce okay um I'm sorry who's presenting this John oh John where are you uh Raj is not in our system so we'll have to change that um so at a recent meeting um of the council you will if you were watching you probably saw the discussion we had regarding administrative relief applications when there was two presented before the council and the council had some concerns about awarding those based on you know upcoming potential you know possible takings claims or other things regarding the fact that we have no additional uh bass allocations at this time so at that meeting the council um asked that staff provide a comprehensive plan to look at administrative relief and how we're handling administrative relief and what are the potential uses for administrative relief permits um and in conjunction with that they asked uh legal to draft this moratorium a temporary moratorium on administrative relief applications so that that would give us some time to consider that plan and um some breathing room so that we didn't have you know I think we have five that are going to be eligible upcoming um have them you know breathing down our necks while we're looking at the this comprehensive plan so before you you have the proposed temporary moratorium I think it mimics the the bass one that was adopted last year um and we would just ask at this time that you recommend approval okay discussion at the table or public comment public comment let's do that first any public comment we have V kid and followed by Don Horton well whenever it says moratorium I've always been for it I've been for a moratorium on market rate I've been for a moratorium on uh tdrs I've been for a moratorium on administrative relief administrative relief we have so few uh that are actually in play now we have 300 that were U granted to us by the governor no no no those are affordable units affordable but what I'm saying is there has been a lot of discussion about taking some of those 300 and using them for uh uh taking suits for giving somebody something you know an administrative an administrative relief um fills an administrative relief Billet uh to to uh take somebody out of a taking suit um the we have like 20 what is it 27 left 23 23 okay so I mean they're gold they're definitely gold and we should have we should have a set uh priority uh method procedure in place to deal with those 23 and and I'm all for this temporary moratorium and I hope you uh I hope you pass it thank you very much [Music] I feel like you're just dealing with ying and yang here uh listen you've got people that have been sitting in that queue that in good faith more than four years ago have put an application in uh always at the end of that tunnel if they didn't get an allocation or weren't lucky enough to get an allocation they've been hoping that they could bubble themselves up to the top and these are our friends and our neighbors that are in that queue uh these folks have been hoping for four years like everybody else that's been in the bass q that they could get themselves a permit and there are people that are coming up to the top and one of my clients just recently went in front of council and uh uh a as not as they've done in the past uh they want to kick the can down the road um they they are um they're actually about to pop up again with another uh now up at close to five years so getting another perseverance Point look the rules are the rules and the council had three things that they could do they could buy the property or make an offer to buy the property at a reasonable amount um they could issue a permit or they could do something else I've watched them do something else a couple of times but historically in the past they have issued they've granted these people that have waited in good faith for four years to get themselves a permit there are uh bass allocations that are are set aside for this intended purpose and I just don't think that we need to continue to Kick the Can down the road we need to give these people that have been in a queue in good faith their permits or buy the property if they're willing to sell the property although we continue to buy property and do nothing with it so anyway that's my thoughts any other public comment anybody on Zoom no one was thir en raced all right all right to the table Patrick no comment Tony Jennifer you said 23 yes sir 23 remaining in the queue no there's 23 permits administrative relief permits available we have 62 people on the bass list 60 pass 62 yeah well he's thinking I think we need the moratorium um to provide the breathing room for staff to evaluate the the comprehensive comp plan changes and viewpoints that are going to go forward to evaluate I know that we have discussed this for years I know I have personally asked for years for True overlay and true evaluation of the likelihood of success Under The Bert Harris claims that is when did people buy the property um did they buy it in the last 10 years but they might get an administrative permit that doesn't make sense to me when other people who may have owned the land for 50 years and have legitimate claim um could be um taken care of in that way as opposed to the Village spending taxpayer money so I think that the moratorium is necessary to allow a strategic plan on how to deal with all of these issues and how to hopefully uh save the taxpayers some money we're not we're not an open spigot as as sometimes it seems we are Cher or Jimmy I unfortunately think this is a necessity I was looking to make sure that I read the six months correctly that this is for six months but I wanted to make sure that I didn't skim over that incorrectly it's for six months but I wouldn't kick it any further as this needs to be done as a um thing it's got to go to council and it's got to go to DCA but I think we passed an ordinance not too long ago that once Council does first reading it is in effect okay it just I remember right this but it needs to be addressed it needs to be done and everybody else needs to put aside the petty stuff and sit down and get this done it's time this is not bubble gum time this is time to get this done uh Jim or Lori or myself jener do you know how many people will come up in the next 6 months about five or maybe um in the next six months what or year what whatever's easier um I want to say it's about 10 but I don't have the list in front of me so I don't have that number off the top of my head sorry I just bred the list and there's like four people that had their application in since 2019 yeah I did I did that too there's four or five is what I saw but there may be some other things that I'm missing but um I hate to kick it down the road again um the the argument of somebody that bought it 10 years ago versus somebody that bought it 50 years ago is very Al very U on point argument and I like it but these administrative leaves have been in the system a long time and I personally think that that there should be a moratorium on those um it's just my personal belief of that we were kicking a lot down the road how how I know we don't have an other category of what the the council can offer I mean currently we have two things three things that the council can do they can give them a a relief they can offer to buy the land and they can do other and other used to mean that we gave them extra points well extra points doesn't do any good now so there's you know with the the the other is very difficult to come up with other solution right now um but at the same time I these people it's it's it reminds me of the land dedication and everything else they've been waiting waiting and waiting and waiting and they've been trying to follow the rules and some of them the reason they didn't get their allocations is because they're sensitive lands um maybe we should buy them then but that's to be evaluated when they come forward and to keep piling things down the road I I just I would like to see it go forward now I just can I just make one clarification to Cheryl's comment it is 6 months but there is an option for the council to renew I saw that but I just want to make sure was six month you have to make a decision to do something within six months unless the council de yeah well I just want to be clear about that so the 23 the council the C sorry the council is already working on uh extending the six month for the market rate stuff so we're on our second we're about to go into our second six months on the market rate go ahead so the 23 that are in the queue are all applying for administrative relief no there's there's 23 permits available that we have that we could give to 23 people who if they were to apply okay we have 23 permits in hand and how many have we to apply right now we have two applications in they have to wait till the the LA the end of the quarter of which they have hit the four annual quarter and so I think we've got like four or five coming up in the next couple quarters and then we have like another two or three that they're sporadic so you don't see them all at once there's not like a a certain I can't tell you you know we've got 10 this year off the top of my head I'd have to go back and calculate their their dates I have one that has the dates I can find it at some point and send it to you if you'd like but it won't help you for tonight I think I'm looking at it right now I believe well I I just provided him a list of the the last um um list of of people on the list that has a year date on it it doesn't have the exact date I think I don't think that it has a year date I mean only a year date and and um there's two that has been postponed I think there's another one that's on Council for this Thursday maybe one more on Council for this Thursday there's no administrative Lea on for this Thursday uh the two that were that are in process were continued out till October right th those two got continue to October and it looks like there's like I I passed it away too quickly no no it's okay count the orange ones how many is on there I found the I found the my list here so I've got okay um that's 2019 one two I've got two eligible in July I've got got one eligible in August one eligible in September three eligible in October and then nothing until February of next year two three four five six two three four five six 7 seven eligible two that plus the two so that's nine nine so look at section four um a and then the three points that are there are these people that have been in a queue for that have got their applications in do they fall under this the the two people I don't I'm not looking at what what do you what section it say The Government Act of development approval was obtained prior to the effective data of the ordinance upon which the property owner has determined determinedly relied in good faith by making substantial expenditures and that it would be highly so the ordinance would not apply to those two the two people that are in p process right now if that's what you're asking the two people that were continued out till October this this moratorium would not apply to them CU they already have an application in it would only apply to to anybody who has not applied yet it's accepting new applications is the moratorium Jennifer um so there's we have 23 allocations available that's building permits yes 23 administrative relief allocations 6 some odd 62 and so we're trying to figure out how to divide 23 into 60 yes description really yeah maybe but the way the the basis of way the way it's been done if I misstate this please make sure you correct me is that it's done on uh time on dates and if you look at the 63 uh there's about seven well she counted seven and there's the that they they postponed or delayed uh that would be coming up within the next year okay so we'll say 10 in the next year of those 23 um then next year the following year you know you'd have another batch coming up so why why does it why didn't the village just get rid of the 23 and and you know you can only use them for administrative relief okay well there's yeah once they restricted well I think once they're gone they're gone and so I think the the reason or the rationale for the breathing room and please correct me if I'm wrong Jennifer is to allow them to evaluate whether the method they're using is the best method for determining the most worthy properties on which to be built because right now the administrative permit pool is simply a waiting game if you wait out your time you come in and and your expectation is you're going to get that one that may not be the best from a planning perspective on what Parcels are land deserving of them as opposed to you know and and not that I'm unsympathetic to those that put in their time but versus those who have simply put in their time I think I think part of what the council has tasked us to look at is is you know uh the economics of it all as well and what is beneficial to the Village which which Lots would be more beneficial to give these permits to versus ones that we may have to pay out for takings claims also the other category that the chair spoke of what could the other be uh what are the options is there an opportunity to use some of the 300 early out evacuation permits to do something with those so there are several things that we're going to be looking at over the course of the next you know 6 eight months that um that to Mr rael's point you know Breathing Room would be helpful it'd be nice if we could just stop time I don't think that's an option would have been nice if this was all resolved like years ago but I'll take the blate um they thought it was they thought this was the plan this was the plan that was going to work they did they did I was involved in some of that and and this was this was our backup plan this is what and should we have had more foresight probably but you know hindsight's always 2020 always Let me refresh your memory that we stood when you and I were both sitting on affordable housing and we had this conversation for the council in 2010 they said oh it will never get there and we'll get more before then lo and behold it's 2024 we haven't gotten more and none of us got younger so and that's that's we're here true and that one I didn't make that decision on um I don't know uh we did public comment is any more com motion did you want wait wait wait Jim did you want to comment or not yeah I have one question I should we finish the motion and then we can still comment after a motion right now we comment no go ahead okay you mention that in six to 8 months you know this we're hoping to have this kind of squared up um I'm I'm just take taking the words but with reviewing I mean with reviewing that yeah but with reviewing 10 applications for this administrative relief I mean is that I just so what was the I'm sorry was your question so you said well I guess we'll say the next year we're hoping to be you know squared up and everything's good there sounds like 10 of them are coming you know or are are eligible for this administrative relief application over the next year so to me you know I'm not trying to sound like I'm I don't want the moratorium you know if it provides breathing room that's what it does but um I I just you know the going forward I don't even think we're not taking applications anymore at this time no we are we are on this well so we're not taking any new I'm sorry we're not taking any building permit B pass we're not right now because we're in a moratorium once that ends we will have to but now we want a moratorium on we're now asking to put a moratorium on this so we don't any of these people that are coming up eligible cannot apply because I think the idea is that if we come up with a new process or a new plan or new guidelines for administrative relief when they apply they are fully aware of what the new process plan guidelines would be and they're applying at their own understanding of everything versus changing the rules in the middle of people applying at the end of this moratorium wouldn't we have that all these people that were eligible then you would just see the I guess the pile of applications if you will it you you would get the stack it's likely it depends on what plan we come up with or I assume you know what the guidelines we set out for you know obviously if we say you know we're not going to give any to Ocean Front Lots I mean I'm not saying we're going to say that but if we did um you know I'm I'm guessing that maybe some of these people would not apply if they were ocean ver LS so in my and and please I'm trying to just have a conversation in that to me is is more subject to these the term was thrown around so I'm going to say it these taking claims now that we've these people applied when there was a certain ruling or certain codes in place and now we're changing some of these things around putting a moratorium and and now we're that I feel like sets us up to be in worse position I can let Roger speak to that and I maybe that's complet maybe that's off base that's what what I kind of feel not drastically off it could go either way it could go either way let Roger so I I think the the answer to your question is somewhat straightforward which is just simply this is a temporary moratorium it's meant to just toll the period whether it's going to happen or not no one has accw those rights just yet until they actually apply so this is just tolling the procedures okay but you are right that that all 10 of these assuming nothing changes in the moratorium just goes away in six months all 10 of them could apply in the same quarter right it doesn't change their it does change their status not change their status it the it's there there's a there's a time frame within that they have to apply for administrative relief that time frame is told I think the word's told it it's hold it's on hold and and it the time that it that six months doesn't apply to them now so we would have those 10 plus whatever else would be coming up next year to whatever solutions they can come up with and could very well be that the solution Remains the Same the process Remains the Same could it could be it could be until we do the research it's hard to an also an opportunity to to research and access and see what access you have to other state funds for potential purchase of lands it's the opportunity to acquire that has been bandied about before but it's it's an honest assessment there's a lot of moving parts I mean we're also a lot of cards balls going up in the air right now we're also in the process along with the county looking for the conversations about do we want to ask the state for more allocations and that hopefully will that conversation will wrap up towards the end of this year so you know all of those conversations sort of interplay with each other and um we for trying to get a handle on all of those things so thank you CH you were saying you were going to make a motion where were we motion motion to approve is presented second okay Sher cson yes Seas ra for M yes Patrick FY yes Tony Hamman yes James Ry yes Vice chair Lorie lant yes and chair dub Gillis no motion passes 6 to one okay moving on um item F uh is related to uh Creekside this is an ordinance of is marada Village of islands Florida considering the request of LH Creekside LLC to amend the official zoning map from Village Center VC to Neighborhood commercial NC for the subject property located on Plantation key with the real estate numbers 0043 7590 0000000000 004 37610 D 0000 0000 and 0437 640 00000000 as legally described herein providing for the transmittal of this ordinance to the state Department of Commerce and providing for an effective date upon the approval of this ordinance by the State Department of Commerce all right all right good evening we're here this evening with uh the applicant um LH Creekside LLC who has submitted a map Amendment application requesting approval for a zoning map Amendment from village Village Center District to Neighborhood commercial District on the subject property um located at 90611 and 90691 and 90701 Old Highway the property in total is comprised of 1.46 N8 acres and the current use of a of the property is hotel motel The zoning map Amendment will allow the applicant to transfer the hotel motel units to another site in Isa marada and redevelop the existing hotel motel into multif family affordable housing units the applicant has submitted his letter of intent detailing this request the subject property again is 1.47 acres and Plantation key the property is not recognized as any Habitat to any state or federal listed animal species and is not within the state conservation Recreation lands boundary or critical habitat area pursuant to The Village's GIS data and Records the parcel is not defined as any habitat the subject property currently has an existing Village Center zoning District designation the adjacent property to the South is designated Village Center to the north the adjacent property is designated as commercial fishing the property to the west across the Old Highway and Overseas Highway are Marine use and Recreation and to the east across the canal is residential single family the character of the surrounding area is mixed use with a collective of commercial uses open space and single family residences pursuant to section 30- 697 the purpose of neighborhood commercial zoning district is to provide a compact commercial area designated and designed I'm sorry and intended to allow for a mix of residential office and local retail Sal Ser servicing the daily needs of local residents within convenient traveling distance though not proposed any future development I'm sorry it shouldn't say though not proposed any future development of the subject property would require a safe plan application approval this will ensure that the subject property meets the standards of review of the comprehensive plan and Land Development regulations including but not limited to minim the minimum requirements for open space habitat preservation concurrency management level of service standards for Transportation infrastructure Wastewater storm water and other public services offset parking off street parking and internal circulation required setbacks Landscaping dedicated conservation ements for existing habitat on-site and offsite improvements and any design amenities required to achieve the land use compatibility for surrounding land use zoning districts pursuant to section 30-41 d4b of the code of ordinances The Village Council must find that the application is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that the applicant has complied with all procedural requirements of this section and that the maintenance of the existing zoning in the property does not accomplish legitimate public purpose The Village Council shall make this determination on a finding of legitimate public purpose based on one or more of the following factors demand for the proposed zoning District in the village in relation to the amount of land currently zoned and available to accommodate that demand pursuant to The Village's GIS data and Records there are approximately 36 Parcels that are designated within the neighborhood commercial district with which represents approximately 0 1% of the total of 7,18 parcels within island marada of the 36 Parcels within the neighborhood commercial District Five Parcels are vacant which equates to approximately 133% of the total neighborhood commercial Parcels compatibility of the site's physical geological hydrological and other environmental features with the uses permitted in the proposed zoning designation the proposed use of the conversion for hotel motel to Workforce affordable housing is allowed in the use as use in the proposed zoning District data errors including errors in mapping vegetated types and natural features described in the comprehensive plan there's no evidence that there are any errors in The Village's data records or other resources new issues the need for Workforce affordable housing still exists within the village The Village has accepted 300 additional affordable housing units and is ready to allocate them to Aid in meeting our affordable housing goals recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness the applicant is working on a TDR application to transfer the hotel motel units to a different property all approvals will be before the Village Council at the same time compatibility of the proposed district with the property surrounding the site plan of the requested rezoning in any applicable neighborhood or Redevelopment plan as previously in indicated the subject property currently has an existing Village Center zoning District designation the adjacent property to the South is designated Village Center to the north is designated commercial fishing and the properties to the west across Highway and Overseas Highway are designated Marine use and Recreation and to the east across of the canal as residential Singo family again the character of sound character of the surrounding areas mixed use with a collective of commercial uses open space and single family residences staff has recued this requests for a zoning Amendment map Amendment to the Village Center neighborhood commercial from Village Center to Neighborhood commercial and determine that the request meets the criteria therefore staff recommends approval of the map Amendment thank you uh the applant is here would you like to make a presentation uh yes Bart Smith on behalf of the applicant uh as was stated uh the intent and purpose of this is is is twofold one Creek Side is a 50 unit hotel that their intent is La also owns the island what they're they're going to do is transfer those Transit units to be redeveloped at at The Islander and of course what happens when you have uh the units transferred off to site well you have a vacant Hotel property that has very good actual bones to the concrete building and so the the goal is then to convert it to affordable housing first for actually workers to construct these things and then for the workers to actually work at the hotels or work in other places in the village and so in order to facilitate that we need to First transfer off the units and then be able to convert it well there's an interesting catch in the Village Center it prohibits the conversion of hotels motels to affordable housing I don't know why it's there but it is there and so we've looked at any which way to not have to change the zoning But ultimately sometimes you just have to look at it and say you have to change the zoning and so when we did that we looked at uh other zoning categories that are under the same future land use map because that provides the same consistency uh with Comprehensive plan because it's under the same fature land use map of mixed use and so that then would provide consistency and provide the easiest path forward and of course all of the the same for all intensive purposes and uses so this is the prodal itself you're all familiar with it uh it's right along uh the Old State Road Road uh it buts the water it's got an existing Motel on it um it's Zone it's future land use map right now is mixed use it's about 1 and A2 acres and the current land use District map is Village commercial uh when we're done with it I believe the unit account is around 12 units which is within the uh allowed density uh for this parcel um so the proposal of course as I've stated is to to change it to Neighborhood commercial commercial transfer off the 50 LLY established hotel room units and then apply for the workforce units that are available once we get those Place those on convert this property then be Begin work now all these approvals though of course have to come back through but we first need to get the zoning approved and that is step one um so uh the the uh this is what I explained you can't convert it so the this is the alternative uh everything under the code is about the same the density doesn't change the intensity for all int is is pretty much the same building Heights are about the same floor area ratios are very similar and the uses are very similar um the purpose of the comprehensive plan for the Mixed use is for mixed use patterns of development including affordable housing employee housing so it's consistent with the comprehensive plan it's consistent with the policies under the mixed use and it's consistent with all other parts of the code uh so and of course this will assist in developing additional affordable housing and it's at the the most appropriate manner to utilize this property after it's been transferred off um I won't bore you with this part as Jennifer already went through it that's just the the survey of all the additional lands how many years own ni uh um neighborhood commercial and uh of course then we have the affordable housing uh Jennifer went through the different uh parcels and so with that unless there's any questions I would hope that you can vote for approval and of course we've got a lot more different steps we have to come back and get approved but this is the first one that we need to start moving forward thank you thank you thanks you want to do public comment first you want to do sure public comment did you sign up did I sign up yes I wasn't planning on comment well the rule is you're supposed to sign up yeah it's supposed to be before the item but com you can I'll let you comment but in the future you need to remember that apologize okay but I wasn't going to comment and all I want to say simply is I've heard dozens of people come up here and use the word affordable housing it's a trojan horse I would like to think that this will eventually go and it will be affordable housing rather than a hotel a motel a be bar or something else so I just caution you on the fact that affordable housing and using the word affordable housing several times in presentations often doesn't materialize that way I'm hoping that isn't the casee here thank you thank you she'll need to slip turned in Tom please thank you okay any other public comment nobody else no Harvey's not here any obviously not do we have a public comment on Zoom I I do um on Zoom you're not on Zoom do we have zoom I'm sorry forgot about Zoom no up okay now you make comments okay I have three points that I need to make the first one is are you aware of the historic value of the restaurant that's sitting there that you're they going to close because that is the original Harry's place for those who have been in the county long enough Harry Harris was the first commissioner from the eper kees and that was his restaurant and bar was also the first liquor license outside of Key West and when this became Monroe County so you have't historic piece of property sitting there in the middle but it's not your hotel units I applaud the fact that you want to move the hotel units but I would like to make sure that there is a uh that we amend this so that none of the tdrs can be granted until the hotel units are converted to Affordable units and must meet the conditions to follow affordable as exist in the village and Mr Quick do I mean I'm sorry Roger do I have the correct language I know I discussed it briefly with Jennifer today but I would like to make sure that's in here that this is a requirement prior to anything else being issued those those Hotel units must be uh converted to Affordable and perpetuity for the village community okay yeah that that should not be an issue and in fact I believe that's already a code requirement I would just say that I they have to transfer they have to to do the tdrs before they convert you can't you can't they can't hold two types of um can they go concurrently yes okay the TDR is predicated on the this being converted when we talked earlier today you know I thought about sequencing and so the TDR could happen and then we could condition that to say that prior to um any sort of construction at The Islander there has to be a certain percentage of the Workforce housing units fin Smith am I making myself yeah yeah and just from a logistical standpoint so everyone understands we need to pull the tdrs off to for from a density to put these on here okay and then the then what we're doing is we're going to start construction internally on these but we don't want to transfer the hotel units off until we have the affordable because we would operate this as a hotel unless we're assured we've got affordable units to go build there that's you ain't got nobody to work yeah exactly yep okay that that's my primary concern I have seen too much pressed digitation and I'm not impressed no no I I get it and and but you understand the the concept of we got it we got it basically trans get the tdrs off so that we have a no density from the tdrs the transients and there a mechanism in place so that there's an automat or a snapback provision so that prior to you you getting the first thing that works with that TDR hav arrived on your property these must be converted on there logistically to a affordable housing look I I'd just love for you to give us the tdrs for the affordable right now so we know that we can do it I'm just you need to talk to council about that okay but I'm just saying I would like to make sure that we all have an understanding and I would like that included in whatever we're sending over to I understood and that's a reasonable request yes okay I just makes everybody much happier much more comfortable and if we have to put in following the set guidelines as agreed to by the state of Florida blah blah blah so we aren't voting on whether or not they can transfer them all we are voting on is the changing of the zone I'm not going to agree to a land zone until I know everything else is going to occur then since he's filing and agreeing and noding his head up and down not going back and forth and we've all articulated you can put put these recommendations on the record yeah that's what I'm saying I want the recommendation record I understand it's got to go like that my other thing is I would like you to recognize when you're bringing things forward looking at the Historical value of some of the pieces of property we got a whole lot of things left that are historical that survived multiple storms and this piece of property also survived the 1960 hurricane so it was interesting that it was there I think Tony knows it well was that Donna at night the the restaurant in the middle was the the hurricane went through the 1960 hurricane yes Donna yeah it uh was belonged to Mr Harris um but it's the other question I had is when these transfer I am my biggest concern is are we going over density by sending these 50 units down to Islander no we've done that calculation that's my question i' no they we have a cap on Hotel units in the village and they're transferring those to The Islander and that maintains that number in our cap so they're not increasing the number just I think she was referring to the the It On The Islander property by adding 50 I'm sorry no we we did the major conditional use review and they they're still under their F and everything it is it is very crowded in Upper mumbi on a on a Friday afternoon and a Saturday evening and I'm just trying not to add to the Mayhem so any more than we have to okay I'm sorry that's all I have yep jimy yeah my only question is the is you said something that the current zoning doesn't allow for the affordables no it doesn't allow the conversion of a hotel motel to affordable housing so what you'd have to do if we kepted Village Center which doesn't it doesn't actually it's not feasible we'd have to knock down the building and then put up a new building and this basically the same footprint to build affordable which just doesn't make sense that was I'm not sure that qualifies either no because that wouldn't be the conversion it be new affordable and and affordable housing is allowed but not the conversion of of a hotel Mot to affordable housing it says the knocking knocking down I don't think solves that problem but what you're doing solves that problem yes corre okay so it's that's the issue using structure it's because that's actually not wood no no it's concrete but it's the because I didn't know if it was the amount because there's 50 you're asking for I think there's three Parcels there so no it's it's it's literally a direct prohibition on the conversion of hotels motels so forth yeah why do we have that right that's that's something not here to solve The World's problems today but that's something that needs to be addressed not that we have I mean that is not a dry lot um motel but we do have some that are dryl motels you know and and they would be ideal for a little Community apartment community they we can't convert them now I've got a couple questions um is is there a monetary transfer of money when you send the uh development rates down to The Islander no it's own by the same entity or technically it's a different LLC but the underlying ownership is the same and do you purchase the rights to uh affordable housing to build there or this just purchase them vill just Awards them they're allocated for the village they're awarding they're they're like a regular allocation only they're afford the workforce okay and I would just make a comment I I I I tend to agree with Tom I I watched the County Commissioners use Workforce housing as U as a facade to develop my major pieces of property and that never works out but they use it as the most attractive uh bait to get anything pass so whenever I hear affortable housing all of a sudden I say what's what's what's going on behind there because the County Commissioners County Commissioners are notorious for that and I'm not very familiar with the situation here in is with Workforce housing you know um this is in perpetuity yeah it's 99 years but you know we'll probably be underwater in 99 years so and how many units 12 approximately 12 I believe was the last design cuz they're going to have bedrooms and kitchens instead of just being you know 200 or 300 Square what kind of rent rent are you looking at for Y what kind of rent dollar dollar amounts I'm not sure but it'll be under the HUD guidelines there's a schedule if you look on the Village website that will tell you but but the the intent is actually to utilize it for the workers on the that work at The Islander so okay that first F the first right for them but obviously you have a unit open you're going to rent it out to someone in the workforce um this this particular project cuz I to a metran horse scaredy cat with affordable housing um because we we've seen it repeatedly used as the only justification for upzoning properties here we actually have a property that's in the village activity center and um is being arguably down Zone more like parallel zoned um but it is not in it's not a a dramatic increase or an increase at all in intensity and density which um makes me have much less concern than I typically do about the Trojan horse affordable housing argument oh look if you look at the record here about a year and a half ago I wrote we wrote to Dan Dan galizio when he was a planning director requesting is there any way to just get the the allocations as it is and we've ultimately after Dan left and Jennifer came in did you ever get a response no but I think the answer is no we need to change the zoning so this has been the the intent and purpose from day one Jennifer's shaking her head at these conversations I was I was around when they made that yeah rule about not converting hotels into residents I was there I'll take I ask you a question for clarification since I'm not sure we are anything we have is affordables imp perpetuity that's we did here in the village did the county go to imp perpetuity or did Key West go to imp perpetuity uh they all 99 years yeah that's what they're calling perpetuity okay I know 99 year I know I still twitch when I say in perpetuity it like if you do that under the law typically then then basically someone can challenge it and get it stricken I I I remember rap way too well yeah but it's like but no more 20 years like they were doing for no no no so like the city of Qs is 50 and the city has the right to automatically renew it for 50 the County's 99 city of marathon's 99 Village is 99 just making sure that I didn't miss something that drop back to a 20 year okay yeah there's not anyone that doesn't have that anymore one question is a restaurant going to remain there or is that going to be converted as well I I'm not aware of any intent on the restaurant at this point that's me that's within the property limits over yes so in our staff report it says that the current use of the property is hotel motel but there are other uses on that property currently yep okay um I from your conversation I've heard you say that that um you will be only putting in about give or take 12 affordables so obviously you're taking one or two of the hotel units and making two into one or something that's correct because there're going to be more than one bedroom typically there are two bedrooms and then you got a kitchen so let's say you got a hotel room that's 200 square ft I am perfectly aware yeah yeah you you can't you can't like when we've already got the plans that we've provided to the village that basically shows the design of the different Ty you can you can uh visually to to make it understandable to people it's you you probably are doing more is if you have two motel rooms they have a bedroom two bedrooms and two bathrooms when you convert it you have one bathroom and one kitchen and you have one bathroom one bedroom and one living room and you cut the door in between between and seal the outside door yep that's very simple and you can get it not not so not so simple to actually get done but that's the simple version of yeah and then you can get it done and you can get people in there that can then work and get do work at the the other property and so so you don't out of 50 units you don't think you can get more than 12 no well one uh the maximum we can do is 18 a little under 18 because the density I think it's like 17 but uh the based on the designs we had and there's like there's turns oh and like it's not just a straight like this so you got to turn this way you got to turn this way where there's there's dead spaces there's stairwells so logistically how to even get it where they they were livable that it was in that neighborhood yeah it's y not a vote for tonight a curiosity question sorry Anthony bour actually addressed that if not familiar uh there was a program on the Travel Channel then Anthony bouran did and he took on old hotels around the world and conver him this is one of the properties that he did it was actually a program featured on um Anthony bouran uh I can't remember what parts Unknown Part Parts Unknown or something like that but he could did the conversion on that hotel brought it into this Century um in fact he brought it out of probably the 19 1800s did the conversion on on creek site but they did yeah could have been but they did there was a discussion briefly about him what he would do if he had made it into the apartments because he talked about how he would do this convert that and he this is before they torn the other building down and he did get 18 units but he said efficiencies are always good to have somebody's always going to want to stay privately and he did get I think 17 or 18 units that were sized yeah we uh PRM uh when we were doing Isabella we we the blue marlin Hotel was 12 units and we turned it into like eight but it was efficiencies in one bedrooms which is what you need the The Village I'm the Village Center doesn't allow this conversion so now we're saying we're going to allow it just because we change I mean why don't why don't we allow that conversion I mean you because the code doesn't allow it so now we're going to change the zoning so we allow the conversion going to change the zoning and the count and the Village Council is going to decide whether to allow the conversion and and um issue the affordable per um housing permits right now what's in front of us is whether to allow The Flume Amendment change and the zoning map change to facilitate the council's later decision no Flume no oh Flume am sorry sorry habit they're always two they're always companion that's this is zoning so this is just quasi judicial because it's a single parcel and it's just a land use District map Amendment and because of the consistency with The Flume it's just Zing yeah sorry it was just a misstatement what I'm what I'm looking at for the zoning change isn't to me to me not that crazy but I but based off of what I'm hearing is it's because we're going to allow the conversion that we don't allow somewhere else I think that to me is a little now I'm think so there's a story to the story I don't see I don't know that story so what I'm saying is in front of me there is a story to the the footnotes so so I don't have the footnotes you guys left the footnotes off of my paper okay it's called 50 years from now you'll know those footnotes that's sorry no I I agree I agree with you guys I agree with you guys so okay okay all right good you'll get it it's okay I know so so the the part of the footnote to the footnote is that um if if you look at it they're they're not technically they're converting them but they're not they're transferring them okay they're not they're not converting it technically codewise they are but technically they're not converting they didn't they they they don't plan on just eliminating those hotel rooms they're going to move them they're going to keep those hotel rooms just relo well I'm this is why I'm trying to explain how this came about is that there this that I thought it was in more districts than it was in to be honest um it came about because many years ago now um there was a decision made that we needed to keep the business that we're in which is tourism in tourism and not allow because there was a lot of that going on especially with smaller hotels think windley key anger's Reef yes well you can relate to that and what was the one across from Robbie C down tarp c yeah on Lower mat where now has Tarpon Tarpon point that one right there Tarpon point was another onear hotel so all of those were were converting away from a hotel and into residence well you know that's not an all bad thing except it was believed that our hotel stock was of minimum need at the time anyway and to lose more was so we we did the code to restrict them from being transferred into residences that's how it got there but if you look at this because I I I don't see this as transferring a hotel into a residence I see I mean uh converting a hotel into residents I see it as they're transferring the hotel now they have a building and they want to do affordable or you can there's three things that you can do you can do affordable you can do market and you can do multif family um we know two of those right now really aren't aviable option right so and and my clients are in the hotel business owning The Islander which is right right so um so he's going to you either have to change the the rule that you can convert it because or you have to change the zoning District but they don't want to convert they're moving the walls to make an apartment but they're not wanting to convert the tdrs because they want the TDR hotel rooms because they want them for The Islander so then you're either going to have a building and they have to rehab the building to allow it for a different use or it will be vacant and the use that we're being told is going to be a a conditional AFF firm and of the choices it sounds pretty firm these days because the other two aren't really viable are affordable so they're moving walls around to make Apartments but they're not wanting to convert a hotel TDR into a residential TDR they want to save they want that hotel unit they want to move it valuable right though but it was I actually I was surprised that it wasn't in more zoning districts that you can't convert it I thought it was in all of them first real quick what he's describing to me I guess isn't it's a Redevelopment project I mean this isn't a conversion of a one unit hotel room to or or let's say a two unit hotel room or two bedroom hotel room to a uh one affordable unit this is a Redevelopment so does that even apply like do we even need to it sounds like we have to change the zoning if he wants to do affordables at this in this existing structure I asked that same question it was determined through legal that they needed to change zoning districts back a year ago I'm guessing no just I asked just last week okay Friday or no you don't have to wait 50 years on that one okay okay um I understand now thank you but well it because you you are exactly I asked that question I said why do they even have to he as he said it at the beginning of his presentation why does he even have to change zoning districts because he's not converting them yeah he's moving them but he's not converting them but well isn't it that affordable is not allowed in Village activi no it's allowed it is allowed but not if it used to be a hotel right that's what which was still so y well the intent when you look at what was going on when when the yeah when the it makes sense the affordable requirements change a lot too I mean course but it's not just affordable that it's restricted it's restricted for residential and for multifam too it was restricted across the board of converting a hotel room and that was that was 04 which remember that was the big craze buy hotel rooms and turn them into residential units and sell them off for three times what they're actually Worth right and then you got three mortgages on the property when you bought it we all know where that was right you're right all of them it's not just the it's yeah I like I said I I thought it was in more zoning districts and it turned out to be but that's okay all right um can I move to approve or do we have further discussion that's what I was just going to ask we have more discussion okay move to approve good I move to approve the zoning change Amendment consider include the I'm just going to withdraw it then and allow you to make the motion okay let me read what he wrote I see that for a minute okay um I move to amend I mean I move I move to approve the recommendation as presented with the additional recommendation that no permits or other activity occur on the receiver site property until the uh discussed property here that is currently Creekside motel at all is uh properly retitled as affordable housing and that project has begun I think that's what I wanted right clarify that the receiver site has ongoing activity I don't like right like The Islander has oh it's a it's got permits being pulled over yeah it's like they just filed for another building permit today to do landscaping and stuff like on the existing of these okay I just want Clarity on that I didn't want someone to get mad when they saw them doing like work out there yeah try it can I try it uh the no the 50 transient the 50 transient TBR may not pull building build permits until building permit for the affordable housing are issued for Creekside yeah that okay yeah that's just issued is that what so here's what happens if if we get to where they're issued you have to file the deed restriction right before the permits are issued so you're locked in and and at that point you're going on both de restrictions the deed restrictions yeah because because before building permits issue the deed restrictions requ last month didn't we limit a CO until the we said something along the lines of the we can't get the it would be in this case The Islander can't get their Co until the affordable Co has been issued right we don't need a that's the normal I'm not saying that I mean that's maybe way down the road but we did that we're we're locking making recommendations to the council they're the ones doing all limiting here we go what did I I'm done we being done I like you thought patter did okay no we can I think you can just stay the applicant provided as a recommended condition I'm good I think okay I'll second it okay I need I need a copy of that in order to repeat it to the bottom line is he can't build anything no I I understand it I just got to be able to say it well technically the way it is is no permits will issue until other permits are issued but the the the timing of the building will presumably be simultaneously simultaneous but there's nothing that would stop them from doing all the units at The Islander without doing the affordable homes but they couldn't be anything other than affordable homes because the permit issued and you do have time constraints on when you got to put a shovel in the ground and you got and you got a deed restriction against a property that that to bring in dirt bring dirt so I did think that it was in the code that that when you when you're required to build affordable or if you're doing affordable that the that has to co before your other one that doesn't mean you can't work on them simultaneous you just can't do the COO okay yeah I Ag and there is an inclusionary housing that building's already built I don't think it ex yeah these buildings they're going to have to converted a big conversion so all right anyway we got a motion second and you a second I seconded it right okay you second it sh C yes season ra yes Patrick Foley yes Tony Hamman yes Jun TR yes Lor L yes and de Gillis yes motion passes 7 to zero thank you look forward to seeing you again soon all right uh chair and local planning agency members anybody got anything future agenda items anybody got anything planning director Village manager uh the only thing to note is that there will be no July meeting um I'll be on vacation during when year July meeting would be so I've pushed there is actually nothing in yet but I've told everybody that we wouldn't be having one so your next meeting will be August 12th for your knowledge and then um um in case um I think it was Lori Cheryl and Jim were appointed to the extended terms at the last meeting in case you didn't see that but that's a vote tomorrow night oh is that tomorrow night I'm sorry I thought it was the last meeting no it's all so it's tomorrow night you're being voted to the extended term sorry and the rest of us our terms will expire in one year correct they get it an extra year um Village attorney I have no report um I only wanted to say thank you for having me and it's been a pleasure dealing with all of you today don't say so much next time yeah really uh I need a motion journ yes second everybody vote by leaving yes e e