e e e e e e e meeting to order the board of adjustment if we could stand and do the pledge i al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands under God indivisible with liy and justice for all okay if we could have the roll call member Chase here member Gara here member moholland here member small here Vice chair buar here we have a quorum all right um we need to approve the agenda for today I make a motion that we approve the St Pete Beach Board of adjustment meeting for April 24th 2024 second all in favor I I okay uh anybody who has audience comments today uh if you fill out one of those cards and then the city clerk is going to swear you in if there's anybody that wants to speak to anything today not sure if we're going need speak if you anticipate potentially speaking then you should stand and raise your right hand okay um raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the information or factual representation that you are about to give or present to the board is truthful yes yes thank you okay if we can have the approval of the minutes for the March 27th meeting motion to approve the minutes for March 27th second second yeah there was okay roll call member Gara yes member moholland yes member small yes member Chase yes Vice chair buar yes motion carries good do we want to do the election of officers before we do anything else it's usually standard when we have new appointees after the election um obviously welcome our new board member uh yes it is appropriate to appoint a chair and a vice chair okay do we have a motion for anybody for a chair I also discuss it too if if you'd like before does anybody have an interest in taking do not I'll I'll keep on I don't mind okay the only thing I would say that anybody that we appoint to be our leaders that we have some uh acknowledgement that they're going to be here for most of the meetings or we have the schedule now that they at least anticipate being here based on what the schedule is that would be the only thing I would ask of whoever is going to accept the position said they must be committed to be here most of a time I think we've done a pretty good job it's important to the residents and to the staff that we have a quorum for these meetings no doubt about it that would be the only thing I would say okay any other we reviewed the calendar recently Mike and I think you didn't have any conflicts no I didn't have any conflict I'm very supportive of you staying on okay I'll Su at that okay don't know if that was really a motion but you I'll make a motion to um maintain Mike Mike buar and as Vice chair would you like to move into the chair position I guess that's a clarification because you're sitting in correct the chair seat today so the motion would be to appoint Mike Bomar as the chair of the board of adjustment for 2024 2025 perfect I'll make the motion to um move Mike Bomar into the chair position for 2024 to 2025 I second okay all in favor I I I um do we have uh any discussion VI chair well if Denise was willing to do it I would like to nominate her I'd be happy to I'll second the motion great I don't think I officially nominated her but I will nominate Denise I move to I move to appoint Denise Chase as the vice chair as the vice chair for the board of adjustments I'll second that uh roll call are all in favor I all okay okay well done there we go um we're ready for the first case in that we are I absolutely am I think once uh the case numbers read so we're moving on to item 4 B case number 2417 7100 blind Pass road before we get started on staff's presentation uh I would like to go through any parte Communications the board members have had uh this would include site visits emails Communications anything outside of the record any knowledge you obtained outside of what what will be presented today that um may or may not be used for your decision no none are we referring to the first case only or all three correct so we'll do it Case by case okay fine uh yes I've uh driven by the property once I've walked it as well uh and I did receive the one email that was provided by staff when I arrived here today okay uh yeah I did a driveby I didn't have any communication with the residence but did you receive the email from staff uh the letter yes yes okay yes I did do a driveby I met with staff and I've reviewed the documentation that was provided in our packet thank you I've driven by the property and read the email that was provided okay appreciate that okay Kristen good afternoon everybody um Kristen Coman community development director and if I could have the presentation please we're going to start off with variance case number 2417 located at 7100 blind Pass Road the request is a practical difficulty variance sha Neil for Jennifer gos request to permit the to permit the existing non-conforming six foot high fence with existing 3ft front yard setback to remain within the front yard where a 4ft high maximum height is permitted and a 10-ft front yard setback is required and seeking relief from Land Development code section 6.15 listing of exhibits here is an area of the property a subject property is outlined in red it is a corner parcel located at the intersection of blind Pass Road in 71st Avenue it contains a single Family Residence and surrounded by single family residences to the north south east and west the property is located in the DCR downtown core residential Zone also DCR on the future land use map the applicant requests uh to permit the existing non-conforming six- foot high fence with the existing 3-ft front yard setback to remain within the front yard where a 4ft high maximum height is permitted and a 10-ft front yard setback is required so there is a little background on this um application um and some code enforcement issues the variant submission is of the request due to an after the fact permit that could not be issued by zoning and part of Code Enforcement case number 2023 0619 and that was opened on actually Halloween of last year for construction of shell within the city RightWay parking on Surface within the right of way an unpermitted fence and erecting an illegal sign and within the right of way all other issues with the exception of the fence have been addressed at this time so here is a survey uh showing the existing conditions within the rectangle at the bottom shows the fence that is now located parallel to 71st AB as it currently exists and here is a survey that was presented by the applicant and owner um from 2020 showing the prior Fence location so if you also look within that red rectangle you can kind of see that it it meanders or it has a little zigzag to it and this is just a little helpful so you don't have to um eye well but here's a comparison between the 2020 and 2024 a little bit of a closeup so here's the history I did use some um Google streets images just going back as far as 2011 2018 2019 and 2022 just so you could see kind of how this evolved again this is an after the fact the permit was not you know given or issued or granted nor could it have been at the time so they're they're seeking relief now we're going to bring on to the property so notice was completed as required the legal ad published and Noti is mailed on April 10th and signs posted on a April 17th now because this is a corner lot and it butts more than one street notices are posted along each street again as a corner lot it has two fronts so the top left is blind Pass road and it serves as the main entry of the um the dwelling in the bottom right is 71st AB Fence location so another thing to note with this property even though they front technically their entry is on blind pass by our land use definition whatever is the smallest Dimension is actually the front yard and the the larger one which would be blind Pass road is their secondary front so it's sometimes there's different setback requirements versus a front a secondary front so I just wanted to make that clear that the one where the fence is located on 71st is actually considered the front this is the adjacent um property to the north single family residence and adjacent property to the West also single family and here's just an overview of the existing fence taken from the opposite side of 71st going inside the fence this is a current view so this would be looking West here is another angle of the property and here is within the center rear yard uh looking South towards the fence and just spinning and then looking North where the applicant has uh and the homeowner has their um their pool and other accessory features so this is the uh variance criteria and comments that were located within your staff report and then staff comp comments the applicant should be prepared to provide their own testimony and respond to TA staff comments below um the applicant should provide some testimony as to the history of the fencing as previously there was a fence installed not parallel to the property line or Street and was reconfigured and additional fencing installed to be parallel as shown in the current condition staff finds the request will not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood and find the interest of Justice will be served and granted the variance and staff does recommend approval with the following condition installation of landscaping in front of the fencing comprising of shrubs and he Hedges to visually soften the height mass and scale of the fence in conformance at a minimum with Land Development code section 22.4 2 with landscape inspection completed and approved by zoning prior to the issuance of a final inspection or certificate of occupancy because they would need to gain the fence permit based on should you approve it that is all I have for you if you have some questions for me I know that the applicant is here as well oh and before I go even further sorry uh we did get one letter um with regards to this application and it was in support which you received as well okay thank you CHR so the violations uh previously it was a current owner that committed those violations I do believe so yes did they resolve them quickly when notified or I do believe they worked with staff um code enforcement but they are all have been rectified at this timein one day yeah okay moving on would the applicant like to come forward and explain anything to us um all of there I can say is back you state your name Sean Neil um we purchased a house in 2020 uh just before Co and all that so they were still doing the construction down here on blind pass trying to open it up um then after Co then everything got shut down so while we're in the middle of trying to get this place together all we went on was all the people working up and down the road and people that we were had access to from the city that were constantly up and down through there so um also the fence the only reason why it was even messed with to begin with on the outside of it there were some old tree stumps and we had those removed it cuz it was all overgrown uh once we got we've seen all these stumps there was a big water line that the previous owners had run that nobody knew anything about and it busted and it I mean it just destroyed that whole side of the yard over there so and then of course the aesthetically the fence looked like like not very good um so that was the only reason once we fixed that and that's why we did the shell there just it was quick easy didn't have to worry about cutting grass or doing adding extra irrigation or anything like that and then the fence again was just to to straighten it up and just make it look aesthetically was the previous fence of the same height of the yes yes yeah it was always a 6ft binal fence it was just all over the place and it after we've cleared out brush I mean that that's when we found out it was because of tree Stomps they they just went around the tree Stomps which made no sense so but um other than that I mean we had a No Parking sign up cuz we had some issues with a neighbor when they purchased a house next door they kept parking and blocking our driveway so not just not not the shell but our actual driveway they were just parking up and down the street so put a parking sign up there or no parking sign up and that's what started all this so this sign but um like I said soon as uh we got the the notice about the the sign and that's I was up here I think the next morning I think it was up here so and been trying to work with Kristen and everybody else so okay thank you okay thank you do you have questions okay all right you sure uh sir so uh you're not the owner is that correct uh it's my ex-wife oh your ex-wife yes but you're representing your ex-wife yes well that's interesting but I guess that's fine it's a long yourwife here to testify uh no sir she's actually at the house still she's we just got her out of the hospital yesterday so she couldn't be here I hope she's doing okay yeah we're she's getting better uh so so to your knowledge has there been previous variances on this home nothing that I know of um like I said when we bought the house it was I I believe it was empty for over well over a year I mean I'm assuming I think it might even been longer in that but I think the previous owners had passed away and then that's when we bought it and it was like I said the whole place was just it was an iore there for a while so okay um so other than the violations that the um city planner noted there's been no other violations on this property based on your um we had a problem when we had a Pergola installed on the other side of the house um cuz we couldn't find any kind of ruling or anything like that but as soon as they came and told us about it and we had the plans grew up for it submitted it had the permit pool and everything you know the city building is only a couple blocks from that house right oh I know that uh so the the fence that was there um you basically remove that and you put a new fence in essentially straighten it out and I think you said you remove some stumps and things like that right right um did you just assume because it was uh 6 foot fence that it must be okay um well um the person I the at that time it was I don't we need to go into what he assumed or I mean we're here to either permit the fence not permit I'll I'll be glad to answer that's respectfully chair any board member can ask any question I understand that but you know I mean we have a fence it's not compliant right every week we come to or every month we come to these meetings and we find ourselves in positions where things have been approved that we really don't want to make it difficult for the homeowner so we approve things that technically aren't within code I'm just trying to that's what that's what this board does I I understand that I appreciate you for the education too uh but what I'm trying to understand is if the property owner made no effort to determine if the fence was okay or not and uh I'm less inclined to uh cut him some slack I mean like I say every month we come in here and we're approving stuff that uh doesn't so but he replaced a fence that was already there that's correct I think he's willing to answer the question yeah um at that point and I I take issue with not being able to ask my question I just think there I'm not a blind leming here for you I'm not trying to say you are representative just as you are that's right and you're asking him what how he felt about putting up the fence if he knew it was against the law is what you're asking him let's let's let the applicant yeah I can give you some clarity real quick um at that point in time when that fence was getting done and everything was getting cleaned up these offices were closed because of C Co and just like I said previously the only people I had contact worth was everybody City in Engineers that were up and down this road constantly every day if you guys live here I'm sure you know um I I went off you had Caitlyn you had bill you had Lynn you had that's the people I was able to speak to without I mean you couldn't come in here you couldn't get any answers so all I had to work with is the people from this city and every move even from painting to house can we paint the house can we do it these colors I mean we ask for everything but again these officers were closed it was a very challenging time for everybody let alone trying to renovate I understand the FR I mean it was just it was crazy times I understand sir and but but just to let you know I just didn't go there and Big Willie saying I can do this and I can do that I asked to do everything I appreciate you answering the question no no problem I have a question um I know the comments were made about the recommendation to approve uh but contingent on some installation of landscaping does that sound like something that yeah yeah me and Kristen talked about that before that's yeah I I I don't I didn't want to put grass in CU that was one of the option just because I don't want to I don't want to maintain it because I don't I don't like the sprinklers and I don't I you know I barely have any grass as it is so okay I've got just a little bit behind the fence but I'm not you I I put up trees brush whatever you want I'm not opposed to that okay I think staff's recommendation to soften the blow was put yeah right I think you gting sheets of all the the different things did unless there's any other comments I can make a motion well just a second um thank you very much okay do we have anybody in the audience that want to comment on this got my mother-in-law here she just don't want nobody to take her garden okay do you mind coming to the microphone I have son sorry to cut you off ma'am can you just say your name for the record Janice G okay thank you I have a son who lives with us he's 43 he has a a mental deficiency I work with him all the time I have uh Sean helped me fix or Sean did it uh fix me some uh raised flower beds so Chris and I make a little garden there and I'm trying to teach him when I'm going you know if he needs to grow some food he'll know how to do it so that's why I say I'm being selfish because I am I do work with him quite a bit and that is the only little yard space we have thank you for sharing thank you very much thank you okay discussion anyone else seeing none public comments closed and do we have any board discussion or I mean I think this is an instance where they beautified the property it was a really challenging time to get direction from the city when they got direction from the city that they had done things wrong they fixed things that were you know um bothering the neighbors and this has nothing but um support from the neighbors that we've received um so I'm very supportive of letting them maintain their F I think if they do a little landscape in the front and soften the blow of the height of the fence it will be just fine okay is that going to be included in the conditions yes uh so whoever makes a motion needs to include that in the conditions I believe is that not correct Mr City attorney correct the uh if we're talking about the recommended condition then it would say I move to approve variance blank with the condition recommended by staff it does need to be in the motion thank you okay well I'll I move to make a motion that we uh approve the variance for case 2417 with the recommendation intact as described by staff second second okay ready roll call member Mo Holland yes member small yes Vice chair Chase yes member Gara yes buar yes motion carries okay we'll go to Mr chair I'd like to I don't know if you call us a point of order or not um City attorney please correct me if uh what I'm saying is inappropriate I since we don't have a case in front of us right now I want you to understand I don't work for you I work with you so you're not going to muzzle me if I have questions to ask I'm not trying to Muzzle you well there two meetings in a row you've done that so so you know you've been here the longest I deferred to you to be the chairman I'll give you due respect but you need to give me due respect okay I think you're kind of getting out of line so let's move this hey we're here we're all board members everyone's allowed I mean this is the only time you guys can talk about these things the reality is so I think once we handle both of these items at the end I was already going to kind of bring up possibility of a workshop or something so that we can all kind of talk through these procedural aspects should occur um but I don't need to remind you you know there's decorum towards each other and there's ethics that we have to abide by and respectfully if any one of you have a question you should ask it that's the whole point of this meeting so okay let's move on to case number 23086 so before we get started I'd like to go through the expart A disclosures um I have none okay I had none I uh viewed the property from the street um I spoke to staff um because I had a question of any potential follow-on permitting that would be required um were it to be uh approved by the board uh and I also uh while I'm very familiar with the area and I'm an advid voter uh Boer I did uh take my boat by not only this dock but many of the adjacent docks just to get a clear understanding of uh the specific request and how it married up in relation with what else is what else is out there so um that's my Expo thank you and if I may go back I voted by it and paid attention to the okay the you could just try to speak into the microphone I heard you for that but just moving forth I had none none I did drive by the site met with staff and reviewed all the documents okay I have none okay okay so okay Kristen thanks uh may I have a presentation please okay moving on to variance case number 2486 uh applicant owner Tyson rosson from Edge Marine Construction for Peter eagleson property located at 2191 East Vina delmare Boulevard and the applicant requests an unnecessary undue hardship variance for to construct a 6ot x 12T Lower Landing on a non-conforming existing dock creating a length of 92t 6 in where 49 ft is permitted and 86t 6 in currently exists requesting relief from Land Development code section 6.23 D3 listing of exhibits the subject property is outlined in red it is a waterr parcel with single family residence to the North and South Vena delmare Boulevard and a single family residence used to the west and passag gril channel to the east the property is located within the ru1 Zone Ru on the future land use map and again the variance request detail to construct the 6t X 12T landing on the non on the non-conforming existing dock creating an overall length of 92 ft 6 in it should be noted with dots within the Land Development code um section 6.23 that the requirements may be varied administratively provided that a signed statement of no objection from the abing property owners is provided with the building permit application in this case the abing property owner to the right or South did not sign a statement of no objection requiring variance approval to be S so it's a little different than just our usual um and I just wanted to make that clear so can we just clarify that so if we can go back yep just to for the record so had a no objection been signed by the abing property owners would this case be here today no it would have been administratively it would have been administratively approved and also approved by the county okay yep thank you so speaking of Prior Board of adjustment approval this property was formerly the recipient of the variances uh variance case number 21188 in 2021 where they were granted another unnecessary and undue hardship to construct a residential boat lift to the left of the dock head to be 84 ft from the seaw wall where 49 ft was permitted in addition to remove and rebuild the dock in the previous permitted footprint of 86.5 Ft in length uh this work was completed in May of 202 to um and just also to note it should be noted that the ab budding property owner to the right again south did not sign the statement of no objection in 2021 requiring it to come before this board at that time so with this property there's a lot happening um currently it's not just the dock that they're looking for they do have um some current uh permits that they have either open or under review um there are two building permits for additional work being undertaken taken um in addition to the variance request the Demolition and removal of the existing rear concrete patio per plan install a new in inground concrete swimming pool pool equipment paper decking and walkways pool equipment which a portion of the survey showing the scope of work is provided below or on your screen and it was approved with conditions that the property come into compliance to meet the requirement for at least 24% Green Space per section 22.4 F of the Land Development code so with that in connection a zoning will conduct and pass AI pass the final landscape in inspection in conjunction with the final building inspection to verify that ground cover has been installed as required so you will see pictures of the current status or if you drove by there's not a lot of greenery but because of the scope of work that the applicant or homeowner is looking to do he was to come in compliance with that also with any unnecessary and undo hardship if they come before you staff also does look to make sure that requirement is met because that is a requirement also within the Land Development code but should you not approve this or support it he still is coming into compliance with the pool permit just just trying to oh okay um just to kind of put that on the record as well so all of the prerequisites to be here today have been met that is correct thank you m uh This Is A current survey of the property again this does not reflect at the time of submitt but this does not reflect um the approved improvements with the pool and everything that you saw on the previous slide and here is just a closeup of the request that was also included in the staff report showing the overall length of 92 feet 6 in okay could to bring you on to the site notice was completed as required legal ad uh published and notice is mailed on April 10th and signs post it on the property on April 17th and here is is the current um front of the dwelling this is the adjacent property to the South single family residence and headed north here is the adjacent dwelling we're going to jump right to the back of the dwelling from the seaw wall looking West and here's just some other pictures taken one from the north side of the seaw wall looking South and that would be from the southern portion looking out over the existing dock here's looking at the Southern Property um that did not sign the letter um of um no objection yes no objection thank you um and I just wanted to note that they currently do not have a dock at that property so here's a profile view of the existing dock that was recently completed in May of 2022 and walking out to the Ed end of the dock looking West and the boat lift so this picture is kind of interesting because I stood at the edge of the dock and I just wanted to have a Viewpoint looking South so you could see how the how this lines up with the length of the adjacent docks as you go around and then this was looking North and then we're going to go overhead and so you can kind of see it does have that kind of curve curvature to it but I wanted you to see overall um the Google Earth image um in proximity to the subject property so with the variance request there are criteria and comments that were located in within the staff findings report um that the applicant also had to provide the justification to um that was included um the applicant should be prepared to provide their own testimony and respond to the staff comments the applicant should provide an overview of the proposed project including but not limited to why the homeowner is requesting the additional lower Dock and what challenge currently exists requiring the proposed additional bumper piling particularly the applicant should address how the Lower Landing bumper piling would result in an increased safety as stated in the application and why the safety would not be equally provided by orienting the Lower Landing to the southwest side of the dock head instead of going out if they oriented it to the side um also any information on the reasoning as to why the adjacent property owner did not provide a statement of no objection should be provided the supplied profile view does not provide any information of the mean high water mean low water and bottom and testimony should be provided to to be added to the record the applicant should provide testimony as to what options were explored to be constructed that that would not require the link to be increased within compliance and if any alternate plans have been developed should the variances not be granted staff finds that the applicant has addressed some of the hardship criteria but has not specifically addressed conditions that are particular to the property nor demonstrated all criteria for hardship have been met so due to the lack of support within the submittal documents staff recommends requesting more information from the applicant and staff requests that the applicant verbally address the hardship faced in requesting the installation of the landing and the piling in addition to the circumstances to return to the board requesting additional relief if the applicant cannot provide substantial evidence through testimony staff finds the proposed variance relief sought does not Advance the purposes of the Land Development code section 1.1 or granting of the variance from the Land Development code section 6.23 D3 and then staff would recommend denial of the request okay we did not receive any letters in support or against board have any questions for Kristen you did make mention um that the neighbor to the right is not affected by this is that correct so looking at the proper far setback goes so correct like okay that would it would meet the setback requirement for that yes and then North neighbor approved with the yes y there was a signature and that was included in your uh packet as well could we go back uh to the photos sure the very end the last couple photos Okay so that one um that to me is reflects accurately on the positioning of this dock but could you go back the next one sure so that's looking to the neighbor to the north um Dock and the way that photo shows it makes it appear as if he's already further out than that neighbor at least that's that's how I interpret that picture if I if I didn't really know what it looked like out there so I think that's a little bit deceiving I just want my fellow board members to if if they focused in on that photo they would say well this guy's already further out than his neighbor but he's not um which is clearly evident if you go to the next photo and I just wanted to make a point sure so I can also tell you um as part of the uh prior approval um further variants um the information provided I can't get up there but um that was showing that the adjacent and I cannot confirm by this but it showed the adjacent property to the north was 87 ft where he got approval for 866 so it's a difference of 6 in so if that changed between you know when this was signed in 2021 to now I can't say whether or not but this was based off of information that I looked up at when looking at links yeah I'm just referencing out into the water where a boat might strike it or something okay not the the feet but okay from a out in the channel perspective Kristen can you just comment is the length of this dock in line then with all the neighbors who actually have docks So currently I think the adjacent neighbor to the north at the 87 ft is the longest that I saw again just trying to do estimate it from Google images and you know trying to look through um you know building permit files might not find everything for him so it was it's it's a best guess but um yeah it would be in line as what it is existing now okay thanks okay any more questions or comments would the applicant like to come forward and if you could state your name and address for the record sir uh Tyson rosson with Edge Marine construction and uh representing Pete eagleson the homeowner who is also here um the uh in uh going to the length of the next door neighbor we built that one as well I believe that one is 92 feet the neighbor to the north um just so we're I'm pretty sure that that's the case um the uh to give a little background on the dock that's out there now at uh Pete's house or Pete aon's house the original permit the dock was originally permitted in 1984 as the way it sits right now it's been rebuilt twice once in 1996 and then again when we built it in 2022 um it does go on it does go beyond what the city allows for the length setbacks but since it was previously permitted we were able to go back and not have to get signatures from my other neighbor to rebuild that it's essentially grandfathered in so it's more of the path of least resistance especially if you have a neighbor who's not willing to assign the necessary variances for it um in 2022 when we came here um for this for this same hearing it was to place a boat lift in place of a an existing wet slip that was out there um so that was the only reason we came for it for um for that um the dock that was built in '96 that we replaced had pretty severe storm damage it was basically unusable so when we went back and rebuilt the new dock in 2022 we built this dock a foot taller than the existing seaw wall which is per code you're allowed to go a foot higher in in St P Beach um so in doing that it's a foot taller than what was existing there before and then now and then with and then we put in the boat lift um so now with Pete using the dock more and more and changing up the the the backyard to make it more more usable um that dock is now a foot higher and the the whole dock is the same length all the way out so now that he's going to have using the boat lift more have more people out there it's a pretty high if you were to if you were to happen to fall off the dock or fall off a boat it's a pretty tall climb to get up there so the reason we're proposing this Lower Landing after we've already built the dock is now that they used it more we can see that there is kind of a safety issue with we us building it higher and to go back to building it higher not to keep droning on about this the reason it was built higher initially was to to protect it from higher Storm surges when those come in um that got the hell beat out of it the last time so to keep it out of the water or to keep it out of out of danger we built it higher but now with it being high if someone were to fall off it's difficult to get up so we propose building the Lower Landing closer to the water so if in case someone did fall down climbing up a ladder saving them an extra two feet would make it a hell of a lot easier for someone if that were the case hopefully it doesn't happen but you never you never know so that's the reason for the request of the Lower Landing um it's not to have the longest dock on the Block it's nothing like that at all it's just to to have a safer platform if something bad were to happen getting on and off of a boat if people were you have guess over stuff like that that's really that's the the basis of it okay and is there reason that Landing can't be to the South as opposed to out I mean we could build it that way yes but you have a pretty you have an incredibly strong current that goes through there so if you if you have an ingoing or outgoing tide if you were to come up to the side of that dock with a bat you're either going to be pushed hard into the dock or you're going to be pushed far away where you're having to sit there and just throttle back and forth to try to keep it in place being able to put the nose of the boat into the current would make it a lot easier if you were if you were accessing it from a to and from a boat and that is a big safety issue that people are getting on and off the boat and being you know bounced against the dock or pushed away okay yes sir anybody have any questions for no you asked the question I was going to ask did you have any information why the adjacent neighbor won't that I don't know I know there was attempts made do you have any I don't know some neighbors just don't want to I mean I can't without prying um no no objection just not willing to well I mean you so when you you hand them the letter you they show them the site plan there's there's a second page that's part of that the letter of no objection that they' have signed a Noize um so it was delivered to them a few times via because they live out of state as well so it was sent by mail knocking on the door but again we didn't have it the first time either so it wasn't was not unexpected okay but we the effort was was made just Kristen clarification so when they came for the first time the variance that they received was solely for the slip they didn't because they were grandfather in at the 86 with this current length they didn't actually need is that an accurate statement let me one second um so that variance was to construct the boat lift to the left of the dockhead um to be 84 ft from the seaw wall where 49 ft was permitted um and then they did remove and rebuild the dock in the same location and length but they have have they received a variance for the length of the dock yet no okay would they need a variance if they were to build to the to the North or to the South I should say to lower it on that side of the dock instead of I don't believe that I think you meet the setback requirement for that no but the the reason we need the signatures is due to the L setback so it would still be beyond that so if we moved it to the right right it would still require cuz it's beyond the 49 I think it's 49 ft or it's beyond it Way Beyond it it would require the right the South neighbor signature if we put the Lower Landing on the the south side is that because it would move it over and then it would be in the middle third it wouldn't be in the side so in St P Beach you have to be in the center 50% um it wouldn't it wouldn't be in it would stay within the center 50 50% but it would be it would beyond the length setback so it's still when it when it's beyond the length setback it triggers both neighbors needing to sign yeah because you'll think of like the shorter little rectangle like if the dot goes out or the back so it would be within this rectangle but it would be Beyond right right that inner partiel the envelope lengthwise right okay anybody have any questions I do Mr chair I have uh a couple questions for the contractor and a couple of my standard questions you permitting of course uh for the uh property owner uh so sir you you talked about you built the original dock in fact you built most of the docks out there I think Ed Marine is only about two3 of them um why didn't you have this conversation or maybe you said it and I didn't hear it this conversation with the customer when you originally dock in and you had to get a variance anyway so we we when we did the dock it wasn't the dock was out of completely out of commission like it was there was busted piling framing do uh decking missing so the dock wasn't being used much there wasn't a boat lift out there like there is now so now that there's a boat lift there the Dock's getting used a lot more you can kind of go out there and you realize if you would have done things you could have done things different if you would have been using more back then so it's kind of a it is a hindsight situ situation but when the dock was built it was that made the most sense for for the way he was using it at the time but now now that there's more more use of the dock it's it's been and we've also built it a foot higher it wasn't that high to begin with either so now with it being higher um and it being used more frequently that's kind of where the so uh certainly I like uh to follow the city's guidance because they they work hard on these things but I do not believe that I'm here to just always vote the way the city recommends sir um when is there any consideration for what I'm trying to say is I understand that's called The Washing Machine out there for reason yes sir um is a six-footer necessary or wouldn't a 4-footer work with uh something like the knifong dock I've seen that one um the the reason for this it's a good question um the reason for being six feet long is that since the dock is a foot higher we'd build the Lower Landing probably 24 in below the top of the deck which would put it a foot below the seaw wall so in doing that we make our steps 8 in tall so it's a it'll be a you'll need three steps out there so when you build those steps it eats into the usable deck space and you need to have enough space to step so that's where the six feet comes in so you know anticipating doing full WID steps though is that correct sir so the neighbors Dock and I think you did that that looks like it's a four footer and I think the height is the same that one was so the city made us go or not sorry not the city the county required us to go to a certain height out there I believe because of seagrass so then that was after we went through the permanent process here with the city of St b beach um so that one just the way the the design works for that one it worked for the neighbor he also was able to get both neighbors signatures so it didn't didn't matter us to come to to yes sir so on 2431 East Vena I I believe that's another one of your docks I have a phone did you show me photo pardon me can I see the photo yeah Mr City attorney is okay if Heine you want to come up and let me know if that's one of your dogs too uh yes sir so is that a six or an 8f footer picture because that that sticks out in the channel a good bit um that I don't remember that one's probably from three I'm looking yes I do that one uh from a boer's perspective that one is out there a bit yes sir um and once again I don't know if it's a six or an eight I um we do quite a few I don't remember exactly okay um many stairs down actually can I see that educ I mean I didn't want to tie up to somebody's dock with a tape measure I'm not sure that we've gone over very well ask no wait that's hold on no that's not his that's another one that's right down there that's Jack uh I think that's I think that's eight it be my guess I would hope so I don't know if you want to no that's okay anybody else want to see that okay um okay that's all that's all the questions I had for you I would like to ask uh Mr eagleston just a couple uh standard questions that I ask everybody assuming I don't get cut off when I ask them were you soring in sir no sir okay Jenny do you mind ra right hand do you SAR orir that the information factual representation that you about to give to the board is true yes ma' sir so um yes sir name Peter eagleson I'm the homeowner of 2191 each ven delmare I've been a vena delmare homeowner for 34 years uh so you have some existing variances for your pool in the light currently open is that correct permits for my pool yes sir not variances no sir okay and have you ever had any building violations on this property no sir okay thank you you're welcome okay anybody have any questions for the homeowner other question I will state that I have a friendly relationship with my neighbor to the South great excellent thank you all appreciate it thank you uh is there any audience comments anybody in the audience that would like to comment for or against nope okay not seeing any uh do we have any discussion any more discussion between the board I uh as I previously indicated uh normally I would you know the benefit of the doubt to the city's recommendation but um I'm not here to always follow that um I do recognize uh that this is a safety issue um on that particular Waterway of course we don't want to create a safety issue for voters especially somebody voting after dark or Christmas parade or you know coming back from Fourth of July or whatever um but uh from my perspective I I do think this is a um a legitimate Quest request by a longtime neighbor uh and I would be inclined to uh support it I was a little concerned about I'm still a little concerned about sixf footer um so I would say my only reservation of recommending that we approve this is the six feet um but the the experts said that's what they need um so that's just how I feel on it I know the Waterway I'm I'm an avid boater uh East Vena delmare is some of the most beautiful Lots uh in our city uh but there're also very difficult lots to be a motor on uh and uh I I do think that this is unlike many of the applications that we see where people uh lay it on thick sometimes uh I I do think this is a legitimate request uh for safety purposes so that's my comments okay I would um initially I was thinking this was a case where they're just pushing the limits right they've already got dock that as extending but after I learned that the prior um variance was actually for the dock or for the slip versus the length of the dock and I would agree I I wouldn't feel um we live on the water as well we have a lower dock I wouldn't feel safe with my children on the dock if there wasn't that lower spot um so I can acknowledge after having used the doc more that that became evident um that it would be um espe if you have design yeah to be able to get on and off the board for sure and another comment that I have is I think six feet is very reasonable four feet is really tight when two or three people are on a dock four feet wide is not very wide okay so okay we'll close that and if we have any motion or motion for this case I'll make a motion that we approve the variance for the 6 foot dock extension case number yeah if we could includeing the case number case number 2386 second we have a motion and a second take a roll call member small yes member Chase yes member garha yes member moholland yes chair buar yes motion carries do I get two votes on that just joking okay we'll move on to case two uh 23072 207 or 2007 pass gr away thank you thank you so before we get started any experte Communications that you'd like to disclose starting I drive by it every day and I've noticed what uh there that are looking for and what how I think it would affect so yes that's my exper take okay so say visit uh I walk by it usually at least well four times a day coming and going um but I did do a specific uh walk uh into the parking lot um one morning um I was also um contacted by two NE neighbors and I received the three emails that were provided by staff when I arrived here today thank you no experte except for the information provided site visit and information provided by City okay same site visit and letters received thank you this offici okay I may have the presentation please okay our last case of the day Varian case number 2372 located at 20007 passway for an unnecessary and undue hardship variance a Kyle bass Weber Krab and wean for column Properties LLC requests the construction of a roofed open porch extension 12 ft by 28.6 67 ft of overall dimensions 11 ft 2 in high to create an an approximately 300t covered ride weight area that will encroach entirely within the required 25 ft secondary front setback while maintaining the existing 1.67 ft setback where 25 ft is required and requesting relief from Land Development code section 15.7 B2 listing of exhibits okay property is highlighted in green currently a restaurant use red white and booze on the corner lot Waterfront parcel located on passer girl champ to the east single family residence to the north and another commercial restaurant the warf to the South and Commercial uses to the West property is located within the cg1 commercial zoning District CG on the future land use map and here is a survey of the property again not to scale um this is a portion of the site plan showing the proposed front additions um in the rectangle I did want to show you I did draw in the required 25t setback so you could see where that uh setback would actually be if if to um if met compliance request detail again this is just the zoning table that was included in the staff findings report so it just gives you overall um view of the cg1 and you know what it currently meets requirements um and proposed here is the proposed front elevation with the new um covered porch areas and also proposed floor plan also included in the submitt packet so with this one this application they did receive prior variances um and prior approvals variance case number 23018 was before the board 2023 for with conditions from the board of adjustment for removal of the of the existing non-conforming 6ot High wooden fence an installation of an 8ft high wooden shadow box fence that exceeds the maximum permitted height of 4T within the Waterfront yard and that was relief from Land Development code section 6.15 it did have two conditions uh applicant to retain Andor install curb stops for each parking space along the southern property line an applicant to ensure that parking spaces will meet the minimum depth requirements and drive aisle width as required by Land Development code 23.11 and inspected by zoning prior to final inspection in connection with building permit 22228 a site inspection requested by the applicant and completed by staff revealed that the wheel stops along passway right away will need to be removed as the parking spots are not fully contained within the property or meet the demension requirements which may then alter the parking layout and parking calculations to be re-evaluated to make sure it meets its minimum parking spots based on the square footage property also received a conditional use permit number 23034 on 911 2023 City commission did approve a conditional use permit with conditions for the following the request to allow the continued use of an approximately 20 foot by 48t 960t class a doc addition used for drinking and dining that was erroneously approved without a conditional use use permit and to also requests to establish an area to play live music on the outdoor dining and drinking deck going to bring you on to the property so noticing was completed as required um it is again a corner lot so signs were posted both on 21st Avenue and pass gr away here is the front of the existing building they currently does exist a smaller covered uh front porch area that is roofed but open this is the parcel to the South uh the warf restaurant looking North is single family residences and here is also just the intersection of 21st Avenue and Passover way and looking directly across passer rway to the West which is also another commercial use just some different Vantage points this is the current uh parking lot um another view looking South and then up near um the front of the building and close views of the existing porch areas So currently I don't know if the door is really utilized at this point but they do have a bike rack um where I guess it's so close to the building the bikes couldn't Park in the bike rack but um just just an observation um there this is the existing cooler that was um installed on the property um it is looking and the applicant um or is um or the homeowner or contractor could speak about this but I do believe it's to be roofed by a future permit there's looking North okay looking East over the uh the outdoor seating area and the new shadow box fence that was approved by the board and current Landscaping of the property I did take some views um from the north on the sidewalk just to see where the current roof line is in the vena um the uh the masonry um fencing or wall there just so you could see what you could see from the the the existing height um and then just also another view coming down the bridge on the sidewalk and the variance criteria and comments also locate within my site findings report because of this was commercial um it did have to go for technical Review Committee which did have comments um it was held on April 3rd of this year and there were several Planning and Zoning Transportation comments that were discussed with the applicant the property owner and contractor and it was determined that the site lacked design and Landscaping items required by the Land Development code and some of which may be included um within this presentation for Testimony to be provided from either the applicant or owner just for the record So within the uh TRC um we would like and comments based off of that and of this review We would like this um the applicant to comment um and provide testimon on the following the applicant should provide further testimony as to the hardship faced in terms of the necessity for this proposed covered roof waiting area relative to the use the applicant has the right to maintain their non-conforming structure as is the case for others in the same situation but this information is requested to pertain to the necessity of the covered area relative to the use of the restaurant the applicant should provide testimony sharing details on open permits or current construction addressing any future changes that may be proposed for the restaurant or site that may include the use of space that are not covered under this scope the property has gone under undergone significant improvements over the past few years pertaining to installation of a walk-in cooler new dock seating areas and fencing among others addressing future project proposals holistically with this subject development will enable a more thorough understanding of how the space will interface with those potential improvements the proposed site plan alterations of the current site improvements outlined and with my comments below the parking lot striping on the site does not match what is currently on site the applicant should confirm the new site layout with restriping is intended to be installed under the scope the proposed relocation of bike rack to be shown on the site plan colors and materials should be described but if a color elevation is not available um provide a color board with references recently a photo opportunity or prop which appears to be metal section of a ship has been installed near the front entrance of the building the applicant should provide details on relocation or removal of the element under the scope so when I did go out and do my site visit that had been removed I would just request some information on the proposed if it is to return proposed location that that may be reinstalled uh the applicant should indicate if any railings are to be installed along the front of the additions or if intended to be open the planter and Landscaping beds currently contained minimal landscaping and should be supplemented a landscaping plan should be submitted and if additional areas of landscaping can be identified additional planting should be installed Land Development code section 22.6 requires a specified percentage of the addition cost to be supplied in on landscaping and if the site is deficient to Landscaping staff requests one square foot of landscaping to provide it for each square foot of building floor area added for properties that are deficient to Landscaping so if we don't go by a number amount if we just look at the square footage that's proposed we would kind of look to have that located in landscaping Elsewhere on the site if that provides further clarification for that um applicants should provide details on the proposed use of each addition because there are two separate areas that they're looking one is definitely within entirely within that 25 foot yard sub back but then there's that other covered area um and if any amenities such as SE or tables are to be provided the plan should be revised to address the following cont ments uh the plan set sheet one incorrectly identifies the proposed length of the covered R ride weight area as 20.67% sheet three roof plan also provides the elevations of the building the front elevation does not include the door that is currently to the right of the front entrance in the floor plan sheet two does not include information if the door is to be removed and it indicates a solid wall which is not correct so just some testimony on what is proposed so the staff finds that the applicant has addressed some of the hardship criteria but does not find that the applicant has thoroughly demonstrated that denial would result in deprivation of an integral and necessary aspect of their business in a manner that creates a hardship due to the lack of support within the submitted documents staff recommends requesting more information from the applicant if the applicant cannot provide substantial evidence through testimony staff finds that the proposed variance relief sought does not Advance the purposes of Land Development code section 1.1 or granting the variance from the Land Development code section 15.7 B2 and staff does recommend denial of the request however should the applicant in order provide additional information to satisfy the board that substantial and competent evidence has been provided and look favorably on the application on the relief request the board may want to consider the following conditions the roofed open porches to be constructed as per plan submitted and may not be later enclosed or utilized as a service area without obtaining a subsequent variance and shall be utilized as a waiting area only Landscaping plan shall be submitted and if additional areas of landscaping can be identified additional planting should be installed as per Land Development code section 22.6 and requires a specified percentage of the addition cost to be supplied in in online on-site landscaping and if the site is deficient to landscaping and again that's where that or the one square foot of landscaping be provided for each square foot of building floor area added for properties that are deficient when viable plans to be amended to reflect the prior changes that I requested uh by the board or staff and sight improvements to be installed as per plans we did receive three letters um an objection with regards to this request um in regards to those letters Kristen many of them referen the um not being compliant with current cup and other permits or variances provided can you give some context to that activity so cup I can't okay um it was approved in September there is a federal case challenging one of the conditions along with uh the sign ordinance that's currently in court it has not been resolved um it's pretty much all I would like to say publicly okay okay the uh is there any board comments to Kristen or questions I have a couple questions uh you may have addressed this um Ada parking so the two plats um that they provided um there I I don't know if it was staff that did this or they were the business provided them but um they're like pieces um but it in the two pieces that um depict handicap parking um neither of them reflect what's actually there I'm not talking about striping I'm talking about handicap parking Ada mhm um if you go down to that facility right now is it ADA Compliant because I I don't know if either of these are ADA Compliant but I know what's there now um I believe our former Transportation planner did work with the applicant um on getting uh ADA compliance spaces that was also required as a condition of the cup uh this would be the plan that is showing before you would have some alterations where staff was very concerned um as you go by when they are busy it is kind of like a free-for-all where people are parked um and we wanted to provide uh enough area that people could back out and be um able to get back on pass of gr way um and so we did work with the applicant trying to revise a revised for a revised parking plan I will tell you as far as parking spaces go it is kind of an unusual parcel because he has on-site parking he also has boat parking with the the area on the water and he has another adjacent parcel um on the west side of pass girl way next to Shar yes correct is that deeded the same though are those properties both on the same deed or are they separate properties that I don't know we can wait till they come up to ask that question I guess and I don't I don't have a problem with that but it then creates the issue of well if one property is sold um much like some of the things that have been going on in the city on a larger scale um with multiple Deeds but one request and that's all fine and good until somebody sells a property and then you end up with a severely non compliant property and then we're here forced to Grant requests for the new buyer because we feel bad for them um so I I I think that's something that um when they do their presentation we should ask if they are I would like to know that absolutely um so I know there's been a bunch um how many previous variances has this property had I believe just the one this one for the fence that is correct okay uh are there open permits or variances on this property uh there are open building permits on the property that is correct for um if you give me a moment I I mean I can ask them when they come up fig we can do we can double time it I can look that up for you too okay for covering up the freezer I believe pardon me covering the freezer the roof that's she said that's later okay I mean there's been a lot of shotgunning going on there um I mean I know you use the word holistic I use shotgunning but it means the same thing I think yours is just a little more diplomatic um and I'm before we vote on anything I just want to understand some of this okay I wasn't here for any of the previous request so if it's okay with the board while Christen gets some of this information um would you like to hear from the applicants representative do you want to did we get the expart part done yeah yes we okay that was okay he made me question myself no no we did if I may um question you on your question is that the concerns for the parking spaces available for the deed across the street is that why you asked that well well well one the reason I asked because that's used strictly for parking right now right but if you look at one of the plans like I say there's multiple plans in or there's there's at least two plans in here one of them um shows that this add addition will result in losing parking spots um it's a good question and that's not how it is I'm not famili with any unified site plan none of that um but I'm sure the applicant can speak to it Kristen is there on that note though is there a minimum number of parking spaces that need to be available to the patrons yeah that is based off the square footage and I do think I have that somewhere which I if they are to lose I guess I don't know I'm making it up too yeah uh are we is that an going to still provide enough parking spaces to the square footage of so and that's that's why I asked the question because if they are saying we have enough parking spaces available using another piece of property and then they sell that right and they're not going to be compliant for their number of parking spaces available I would have to review the numbers for that I think it was reviewed in connection with having both it's an excellent question I think off of just not doing the numbers most likely would not have enough it wouldn't be sufficient with the without that other two adjacent Parcels or if there one I don't know with the actual restaurant and the parking spot parking lot next door I don't know if that's considered all so across passor girl way that separate isolated lot which was on the site plan um I do not believe but I would have to verify that that they would not have sufficient amount of parking on that one parcel that we looked at okay yeah and they also just just to be part of the record on that separate parcel is their dumpster enclosure as well okay so really that needs to be included as part of this whole establishment that act that parcel across the street yeah or they're not in compliance with other other things than just parking yeah they wouldn't have their their um Solid Waste Management they wouldn't and then also the parking okay um I can answer the [Music] um permits that they do [Music] have it looks like there are five open one two three in review one of them being um the covered weight area which was denied so it's still an open permit the covered what I'm sorry this porch area this this request that they have now what we're reviewing now correct so that was based off their submitt was based off our staff's denial what would prevent uh that property across the street from being sold even if it threw them out of compliance is there something that would currently yeah if we're not told about it nothing okay happens all the time right I know it does I know that's why and again I don't know if there's a unified site I mean he may be able to speak their attorney if there if they've unified the sites I have not been made aware of that um we do have a form that we utilize for these types of things when someone does assemble lots for lack of a better term and we have a standard unified site declaration that will require City involvement that's recorded against both properties um I can confirm that that has not taken place as I said here today are we ready to hear yes we are would the applicant like to come forward please State uh state your name and address Kyle Kyle Vass on behalf of uh Mr and Mrs colum um our company I'm also brought with me our contractor Paul um and then you can see Mr colums here as well um neither one of them has been have been sworn in so before they speak um or you yeah just in case Jenny do you mind thank you please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm the information or factual presentation that you're about to give um so I'd like to address the questions about parking and the unity of title uh first currently uh first of all great questions um we already thought about that um that that may be a concern of the city uh because I believe um uh Mr MO Holland close um close um I believe it would throw it out of out of compliance if one was sold separately um I think that is um we're we're try we're going to try to take care of that with a Unity of title we haven't gotten there yet but it is something that we're looking into uh to doing um our position is that neither one of the of the two Parcels uh the restaurant parcel in that separate um uh parking lot that nobody would we wouldn't want to sell those individually anyway because of a potential compliance issue in the future um but things change sure and and that's why I was going to say the next point was if you if the board is inclined um we'd be agreeable um to make that as a condition of this request uh for the for your exact concerns um so so if that is uh a going concern we can absolutely um it was I don't want to say it was on the back burner but it it definitely wasn't on the front but I can I can move it up in priority as far as the the uh the hierarchy of things that we're working on um so I think that answers it on the parking issues um the question about the handicap parking um the stripes so so we have a I don't want to say too much because I think we have the issue resolved with one of our neighbors uh with the warf uh I think we have a pretty fair a fairly good relationship with the warf um there was some damage that was inadvertently caused that we're working through regarding the parking uh so we do have to pull the bumpers the the parking bumper the parking stops out we have to resurface it restripe it and then put the bumpers back in that is um obviously uh a difficult thing um to get the timing right but the stripes are all put in by company that does this so it would be ADA Compliant as far as the handicap parking um is concerned um trying to remember if there are any other comments or concerns I'd like to address those first um if not I can jump right into hardship so that would just overall plan overall master plan because it's feels very peacemeal it does feel peacemeal and that's why I'm here and I'm trying to get it uh wrapped up into one bit so we have a lot of seemingly separate projects that have that are interrelated and that's why I have Paul here he's going to talk the permits around the for the cooler for the dumpster uh for the project of why we're here um if it's okay with you he can speak he will he speak to the conditions that were not met on the previous approval with conditions attached what the parking so curb stops okay let let me try to say it this way there was a conditional use permit for outdoor music I think he's talking about the curb stops that wasn't a cup no he was talking about the previous condition the conditions with the fence oh ear saving you Matthew that's unless you want to no um I don't know if he can speak to those but I can tell you the concern if I understand the concern correctly those have been addressed as it currently sits in the the two outermost curb stop what most curb stops have been removed to bring that into compliance just the correct it's just a striping that's outstanding and again uh We've going to we have to resurface the entire parking lot um and then the striping will go in according to the plans that you saw here I've been working with the city on that um and actually the striping as you see it today will be very different uh uh at the end of the project um but if if I may that the most southern southwestern parking spot where there is the utilities um that is adjacent there that does not meet the depth requirement um for a parking spot I know sometimes there's a parking attendant that sits in there but there is a curb stop there and I do have and have seen and have pictures of a car being parked there so I would request that that be removed because I would not want it it is not a viable parking spot it is do you have a picture of it I have no objection to it being removed I just want to make sure that I'm talking about the same thing um may I have the overhead please actually while we're talking about the parking we could probably pull up all the pictures maybe I don't have don't have it here but I do have a picture how many parking spaces are you GNA lose but if this was granted I think we lose um do you want to go back to yeah let me go back to the existing survey that that'll be helpful okay so this is the existing survey and it's kind of hard to see um um but it looks like there is on the Northern side there's the handicapped and then it shows a full space and then like a really not a space cuz it overhangs onto the sidewalk uh to the West um so that's like a handicapped and a full space so that's two and then on the southern part of that parcel in front of the dwelling you have another handicap space and again you have they're angled so another full space and another space because it's angled it hangs over onto the sidewalk there so staff was really trying to look out with this and if we did a new one that all the spaces would be on the property and not overhanging um over the sidewalk and make them compliant Christian do you want to go to the next one absolutely the one I'm talking about there you go yes this one's a little easier to see so you'll see the difference to the northern portion um the the the northernmost what call them two and a half spaces are gone um and then the southern part of the northern porcel parcel uh will be a handicap into two um Ada other otherwise um standard size parking um and then uh down here on the southern portion I think we may lose one on each side um but the depth of course would be uh correct and uh once it's restriped and um that's also why I mentioned the the um unattached parking which we will look into um well we will seek Unity of title and there is actually one of the one of the difficulties with getting Unity of title um on two properties is whether the ownership is Sim uh similar or the same between the two and in this particular case there's no mortgages on either property and Charles owns or Mr colum owns both of them so we won't have that hurdle um so I do have to go through the county as well um so I think I started the county and they push it to the city and then so it there's somewhat of a process there I just don't see yeah that that it's going to be a problem to do it and when you say just if I may uh the unit would be for the property across the street correct the one that is currently yeah over over parking okay that does that clear yeah okay so going back to that one parking spot it is shown on this site plan see the no parking on the south yes that that is the one it has the utilities so there currently is a curb stop there and it is being utilized for parking so it would be rectified should this be approved correct but it was also part of my um permit for or part of the approval and the subsequent zoning permit for the the fence okay so that is the space that is not a viable space correct okay I see what you're saying talking down here in the corner right on the corner yes it's it's very shallow deep because you have those utility boxes there so it's not a conforming space okay understood um I would submit that that should be a condition of approval there you go um I that's what that's kind of how our our technical review went I don't want to get um the concerns such as this Fair concerns they're acknowledged um we're agreeable that they are conditional uh conditions upon approval um and I think you all know what that means but um rather than act as a complete bar to allow the property to be updated and allow the um the well the reason that we're here to be constructed um allow them to be conditions upon approval another one would be the landscaping or the colors um we're more than happy of course at this juncture of the construction we haven't picked out the colors um I've spoken to my client and asked him uh uh what he anticipates those being of course he says neutral um not um um offensive in in in brightness or no neon colors for example um but if if the board wants to make that a condition upon uh approval that's absolutely fine I would I welcome that I I understand it uh same with the Landscaping we do have a landscaper that we have engaged with um but before the the entirety of the project is done um it's difficult to see it uh which I understand but um we have engaged with a landscaper and uh again that can be a condition on approval so much Green Space uh so much green uh canopy I think I'm what we we talked about at the technical review um which we could submit to the city and and have that as long as the city's okay with it Kristen and you were saying one square foot for every square foot of addition so if so that would one that would need to be in the motion yes and the other I had a question regarding that small parking space yes does the city consider any parking spaces for golf carts since they are becoming more used we do consider um golf cart and like compact but there has to be a certain number as a base to to be considered those yes to be considered or to add those into the parking plan okay so I'll move on um and then of course we're here as an open book and then once I'm finished I'm going to pass the microphone to Paul um and he can talk to you more about about the open permits and the construction plan as a holistic view or in its totality um the one of the questions that the city actually asked and their staff report was what's the hardship um go to the front picture of the front can I have the presentation please me off the camera that that should be fine yeah so right now I would refer to the the front porch as more of a an abbreviated front porch it it's really um wide enough to to only house to only hold a few people um this building was built in the 1970s I believe that porch was was original to the original building um my client did not build this um and as the the location and and his restaurant has gotten popular or more popular and the more people go to it um he has realized they have realized that there's nowhere for the patrons to stand out of the weather out of the Sun and out of the parking lot okay um and this kind of dobes tail Dov tailes back into the parking lot so in order to ensure the safety of the people that they're inviting to eat at their restaurant um they would like to offer them a place out of the rain out of the sun um and and most importantly out of the parking lot um for them to wait um the uh the the question was raised in the presentation whether whether there will be railings or not um candidly I would leave that to the city um if the city wants to make that a condition upon approval whether or not they have railings I've spoken with my client about it and we're more than agreeable to put railings up um ideally we'd like to see what looks best for the area um but if the city prefers to have railings up which which would only further the idea of safety to keep people out of the parking um that would be understandable uh as far as seating and tables there will no be there will be no tables there um the seating would be minimal but not for service and the reason there would be minimal seating I'd have to look into whether or not it would be required under Ada uh but somewhere for you to get off your feet while you're standing there and waiting sometimes the weights can be lengthy um and you wouldn't want to stand out front while you're waiting for a table for an hour um some people cannot so I think there's a a a small bench there now um there may be that there may some other seats they haven't finalized that yet candidly but um nothing permanent as far as no no seating and no service out there okay um it is not it's not anticipated and it's not thought to be or planned to be an extension of the dining room um it's not going to be a um a force multiplier as far as a revenue driver um it is it is a place for the uh holding spot if you will to stand and get out of kind of get out of the way um so the hardship there is without the variant they could only ever have what's already there um I think with the with the growing uh with the growing area um I think it makes sense to update the building it is a over 50y old building it does make sense to update it um and um part of it part of the the construction is because it is an older building and it needs to be updated Kyle would it be beneficial that I bring up the floor plan that may help you short can you actually go back to Kristen please I can I want there's one more thing I want to address well at least one more thing which way so one of the concerns was well I noted a couple concerns that you had so the spacing there was a there was a concern on on the measurement maybe being inaccurate yes I think it's twofold so so in correct me if I'm wrong it's a there's excuse me oh look at that so this section here if you're looking on the so this section here which is already currently there if everybody can see that that's 20t in some change correct so if you look at 20 feet but then if you look at that I I actually blacked it out so not to be confused that on the plan is 20.67% is that what we're we agreed on yeah should be yeah okay I just want to make sure we're clear on that and also along the measurements so we've been calling it a 12T by 28t addition it's a little bit of a misnomer um it's I would argue that it's significantly smaller in size than 12T by 28 feet because if you can see here the reason the northernmost side of our requested construction is 12 feet is because of that's a it's curved right there on that Northern corner so it's really 6t push out um but because it's curved that one side has to be 12T um so it's probably a little bit more than half of whatever 12 * 28 is in square feet um and with that I'd like to address the plans if anybody has any questions for me no sorry the addition that shows that 1833 by 8 yes or 18 .72 I don't know which one to be looking at on that the other area of the other rectangle of addition what's that that is also going to be a covered porch area um my understanding Kristen can correct me if I'm incorrect that is outside of the 25t setback side setback I I'm un I don't think it needs to have a variance that does not have need a variance however one of my comments was they were mislabeled like one said a maintenance area and then one said a rain shelter so may just help to clarify what that would be sure that is going to be part of the um the weight area the extended weighting area so it's all tied together it will all be tied together to make the the front of the building more cohesive the door that was another one the door that um is on one picture or is on the pictures but not on the plans the reason it's not on the plans we've already talked fire we've already talked to fire um the fire department and that is not a safety concern to have it removed that door is going to be removed and won't be there anymore um did you want there any questions I'll still be here but I wanted to see the night the mic to to I will have a few questions but you can finish everything that you want to present and I'll ask you at the end okay you may answer one or two of them anyway okay well let's do let's I'm going to I'm going to see the the oh you're leaving the podium well I'm going to be here he's going to be here let me ask you your questions now if that's okay with you that's perfectly fine I just want to keep the harmony here uh so the once again the plans that we got um is they're kind of cut up and they clearly show the roof over the uh cooler which um Miss Conan mentioned earlier uh I just want to make sure that you'll State for the record that you understand that if this variant approve is approved it is not for the roof over the cooler I'm not sure it's dep well it's depicted in your diagram here and I don't want there to be any misunderstanding that a roof appears over the cooler and that was approved correct I understand this is just the waiting area correct you will stipulate that I would stipulate that I would concede that yes sir thank you um I I think if I may interject the cooler and Paul can can elaborate on that that was under separate permit or is under separate permit okay okay a separate permit would be required for that be required right it's not an existing variance or permit is that correct that is correct okay right so we're just talking about the sitting or the front porch yes sir okay thank you I had one question quick Kristen that roof over the cooler doesn't require a variance so no it would not require a variance but it would require a separate permit yes so that that is also why as part of my um comments I would just like to understand what maybe also in fruition as part of the plans um just in case they may need to return back or just so everybody is on the same page of what's intended um you mentioned in your application I believe it was paragraph 8 uh you referenced uh an adjacent business what adjacent business were you referring to in paragraph I believe it was paragraph 8 of your application yes uh it's like the second paragraph actually this first paragraph is a comment including the adjacent business what are you referring to there it's number eight of the criteria last one oh as I read that you're basically saying that you should be allowed to do this because there's an adjacent business that has it well yes and no no so hardship variances as you as you well know are looked at Case by case um and because one hardship is granted for one property doesn't necessarily mean a hardship variance for another property is also granted for the same reasons um the reason I include that language however is because one of the conditions is to make sure it stays in harmony with the area because the last thing you want to do is offend right pass a grill uh as far as looks and the harmony of the environment um and so that's why I include that not not to say hey because this individual has something we should too have it um but it was more to say that the request that we're asking for for the covered porch is something that's in harmony with the area and I think more than more than not the the restaurants and the businesses in the passag grill area do have some form of uh uh extended covered front porch area that would be the purpose for that but they're not all in the setback are they and that's why why I was wondering what your point of reference was there um in the application that's because you're basically asking to go in the setback significantly so terrific question I don't know who you're referring to there but so I'm referring I don't want to guess I figured I'd ask no that's it's a great question um the the the adjacent property would be to our South which would be the war they have a covered front porch area you are correct they don't have a side setback of 25 ft um our property is the only property that does uh which is why we're here on the variant the the other properties and I I'm going to I'm going to mess the the the the name of there's a there's a downtown area where there's other properties they too have um outside cover seating there's one property on the um uh right adjacent to the beach that has or had outdoor seating like in the parking lot area I don't know if that's still there or not but it was I think they're in a different zoning District though they are in a different zoning area um not bringing it up to say to justify any other reason other than to say that um St P Beach and pasag gril area specifically do have a a there is a Harmony there to say there there's an outside environment people enjoy eating and sitting outside or being outside um the the restaurants do have front covered areas um and although most of the restaurants or eateries that I've seen down here in in pass Grill area do have outside seating we're not asking for outside seating and we have no intention of converting that or building it in in the future okay uh I believe uh I have one more question for the gentleman um so it's anticipated to be a waiting area um and there's already already been some discussion that uh there'd be seating but not tables I think I CAU uh what about serving alcohol would be no service out in the front porch would people be able to go out there and bring I don't know the answer to this I'm asking you or ask in the city I don't know would people be able to sit out there and drink alcohol so there wouldn't so it would be a the answer is no well there you go the answer is no it's not even City I mean you have to get permitted to serve alcohol through the state and it wouldn't be part of I I thought Dr to interrupt you but I thought during Co and maybe that the government there was a yeah we we were lenient in I mean people were drinking on our sidewalk right here during Co right just because of the spacing requirement but that doesn't apply anyway correct okay does not apply and one more question what about live music out there um I don't believe there is any intention for live music on the front once again would you stipulate that I'll stipulate that okay I just have one uh thing about the alcohol so I'm kind of Twisted here if I'm waiting for an hour to to sit down and I can't have a cocktail while I'm standing there that that seems like a an something that doesn't make sense you know or whatever I don't know what the alcohol laws are but I thought it was for their property it all depends on the site plan that's submitted to the state at the end of the day you designate areas on your business that you will and will not be serving alcohol but if you s if you go into the bar and buy a drink and walk out on the front porch while you're waiting that doesn't make it illegal does it now I'm I'm just questioning I mean it's common sense if there's someone doing an inspection with the site plan in front of them and and no then probably well I just don't want to restrict something that's we shouldn't you know and I I wasn't asking for a stipulation on that I did I did ask for stipulation on music I gave it to you but on the alcohol you know whatever the rules are the rules corre they're not they're not going to be serving but if you take it upon yourself to walk from a inside it's not on them no well well it is actually on us it actually is on them and and I think the applicant not to put words in his mouth cuz he can he can correct me but he said this is specifically a waiting area right there is no service there is no music it is simply to get off the parking lot for Citizens and if the board sees favorably and is worried about those things then we can profer conditions and and agree to those things prior to are okay did you want to have your contractor come up as I do yes okay and I'm still here for questions if anything comes up thank you I'm Paul Carr representing Carl colum as his contractor my understanding is I'm here to to go over questions for outstanding permits yeah and I'll say also maybe just the general master plan is what we're seeing like this is your plan for the next 5 years or are there other things that you're anticipating beyond what we are looking at okay yeah and and if you can include in that like anticipated timeline for a project that would be helpful so this this is the master plan would be to have this out there um to have the cooler covered to um put a nicer dumpster enclosure on the opposite on the other property and to restripe the parking lot in accordance to what we're required to do that's kind of the master plan um there's other things that with the music and stuff like that that we're not touching on because that's completely not part of this um but that's that's the master plan and to bring the landscaping and to do the colors and to put cladding on the cooler to where it looks more appealing than what it looks like now but all that we put I believe on this plan other than um the cooler cuz the cooler was on separate so um and we did that per request um we put the cover over the cooler on this plan showed the elevation of it so that you guys could see what it was going to look like in the future and that's in order to shed light on on that for you um as far as open permits um are there any questions on that for me what are the open permits or are there any current open permit yeah I know we had the open permit for the cooler but that was taken care of and closed out uh we had a stipulation on our set of drawings for the cladding in front of it I know that yes so that would not be closed out until that was completed because that was a zoning requirement as part of that that permit is still open okay MH that that was all um per a meeting that we had with the city we'd like to see once this is in construction what we want to actually do with that expl explain what what do you mean what we actually like to do that to how we would be clading it what what material we'd be using what colors we'd be painting it yeah so by by the zoning permit that was approved we were H you were going to do some kind of like cedar siding so now you're maybe and I'm just saying it could be an it could be painted but that was what was approved so now are you going to enclose it now that you're putting a roof on it which would change what the zoning condition was no okay so that's what I'm saying is it just a roof structure you're doing and is it still open on the sides because it's supposed to be screened right instead of seeing that um the cooler and that was the condition and the plans that you provided so that's why I'm asking would there be a change from that original design to something else no okay is there a reason that the current open permits and projects that are outstanding can't be completed or at least come have to compliance prior to an additional variance being approved for the property um um I think we were waiting to see if we can get this variance how much more effort we're going to put into hiring a landscape contractor to give us a full design on it um hiring um a designer for outside for the colors and things like that and then redesigning um that for for you guys so you have a landscape plan um we put quite a bit of time and effort into getting just to this point and not knowing if we're going to actually get approved it's a good amount of money and time and effort to get here so I think that's kind of where we we hit a hit a wall and a stopping point of how much more do we do we do if we don't know if we're going to be approved at all I guess I'm I'm wondering maybe to um make my question clear like for the roof over the cooler and the parking lot areas that was already approved condition when we had the fence that has not been done is there a reason those things can't be completed and the short term without having the experience approved they can but it would require us to redo it again so um currently where it sits I can't change that front parking lot without doing demo without doing things like that um that would be part of this plan that we have here so in order for me to comply with everything I have to be able to tear some stuff out and change the parking and specifically that side where the signage is um the other side of of believe we could change it all and restripe it we waiting there for the war correct correct yeah we're trying to get um the parking issue specifically again is is difficult because we don't want to come in now and do the parking and striping and then have to come back in again and do it again uh we've already done it once um it's now been messed up and we have to fix it um which I think works because it was messed up now we have the the we have to fix it anyway um but we don't want to have to do it two three more times um if we can if we can get the construction moving forward kind of cohesively um that would be the overall idea so may I ask a question um just based on the sense I'm getting from the board uh timing wise hypothetically just gets approved right what then like are we talking 90 days are we talking 30 days 15 60 I would say a construction project like this is is probably a 3 to four month project okay in that time frame is it your opinion or testimony that the parking and the covered roof can't happen until the construction of this portion if it were approved is completed or can they H happen simultaneously realistically I mean just it would be during the construction process um that we would be able to do that I I would I think the hold up on like the cooler roof and things like that are because they may we may have to submit an amended permit or something to that effect if we can't have the overall plan that we're trying to get is that fair and if I may the cooler roof has is not part of any permit right now that still has not been applied for that's not part of the open permits correct so we would have to actually get an original permit which would be based on the look of it based on the overall cohesion of the project and if for example we can't get this particular issue out here today then that would have a significant impact impact and change on the overall look of the project so that's why it's it's seemingly in this or it is in this order so we can try to get um the con the construction started and all going at the same time so we would be looking at this variance in light of sorting out parking sorting out Landscaping getting a cooler permit and agreeing to the usage being a strictly a waiting area those would be all the types of conditions that we're talking about now because this is not going to happen unless the grander master plan is occurring which includes coolers and parking spaces and Landscaping correct is that what I'm hearing not sure I understand I think you're asking if it's all going to be one project working that's what I'm hearing is we can't complete one thing from a previous permitted item parking because it would have to be redone again and then what Kristen's sharing is there is no permit yet in place for one of the items it's part of the master plan which is for the cooler cover over the cover okay the the confusing part about this is there's also so requirements in a cup that has not been stayed that to their benefit there's a court case that everything's you know I'm not going to say it's paused because of our position but at the end of the day there are certain requirements in theup that have not been done based on my impression don't want to speak for them is because of what's going on in court to their benefit so if we look at this variance through the lens of compliance for the parking compliance to Landscaping compliance to uh getting the cooler permitted coverage um and compliance to its use is that what would make sense so I would agree with all those except for the cooler permit that would be I think that's complet a separate issue the only thing that would change on that would be the overall look or design of it based on the entirety of the project but that was my question is the design going to change from what was approved by zoning when the permit was issued and that could I'm just thinking that yes that could happen so I guess I'm confused I thought you just told us that the cooler was the cooler itself is there the roof is not the roof has not been approved so the concrete appli for yeah it has it hasn't been applied for so the concrete pad which it sits on currently talking was erected and a permit then was given after the fact it was applied for then the cooler came which we do have a permit for part of the conditions for that cooler was it to be screened as per the Land Development code which it was agreed upon it was a cedar type slat siding that was going to be done but my question is when you come in for that roofed portion for that permit would that possibly change the screening like the posts and things for the roof would it change from that deviate from that original approval no out of curiosity do you guys have like a master site plan do you have like a plan of what you're trying to get to or do you just kind of just out of curiosity because I think if if staff and the board saw hey guys this is our 2-year plan of what we want to do I was just out of curiosity or do you just I think that's I think that's this right is because one of the main one of the main features of the build will be this the cover portion of the area over the front door and if the city is going to tell us no the hardship and we can't do it then it would require potentially got maybe we pull that picture up one more time then that just to clarify the this that we're talking about is this the this meaning you're talking about this is your master plan so there will be no parking on the North side there there's going to be the addition plus the other addition that doesn't need a variance plus the covered area over the cooler and then all the parkings relay out like this with no parking down there on the on the southwest corner and then we're talking about unifying this with the other parking area to satisfy all of the requirements correct is that now what we're saying okay well in the unity of tile just be clear and that's just something I want to make I wanted to offer um I wanted to offer to make sure um that you all just don't know me but um uh if you make it a condition of approval then obviously it holds me to a little bit tighter in your RS um and so uh we're not opposed to unifying the titles um as far as I know and what I know about uniting a title um I do know I have to go through pis County I've spoken with them before not on this particular issue on other matters um and speaking with them I don't see it being a concern or an issue at all particularly when there is no mortgage company the mortgage company on on when you're trying to unify titles they tend to be the problem in these in these in this case there's no mortgage company I need a portion um I need a parel being concern or isue I think some of the hesitation and frustration you're seeing at least for myself is we've granted a variance to this property with conditions based upon approval that have not been acted upon and so I hear you like that's a great offer that we have on the table but it would be I would feel more comfortable if I'd seen those been acted in the past and unfortunately I can't that um all I can do is ask that going forward I would sub that those happened before my involvement um I don't know if that helps but um all I can do is ask forward with the conditions in place that make you all feel comfortable as member Chase just stated we we granted you the cooler based on with conditions and they have not been met and I we were having trouble to understand why you have to have this varant approved before you can finish your conditions on if I may the the variance was for the installation of the fence not for the cooler the cooler was a separate building permit that that is still open and the variance for the fence has been all I'm still having issues with the parking yeah okay okay got it as far as as far as the CHR as far as the one one car stop on the on the Southeast southwest corner and in the dep of the parking yep the death yep and the drive aisle and everything when I went out and measured we we had spoken about that and that's that's why I discussed the issue that we have with our neighborhood to the South um conversations with that have been going well it's just a matter of getting the timing to get it reted um and restri in accordance with the city's plans but with is which is what you're looking at now does anybody anybody on the board have any more questions for does um does the owner wish to share anything uh my name is Charles colum I'm the owner of Red White and booze um I know Mr Holland Mo Holland uh he passes by all the time um basically excuse my throat I've been coughing quite a bit um basically we're trying to comply with everything the way I see it to make it about the roof of the cooler about complying getting that closed out on the cooler covering it up doing siding and really until you get the roof on there you can't really tie everything in you really can't I mean tie it into the whole building in the front I mean everything needs to work as everybody knows build my house that everything needs to come into place you can't put one piece over here and then do this piece over here and get it to look right so it needs to am I correct so but I mean really with the plan that was we talked to you about this before about about the real way and we'll comply to anything you want that I mean the siding the cedar siding I think is still going to go there and it's still going to go across there but we don't know how to end it we don't know how to actually fasten it until the roof is on there until the post there to see what we have there's no way really to to to to do it um but at the time of the permit when it came in because again it was an after the fact permit that there was no roof involved in in that prior submission so that that came after yeah that's what I mean so it may change but what I'm I guess I'm looking for aesthetically it would be similar or if it would be different um which may not be under the purview of the board but I I'm just trying to get on the record that there are sometimes changes that occur along the way from what was originally approved I don't think I think the original with the siding on there the cedar siding that's not going to change okay it's just going to change to where how it's going to be attached until we get the roof on there we can't really do the cedar siding to make it look I want it to look good for for me and everybody else in St P beach pass Grill we're really trying to uh make this a this is this is our first restaurant and and it's been a challenge and so many different ways uh sometimes I've I've almost given up on it because of all the issues we're going through and um um but I haven't given up and I'm going to continue to do what I can to conform to everything I need to be and uh I mean that's basically all I have to say would it would it make more sense that we we have one small piece that of a bigger plan that you need a varience on and why you're here but really have a master plan presented and then we really just look at this as an integrated part cuz right now we're like we don't really know what this cooler is or the parking or the you know all these little pieces that some are not even don't even have permit requests yet for but to have that really put the only thing we don't have a permit request for is the roof over the cooler part of this per it is part of this permit yeah okay so um okay I don't know I I'm just it didn't sound like it was like the parking lot the parking lots until until we get the dumpster pad a new dumpster pad done okay we can't move forward with the parking I mean we've already striped at one time PID to have a striped or whatever and now they're um we're uh what's the restaurant huh no not the war next to the one they're working on people shers used to be shers used to be shers over there so those people have created a problem on that parking lot even though we've they've done concrete they they're pouring concrete closing up Windows and and so on and and now they've got concrete all over the new P so that's we've already talked to them they said they'll pay for that but we can't really do that until the pad is in for the dumpster and every we'll get concrete on the new pad we pour so I mean you know put on there so I mean everything's a process everything's um which is a pain and enough okay you know feel like every turn there's one more go first and trying to get the hardship varant out of the way if you will to make sure we have that locked in we can continue forward with project so yeah I I'm just making a note of a lot of potential conditions should we decide as a board to look at this favorably say including I don't know how to phrase this so maybe I Look to Kristen this cooler covering permit just to go back to that looking at the building permit application that was submitted MH the description of work was install new covered concrete entry modify the roof line to create a new exterior covered waiting area porch area for guest includes framing trusses Roofing concrete railing and sidings I don't see that under the description on the building permit application to include that roof that's our original application okay we have done a new on packet apping permit for the cooler separate and I was told to place it on this permit therefore I put it on my drawing same thing with the dumpster pad I was asked to put this on this permit not apply separately so read the sign again and I think that was a part of the master plan but I'm saying your building permit application so I need to read state that and new build application I have not been asked to do that I resubmitted these plans three times so but I've not been asked to refill out application permit all I've been asked to do is add add add okay and I think that was part of again just understanding the all the scope of the things you were looking to do right and I think we've had several discussions and meetings on that um and I did ask it so that the board could see that now I'm just saying for the application itself yes the plans I see have been updated I haven't looked through them but just your original so you may have to do a resubmittal if you want to include that on that to to to have that um because I think the don't let's see because the dumpster you do have under a separate permit it's not this one pull that off because we were not in compliance with the dumpster okay sat and but that that's what I mean when you're saying right when but when you're saying it's on the plans and then that should be part of it the building permit application and the plan should be kind of married together and I appreciate you putting them on as one so everybody can see what you're looking to do instead of you know just having a separate plan for that that and that and you could utilize it for several things I'm just saying the one permit that we have is just was for this covered area initials permit application was for okay that and then I came in we were going to apply for a roof over the cooler and I was going to apply for a dumpster and I was asked to put this all into one single plan and resubmit which I did I was not asked to refill out an application if I was the verbage would have changed in that application scope of work is okay so that's just what I'm saying you may want to pull out for that cooler a separate one just for that but it's still part of the master plan right we talked about this in our last that it needed to be done we were holding off holding off and I don't want him to get fined i' like to get the job done as well sure so okay we applied separate for that that's been two and a half months now I appreciate there's phases that happen to and it's very frustrating for me as permitting yeah okay so I I I guess for the purposes of trying to look at this piece um it feels like there's conditions to be met that would say if we were to look favorably on this it would be in light of a master plan being executed and approved by zoning and building for the additional areas that we've described on this master site plan which is an additional waiting area a cooler area a parking lot landscaping and waste management with handling of that with the dumpster so those five elements of the broader master plan it would be under the condition that those are addressed and met according to the permitting process in addition the usage area would be agreed to and limited to being used as a waiting area and there would be a Unity of title that would be sought and put in place with that parking spot next to shers does that sound correct I actually really like how you suggested we put it all in approval of of potentially if if the board is going to recommend approval of the hardship varant uh make it subject to approval of the um master plan so I'm just putting that out there that's just a very long discussion for is Kristen is that like is that order the right way to go versus waiting to approve the variance until the other outstanding items that um the planning board is working through are completed I'm just trying to think of like each individual like open permit is there so there are some things like I just was asking about the cedar enclosure and with the roof it may change or tweak the design right um once they because they have to apply for that separately it wouldn't be under the same necessarily the same scope um what you could do as long as there's no objection and I would like that on the record for obvious reasons um um you could require like a like a check-in date like within 90 days it will come forward that could be a condition it happens all the time usually it's a year um but for something like this where and mind you you can decide to go whichever way you want to go based on the criteria in front of you and the evidence provided um but we could legally craft a condition in which within 3 months it doesn't have to be the owner it could be the attorney it could be the contractor someone comes in to a meeting and provides an update on ABCDE where they are on the project um and at that point you would be able to modify the cup if necessary we would have no objection to that you have no objection to that okay okay it got longer well just I understand they want to get everything done at the same time because you're bringing in all of these contractors do we do we have any more questions do we want to close them yeah we want to close this part I was waiting until everybody go to our discussion okay if we don't have any more questions from the board then we'll close that section and we'll see if we have some board discussion or I I don't know how how we could make a uh I mean it's aesthetically usability like I get what they want to accomplish um I think my um hesitancy is just there's so seem to be so many open items with this property in the city from a building perspective right now that adding something to the mix in this moment um gives me a little bit of pause um I don't know how we covered in a motion it's like a page and a half of well the the the staff did already provide um recommendations that align to most of I believe what we discussed in terms of landscaping the roof and all of that and if we wanted to have a mo if you know that was the intent to provide a motion that included that and adding on the check and date like I think that could be fairly easily done okay but any other board discussion uh I just feel uh as it relates to what we discussed on the unity of title um that if there is any motions to approve uh that that absolutely needs to be a condition and I say that just because of everything I've seen that's gone in on in the city with all the Legacy issues with properties that were granted things uh at the time with uh single ownership and then they were sold and you end up with a bunch of buildings out of compliance and in some cases these are big issues so I I would just say that if there's a motion to approve this I would recommend that we absolutely include that um so that does this doesn't become another one of those properties yes and and this is we have standard language conditions that we utilize it talks about um decoration of unified site plan which it's a little bit more simple than what I think Mr Bass was thinking because it's just a document where two owners come in and say we're unifying the site for development purposes if we decide to separate in the future it's a recorded document obviously the city will be notified we can't withhold approval however we are notified to ensure that what they are separating is not leaving a property non-conforming with things like parking and Landscaping and minimum lot requirement um and if all of that checks out then we will move forward so there is a clause that we can include so we can entertain a motion if someone would like to make one yeah I I don't know if we're ready uh for that chair respectfully um just because there was a lot of conditions that were that's and and it's not impossible trust me I just went through 40 conditions yesterday through a motion so it's very doable um but I want to make sure that we have consent no objections if we are going to go that way and I want to spell out everything that's discussed if I may please so number one I have um they proferred railings on the outdoor area um I'd like to just ensure that it's 88 compliant I don't know what that entails but um I think that's stronger language than than railings but I don't know what the board feels about that it's fine railings sorry question uh you proferred railings on the outdo incl to have railings we have railings I think respectfully we don't want to design your project I just kind of wanted to know with the front elevation and just safety protection I there was Ballard there so yeah candidly I would say railings should be there okay okay good for this for the safety purposes of keep everybody and you have no objection with that same condition including uh the requirement to be ADA Compliant correct yeah no objection okay then we have um and we can work through how the word is strictly awaiting area no out no outdoor um dining no no music if I may I have the roofed open Porsches to be constructed as for plan submitted and may not be later enclosed utilized as a service area only without obtaining a subsequent variance and shall be utiliz or shall be utilized as a waiting area only and we could also add in there and not include um shall not include outdoor music yes very well worded and then I don't know how you all feel about the proferred conditions um the other two that and mind you this is just to get my note straight in case we move forward with an approval but again this is your choice I just want to be clear um how does the board feel about two and three that were proferred by Kristen so one of them is related to landscape landcaping absolutely okay and number three is more of those housekeeping issues when there was um some issues like page one page two or sheet one p you know things may have been mislabeled I would like to see an amended updated plan be submitted to reflect those changes so yeah if should approvals go through we're on the latest and greatest yeah y absolutely so then five I have a uh based on member mahand declaration of unified site plan shall be recorded for and I'll I'll get the property addresses from Mr Bass but we're talking about what the old Giordano's parking lot I believe yep but limited to site plan not title so we were talking about Unity of title and site plan so we we do a bunch of different very long legal terminology so we do covenants in lie of unity of title um running with the land we've done unified Declarations of unified site plans for zoning purposes okay um I don't think when I Mr Bass said this I I highly doubt he wanted to like replat them or anything that extensive um but I believe member mahand your your point was whatever if they put it together we just don't want to be in a situation where they leave it non-conforming is that essentially I don't want to speak for you I I apologize I was making a note worries think what you said I just want I want to make sure that the properties can't be sold which would make the well either property but I think we're principally talking about the restaurant property as non-compliant right perfect and with the inability to become compliant unless they tore part of the restaurant down or something which we know we're not going to make them do that correct I've seen too much of that already absolutely um and I think what this does for us is it's a recorded document against both properties so I mean I guess people could do handshake deals but I'm I'm I'm highly doubt that would happen here the title company would see it we would have to be notified they would have to get our approval he would sign off on it so he couldn't um change his mind essentially and this is just a regular document that we've used for countless other projects I then the 90-day check-in I mean it's it's up to you all that would put us in July you I have a question how long how long to you're anticipating getting started on on this because it's sounds like you're going to pretty much be closing part of the restaurant down for I mean question for you but for me I'm ready to start okay six months ago and I applied for permit so if we Grant this variance with those conditions then you guys would be starting right away as soon as I get a permit yes that is the thing is the permitting process you know plans come in they get reviewed should revisions be required but we are running a little bit behind for sure I'm not going to be thees on that not but um so that does take time we have you know one building official and we have some plan reviewers but it it is taking a considerable amount of time so I don't know just 120 days might be a little bit more a reasonable time shoot for something in that August or September time frame given the length of time before they'll even get a permit you know issue to do anything right uh if we wanted to add that in so that fair I'd just like to see some aspect of accountability in the conditions given the historical we're ready to ready to go ready so as soon as we have the permit we'll we'll start um it is going to affect his business but there is access to his restaurant through the back area it need be May the back as well but within that time I'm assuming all the parking stuff we've talked about that are on the sidewalk and stuff that can be sorted out before another permit is issued yes well I don't know I mean if they're going to come in and apply for the covered roof area over the cooler I mean we do have I got to change the verage on yeah oh I just thought there's two parking spots that are encroaching the sidewalk and need to be addressed immediately that doesn't require another permit so there's certain steps that can be taken and then we can all have this fun again if we we wanted to in 120 days the parking issue home on me I'm trying to work it out with our neighbor okay once we square that away which I don't anticipate taking too long conversation's been going great so far um but yes that's when parking will be taken care of so okay soon rather later okay great it's up to on the the time frame the one thing I would suggest and again for the record Mr Bass if you could so this checkin would include language just like it does for all of our that at that point based on the update the board could modify the cup cup or the variant variant I was GNA say Mission gotcha cball well I think they're going to need an answer I mean to for us to say and we're going to Grant this but but change it in 120 days maybe doesn't seem to me to be something that we'd be doing I think what you're granting is so this is standard language that anytime someone has conditions that they have to meet if they don't meet them okay you can always revoke the SE or the variance I mean that's just in everything um I'm just saying based on what I've heard today and the hesitation on whether or not these conditions will be be met respectfully of course um it gives you all reassurance and it also holds the property owner kind of to his word of doing the best he can in the next 120 days because if he comes back in 120 days and respectfully nothing's been done right you're going to feel a lot different than if there's a unified site plan recording and there's permits for all this work and they've started the construction and you know things that they are just waiting to do um so that's just my suggestion on that language if we do craft something okay so we would need it in the form of a motion to carry forward any objections to the conditions six conditions that we wrote down so I'll go through them one more time ada8 compliant which includes railings the three in the staff report um which you've read right Landscaping Cod okay all right decoration of unified site plan is there an issue with me putting a day requirement on that I mean I don't see why we couldn't do that in like 45 days I have no issue with that no no objection within 45 days and then uh within 120 days from the issue into the development order you will be provided an update on status of all open permits including conditions in the variance and the board May modify the variants at that time and we can just go ahead and put a date of the July meeting if that's okay or we can work we can work on availability that would be August meeting for the 120 days 120 thank you yeah now I do understand and I just want to I don't want to speak for but I I understand that there are issues with timing on permits and I I personally just ethically don't think that's fair to hold we're busy we have other things to do so I I don't know about that time frame I don't know how realistic that is for you how close you guys are to obtaining permits let's do it this this is quasi judicial right correct um so first of all no objection to the conditions that you just set forth okay um addition secondly if we're going if this is quasi judicial I can always file a motion a good have to be in good faith of course it couldn't Prejudice anybody but if it would if it if one of the the reasons for the the request for extension of time um was because we weren't able to obtain a permit for 3 months uh I would think that would be received in good faith so we can do it in that way yeah I think that's fair unless it should be six months I mean being realistically looking at it I don't know all I know is within 120 days from now at a minimum you'll have a unified site plan yeah so there'll be some there'll be some progress and some the parking issues should have been able to be addressed like there's other things that I would than yes okay so we still needed in a form of a motion yeah what would your guidance be on that if you are going to move so if you deny variances you have to do it for specific reasons so they would it's your finding based on the testimony that they would have not met the criteria right you have to be very specific on why you're denying it if you approve it you feel like they have met the criteria and the motion would be including the proposed conditions and we don't the the six proposed conditions you can just be because we still need to craft them okay um I'll make it's based on the criteria sorry go ahead I'll make a motion to approve case number 23072 including the discussed six conditions I'll second it roll call member Chase yes member gsha yes member moholland so I appreciate what we've done uh and the cooperation of the applicant for uh the uh modifications and I think it's it's progress in a good direction and uh I'm I'm happy we were able to get some of that done but at the end of the day from my perspective it's not a hardship so so no member small yes chair buar yes motion carries 4 to one okay good luck you guys getting back okay um did you want to so we have you were yeah thank you chair um so we have some new board members which I'm excited for um I think it's it's we appreciate what you do it's hard being a volunteer member um at the end of the day especially right now in the temperament we'll be honest there's a lot of um you know apps and social media and and it's every decision you make is is watched by people you may not think so but it is um so I do appreciate what you all are doing and in your service to the city last year I did a workshop on quasa judicial procedures remember everything that you all hear is quasa judicial which is is different than any other board so there are certain ways to follow um I think we went through it today very nicely but I also wanted to just kind of touch base on policy procedure what we should be doing reminding you that it's the criteria that you all really care about and analyzing those four to eight criteria based on the on the variance itself it's not you know I don't like this person or I like this person or and remember the hardship is is respectfully not a physical hardship right it's not I'm old and I need an elevator um it's the property hardship right which we have a lot of interesting configurations in the city I will say especially P Grill but you you know there's some things like that that I kind of want to remind you all on a yearly basis so I don't know if maybe next meeting I mean I'm open to to talking about I don't need more than probably 30 minutes we could just add it depending on the agenda I think we have three cases as a just a very brief start off the bat and we could we don't have to start early or later um if that was okay with everyone we have three cases for next month we have three practical difficulty cases yeah and it actually is on May 15th so it's a little earlier because we amend it the the days for May and June are any of them commercial or all residential Kristen um they are all no they would have to be all um residential okay yeah sorry well that's fine I just didn't know if we had another situation like today I consider that more commercial what we just just yeah so usually an um unnecessary undo hardship is always going to be commercial there may be other things like the dock case was the same but it practical difficulty is more like single family residential okay okay anybody object to coming in a half hour earlier well most of you most of you have been here um this was a rather long meeting un but again I think normally the questions the healthy debate this is the this is the all like the purpose of this board you always have to remember these are not property rights you're granting exemptions exceptions to the code it's it's an important duty that you all have respectfully to all the other board members this is the second most important board in the city in my opinion just cuz it doesn't go anywhere from here you are the final say maker and you are making decisions so it's important to make sure you get everything on the record because we get appeals and we have to deal with it and all I care about is did we do what we had to do as a board um so we can start at two I can just lead it off or I can end the meeting either one like I said I don't need more than 30 minutes say let's end the meeting just in respect of the appc to the applicants sounds like a plan so we'll just add it as a workshop discussion item at the end of the meeting okay okay okay so anything further yeah I'd like to revisit uh the issue that we had earlier I don't think this is a time to do that we've been here for two and a half hours and I think if we're going to have a little discussion at the end of the next meeting we can cover all that stuff well respectfully the end of next meeting well for two meetings in a row now you've cut me off so does that mean we're going to do three meetings in a row you're going to cut me off and then talk about it afterwards I'm not trying to argue with to ask any question I want you sure do re simp in two meetings in a row you've cut me off well okay is there anything inappropriate to the attorney that I have asked any of these residents questions excuse me a second we can discuss this off of camera in a workshop environment okay off of camera we still on camera yeah yes we are okay well why why would we not want to talk about it on camera so I think there's um when it comes to the policies and procedures I will talk about it I think there's questions again I don't think there's Mal intent personally I don't think it's personal I think every now and then the chair has to run the meeting if there's a question on relevancy I would prefer you ask me right that's what I'm here for is to advise you all um I think any question is a good question that's just my standpoint the reality is is the applicant is here is asking for something they default the staff 90% of the time staff is not their expert they should have to ask or say something for what they're asking for and I think you know those are just fair things so there's no bad question in my opinion um but remember there's decorum towards each other I mean we all have to be you know you guys are all called colleagues up here and if someone wants to speak then he should speak or she should speak so we could have a meeting that goes till 5:00 you could have a meeting because we want to Rattle on about stuff that's to me is not necessarily that's your opinion yes it is that's your opinion yes I'm enti with to my opinion you are you're you're you're no great you cut me off twice you cut me off two meetings in a row okay I mean how how can you sit there and say that you didn't cut me off I'm trying to move the meeting Along come on we're here for 2 hours I mean these guys were here to 12:30 last night I mean really really really two hours is like really we're it's just really too much to cover what we're covering we have Dy here if I can make a suggestion I don't think what I'm hearing has to do with anything that will foreseeably come in front of you for a decision so I would just go ahead and end the meeting and and we can have a I'm trying to end the meeting no no I would I I just think plan on getting cut off three meetings in a row Mr attorne and I I think your point is well received and I understand and um I'm here to do a job just like everybody else is I agree every vote is equal and I'm not his son and I'm not his employee understood I don't know where this came from from you I've been trying to run a meeting and keep it in order and keep it going because we could sit here I make a motion to adjourn today's meeting I'll second it call call all in favor I all right journ