--------- And I'm also with Marina Corey from DPZ. So Okay. Good afternoon to everyone. Welcome to our workshop for the Marina Island overlay. Um going to get our workshop started here and we're going to um have
some opening comments from our city attorney, Miss Amy Meyers. I was requested to give a brief overview about the uh purpose and intent of the two Marina Island items you are considering today. The first one is an overlay
ordinance. It is the setting of policy against which all future development orders will be sort of measured against. Um, your development agreement is a contract uh that both of them serve both the ordinance and the agreement serve to
create entitlements for this developer. Um, but the the agreement itself is a contract that has a lifetime of 30 years as currently presented. There is overlapping content and and both the ordinance and the agreement u to vest
the densities maximum height uses of the property but they have different different effects. One is the setting of policy and one is an agreement that has some strings attached to it for in terms of timelines and public entitlements as well.
Um I have distributed before you as before you get started um just a visual that sort of indicates uh the development process very very generally. Um I want to highlight that this this overlay district ordinance and the
agreement uh fall into the entitlements C category. It's step one. Um, as the developer gets ready to go to construction and actually build and develop the land, he'll have to uh submit a series of development applications. That's essentially step
two. Um, and then when he goes and gets ready to build uh his actual building permit and site development permits. So, this is step one in a process. Not every question, I think, can be answered about what specifically will go where and how
it will um look like. Um, and it's not meant to. This is meant to preserve sort of the big picture entitlements. Um, and that's going to be achieved through those two items you have before you today. Um, also distributed um is some
draft language regarding a buffer um that would go in the overlay ordinance. This is similar to the language that was on the table before you at your last public hearing. And I realize we're not in the public hearing, but in case it comes up, I wanted you to know it was here. It's substantially
similar. However, it emits some indemnification language that a third paragraph you might have noticed um in in the first version. So, those are my comments to get you started and I'm here to answer any questions.
Right. Thank you, city manager. [Music] So, mayor, you um the commission asked that we have a workshop on this overlay and to give uh a little bit more in depth and background on it. Um we do
have Andy Bells here today. We have also some representatives that can answer any additional questions um about the overlay itself. Uh the commission did send in some questions that were uh answered by Mr. veils and um he is here
available to answer any additional questions. Before we get started, um I wanted Amanda if she would uh come up and give any information that has not been covered by Amy or um in your
presentation from uh previous weeks. Afternoon. Um I wanted to let you know that um I know one of the questions was about a traffic study. Um an indepth traffic study was completed. Um I I have it. It's about two sides. You know, it's
both sides of page and it's about that thick. Um we told them the methodology that we wanted. We explained to them the roads and the intersections that we wanted to be looked at. This was last year. Um they did um carry out that
traffic impact study. We do have it. We had it reviewed by Kimley Horn, Vinnie from Kimley Horn. He will be here at the public hearing. So, I wanted to let you know if you've got any traffic related questions, he will be here to answer those. Um, I think the other thing that
um I wanted to to kind of make clear was that um it's been touched on and it's on my presentation for the commission meeting is that um all of the things that are looked at at development order
stage such as the environmental impacts, storm water, those kinds of things will still be looked at. There will not won't be any impacts. there's any wetlands on there, but coastal impacts, those kinds of things will be looked at. Some of the questions that have been asked don't
actually come into play until the building uh permit stage. So, it would be the building department when they submit for their their house plans that would make sure that those houses were at the correct elevation. Obviously, they're not going to be bringing in filter. They're all going to be raised
up. Um, but that's the kind of thing I feel like we've had a lot of questions thrown at this that are not relevant for an overlay, but it's it's complicated and I understand that. People don't realize, you know, at what point does
something kick in. Um, the overlay is purely to allow things that you are allowed to give permissions on. Anything that's in the comprehensive plan, things like density, they cannot mess with. They
cannot increase the density other than the density that's already allowable. They cannot impervious surface, they cannot go over the impervious surface that's in the ULDC because that's also in the comprehensive plan. So, anything
that's state controlled, anything in the comp plan, they cannot ask for allowances on. The only things that they're asking for are things that are city ruled such as lot sizes, setbacks,
signage, street designs, heights, those kinds of things. I just wanted to because it is complicated. So, I just wanted to kind of make that clear. Thank you. So, um, we tried to, um, as I think everyone knows, uh from
being up here in the past, we've tried to, um, create a community with, uh, DPZ's, um, amazing help. who they've they've done so many great communities around the country and around the world um that fit with the ethos of of
Linhaven and the bedroom community, you know, feeling and and that that great warm feeling you get here in in Linhaven. We've tried to work closely with uh city staff to to really um manage all the little details because
there's a thousand of them as you can imagine. Uh, and I think it's going to be a great project. Um, if anyone has any specific questions, we're here uh to hopefully answer them. Thank you. You can Yeah, you can have a seat.
Thanks. All right. So, uh, commission, we have a a little over an hour or so to to go through this. would also like to get our questions out, get those clarified, and then we'll also offer some time for the um community to ask questions as well.
Um and then of course we'll um discuss this um on officially at our uh commission meeting later on this evening. So uh let's just sort of do a roundabout. Commissioner Pebbles, there any particular questions that you have
initially opening up? Yeah, sure. The first one is I want to address what we have right here and and I've I've spent a lot of time talking to citizens on this because first of all, let me say I'm very pro Marina Island. I really want to see it go through. But
the key is to make sure that everyone can be good neighbors to each other, right? So, but I've I will say I've probably had more responses from citizens than anything since I've been up on up here.
And it's all been please, please, please make Marina Island happen. Really only the difference is if I want I want to see Marina Island, but can we please make sure we do this? You know, and so I just wanted to say like over thank you to everyone that reached out. It's great
feedback. Um, but there has been some things that have really stuck out that the some of the people in the community as well as uh members of the industrial parks have asked. And the number one thing that that I just want to make sure
is that we want Merrick Industries to stay happy because they're very they're vital and very important to this community. And you as you see here what they handed to us, I believe talking about using a a U zone D buffer instead
of a zone C. I think that that is a fair compromise. I think um I I went I went out there to America and visited it myself. He showed me what 20 ft is versus what 20 what 60 ft is. And 20T is a lot closer than I thought it was. And
um yes, there is shrubbery and trees and stuff there. And yes, ultimately the people that move in, as long as they know that that's there, it's kind of on them for moving in. However, if we have merit that really their only request is
that can you please make it 60 instead of 20 and can you please have it in writing that those people going in those properties know that that that they exist. I think it's a fair compromise. I think it's something we should look at and seriously consider. Um there are a
few other things too. Um, one thing that there is a few citizens that live like on the water and one thing that I've had a few of them reach out to me and they are very pro Marine Island as well. They just want to know like with that boat ramp there,
with the stack boat ramp, they're kind of worried about noise that's going to happen that could be affecting them uh, living so close. And really, I guess just to make the developers aware of that, if we could somehow make sure that they're, you know, that's looked into.
I'm sure that it has, but I just wanted to make that voice that publicly. And then the other things, two things that really stuck out to me is that I know that we've talked about this in other areas in the past, and that's parking. So, some of the things that they've asked for in parking, I think it's fair
of them to ask, but I think I just want to kind of bring it to the table that we can talk about. One of the things is parking for a hotel. It's currently as the overlay would have it now would be one spot or half a spot per staff and
one spot for every two rooms. I think that if we're going I think if we're going to do one spot per two rooms that we should probably have one spot per staff. I think asking for a half spot for staff and one spot for two rooms is
a bit of a is a hard ask because that's virtually guaranteeing there's not going to be enough parking. I understand that some people are going to be riding their bikes there, walking there, whatever, but if it's a hotel, they probably brought a car cuz
it's not a hotel that's by airport. So, it's not like they're Ubering to the hotel and then Ubering to the airport. Um, the other one is I don't want first of all also I don't want to claim to be an expert in parking and it's just something that came up to that I kind of noticed as I was reading it. And the
other thing is that the way that the restaurants are set up which I'm very excited for, but this the restaurants currently have one spot per 250 ft of gross flooring. Panama City
has one spot for every 75 and they have parking issues. So, um it's not apples to apples in that situation, but it's just something I wanted to bring to the table and talk about. Those are really my main things. Really, the number one
priority for me though is I want to make sure that Merrick Industries is happy and those citizens that we're talking about the sound are happy because they're probably the most directly affected. All right. So, since we're there, we're going to come to Commissioner Perno in
one moment. Let's see if we can get the questions answered. Any thoughts on the parking? You have any thoughts about the parking? Is that a concern for anyone? I mean, it's a concern, but I'm sure they have answers to it. I'd like to
hear what their answers are. I'll address um the American industries and Marina will hi her experience. Hello. Um in terms of parking, you know, it's always, you know, it's always a tricky one because based on based on well, first
it's very contextualized, right? And based on the people we work with, we've been told we're never going to need more parking than we have nowadays with with changes coming in terms of robo taxis, changes coming with um even in car
technology. It's going to change and this the environment is going to change. So what I would encourage you, we we also don't want well on one hand if he had a parking problem, you'd know he'd be successful, right? So the community seaside for example has a tremendous parking problem and it's it it is so bad that or good whichever way you want to
look at it that people locals don't even want to go. Um, keep in mind that you would rather set the parking standards a little lower and then let the the um hotel operators who come in ask for more
because he's going to get restaurant operators, he's going to get uh hotel operators and they are going to if they feel they need more, they will ask for more. But to set it arbitrarily too high, yes, some some places have it as high as one per 10 spaces. I don't know many communities that have it one for
75. It feels that feels really really high. Um four per thousand is probably generally what you see. Um in most places it can go as high as six for restaurants. 10 we we we have found is just excessive. There'll be a lot of
people who live there who go eat there who won't need to park who won't need a parking space. But for the people who come in from out of town or from out of Marina Island, they will need a place to park. Um but they'll come in as groups, right? there's not one person coming in per um per car typically, you know,
you've got a multiple people. So, um I would encourage you to not hit too hard on parking because more impervious cover and it makes everything more expensive. We we've tried to rightsize
it as best we can knowing that it is a bit of a guessing game, too. That would be my answer. I add a couple comments to what Marina um said. First of all, we have we have over 5,000 parking spaces with the
street parking. So, there's plenty of parking we can spread out into. So, if a an operator or something needs more parking for their hotel or whatever, they can they can get it. And for restaurants and things like that, I think a lot of the restaurants because now most people go across the bridge to
to Pier Park or to Panama City or to Panama Panama City Beach uh to to eat. Um I think the fact that we've got this beautiful rails to trails that um you know the city built um and it's we're
going to build the last mile of it so to speak and it's going to connect into our trail system and people will be able to come in that way. also the boat from the marina. So that's that's also taking traffic and we we anticipate there'll be a lot of golf carts. We're going to have special golf cart parking, electric
bikes, uh bicycles, etc. So um I I think that if we can maintain this, we we certainly are committed to to making sure that people u can find a parking space. We have one large parking structure that's an overflow um on the
site and um and I think you know we've because the project will be phased over many years I think that um that will also write itself um as Marina was saying in in regards to
um American Industries I couldn't agree with you more I think there's a 150 people or something like that that that work over there we certainly welcome them to come and walk over and have lunch. Um but uh I you know we want to be good
good stewards. We are not going to put any house 20 ft. The the lots that you see there are actually lots. The houses will all have all of those houses towards the water are going to be pretty high-end houses. Um well I mean they're
bigger houses I should say. So those houses will have walls around them as well. So that'll dampen sound. And what we're using is the um mixed use to industrial uh what's already in the ULDC code of Linhaven. So we're not changing
anything else. Um changing it to to D is a way that you could do it and I appreciate the commissioner's uh uh comment on that. Uh but I think it's unfair also to to to make a special exception uh for
Marina Island which is going to bring a lot of good to the community um tens of millions of dollars in new revenue to the community which they can use to build parks or schools or whatever. We've also committed to building a uh children's museum over there uh tech uh
technology center. We've talked to city staff about it. Um we haven't publicly announced it yet. I guess that's what I'm doing right now. But uh uh we we want to we want to give back to the community, but we also have to, you know, it's a project. We want to make money on the project obviously. Um
uh but money is not the you know, not our only driver on on this. We want to build it something great, you know. So, um, if we could, you know, I would ask Merrick if we could maybe, um, refine
that a little bit and say anything that is within, um, that distance, which we have right now in the mixed use that we would have some kind of secondary uh, sound delineation uh, device, which
trees and and shrubs and a burm take about 20 dB out of it, I You said that there's about 75 dB, Joe, didn't you? Uh, okay. So, the trees take about 20 dB out of that. A wall will take another 20
dB out of that. So, a W, just to give you a quiet washing dishwasher is 42 dB. So, that's like the most quiet dishwasher on the market. So, if you get an idea of what that equates to, um, that's what I would ask. But we'll
we'll we'll acquies to the city's uh requirements on that. I mean, within reason, obviously. And for the questions on the parking, well, I think um as they were talking about the parking, I think good points are made. And one thing I didn't
consider and now I'm thinking about it is we're already going to have to worry about traffic on 14th Street and other areas in the city. So if we incentivize not using cars, that means you will have
less traffic on those streets, and I think that might be a good thing. Um, and if Marina Island is as good as we all think it's going to be, people will be willing to uh ride their bikes and their golf carts and stuff. So, as far as the uh the other thing, um also want to say
don't forget about the uh the request for for um notifying in writing to the uh the properties that A but they requested that and um if a sound wall will meet what Merrick is happy
with, then sure. I just want to make sure that Merrick's happy. Like I said, I want Marine Island there, but I just want to make sure we can the best way we can make everyone happy. Of course. And of course, it's not good for us to have uh uh uh clients that are buying houses
on the water. Um especially, you know, in that particular area, it's really good, you know, beautiful views and so forth. You see the marina, you see the bay. Um it's not going to not going to work for us if there's a problem. So, we're going to certainly uh do it. And
the houses are most of the houses are set forward. That's one of the things we did when we changed the setbacks on that which is one of the things we're allowed to change. Um the houses are set forward. So really it's out it's only outdoor space that's back there that sort of courtyard area and it's
surrounded by an 8 foot wall. So all right. Any other questions for parking? Did you have any Commissioner Ward? All right. Thank you. Uh Commissioner Pero. Thank you, Mayor. Um, you know, Commissioner Poples summed up my feelings as far
as the go between Merrick and and the uh Marine Island. I do feel like Marine Island is going to be a great thing, but but I do feel like um Merrick was there 40 years before and if if we could just come to an agreement, I know this this
is this says 60 ft, but wasn't weren't I was talking to city manager. Wasn't there something in the in in in one of the codes before that had it bigger? Was before that had it bigger? Had the the the setback. Well,
um with with um mixed use up against industrial, it's it's 20 foot setback, right? But when residential goes up against industrial, the setbacks more.
Correct. The way our code is written is you look at the land use. So it's the land use and then you look at the either the type of street that runs by it or you look at the adjacent properties land use. So what you're looking at is an industrial land use against a mixeduse
land use. A mixed use allows for commercial or residential, but the code reads that where there's a mix, you use the most intense use, which which would be the commercial anyway. But we have to look at the land use against the land
use. So we're looking at we're not looking at low density residential. We're looking at mixed juice against industrial, which is what gives you and and the choices are so the map has residential right there. It's residential, but the land use is
mixed use. The land use is what we have to look at. And the land use is mixed use, even though there's some residential in there. Mixed use allows for both. But the way that the ULDC reads is you look at the adjacent land
uses. And for uh mixed use against industrial, it's a sea buffer that's required. The narrowest is a 20 foot wide. The widest is a 30 foot wide, but if you go for the wider buffer, it requires less plants per 100 linear
feet. If you go for the 20 foot wide one, it requires more plantings which absorb the noise. So, more plantings per 100 linear feet. I don't know if that makes sense. Yeah, I I remember reading that in the ULDC. Sorry, I mean to cut you off. Oh,
go ahead. Um, do we get the choice of which one gets chosen or they get the or does the developer get the choice of which one gets used? They can choose. Yeah. Usually the one with the the most plants is the most expensive and so, you know,
often times, well, not often times, but sometimes if they've got a lot of space, they go for the wider one because they don't want to pay for all those trees and plants. Um, but often times, as you know, with the smaller parcels that we're used to looking at, um, they want
to go for the narrower one because they don't have the space for the bigger one. I remember in times past when Marine Allen's come to the commission, we we saw a burm, didn't we, we have a a map
with a burm on it at one time? Uh we I we've had various maps and conceptual plans come to the city, but none of them were ever approved. Um I think you said you were going to put Burm. You going to put BM I just I just hope that that we can
have, you know, a a good a good outcome with this between Merrick and y'all. Of course, we want it we want the same outcome. Um, how do how do we know going forward that that there there's going to be a a peaceful transition between both?
I mean, I really want to I mean, whatever we approved today, you can come back and just do something that's not, you know, not going to make them happy as as a neighbor. Well, I think we actually we we can't because you guys have two more bites of the apple, so to
speak, uh with the with the DO and then also with the permitting. Okay. The city attorney pointed out. So, if our our uh when we present the DO, you'll see um footprints of buildings and things like that. You'll see I think that we won't
the buildings will not be within within 60 ft of that wall. Um but or of the the property line. Um one of the things that why we're we're standing so hard on this I guess is there's a large park which is a community park and we we kind of
anticipate doing events and free concerts Shakespeare in the park. We're putting in a big uh screen thing that pops out of the ground and you know that you can watch movies in the park and and stuff like that. That's for old Lin Haven. So, not just people there. There's no gated communities in the in
the whole thing. I mean, we've been really adamant about pushing the whole inclusive inclusive inclusive thing, which we'll see tonight in the presentation. But um if we move that 60 ft, we we need those properties uh from a financial standpoint, we need those
properties over there on that side because they're such beautiful properties and it's it's going to be an amazing view. Those are probably some of the best units in the whole development. So obviously from that perspective, we also want them to be quiet and peaceful and and and not have, you know, that
sort of thing going on. So we'll make sure that it's not there's there's not a sound issue there. We have an 800 foot shared uh border roughly 800 feet shared border with Merik and um I think we can make it make it work. If there's an
additional language we want to put in there or something like that, we'll certainly consider anything like that. We want it to be good for them and good for us. As as I said before, we want their 150 people to come every day and and enjoy uh uh some of the restaurants
and things in Marina Island. We also don't want to cut down that big grain because that's what's going to end up happening is we're going to end up chopping off another 40 ft out of that grain, which doesn't sound like a lot, but I think now we're like 140 ft deep
on that that I know 40 ft is a lot. I know 20 ft's not much, but 40 ft's kind of a start. I mean, we got into it about the 40ft setback from the CRA overlay on on on a piece of property not too long ago. So, and and and you know, when you
go 40 feet from the back of someone's property, there's not and we wanted to put parking lot in the back and then there there's not much for there's not not much left once you have a building and stuff. And the g I guess the gentleman it was a smaller piece of property and the gentleman said, you know, how can I sell this piece of
property to anybody when you got me coming 40 ft off the back and we we made it we made an adjustment at that time. So, I mean everything's, you know, you know, per per case. And in this particular case, I mean, I think we all
agree. We want we want everybody to be happy. So, as long as we keep singing that tune and and you guys can be, you know, good neighbors, I'm I'm all for it. My I I'll switch gears now to where um u the entrance the the bridge coming
in like around 10th Street. um where um and I saw the wording where you uh it was in the answers to the email questions that you all were going to dig it out and it was going to have a better flow of water and whatnot. That's right.
Also a canal that runs there and you guys have the land coming off of the you know on on on the other on the east side of the bridge, right? And I know you have part of the overlays there as well. Are you going to be opening up that
canal to the bay? So, the canal today is open to the bay. I mean, you can traverse part of it. The problem with the canal is that the the bridges that were installed over there are very limiting. The Sally May Bridge, you can get under the the the one between the parking lot and the building. Uh, you
can get under that or at least we can with one of Chris's boats. Um, hero. Yeah. And uh but once you get to the next bridge, it's it it it stopped. I think one time we were able to get one um uh like a pontoon or something like
that under there with everything stripped down on top of it, but it's not Yeah, it wouldn't be something you could get more than a kayak or something like that through. But we it does need to be cleaned out. Um we'll work with the city on that uh to get it cleaned up because
it's full of debris from uh Hurricane Michael still. So um but we will the first part of that um which will be to the bridge at um at Arthur Drive um that
that bridge to the edge. We're going to we'll dredge that in our in our application for the um marina. We have to dredge that and um we're going to stiffen that wall over there. I don't know what that that wall will be, but
it'll be some type of seaw wall against our side of that bridge. And we can talk to the city about the other side, too, to I think that's a picturesque little area there. Be a nice little walk path. the city owns the property on the on directly uh opposite that. Uh there's a
service easement over there, but uh maybe there's something we can do together on that. Um but when they when they dredge the canal because they need to dredge the canal for flushing uh and also for the flow through the causeway. Um that's going to open it up for
everybody in the south part of the um there. They'll be able to get I think there's going to be 17 ft clearance. uh if I'm not mistaken, it could be that there was 15 ft between 15 and 17 ft clearance over there under that bridge. So, anybody that has a boat will be able to put, you know,
a a dock over there and put a boat on it. And as you're doing the the maritime construction and everything that you're you're I I also read that you're you're abiding with the state regulations and D and all that. Oh, yeah. We we have to uh
the grass there's a you know you a lot of boat traffic means you know there's there's potential to destroy a lot of seaggrass over there and stuff like that. So it's it's a there's a lot there's a lot to it. I know you're doing it and working with our I I'm on the
policy board of the esttoary program and I know I know they've they I think you've actually reached out and spoke with some of them. So, I'm I'm I'm of the mindset that, you know, I I think it's going to be great. And the more the more waterway you can open up and make
and and make it it'll it'll bring things back, so to speak, because those canals were traversible before. And uh I know there's residents that'd like to see that happen again. So we we own two parcels commissioner um bottomland in
that south uh um and they're they're actually really really poor seaggrasses on it today. So I think we we had um Amy Doug Douglas from uh she was with um uh West Florida um get the name of it's
like a Greek name or something like that. the the the um engineering with the environmental engineering company, they went out and they swam that whole thing and they mapped all the seaggrasses out there and and they're in pretty bad bad shape. But when we open it up, it's going to cause a lot of um
positive impact on on the seaggrass on the wildlife and so forth that you know the the marine life that's in there as well. So, and you'll be building the my my question was about the rails, but you already mentioned that and you'll be you'll be finishing the rails accordingly. That's right. Everything
will match up with what we have. That's right. And it'll connect over the bridge. We'll probably do some, you know, um trail head near the the entrance of Marina Island and then that'll continue on to our trail system in in the marine. Your your roadway in off the railroad easement will be will
that go all the way to 390? So that will go all the way to 390. Yes. All right. Commissioner Ward. So, this is uh a lot different for us cuz normally uh I think we cringe when we get development orders sometimes and we're like we don't like it either just
as much as you the residents and way more than that, you know, it's very restrictive. This one's different where we actually have options and um we can uh decide if we want to agree to something or not. So, I'm also a proponent of the Marina Island. I think
um it can bring a lot of it's going to have an impact in the area. um I think is going to have a lot of great positive impact, but it's I think it's up to us to look at the areas that bring negative impact and try to um decrease those as much as possible. Um
so with all that being said, my as you guys know, my big concern is the industrial park. Um you guys heard me talk about it, I don't know how many times. We we as a city provide very little city services when it comes to
industrial park which is why it brings in the most net revenue. And uh I guess that's my my main concern is the industrial park. I know right now with this overlay there's just the one part um that's going in there and I know you guys have property that's in there. Um
my concern is what are you going to do with the rest of the property? um once that comes up and I don't even know if you can answer that question or even if I can answer that question you can you elaborate on that commissioner so we have four businesses in the industrial park sir I'm worried about if we
encroach on them too much that eventually those businesses would go away and then we lose them for good. So that's my worry with developing an industrial park is what are we doing so that we won't have an impact on the
industrial businesses in there. And I like I said, I know the the map that I've seen so far is just one strip that you guys are looking at doing multif family housing, but I know there's other areas you guys have land that you own that I'm kind of worried about.
All our land that we own right now is on the um overlay in that area. That's not to say that we're we won't acquire another piece of property. If somebody comes to us and says they, you know, they want to sell or something, we we would consider it. But right now, we're
not really even that's not in our radar. Um I mean, this is a big lift what we have today. And um it's it's, you know, it's not a development that needs an extra parcel to make it right. I mean, it's good as is. um the
the little parcel that's in between there. Um we have a number of ideas of what to do on it. We sort of put some buildings on it as a placeholder, but it's not really been fully thought through right now. We're really focused on phase one and phase two. Those would
be um as on the you know, I would say um the the do that we'll present will be predominantly like what's being presented to the city today. Um, pretty much where the old field depot is, is the main area. That's the main area. Yeah. And then we own 45 acres on the
west end, which is indicated on the on the map there. Yeah. That that's my concern is the industrial part. We're we're not interested in seeing the industrial park go. It's light industry. It's great. It's people coming out there. We'd love to see 1,800 people come back to the coal center, you know,
um, you know, in the in the high season. I mean, that's great for our business because it, you know, we would set up a shuttle and go over there and pick people up at lunch and take them to the, you know, the downtown of uh of Marina Island. Um, but yeah, it's our intention
to push anybody out at all. Okay. Um, no, in fact, I think it works for us well. I mean, we have a nice buffer between the Arthur drive with Arthur Drive, everything there. We've got a buffer built in that's over I think it's over 60 feet. Um, you know, I haven't
scaled it or anything, but it looks more than 60 feet. There's three or four rows of trees there. So, I think it'll be uh it'll add class to the industrial park as well. Um, we happen to be the declarant of the industrial park when we
bought the land from the airport authority. Um, but our our interest is is really status quo on that. Okay. Um, and I know we talked about the rails of trails. The way I understand it is you're going to have the rails of trails
from 390 to the old fuel depot, but there's also going to be a road next to it. Yes. And so, who's going to be doing that road? Is that going to be We'll build the road and the rails to trails. Okay. Awesome. We we'll ask the city if there's opportunity for FDOT to pitch
in, you know, on the on the rails, the trails, but uh we'll ask your support to to, you know, uh present the the the deal to FDOT. FDOT has a lot of um excess cash in their uh landscaping budget. So, we thought maybe we could do
a really nice linear park or something moving up there. So, it gives it a nice trail head to, you know, somebody starts on 231 um and they're coming in, it gives them a nice little uh oasis they can come to. So, and um going back to
the noise barrier, do you guys have like an illustration or something to show what you plan on installing there for a noise barrier uh for the road? You mean between Merrick and uh Oh, I I do not have that, but I will provide one for the city. Um, yeah, generally they're
they're BMS with plantings on top and and front. So you you've got full coverage there. We we want to cover it anyway from it. You say a wall, you don't actually mean a wall. You mean So So each of the properties themselves have a wall that goes around the perimeter of the property. I don't I
don't know if you've been out to Rosemary or Alice or whatever. They're called Courtyard Homes. you'll you'll see this evening um at 5:30 when we when Marina does the presentation some of those houses. So essent essentially it's the house and then from the house there's a there's a wall that goes
around and gives you privacy in your backyard because the lots are not big, you know. Um so so it gives you privacy. You can have a pool back there and and do whatever. And they're 8ft walls, concrete walls. So Okay. And then the last thing I have is from my
understanding there's going to be one main road that goes to Marina Island called Marina Island Boulevard. That's going to be city road that we have to maintain. But all the other roads that kind of go off of that is that going to be maintained by you and the HOA. And so
the road we build in uh all the roads in the property we're we're we're building we're paying for. Um however uh if the city wants to take over those roads after we s uh uh stabilize the development, we can offer them to the
city to take over. If if it doesn't meet the city's um uh plan then or maintenance doesn't want it or or you know um it doesn't work for the city then you don't have to accept them and then it's our responsibility with the
HOA. Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you. All right, Commissioner Vanderg. First of all, I'd like to say I'm very excited about the de the development. Uh I I too have had lots of communication over this topic from the
citizens. I bet I've had 25 at least 25 comments, all positive, most positive. it's been on one or two. Um their main concern, even though they've been positive, is that with the construction and the development and the
improvements that um it's a positive impact on the bayou and the canals. And so I think they just need some reassurance that, you know, you're going to go in there and do great things for that bayou. Um, a lot of concern there
from the neighbors around. Um, as for me, uh, I'm stuck on the buffer and Merrick's been here a long time and we need to show that, um, we
support the industrial complex, that we support the people that um, want to come there, go there and uh, develop their business. And so, uh, I
might be the minority here. I've been the minority before. Oh, I am the minority here. Or no, I'm the only female. No. Um, I, um, I am in favor of the 60oot buffer.
And the reason for that is I believe in what's in black and white, what's on paper. And, uh, not that I'm doubting anybody's word. uh is just I've learned in my old age that what's on print is
what goes. So that's I'm in favor of the six foot buffer. Right. Are there any additional questions from the commission? [Music] Amy, is there anything that would legally prevent a 60 foot buffer based
on the UDL the land development code as we have it now? So, not legally. You are setting a new policy here. So, if it is your pleasure to set a 60oot buffer, you may do so. The developer has a vision that keeps that buffer at 20. But if it
is the city's pleasure to set a 60-oot buffer now, you may. The other alternative um is to keep it at 20 or something less than 60 and then when it you get to the development order phase and you see what's actually on the ground and its proximity to an existing
industrial use is to approve with a condition that the buffer be expanded. That's loosey goosey. It's in the future. You don't know who who will be sitting up here when that's when that happens. But it is a possibility for the future. Um for right now what you can do, yes, you can do that 60 foot if you
if you'd like. Just a quick question. So, could we just to be on the safe side set a 60 ft buffer and then later on if we feel comfortable with the barrier or whatever they want change the overlay to say,
hey, 40 or 30 or something, you know. I see again two possible paths. Yes, you can set the 60 foot here and then in the future come back and amend it. This is ultimately your policy. So yes, you can come and amend it if it's too harsh or it's restricting development. Alternative, he the developer can ask
for variance when he submits his development order application to get to a lesser buffer. All right. Thank you. All right. At this time, we'll open the floor for uh questions from the um audience. Uh we'll have uh three minutes
for that. We'll start just rowby row. So uh row number one looks good. All right. Uh, second row. All right, Mrs. Gray. Good afternoon. Um, just two things that I'm mainly concerned about. One is the road leading in. So, when I looked at
the GIS map and everything, there's portions that road that they're intending to build leading into the uh development crosses, I think, four or five current residential streets where it would cross there. And I would be
concerned about what those intersections are going to be like. Are they going to be four-way stops, two-way stops? Are any of them going to be lighted? Um, what is the walking like? Obviously, I know the rails to trails is going to go on there. That's not going to be on both sides. It's going to be on one side or
the other. How's that going to interact with the existing trail structure on the other side of 390? I know we have interesting crossings by uh Moit School Road where you got kind of got to divert and come back. So, are we looking at doing something like that there where
they're going to have to go down to Virginia and then come back to be be able to utilize it? Um, also with the road, is the city going to have to pay for any of that road to be built? That's a question I have. And then also, is that road going to be the first thing
built to ensure that all the construction traffic is using it? Uh, what I don't want to see, and I think a lot of people that live on Northshore in Maryland and uh potentially even 12th would agree with this, is they don't want to see all that construction traffic going through the neighborhoods.
So, if they built that boulevard in first, could they legally rest could we legally restrict it to only their construction traffic using it um during the construction phase and keep the other public off of it? Like could it be a private use road only during the
construction phase? Um then also in regard to like long-term maintenance and sustainability of their parks and things like that, um is that all going to be stuff like all these beautiful parks and stuff that they're going to build? Are they going to have the responsibility to maintain those to a set level of
standard forever or are they going to become dilapitated at some point if they're no longer profitable? I mean, obviously, I know they want to everyone wants to put up a real nice community, but all across America, you can see former communities that everyone wanted
to be nice and they're no longer nice. So, is there some kind of expectation to maintain those amenities like that for the community? [Music] Um and then the just I guess just general traffic impact concerns like the
the traffic studies is that just traffic study based on traffic today anticipated after it's built and then also what's the impact again for construction traffic? So those are all questions I'd love to hear answers to. Thank you. Thanks for uh thanks for your questions.
Those are great questions. Um, so I'll start with the construction traffic and the road. Um, there's based on where phase one is located. Um, coming in the 10th street
entrance. Uh, which I think from is that Kentucky? The la the last street is Kentucky. Is that right? The one opposite the water. Carolas. Thank you. Um, so from Carolina to the front gate,
I think we actually own that piece of 10th Street um there and that's how we're going to bring the road in and sort of tie everything together. Um, we will of course have construction traffic during the construction of that
road. So, um, that we had planned I mean we'll work with city staff to to minimize that traffic, but it it won't be coming in through the neighborhood. um to the south of the project. It'll be coming in if if anything, it would come in off of 390 in
Tennessee, you know, which is a pretty um we own part of that property there, that first block, I guess, or the second block of that. Um and then when we bring in the road, our it is our desire to bring that road
in early. Uh you asked about the width of the rails to trails. It'll be the same as the width of the rest of the rails to trails. Uh we'll probably have some additional features on that. More like a linear park for that last uh
mile. It's 65 miles, but that last section. Um and uh the traffic engineers and the and the civil engineers will will map out to FDOT standards whatever that road is going in there. Uh the
city's already given us permission I think with um the postclosing agreement to build the road and then FDOT's already given us permission um the initial permission but we don't
have a drawing that's approved. So, we're sort of where we'll be tonight after the the God willing the um Marine Island overlay district is approved. We still have to present a development order to the city and we'll have a chance to kind of walk through all those
details because right now it's there, you know, it's it's too difficult to try to anticipate all the little details for all those intersections and so forth. But the city will have an opportunity, the commission will have an opportunity, the community will have an opportunity to comment on that.
All right. Thank you. Did I answer everything? Yeah. So, so as I said, it's one of the first things that we're we're we're putting in, but again, there's construction traffic just to build the road. So, yeah. thought you might be interested in this.
So, um, this looked at phase one and it also looked at full buildout. This being the the traffic study. We told them the methodology. We told them the intersections that we needed and basically it was like, okay, traffic
comes this way, what if it goes this way, this way, and then I mean, they looked at lots of different segments. um their findings. So they've got findings for phase one and then findings for the full buildout. So um the that
what they found here and like I said you can ask more later. The study roadway segments and intersections uh project to operate adequately at phase one buildout. The following roadway segments are projected to be adversely impacted
at full buildout. So these are the ones that full buildout. So there will be like you know there's going to be development orders come to us. Every time they bring a development order they're going to have to bring an impact study for that phase or that part that development order to accompany it
because things are going to change not just with what they're putting on but the background traffic that's on the road is going to change. So the um segments that will be adversely impacted at full buildout are Northshore Road
from uh State Road 390 to Goosebay Road and again at full buildout 77 and West 9th Street, 77 and West 10th Street, 77 and West 12th Street. The recommendations are Marina Island
Boulevard is recommended to be constructed as a divided two-lane facility with right turn lanes. The intersection of Marina Island Boulevard and Tennessee Avenue is recommended to be constructed as a roundabout or with
alternative traffic control. The intersection of Marina Island Boulevard and State Road 390 is recommended to be signalized or alternative traffic control. No turn lanes are warranted at phase one
full access on half drive. Access analysis for the future phases should be conducted within their own traffic studies as part of individual site plan efforts. So it is going to be monitored as it goes along closely monitored. I mean this is like I said
this here but the um expert is here um at the at the meeting so that you can ask him. Thank you. Anyone else in that row? Right. Mr. Walker's row 706 Michigan Avenue. In the future,
would there be any thought to having a second street leaving the fuel depot via over the marsh to Arthur Drive? I would like to know if in fact that might be happening in the
future. That's a concern. Um in the traffic study there is some um uh between Arthur Drive and Sally May uh some rec configuration there to make it more efficient. There's nothing that would um uh we have no intention to go
across any marshes. Yes, sir. Um, we're dealing only with the uh changes to what does not go and affect us, really will affect us. Um, you're going to get the development orders and everything like that. What you're doing
here is you're going to give permission to do what happens and happened in the past. You're going to put yourself in a box. going to pass this stuff and you're going to regret it later when you get the development orders because they're going to tell you they've done
everything they have to do city and the city state. So understand this when you get down there and this is going to be done in a 30-year program. They don't tell you what's going to be done in each
phase. What they do tell you is at the bottom of the plan they give you oh about 25 pages of he said she said what the city has to do and what they have to do. If anybody goofs
up be doing this going to fail. We've done this before. This master plan is a regurgitated plan many years ago before shut down. Couldn't do
it. Now these plans are going to be changing usage of the land. My words, it's been done before. The 950 acres is a good example of it. CRA is a good example of that.
of the pending developments are line just like this. Great plans were put in there. Developments were put in. Lawyers came down. They settled it. They even came up with a universal plan for the 950
acres. DND doesn't work. RA has its overlays. They don't work. You know why they don't work? Because they pass them. They do the corrections and then the citizens have to pay with their tax
money. Most of them don't work. 950 acres 20-year plan. DND hasn't worked. That's an overlay. Now you're faced with same thing here.
Again, I'm not against development. We're not against that. The United States government gave up that property and sold it to you. Sold it to you. You owned
it. 20 minutes. The original plan is on that wall there. 1911. With that went every law, every ordinance that went for the city of Linhaven to build that
government owned it for 50, 60, 70 years. Wasn't your property was United States property and they sold it to you and you sold it to Green Island LLC. This time we'll let Mr. Bale
respond. Thank you for your comments. Um so we do have in the document that we presented to you a phase plan. Um, of course, just to remind the commission cuz many commissioners uh I
don't think uh was anybody here uh when in 2017 when we took it down when the um the land had to be transferred to the city and then to uh Marina Island uh and
it was uh I think concealed a sealed bid uh process. So, um, that was all done based on the federal requirement. Um, and then we obviously we compensated the city for the even the transaction in between based on the
terms of our our takeown agreement. Um, I'll just stress uh because I don't know where to start on the on the um to respond, but I'll just stress that we're not here to try to exploit. We we want
to make a profit obviously, but we we're we're vision driven. Um the plan is a new plan. Uh and u I think it's going to be great for the city. I think everybody here in in two years, 5 years, 10 years is going to say, "Wow, we had the vision
to to to do this project." And uh and that's a you know it's a big lift but um I think everyone um including our neighbors in the industrial park including our neighbors in the south uh Linhaven Bayou area I think everybody
will be happy with what what we did. Anyone else from that row? All right. Next [Music] row. No, the next row. No, next
row. I'm one of the residents on the south bio. Moved there in ' 89. Been there 35 years. left home in the country to come down to live on that bio because I love to fish.
Over the years, I've seen I used to go out the canal years ago when I first moved there. I floundered. I fished North Bay. I've watched the bio fill in over the years to where it's
useless. the wildlife, the fish, the grass is destroyed. A lot of that's because of the development of Walmart, Bowwin Plaza, the different things that we do. And I understand, you
know, that progress is inevitable. And when you have progress, you want to make sure that the people that want to do things do what they say they're going to do. I'm interested in the bow and the wildlife and this and
that. You know, I want to see it restored. I don't know how much the uh this corporation's their plans are for the bow. Are they going to dredge right at their bridge and maybe to the mouth of the bow? What about the rest of the bio
up to to uh 14th Street? You know, is all that going to continue to be filled in? That's the answer I have. I mean, that's a question I have. Is are they going to be stewards of the bio from now on or is the city going to take it?
Who's going to dredge it in the future? You know, it needs something needs to be done because like I say, I I can show you pictures. I've been involved in this a long time. And I can show you pictures of the bow where it's filled in. And
now the the the actual sand has got has has filled in all the way to the end of my seaw wall. Never was like that before. And pretty soon, I told my wife here a while back, I said, "You know, if they don't do something about this
bio, it'll be a fine place to build houses because it'll be filled in." And that's that's the truth of the matter. You know, I see wood ducks. I watch the wood ducks every day. They go up in that that creek across 14th Street
and everything. I'm interested in and you know, I hate hypocrisy. I've heard hypocrisy all my life about this thing, you know. We're interested in the environment really. Killing in a bow, killing the grass, killing the fire, uh killing the
fish, killing this and that. You know, I'm for this project. Don't get me wrong. I'm for this project. I just want them to do what they say they're going to do about the bow and do it right. And, you know, that's that's what I want because and that's my interest.
You know, I appreciate y'all's time. Thank you. on Barl. I've met you before. Thank you for your question. Um, so that's I wish he was up here just uh giving my uh my spiel here for uh for
the for the city and the what we need to do the bayou because what's happening is all of Linhaven's um uh rainwater comes down and right next to our property on the south side cuz we have 300 feet on the bayou as
well. Uh well, we have much more than that, but but we have 300 feet on the same side that he's on. All that dirt and debris and road matter and everything gets flushed right into that that that bayou and it's just grown out. Even since we've owned it, in
the 10 years that we've owned it, it's probably grown out 30 ft. And um you know, that doesn't have any place to go because it doesn't flush. There's four pipes that are supposed to flush that four 3-ft diameter pipes that were put
in the 1940s and it doesn't uh actually might have been in the 1930s even when they were building the the U fuel depot. They're completely full of barnacles. There's no flushing at all that goes through there. So, when we make the cut,
it's going to actually and if you look at it on a map, it actually straight across from that. So, it's going to allow that when the rainwater comes, it's going to allow it to come in and push out some of that material. Now, I I I'm certain that the the material that's there now would would take decades to to
naturally erode. It probably needs to be um removed uh with dredging, could be removed uh I we have to talk to FDA DP, but um could be removed with mechanical equipment from the shore.
Uh but anyway, there there's a lot of work that needs to be done there. We want that value to be back pristine because it is we I mean we own property to the to the east to the north to the west of that and um great it's a
greatlook, you know, bayou. It's just doesn't flush. So building that bridge is really key. Really key. And obviously it doesn't help us too much to build that bridge. Um, we're building that bridge as a commitment to the city that we made early on in this process. It's,
I think, close to $6 million to build the bridge and dredge all that out over there. We're making that commitment to the city to to do that and fix that problem. And that's going to elevate all the the not only the property values, but also the just the quality of the properties. Like the gentleman just uh
mentioned, you know, that his he now doesn't have a seaw wall. He's got a a retaining wall. So, um yeah, I I I hope we're able to do that. Uh um and and solve that help the city to
solve that problem. Yes, sir. Hey, uh I'm super excited about this project. Uh I've been working on the bayou back from when I did a uh study for the bay environmental study team to look at the uh title exchange rates in the bayou. Uh since then I bought a
property on the obstructed side of the bayou uh and I've been working with the friends of Linhaven Bayou for years to try to get uh some sort of bridge or something in place uh to to do this. Uh so so I'm really excited about it. I've also observed uh storm water problems when you know not just hurricanes but
flood events where in my backyard the bayou is probably six or seven feet deep deeper than normal. Uh and you know that's backing up and causing flooding all over the city, right? And uh and by having a bridge and not not having to go down that canal that's a mile long roughly and like inches deep
uh that storm water problem will kind of be mitigated by this. in addition to the the environmental quality of the value. So I'm I'm really looking forward to that. Uh so my question I guess in this is what phase of the project uh is the bridge uh and it you know is it early or
is it later in the development? Thank you for your question. Um so as I mentioned before that we are putting in the road weigh in early in the development and that process will be the the dred the cut and dredging operation
for that uh which supports not only the roadway in but it also supports the marina. Uh so we will um submit those development orders as once we get through here. We're about
60% on the uh engineering plans for the marina portion. We we have not started our um development order for the phase one and phase two which we hope to present as soon as we get through this process. Um maybe two to three months
after. So depending on the city's schedule, of course. All right. Thank you. Just to be clear, that was that was the first phase. Okay. Hey, I'm I'm certainly very excited about this project. I think it'll be a
great thing for the city. But I do have one concern. We're going to shift gears just a little bit here. I'm wondering about since this is an overlay and it changes setback requirements within the the current set the current land use per se if you've got single family and our
setback for single family is 5 foot. This will apply across all the properties in the overlay as I understand it. So, I'm thinking more about the property between Carolina and Tennessee on 10th Street and just to the south that is part of Marina Island, but
not in what I would call Marina Island proper, which is the main part of what they're doing. But this piece between Carolina and Tennessee sits in within some normal residential areas. And if if we go and allow that in the setback or
I'm sorry, not the setback. If we allow that in the overlay, then those setbacks can be reduced to none. And it'll be a different feel for those little part of the town where we already have some residential that's abiding by our current land use codes and setback
requirements. So, it's something to think about. Is that land right there between Carolina and Tennessee just to the south of 10th Street? Do we really want that in the overlay or is that something that you may want to look at later? I don't like to delay things. I
don't want to slow this down at all and I don't know what his phase plan is. But that part of it I'm a little bit concerned about because we've not talked about that at all and that is a an area that they're talking about building in that'll be a little different from the traditional neighborhoods that it's in.
So, we need to be aware of that and cognizant of that. Um, and I don't know if it's something that can be addressed later or if it just has to stay in this overlay plan or not. That small portion that is off island that is low density residential,
it is part of the overlay, but this nothing's changing. The setbacks aren't changing. If you look through the documents, you'll see on the there's like a couple of pages that show what setbacks are, etc. The setbacks are there that are there for LDR are the same as they are now. They're not
changing those. They're not asking to change those. Anyone else on this row? Right. Next [Music] row. Right. Next row. Yes, sir. I too am excited about the project. I
see a lot of good things it's going to do for the community. Uh especially uh my daughter's looking for something exciting new uh in the area. Uh I live on the bayou. A couple my neighbors have already already spoke. Uh the wood ducks are are beautiful uh in the bayou. One
of the things I saw on the on the map that gives me a little bit of concern uh is there's a commercial rack and stack facility, forklifts and boats. There's about 108 parking spots uh around that facility. So, uh community is only used to maybe one boat uh really being a
kayak coming through once a month. Uh having 108 plus boats coming in and out, we're have to be thinking about some protections for the bayou. Um, ideally there's no commercial there surrounded by all the residential. Um, that's something maybe we can we can work
through and talk about, but thinking about quiet hours, uh, mitigations like no wake zones, uh, possibly and who's going to be in enforcing that. And uh like gentlemen was saying, I I actually uh waited out there uh over last summer
and uh my foot uh went down about 6 ines of just muck in the south side there and uh it it is continuing to get worse. Um I actually knew of someone who stook a step in something like that uh and it was deeper than a foot and they went a
little bit further and um they died. They drowned because of suction. Their foot got stuck in it. So you can also think about possibly being a safety hazard as the bio currently is without any of the um but all that said excited about um
what we're what we're doing here. Yeah. Asking there's a 108 boats or 108 parking spaces also. Was there a possibility for a no wake zone or there's a possibility for quiet time and um just in general the safety hazard? I
I think all those are are reasonable um requests that would go with the the ethos of of what Marina Island is. Um the parcel that he's talking about is an industrial parcel. Um there is I'm not
sure how many parking spots off the top of my head, but I think it could be 108. It's surrounding the building for um a dry stack, low-rise to rice track automated um dry stack. Uh which are very quiet operation. Um sounds a little bit like a Tesla
driving by or something like that, I guess. Um, and then there's a small um uh like a retrieval uh area, sort of a parking area for boats. If somebody calls in and gets their boat, then they set it over there and and they take it
out. But I think it's a great idea about the no zone. Um it certainly is not big enough to to go more than about 5 miles an hour in that area. Uh, I think that's something that the core will put in um when we when we do
our um uh application with the core for for the marina and and dredging and and the cut and so forth. So, um I mean it makes perfect sense to
me. Anyone else from that [Music] row? Next row. Any questions? Any other questions from the audience? Any additional questions from the
commission? Right. Way. Thanks for coming out to the workshop. Thank you uh Marina Island for being here today and uh answering all the questions that we had. At this time, we'll conclude our workshop and we'll be back at 5:30 for Part: 2
Calling our meeting to order. This time we'll have invocation by Chaplain Frank Stevens followed by the pledge of allegiance. Heavenly Father, I pray for our city leaders. I thank you for their faithfulness to the responsibilities
they have for leading the city of Lane Haven. We thank you, Lord, for uh our city employees that daily come to work and faithfully serve the citizens of of this uh great city. Bless our
first responders, our police, and our fire departments. Keep them safe. Keep them um out of harm's way. I speak this in Jesus name. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right, this time we have our public commentary. We will start with
um Weaver 306 Alexander This is actually a compliment which I'm sure we're not used to at these meetings. Um, I stepped down from a job where I was a senior because we weren't given the service that we should. So, I reached out and I want you to know now I
do a lawn and clean toilets and I was a OJI and an instructor. reached out to Miss Vicky Gainor about our lack of responsibility of where I work and what was needed in that big ditch in front of the place I work which I can't
say. Long story short, she had me get in touch with Mr. Bobby Baker who then got me in touch with the county. The reason the street does not flood by waterburger is because I reached out to the city, Miss Gainner, who got me in touch with
Mr. Bobby Baker and initially the county did not want to do their part. So again, I reached out to Vicky Gainor who reached out to Mr. Baker and we actually started getting things done. The storm hit and the reason that street
is no longer a river is because we work together instead of being so negative. Then I reached out again this year because they said they come once a year and the gentleman I spoke to, Mr. Zer could not believe that I was so persistent. Well, I said I live in the
city of Linhaven. We need to stop this flooding. So he knew how it meant to me. So they came and cleaned that whole ditch out, took it all out. Now that again, that street should not flood. But I think we spend so much time being
negative and talking bad about people instead of seeing the good stuff. We all fall short. And I need you all to understand that we all fall short. We all can be judged for things that we have done behind the scenes. Let's focus
on the city. Let's keep things going in a good way. Stop all this hate and vote with a conscience. Grace is real. Thank you. Thank you. It's a Freddy
Yman. All right. Um Wesley Lockhart Lock Lockwood. Wesley Lockwood. Yes, sir. You're down for public commentary. Okay. Paul Beagette, public
commentary. Ryan Scray, public commentary. Good evening. Um, so I'm seeing agenda items 11 and 12 in the consent agenda. It just doesn't make sense to me that you guys are going
to go through and do that when agenda 20 item 20 talks about setting a procedure for doing that. I mean, it'd be like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich before you set the instructions for how to make the sandwich.
um it just doesn't make sense. So, I would appreciate it if you guys would pull those two agenda items out and just push them after 20 so you guys could set your procedure and then decide who you're picking. It just makes more sense. Um other than that, I do have a
couple questions. Um, I recently had heard that there's a a temporary or emergency, I'm not sure the right term, but um occupancy order for this building due to some fire suppression stuff that's not done. I was wondering if we could get a timeline on when that'll be
completed. Um, and also, I guess I'm just curious what the uh final plans and timeline are for the old city hall building. Um, I know that there had been plans for that to be like commissioner's offices and something else. So, if you
could share what those plans are and the timelines involved. Um, those two things would be uh pertinent for me to know tonight. Thank you. All right. And Bernie Thompson.
Hello. Bernie Thompson, 8317 Front Beach Road. I I'm I just have a couple simple questions. It should be easy. So, for people who don't know, back in 2017 or so, uh the county passed the voters passed a half cent sales infrastructure
tax to be spent on infrastructure. And uh my understanding is that the county would collect all that money and distribute it to cities. Every city would get a bunch. I think this is the eighth year that cities have received money. I believe Linhaven was
projected to receive in the neighborhood of $20 million for infrastructure from the halfsent sales tax of which we're in the eighth year. So my first question is can you tell me what the amount is that Linhaven has
received from the halfsent sales tax that the countyy's collected? I think it's been 8 years. My guess is the figure is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of $17 million, something like
that. Am I close? Does the city know that number? I was hoping this wouldn't happen because Well, no. We don't respond to your question. You just make your statements. We'll respond on our reports. Yeah. Has the city answered
that question or is it a secret? We'll respond in your report doing our reports. Okay. My second question is when the HSN sales tax passed. Um I believe the city took out
about a $10 million loan, a bond. It should have been paid off from the money received. You all look so miserable. I just want to know how much did the city get and did the city pay the bond back? Do you know, Miss Vandergri? Commissioner, you we'll
respond during our reports, Mr. Thompson. I see. Yeah, we don't I had not. I mean, has the bond been paid off? Yes or no? We respond during the report, sir. Mr. Warick, are you allowed to respond?
It's not about allowance. It's just our procedure. So, we just try not to engage back and forth. That's all. Are those your questions? Yes, would be I'd already been sitting down. Yes or no? Okay. You can stand for your other the other three minutes, but we'll respond in our reports. Extremely gracious, Mr.
Man. So, um I'm going to make a a spoken public record request, please. I would like to get any and all any and all emails Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and today with
one search word. And the search word is Bernie spelled B U R N I E or B E R N I E. I look forward to the simple answers. Commissioner Warick. No answer with that public records request. You
need to actually put that in writing. Thank you. I I do not have to put it in writing. No, it can be spoken. You You learned something today. Put it in writing. Thank you, Miss Jerry Parker. I will not sir. We're done. You can go sit down. You learned something. Thank you. You'll go sit down. Thank you, Miss
Jerry Parker. Terry Parker, Race, First of all, thank you, Commission, for addressing the 18th Street pothole situation that was done exponentially. I appreciate that. Um, I I spoke to Mr. Lightfoot about the situation in my
neighborhood um in Magnolia Meadows off of 17th Street um about digging out our ditches. It's been dug out multiple times. Um we've never had a flooding problem except that flood during July
4th in 2013 I think it was. So, what has happened is I have pavers and because you guys dug out my ditch again, my pavers are sinking where y'all dug out. So, Chris has told me that they're
going to repair that for me hopefully soon and quit digging out Magnolia Meadows. We don't need it done. Lord. So, I've heard several people say that we're being negative. We're not being negative. We're exposing it. We're
exposing the negativity in this city. There's an infection in this city and you're just putting a band-aid on it. You're not fixing it. You're just covering it up. You're just ignoring it.
The other phrase is better together. When we get the infection out, we will be better together. And that needs to that needs to happen. The other the other phrase is move forward. I want us to move forward. You know how we move forward? We get the infection out of
here. There's several people that got favors after Hurricane Michael. present and past. If you ignored the corruption, I'll say it again, and didn't speak
about it, you don't deserve a seat on this commission. Thank you. Right. Thank you. Moving on to the uh mayor's report. I'll keep my report brief due to the uh
length of the agenda. Uh first just want to remind everyone about uh election day on tomorrow. Remember to vote um at your polling location. And second, if this is uh Commissioner Vaniger's last full meeting with us, want to say uh thank you Commissioner Vaniger for your
service to our commission and to our citizens. Um thank you for always giving us a uh a different perspective, sometimes not as gentle, but a different perspective and your insight um has always been much appreciated. So, uh, thank you for what you have done and I
hope you enjoy the time with your green girls and and I know they'll keep you busy. Uh, that is my report. All right. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I would also like to say, Commissioner Vanderg, it's been an honor to serve with you and, um, I hope you enjoy your
retirement, learned a lot from your leadership, and I appreciate you. And um so I guess I have a question for uh the attorney. Can I just answer the public records request now or do I have to go through the official like
sending it in or So the question is a public information request. The request is it for records. So the records request has been made and until he withdraws it. Okay. What if I just say have to comply with it? What if I just say the answer is none? You can
certainly respond. Okay. All right. It doesn't make the records request go away. Okay. Well, all right. Well, okay. It won't take that long. Um, all right. Cool. And so, to further along that, uh, I can
answer a question. It's been paid off. I don't got a problem saying that. Uh, as far as the numbers, may have to do a public road request because I don't want to give false numbers with because they're not in front of me. Uh so as far as
um everything else, I just want to say thanks for everyone coming out. Uh it's been a really busy last two weeks, but in a good in a fantastic way. I've talked to probably more people in the past two weeks than I've talked to
since campaign season. Uh and it's been fantastic. Uh feedback from things ranging from RVs to to Marina Island to uh Board of Adjustment. Thank you to everyone that put their application in for board of adjustment. I reached out to all five applicants and they all
responded. So, thank you for that. Uh you made the decision hard and that's a good thing. Um uh speaking of which I was even before Mr. Gray said anything. I was going to make the request that maybe I feel like with Miranda Barnes, we've already kind of talked about kind
of grandfathering her in on the old way. But I do think that it would be a good idea to move um number 12 just so that we have more time to talk about the five applicants since we didn't have a Friday pre-commission meeting. So with that,
I'd like to Well, what is the uh what agenda number is? All right. If we could, I would like to make a motion to move agenda item number 12 to after number 20. So, let's say 21.
Second. All right. Uh, any discussion from the public? Yes, sir. This is Gray. Oh, okay. All right. facility manager if you call the vote. Commissioner Peebles, yes. Commissioner Parno,
yes. Commissioner Vanigri, yes. Commissioner War, yes. Mayor Nelson, yes. Motion passed. Thank you. And I also want to uh do a special shout out to all the people that made this meeting happen because there's
a lot of work that went into this meeting. So, as far whether that's setting up the the budget, the the RV stuff, um, all of that, there's a lot of work that went behind the scenes to put all of this information together. And, uh, us on the commission, we're not the
ones that put it together. We just talked to people. So, there's a lot of leg work behind the scenes that's not been seen. And so, I just want to say thank you to everyone that did that. And, uh, thank you to the staff and everyone that worked for the the Easter um, celebration and all of that. And I appreciate you all. And that's my
report. Right. Thank you, Commissioner Perno. Thank you, Mayor. Um, Commissioner Vandergri, thank you for everything. It's a pleasure knowing you. I'm sure I'll keep seeing you. So, and uh
um tomorrow's vote is very important. So, everybody get out and vote. So, and uh I'll just thank all of our employees and first responders and police and uh dispatchers. So, thank you all. That's
my report. Commissioner Ward, uh don't have a whole lot. Um been busy for the last couple weeks. Um if you weren't here for the workshop we just had at uh 3:30, uh I recommend you go back and watch it. had a lot of good information about the the Marina Island project and
uh a lot of great questions were asked and and answered. Um as far as the uh the sir tax bond, if you go on our website, there's actually a debt schedule on there that shows um how much we owe on all the different debt. I think it gets updated once a quarter,
once every six months. Um I think I looked at it a couple months ago and last I looked is that sort of tax bond has been paid off. And then as far as the half cents sur how much we bring in that's also online on the budget. Um but I'm sure the city will get that
information for you too. But it on the budget it shows how much revenue we bring in on everything not just the sir tax bond. So it's it's for public record of view and uh that's all I have. Make sure everyone gets out and votes tomorrow. Thank you. All right. Thank
you commissioner Vanagramrift. Um I'm going to keep it short. We have a full meeting today. I I just would like to thank the um staff members that worked on Saturday for the uh Easter egg
hunt. It was great. There were 40,000 eggs and my granddaughter and I timed how long it took to pick up 40,000 eggs. And in case you're interested, it took 3 minutes. All right. All right. Thank you,
commissioners. Uh, city manager. Yes. Couple of things before I call Kiki up because there will be an audit report that will come through in terms of the surex. Yes, that is paid off. We paid that off in 2023. Uh, and a commission had
previously passed in a couple of commissions that when we would receive money for the sir tax that we would sweep the account and pay that account out and it was paid off. We collected over a period of years since 2016
um $18.4 million and we have in the shore tax as I said last um meeting $3.5 million. Okay. Good evening. questions about the warrant list.
Thank you. Thank you. Just a couple of highlights I'd like to uh bring to your attention. We are beginning this year a summer camp. We've never done this before, but Justin and his team are going to be doing that. It's going to be basketball camp, soccer camp, STEM camp
this year, and volleyball camp. Uh all those days will be on our Facebook page and website. So, we're pretty excited about that. Um, another great thing that's happening here in the city of Linhaven, as you know, we have a Boys and Girls Club here. There's only one to
the north right now. We are full for the summer. They have over 100 kids and now they have kids on the waiting list. That is a great place uh to have after school care as well as uh summer care as well.
And uh the crawfish at the Bayou Park and Preserve has been repaired. Uh we celebrate Arbor Day uh on the 25th and we will plant some live oak. And I just like to give a very big shout out to
LHPD. They had a really great uh letter from giving them accommodations and commending them on the work they did in helping Ozark Police Department. Uh the investigators here work with the
investigators there. Uh led to the rest of over 300 people in organized crime ring in the United States and aboard abro um on the borders. Uh and so we got a really nice uh letter from the Ozark
uh police department. They took in c custody people who were allegedly supposed to be in the United States. They were from Romania. Romania. So great job police department. And um I have other things, but that will be my report because I'm going to ask Ben
Clark with James Moore to come forward and give you an update on uh the audit. All right, commissioners. How are you guys doing today? Doing good. I'm going to try to click this. Is this Is this good to go, Vicki?
There it is. station. While they're pulling that up, I'll tell a joke. So, I have four kids and they had about 250 Easter eggs and it was gone in about 60 seconds. And I did not pack any of those. My wife did at all. So, she's fantastic.
No. Mayor, if you mind, do you mind if we let Ben come back just a little bit later when they get that uploaded? Whenever you want. Or I can do it now without it, but whatever you want. But it's up to It's up to you. Uh, we'll just wait for the PowerPoint. Yep. Sound. Thank you.
Right. City attorney, I have no report. Okay. All right. Looking at our consent agenda. Course striking number 12. Moving that to agenda item number
21. Approval of minutes 4825. Approval to temporarily close Highway 77 for the annual uh 2025 for the July parade from 7 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Approval to close all city offices on July 7th. Approval to appoint Miranda L.
Barnes to the city's board of adjustment. Approval to declare asset Nifty Lift 4242 as surplus and authorizing staff to auction off. Approval and author and authorization for the mayor to sign amendment three to federally funded community development
block grant disaster recovery program. uh approval and authorization for the merit to sign amendment signed amendment three to a fally funded community block disaster recovery grant and that's M83 and also approval and authorization
for the mayor to sign amendment three to fally funded CBDGR grant for MO125. Then we also have approval of contingent settlement of Benjamin McWaters versus the city of
Linhaven. Is there a motion for this? I'd like to remove 11 for the same reasons. Remove 12. Right. Put it after 20. Second. All right. So, we'll make 11 number 21 and 12 number 22. All
right. Is there a motion for the other content of the consent agenda? Motion to approve. Second. All right. There's a motion and second. City manager, if you call the vote. Commissioner Warick, yes. Commissioner Perno, yes. Commissioner
Peebles, yes. Commissioner Vanderg, yes. Mayor Nelson, yes. Motion passed. On a reading of ordinance 1177, the unified land development code, ULDC, a public hearing opening at 5:58
p.m. City manager, if you read that ordinance by title only, please. Ordinance number 1177, an ordinance of the city of city commission of Linhaven, Florida, amending unified land development code to mod modify the
parking standards for major recreational equipment on residential property defining major recreational equipment. repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith, providing for severability, providing
for cotification, and providing for an effective date. Right. Thank you. Um any comment, city attorney? Uh just just one I want to highlight. Um, in the car provided with this agenda
item, I indicated that uh the total number of equipment that could be parked and in a residential unit was two essentially 1 plus one, one in the front or sideyards plus one in the backyard.
That math was wrong. You can actually have an unlimited amount in the backyard, but you can only have one in the front or side. Okay, I did want to make that clarification. And there's and uh when you say the one in the front yard that's was highlighted in yellow.
So that was at that is that is that should be highlighted in yellow. Yes. Okay. There was a comment made at the last meeting that maybe that number should be higher than one and so I but I didn't feel like I got direction to change it. So I just wanted to highlight it so that if you
don't direct me to change it, it'll be remain one. Okay. Right. Thank you. Um All right. commission. Um, is there any further discussion about this? Any additional questions for staff or changes we need to make to this
ordinance? Well, you know how I feel about this. When this first started, I I didn't even want to put a a number on the number of recreational equipment in the front side yards. So, I said if we need to put a number on it, three. So, that would be my motion for three. And
then to remove the part about not being able to park them on vacant lots. And that would be my motion. And then what part is is that I saw that earlier in here. Is there a particular number there that you're striking?
Yeah, it's under 1 47 [Music] 37 183. Yeah. Major recreational equipment should not be parked or stored on any vacant lot except where such vacant lot joins a lot on which a principal structure and the same ownership is
located. All right. So you want to strike that. Okay. Um is everyone okay with striking three? Well that's my motion. I didn't know if I got a second. Is there a second for that?
Is is that going to bring us to a vote on the whole thing? I I have I have questions that were brought up to me and I know the people are going to speak and over overall I mean right now we don't we
don't let them on the side yard, right? That's correct. Right. Unless unless it's covered, I believe. Right. Covered. It has to be right. So So hold on. We still have a motion on the floor. So, do we want to resend a motion and have discussion and come back with the motion
or do we want I'll rescend it? Okay. just just for the sake of discussion. I was hoping that cuz in the last 24 hours I received several phone calls and um I mean and and one of the one of them was
that you know what we're creating is going to actually be more um intrusive and more more bogging down our code enforcement than what we originally thought. So, I mean, we have uh the ability to let people put
them on their sideyard in their backyard. Um, we have a we have a we're defining an RV as, you know, an RV, a a trailer, you know, a boat, a jet ski,
but we have we have rightaway issues and line of sight issues. So, why are we why are we bunching everything together, the one the one thing that that that um I find that from what I've been from what I've been told and
talking to folks is that, you know, you have an RV in your driveway and you're you're my neighbor and you're backing out of your house. You're looking toward that side of the road to clear, you know, to clear. You can't see what's coming until you get past the sidewalk.
you know, that's that that's going to be an issue going forward if people could put their RVs in their driveways. That's a safety issue. Okay. Um, we we have a a right of way from the middle of the road, 30 ft in most
situations. So, it was just brought up to me, why not just say you can't, you know, you can have something in the driveway, but you can't encroach the rightway. you encroach the ride away, then then you know you you can't have
your you can't have your RV there. And that's just for RVs. As far as a boat or a jet ski, as long as people can see past it, I'm okay with it. If you could have one, if you you could have it in your driveway, you could have it on the side of the yard or the front of the
yard. But RVs in general are vision impeding and it's a tough it's a tough thing. So, that was brought up to me. Um, I wanted to get it out there cuz I have three different people that have talked to me three or four different
ways. So, I know I'm bringing up more questions at the 11th hour, but they've been brought up to me and I wanted to get them out there. All right. uh city attorney on page 47 um
B and then one where it says maybe parked or stored in then Roman numerals 1, two, three or I guess at least Roman numeral one. Would that cover what Commissioner Pero is referring to in regards to the right of
way or we need to change some language in this portion or in some another some another portion? So the way I understand his recommendation is that uh one little two little eyes um the driveway it currently reads the driveway of the
owner's residence but not in any portion of any public rideway. He wants that to apply specifically to RVs, whereas little four um would apply for all of the other toys. Okay.
Well, what if we changed the definition that the uh I guess it would be page 48 where it talks about the what major recreational equipment is. Why don't we just change this to just specifically RVs, campers, and motor homes? Because I feel like to me that's been the biggest
thing that people have asked me about is, hey, we've got jet skis, we've got small boats, we got kayaks. Like it's kind of ambiguous as to what is actually a recreational vehicle. And to me, a jet ski is not a major recreational vehicle. Um, and then you have questions like, well, what if I have a trailer, but I
store three jet skis in that trailer? Is that one item or is that four items? you know, so I think if we just scaled it back, just talked about campers, uh, RVs and motor homes, and then if we want to go back and talk about jet skis and things like that, we can do that later
and get more specific. But really, the when this was brought to us, the issue was RVs, campers, and motor homes. That was the reason why this was brought to us in the first place. So, why don't we change the definition to only that? Strike out the the uh the vacant
property and then make sure they're out of the rideway, say it can be on the driveway, allow it in the sidey yards, and call it a day. I feel like that would just address everything like that. Right. Miss man Griff. Well, as I stated
at the last meeting, I'm opposed to all of it. Um, the 300 RVs that they've been referencing knew what the requirements were when they purchased their RV. It's
in the code. All they had to do was read it, which specifically says, you know, on the sideyard or in the backyard. If we pass this ordinance, instead of 300, there's going to be
1,500. And we want Linhaven to remain as a beautiful community. The code enforcement right now cannot
keep up with the issues that were implemented when we passed the maintenance code. I mean, it's a constant thing. So, now we're going to add to this the codes or the code
enforcement uh officers to determine if it's at the right angle. Does it um is it impeding on the right away? Um I I know I'm probably uh again uh the
minority, but I oppose it completely. I'm for staying with what we have and tweaking it. Thank you. Just point of clarification, the current ordinance does not permit it in sideyards. So there it's only permitted to be stored in backyards. The new
proposed ordinance would open up that the sideyard and front yard areas. That's good, too. Backyard. All right. So, any additional comments on the RV ordinance?
I mean, I'm agree with a lot what was said over here. I just I've been saying this since we started it. And like I said, I didn't want to put a number on it, but I thought, "All right, I'll try to compromise." And I said, "All right, three." No one seemed to pipe in. But
now Well, because we were we were splitting hairs with the a number when we really didn't want to include boats or or jet skis or whatnot. Agree. We've got a lot of coastline and people have, you know, people like to keep their trailers nearby. That's what
this is what I've been told and echoed over over the last and it's you know you don't hear so much until it's coming to the vote and I I gotten some good insight from folks over the last 24 hours for sure. I just learned my lesson last time we went through something like
this and I vowed I would never do that ever again. But what you're saying, I I I I get what you're saying and and Commissioner Vander, I think if we if we did if we just did it where that you couldn't you couldn't park in the rightway, it take it kind of takes care of itself cuz a lot of folks you can't
you go 30 ft from the middle of the road. It's hard to park a 3540 foot RV in your driveway. Yeah. All for it. You know what I mean? So, and it takes care of itself in one way and and I I I think
it's kind of what we already have except for the fact they they let you do it for 24 hours. And if that's new, that's part that's new. New. Okay. I guess my question would be Sorry. You're okay. You're okay. Uh my question would be I think one of the sticking
points here is the sideyard. If we change the definition to only RVs, campers, and um mobile homes, we we probably would still want to have a restriction on the sideyard. Um if we're going to say that you're allowed in the front yard as long as it's on the
driveway. So, I was kind of doing some math. Um you know, we have all different lot sizes across the city. I mean it's it's changed as since we've changed that you can split lots and stuff but if you know I think on average with being able to
split a lot at 50 by 150 that's around 7500 square ft. So you could say something like no more than one RV and a sideyard per 750 square I mean 7,500 ft. So that would for the small lots that
would limit it to one, but someone that owns three acres, maybe they could have two, you know. Um I don't know if that's something we want to consider if that's a sticking point. If not, disregard everything I just said, but um that sounded to be a bit of a sticking point when we were talking. All right, so we have
three zero maybe two or three maybe one or two. All right. So, Commissioner Vandergriff, would you consider just having one in the front yard and striking the side, having one in the in a driveway,
long as not in the right of way, and then just striking having one on the sideyard, putting all the pressure on the code, enforcement off to determine whether or not it's appropriate, if it's
registered, it's running, It's can go on and on. Uh, no. Got it. So, you just want to keep it in the backyard. All right. Right. At this time, uh, we'll turn to, uh, public
comments. Uh, we have our list here. Corey Langford Good afternoon. Uh, some of you are doing the right thing and I appreciate that. Um, Miss Vandergri, I don't really know if you
understand why this is happening. So, code enforcement. So, so there's 300 people right now it's in violation. Okay. We said, well, we don't want to write 300 tickets, so let's let's address it. I applaud the city for addressing that. This this is this is what should happen. Okay. So, we're
saying we don't want to write 300 tickets, so let's allow it. All right. But if if we allow all of these restrictions that that are listed, well, you can't park in vacant lots, can't be this many feet from the side fence, you can't be this. I mean, so you're recreating the problem that you're
already trying to solve. So now instead of having 300 violations, you're going to have 700 violations because you added seven new restrictions. don't make any sense to the rest of the stuff, you know, parking on vacant lots. You should be able to park on vacant lot. I mean,
let's let's talk about what we can do on vacant lots at this point. I can mow my grass and I can pay my taxes on it. That's what's left, you know? So, remove the vacant lots. Look, you can't put a number on this stuff. I mean, it just you're going to get down to splitting
hairs, okay? Like like you like you talked about, there's some people in Lynhaven's got three acres. Mr. Basher's got a huge spread over there, you know. So, when you start trying to put a number on something, it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. So, just just
stick to keep it simple, stupid. Okay? Allow parking in the front or side yards and driveway. We won't even talk about the front yard. You park in the sideyard and the driveway. All right? Keep it out of the rightway. Right? We said we we we allow vacant lots. Park it in the sideyard in
your driveway. It don't have to be on some paved surface or or whatever. Okay. And uh and we like I said, we remove the vacant lot stuff. Um you know, and we we got to we got to get this back in the box as far as the definition of what an
a major recreational vehicle is. That's the other problem that where we're going to have the issues with all of these all these now new violations because we've changed the definition as to what a what a recreational vehicle is. Now, keep it
to motor homes, campers, and leave it at that. All right, let's don't make this too difficult. This is this is not rocket science. There's an easy answer here. All right, we we solve the 300 violations now by allowing people to park in the driveway and in their sidey
yards. We don't put a number on it, all right? But we say, "Hey, you got to be 30 feet or however whatever the rightway is. If it's 30t off the center line, you got to be 30 feet off that." That's not hard for me to take a tape measure out there and measure from the center of the street out 30 feet and figure out, well,
this clown's got his camper parked in the rightway. That's not hard. All right, that's what I would say. I mean, let's just This has gotten way out of control and uh let's just keep it simple, stupid. Thank you, Jose Torres.
Okay. Ryan Gray, Vicky Williams. I agree. I'm against all this, too. It's very intrusive. This is a very active community that we have jet skis, kayaks. We're a boating community. We're
active. We got stuff. And I don't know why this has come up and I don't really care, but it's got to go away. You got ordinances and rules in place. Use them. Thank you.
Debbie Crutchfield. [Music] Thank you, mayor, city manager, and commissioners for hearing us. Um, I too am a homeowner. I have boats and jet skis and kayaks. I have almost all of it
behind my fence in my backyard, which I understand, but none of my stuff is in pretty, you know, in in the rightway. But if you limit the number of vehicles, way I was reading that ordinance said only one recreational vehicle or boat or
jet ski on the property complete. That's what brought me out here tonight was any restrictions that depth. So, my wife and I, we moved out here to Linhaven. Uh my aunt owned the
house for uh 21 years before I did it. I've owned it for 18 years. We've only been living in it for the last four because it was a rental property and we took it through a fixed it up after Hurricane Michael. And this is our retirement home. This is the community that I've wanted to live. My
grandfathers are buried here in Panama City. This Panama City was where we came to celebrate Christmas and to celebrate summer vacations and stuff like that. When my wife and I got married 50 years ago, we we had our honeymoon out on
Panama City Beach. We love this community. When I first saw my aunt's property, I said, "This is the property for me." She passed on. my mom and dad got it and I bought it from my mom and dad and fixed it up and restored it and made it into a nice thriving house. So,
I feel that um that this is an encroachment on our liberties and on our personal property uh and I feel it's against the Constitution personally and uh I really would like I like what Mr. Corey said and I like that direction. Um
I wish you would very much consider it that way. Thank you very much. Right. Thank [Music] you, Donna Marel. Good evening. Uh, thank you for your time. My husband and I moved to
this community a couple of years ago and we think it's fabulous and we really love the vibe here. We are very active um semi-retirees. We enjoy camping. We enjoy boating. That is what drew us here. We just couldn't believe how
amazing this area is. We do also believe in law and order and things being orderly and neat and tidy as well. We have no problem with neighbors and anyone who wants to have a camper or a boat or whatever they do. I'm a keep it
simple person, too. Why can't we just keep things neat, orderly, make sure first of all they're they're registered there? People just leaving stuff laying around. That's not cool. But for us, we're just like it's if it's neat, it's orderly, it's fine. There's no problem.
So that's my two cents on that. Thank you. Thank you, Michael Morel. All right. Okay. So, all right. We've heard from our our residents. No. Okay. Yes,
sir. Ron Mullins, 904 Virginia Avenue. I see. And I saw Marina Island. I couldn't understand the first word there, so got it. Okay. I get it. Yeah, my handwriting sucks. Uh, so my questions are and when I first read this ordinance, it didn't
have any of the what you could do. So now that what I saw what you can do, you know, I'm okay with a lot of it, but the I'm still having issues with the restrictions in the definition of front yard. My driveway is 35t wide and 85 foot long. It goes from the back of the house to the front of the house. Now, if
there's restrictions, how many trailers and campers can I put in my driveway? Real question. And I I can fit a 45 foot camper RV in my driveway. I don't have one, but I could, you know, I have I I work for a
living. I have I do construction. You know, I have a dog business. I have trailers in my driveway at all times. They're not an eyesore. They're parked nice and neat and in order in an orderly fashion. You know, if somebody has a problem with it, I'm friends with all my neighbors. I'm pretty sure they'd come
over and say, "Hey, will you clean up your mess?" I'm okay with that. Uh the reality is is that Linhaven is a place that people desire to come to. Harvey's aren't scaring people away. It's not Callaway. It's not Springfield
or those other towns where everybody's running from. They're coming here because they like the way we do things. We allow people their freedom. I mean, this is we're a mixed bag, but the reality is is that we have a ton of people here that have the ability to buy
these toys and use these toys. And if you're saying they can't have them, you couldn't be further disconnected from the people that voted for you in the first place. Let me share. Right. Thank you. Additional public commentary. Yes, sir.
And then we'll go to the back. Hi, I'm Lloyd Keel. Uh, I live on Kentucky Avenue. When I purchased my home in Lin Haven a couple years ago, I purposely purchased it in an area that did not have a homeowners association
because I didn't want the restrictions or the protections that come with a homeowners association. Understand there needs to be limits on what people can do with their property. Things that cause a public nuisance or health issues fall
into an ordinance category. Um, this ordinance appears to me that the city is trying to act as a city-wide homeowners association. What will be the next thing that we want to dictate? The color of the paint on our house, uh, the type of
roof, swing set that I put in for my children, or grandchildren in my case. Uh, so I had a few questions. I I put them in writing and submitted them to you. Uh so you could address them if I don't go through this. Um reading the
thing, uh would a pair of jet skis jet skis on a tandem trailer be one major recreational equipment item or would it be two? If someone had, let's
say, eight kayaks on a single trailer stacked, you know, on a kayak rack, would that be eight items or would it be one? Uh, when you look at the definition, uh, that's in with the ordinance, a kayak is a boat according
to the state of Florida. So, um, I just think there needs to be some clarification there. When we start putting a number, you can only have so many of this or so many of that. You know, we need to define it
further so we actually know what we're talking about. um you know in the last election uh people of this country and state voted with their hearts and I think it was for less regulation. So
uh I just don't think that this ordinance should be a pass as it is. Uh it appears that people can store as many items in their backyard as they want, but with the uh
city in the MDR and HDR zones, uh you know, the lot sizes, the side lots can be as small as 5T. Well, if you have a pontoon boat or let's say a 22ft runabout, there's no way to take
something with a 9- ft beam and put it down a 5-ft lane. So, uh, that's a concern of mine. And you know it another thing is it doesn't appear to be well we're trying to keep up the image of the city because
I could buy a 1973 Chieftain Wnebago motor home that's faded out and broke as long as it runs and runs properly and is tagged and put it in my yard. Right. Thank you. That's your time. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. But I look forward to maybe someone will address
that written questions. All right. Uh, retired Chief Delange, then we'll get to Mr. Gray. Anyone else after Mrs. Gray? Okay. Good evening, Commission, mayor,
city manager. I think what we're doing is overreach. As it's been stated several times, we're not in an HOA. Commissioner Vandergri lives in an HOA and people respect that. But I think if we keep it simple, as it's been stated several
times, if it's tagged, insured, and can fit in the driveway, let the residents have it. Y'all are overreaching. We're a boating community. We are also camping committees community. There's a lot of us that camp. We don't have the boat. We
have campers. So don't specialize to one one citizen versus the other 20,000. So I think if you keep it simple, if it fits in the driveway, it's licensed, it's insured, it should be able to stay. Now, I've spent more money
on my RV than some of these houses. And I don't think I should be penalized for this. And I did my homework before I purchased it. The police chief told me it was okay to park there. So, I just want to say
that thank you, Mrs. Screw. Um, so I feel like you guys have like three things to consider here. Is it more important for you to have an aesthetic for the city? What our front yards look like? Is it more important for you to protect property rights, individual rights, or is it more
important for you to consider safety? You know, safety often gets brought up, but we talked about line of sight accidents, people backing out of their driveways. My main concern with that for RVs is, yes, RVs obstruct stuff, but so
do vans and trucks, cars, even compact cars technically obstruct your line of sight. Let's say, anybody have a four or 5-year-old? I think you yours is close. Little four or 5year-old chasing a ball runs out from behind a car into the
street. Street's 25 miles per hour. Somebody's going the legal speed limit. Do you know how much space they need to stop before they hit that kid? 115 ft with a six degree field of view. I don't know how many of you guys have done
geometry recently, but I had to bust out a whole geometry book to figure this out. But to get a 60° field of view is next to impossible with the rules you're considering. So you have to make a compromise somewhere. So 30° field of
view is way too small. Um so somewhere around 20% is usually recommended in a lot of traffic safety guides. But in order to achieve that, you're talking a 23 foot setback from the edge of the road. So if you include the traffic lane center line like Pat was talking about,
you're looking at about 30 feet off the center of the road. So far, I think he's the closest. But not just for RVs, everything. Everything. Because either again, you're concerned about aesthetics, property rights, or safety.
And if you're not concerned about safety and you're going to just restrict RVs, I that that's mixed up to me. That doesn't make sense. So, focus on safety and property rights and try to find the compromise between those two. And what I
would want to know is maybe the city attorney can answer this is if you guys set an ordinance that says nobody can park in the city of right away at all and somebody's parked there and a kid runs out and gets hit, does the Of course the property owner has liability,
but does the city have any liability if they don't restrict that? I mean, it's just like if you got trees on the corner, you got to keep them clean. It's it's all the same stuff. So, I mean, I get it. The aesthetic. I mean, honestly, I don't care about the aesthetic, but
the the property rights and the safety, that's you got to try to find the blend between those two if you're going to allow it at all. So, all I would ask is that y'all consider the safety aspect, but not just for RVs, for everything. If you're not going to consider it for
everything, then why bother considering it for RVs? Just keep everything out of the rightway. Right. Thank you. Okay. So, we've uh heard from our uh citizens in regards to their thoughts um on these particular
ordinances. We've heard varying points um about the uh particular ordinance. Um some is to say restrict it only to what was recommended RVs, campers and such. And others say let the language continue to be inclusive and others say to strike it out altogether. So, um so we do have
some varying um opinions there with that. Um, we did have some questions from Mr. Ke. I didn't receive that email. So, it's right above you. Oh, okay. All right. Anyone like to address any of these
questions? I guess the one with the two jet skis on a single trailer. Would that be just considered one? Yeah, because it would be one trailer. So, yeah, that just be one. I would think it would be one. Yeah, that's how I see it as one when I
when I see it. So, yeah, I would I would say Mr. K to your questions. I see some of these are asked differently but sort of pertain to the same idea like the four ATVs, the uh the jet skis and such that
if it's it's on one trailer then it's just one it just be one vehicle or just one um as opposed to four different ATVs that that would be on uh one trailer. So, I would say that that would also
apply to just being one. You can come back. You come back to the microphone. I got you. uh with sideyard lots as small as 5t and the city code allows that in the MDR and HDR
sections. How does the city propose that someone put their boat in the backyard or a camper or a motor home? If you only have five feet between your house and the fence, uh it's sort of hard to take something
with an eight foot, nine foot beam and put it down that 5ft thing unless you don't get a helicopter and lift it and that's going to be a little inconvenient and expensive. The ordinance doesn't require the parking in the backyard. So, the solution would be to park it off site.
Okay. So, if you had two uh or in my case, I have a house on uh the value over here and on Maxwell and I have a boat and I keep my trailer at my house. Uh because, you know, I've
got an old boat and sometimes old boats break and let's say I had an emergency, I could call my son, say, "Hey, uh meet me at the boat ramp and you know, I can maybe make it to the boat ramp and load it up." or in the case of a storm like
Hurricane Michael when it came through. You know, it was a category one or a category two. Then, you know, in Florida, we don't care a category 2. Most voters don't anyway. Uh we're prepared. Um but when it gets to a category 3, I begin to care. And then
all of a sudden, that one became, you know, it blew up and sort of came right at us. So, if id had my trailer at my house, I probably could have taken the time and to go get my boat and pull it off site. Whereas, if I had to go down
to an off-site storage facility someplace, retrieve my trailer, and come back, uh, I I could have lost valuable time and it could have made a safety concern for me. So, you don't care or you still don't
have an answer? I I don't have an answer to you. There is no emergency exception in this ordinance. Um there is no emergency exception in this ordinance. It permits 24 hours anywhere on the property. This I didn't draft this ordinance. I can't take responsibility for it. Well, it just you know it just
seems like some of the things haven't been completely thought through. Uh like you know whether we define something as a single or a multiple item. Uh, I was a distiller. Someone made liquor someone
for a living. And so, uh, words have meanings and especially when you have to deal with other people with those words. I had to go to war with the state of Alabama one time because of what the word said and what they said. Oh, we
interpreted differently. So, I just want to have a clarification uh to make sure that we know what we're talking about. That's it. Thank you. Thank you for your questions. Um I do think his questions and some of the
other questions and what uh city attorney just stated. Um do go back to the fact that uh we're piggybacking off of someone else's ordinances who have different problems than what we have. Um, and
so maybe something we need to go back and just review again. As Commissioner Vandergri said, we we had an ordinance in place, so we're not necessarily like starting from scratch. We could look at our ordinance to see how does it resolve the uh 300 violation. you know, the 300
violations that we have, which is the initial reason that, you know, we were asked to review this ordinance was so that we could, you know, hopefully come to a resolution on how to help resolve that issue and give direction to code enforcement as to whether or not they needed to enforce it and issue those
tickets or whether or not, you know, we would make a change or some type of adaption to the ordinance that we, you know, already had in place. So, not saying that this is a a bad ordinance is that or that we should not have utilized this as a reference. Um, but seemingly
it has certainly created more questions for us and more stir than we initially um thought about when we went with this ordinance. So, uh so I attorney is right. We gave her direction to bring us this ordinance and then sort of adapt it to what we uh thought would be needed
for our city. But seemingly there's a lot of adaptations that have to go into this um to really, you know, meet the needs of what we have um for our community. So, mayor, could I make one just make one point? So, the code that we already have
in place, the code was working pretty good. The only question I have for the commission was um could those RVs, and we go back to RVs, be parked on the side. they were already being parked in the back. Could they be parked on the side? And it really didn't address any
of the other recreational equip um equipment. It was really just the RVs. And other than that, this the code that we have, the ordinance we have was very very simple uh could easily be managed. And so that was surely the question for
the city if those RVs which points to safety as one um resident said were uh in the line of sight um and could not see and impeded on uh that next neighbor. That was really the big
question. This is how this came to be. And so one of the things that we were just allowing until uh the commission made a decision, someone were being parked on the side and the ones that could be parked in their driveway were being parked in their driveway that were
very small and compact. So I I think that we really do need to look at Lin Haven and say what's conducive for for Linhaven. [Music] Yes, sir. Thank you for hearing me, Rick Hugard,
Florida. Um, thank you for what you do. First of all, L Haven, as was said, is a toy town. We have a lot of boats. We have a lot of recreation here, and we love the area. Don't restrict what we do
in our land. if it's insured, if it's tagged, if it's not impeding the rightway. I've got buildings out here on 77. When I pull out from Florida A and go down one of my side streets, come on 77, the building is blocking the right
away. Okay? Straighten out what we got in another way and leave our stuff alone. Leave the toys alone. If it's if it's a mess, tell them it's a mess. Let them straighten it up. Give them an opportunity. You don't have to issue a ticket. Just give them a warning. just say, "Hey, move it." But I I can see
areas where I go where there are, you know, RVs or whatever out in the rightway and it does block your traffic to turn. But we also have telephone poles and we have buildings like coming across the street here. There's a telephone pole on the way. So, let's
keep it simple. Let's not as long as we're paying land tax, as long as it's insured, as long as it's tagged and it's not impeding the rightway, leave us alone, please. Thank you. Thank you. Um, city attorney, if we wanted to scratch
this ordinance and then go back and review our actual ordinance that's on the books, how would that work in this situation? Two pass. I can based on the comments I've received today, I can prepare a brand new ordinance. We can call it
1177R because it'll be a new version, but the same topic with the same purpose and intent. Um, that is based on our current regulation, but adds sideyards or limits it to the driveways only as long as it's outside of the public ride
ofway. um and that it must be um maintained in an operable condition and properly licensed and insured. Those were the two conditions I feel like I heard universal consensus or at least support for. Um I can also ch we don't we can scrap the rest of the ordinance,
but I can I can bring you back that to react to and you can at least have a discussion to see if we're getting closer. Okay. Um and so we can bring that ordinance back for first reading at one of your next meetings. Okay. uh commission. How are y'all with that?
I'm good with that. I mean, you know how I felt from the very beginning on this. I I had a feeling this was going to happen and here we are. Yeah. Now, in this uh new ordinance, did are we going to the one that she's bringing her old or doing it from scratch or whatever,
are we going to talk about sideyards too or Okay, it's up to you. But I heard for sure from at least the public comment was allow it in the driveway. So the current text of this ordinance, the driveway of the or permits them in the driveway of the owner's residence, but not in any portion of the public
rideway. So I will definitely add that in. If after seeing it, you still want to add sideyards, we can certainly do that. And the visibility triangle. Again, it it gets less simple um the more areas we expand into, but I will do
whatever you direct me to do. Yeah. So, if you could do that, make that 1177R, revise it with um with what you've just stated, and then give us a chance to look at it. Um and then we can discuss from
there. Everybody good with that? Well, you'll have a new commissioner on the council, so I'm sure that they would have love to have the opportunity to provide input. Right. Well, we are going back to the old ordinance, though. So, I'm I'm trying to give you something
before you leave. Thank you. Okay. So, um, so we're not voting on this ordinance, so we just close public hearing. All right. Closing public hearing at 6:44
p.m. Opening public hearing at 6:44 p.m. Final reading of ordinance 1179 amending the Unified Land Development Code to establish Marina Island Overlay District. Hold on here.
Okay. And city manager, if you'll read that by title only, please. Sure. Ordinance 1179, an ordinance of the city of Linhaven, Florida, amending the ULDC to establish the Marina Island Overlay District comprised of the area shown
upon the attached and incorporated exhibit A to the ordinance specifying permitted land uses, minimum lot sizes and setbacks, maximum dens densities, height and floor
area ratios, parking standards and street design elements and standards for accessory structures. Permitting alcohol sales throughout the district, providing for transfer transfer of density within the district. Providing standards for
landscaping, lighting, and signage. providing that in the event of a conflict between the provisions of Marina Island overlay and other applicable ordinances, the provisions of the Marina Island overlay district shell
control authorizing codification, repealing ordinances in conflict and providing effective date. Thank you, Miss Amanda. Thank you. This is the final reading and public hearing for ordinance
1179, the Marina Island Overlay District. So there is going to be another presentation from the developer in a moment. This so this is just a brief one seems as how you've had a workshop and you've had your packets to look at. The overlay would allow for
development orders to be reviewed in accordance with this overlay for certain items that the city is permitted to accommodate. So they still do have to submit development orders. This is not giving them permission to go ahead and
develop setbacks, size of lots, size of homes, widths of streets, landscaping, signage, infra infrastructure, signage infrastructure, per and permissible uses um are things that they are able to have
in this overlay. infrastructure being like roads and that type of thing, not storm water. It does not allow for an increase in density. So, they have to stick to the density in the comp plan. It does not allow for an increase in
pvious surface or impacts to wetlands or anything else that is required by the comprehensive plan or the state. Development orders will still be reviewed and requirements for storm water flood plane management, hurricane evacuation, impacts to the roadway
network are still required. Some of which will take place at the development order application stage and some at the application for building permit stage. The development must be the must keep to within the maximum density
allowances imposed by the state. This is something that you might not all be aware of. DCA, now Florida Commerce in um when they changed they applied to change the land use to what it is now mixed use and commercial from what it
was prior which was research park via ordinance 1031. The state restricted the number of units they could have in that mixeduse and commercial land use districts. So
um the development has to keep to within those maximum density allowances in accordance with ordinance 1031 for the mixed use and commercial future land use designated areas for the number of allowable residential dwelling units, amount of square footage for offices and
commercial and the acres of civic space and number of hotel rooms. Industrial future land use designations currently allow for trade and service activities, business and professional offices, commercial and multif family residential
uses. These are allowed now. I didn't know if you were all aware of that, but currently industrial does allow for those things to be constructed on in industrial land use. This here is very hard to see, but this um is what is in
your packet. This is the uh aerial that shows you the various parcels and the number of acres. This shows you the ordinance 1031 area. So where that arrow is pointing to mixed juice and commercial that is the
area there that whole big parcel is the area that is restricted by 1031. They are not allowed to go over those densities and those densities are less than are in the uldc. So they're not even allowed to go for the full density
density that's allowed in the uldc or in the comp plan. They have to keep to these. And this shows you the uh future land use areas. So the purple and the red kind of hash areas are the areas
that are mixed use and commercial. Thank you. And we do have um the representative, the city's reviewer for traffic from Kimley Horn, Vinnie. He is here. If you have any of those traffic questions, he is here to answer those
for you. Right. Thank you. Um we do have an attesting party uh representing Mr. Joe Tenanhill, Attorney Robert Wulp. Yes. Yeah. An affected party. Yes. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I did
submit a request to be recognized as an affected party. We can uh present after the applicant if that would be reference of the commission. Um the presentation will be on on the your future land use map your or future land use uh
categories in the comprehensive plan but particularly the discussion that was had earlier at the um at the workshop about compatibility and buffers and I believe that you all um understand the issue. Uh so if it if you don't mind if we could
go after the uh applicant as far as in that order if that would be I think it would be preferable to see what the application is and then our our one request for a condition to that application. Okay. Thank you. Right. Uh of course we had a workshop on this
earlier. Um I guess one question I know Amanda showed us a map. I don't know earlier, Commissioner War, you had a question about the industrial parcels that were being used um based on that and it seemed like that map was a little bit
different than what you might have been asking earlier or what was So I don't know if we can go back to that one map. Arl, can we have that presentation back please? Got like the numbers on it. Can we have the my one please?
Yeah, if you go back that one there. So I know that's the part on on the well audiences are left our right that one on the left kind of what I'm worried about.
Right. Yeah, that's Go ahead. Sorry. No, go ahead. Oh, I was just going to say this. I had this up there to show you the ordinance 1031 area which is this area here but that that is industrial I
believe. So you had a question about that industrial parcel. My as I stated before my concern is the encroaching on the industrial area the businesses in there. That's what I'm worried about. You have that part there. Yeah. They
they own the they own industrial land also. So yeah, that was the question earlier was how would the industrial land be developed? Like we see how we're developing 10, you know, for this overlay, but the question was would the
development of that industrial land encroach upon the industrial um parties that are already there? Right. I'll let the developer answer that because that's not Yeah. commissioners. Um we have we've not planned that site yet. Um obviously once
we do plan the site, we'll have to submit a development order and that development order will spell out in feet and inches exactly where things are going to be located and so forth. Um it's I I don't think that our um uses
are incompatible. Uh I think there's an issue that we have to work out with MERIC, which I think we've got two willing parties that want to work that out and and I think we'll come to a solution tonight, you know, and we can put that to bed and and hopefully move
forward um mutually successfully. Uh but on that site, we have not done the planning on that um on that site. Oh, I guess my question is if this gets approved tonight, would that include the property on the left also or not? It
would include all our property that's on that map. Okay. But it would not restrict on that industrial property. it would not encroach in any way outside of you know uh um
the I mean we wouldn't create a a um a situation where uh it would encroach on any of these surrounding properties. Yeah. I think if we solved the if we solved the riddle with the buffer I think it solves it for that as
well as for all of them. Okay. Thanks. Are there any additional questions for the applicant? All right. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Um, this is just off the top of my head.
Is there a timeline other than 30 years? What was that going to be? I'll be around to see that. Uh well, first of all, let me can I make a correction, too? We we we found there's a typo in the um on one of the maps there. It's listed as HDR outside the front gate and
20 ft should be 30 ft and LDR. So, it is listed correctly on another map, but it's just there's I don't know how it it it happened, but we'll correct that before we submit. Um the second the second thing in regards to your
question, I mean we you know obviously this process sets the getting um the MI uh the Marina Island overlay district uh approved God willing tonight. Um the next step would be for us to draft the
um development order uh this engineering and and do all the calculations and all that stuff, submit that to city staff. City staff would then come back to us. I would suspect it'll take a little bit of time because it is a big um phase and um
and then we would then we would go through the process um like anybody else to to submit the development order to the commission the reading and and have plenty of um you know public engagement and so forth on that. Um but we want to we want to move we we're ready. We're
ready. Yeah. Estimated. though phase one if if we're approved tonight, God willing, and we were to go and submit our um realistically would take us about three months to put together the development order and then I I think the
city would probably have about the same amount of time to approve it bidding. Let's say about 8 months. We could start working out there. I mean, that would be on the inside. Could be 12 months. I mean, but hopefully things
move smoothly. The reason I'm asking is apparently we gave permission and Mr. Walker probably remembers this and that development still has not fulfilled their promise to
us. And so that's kind of made me think um they promised to do something and we gave them the permission and they're procrastinating because we didn't set a timeline with us. No, no, no, no. I'm I'm saying another development. I see.
That created my worry about a timeline for y'all. Well, we we were anxious to to, you know, start moving dirt because we don't make any money until we do that. So, but that as I mentioned before, it's not the only reason why we're doing it. We think it's a great vision. We think
it's going to be a great development. We think people will come back in two or three years or 5 years and they're going to love it. It's going to add to Linhaven, not detract from it. One question I never thought of until I was looking at this. I know there's an area
that FSU owns on Old Field Depot. Are they going to be able to have I think there's something that addresses that. there's going to be an access point for them. Have they they have an easement in place and and and uh we give them access to to our main road. So there's going to
be no conflict with them. No. Okay. Thanks. We signed that all that stuff before we even took down the property. Okay. Thank you. With the taking down of the property, right? Is there a presentation at this time? All right. I'm going to try and keep it to 10
minutes. So, I'm going to go pretty quickly and then I can answer your questions because most of this you've seen before, but it's I'm assuming there are some community members that haven't. So, let me see if I can Okay, so this is the map you were referring to before um with the number of dwelling units, the
acreage, and staying we are staying within what the comprehensive plan allows as Amanda stated. Um you've heard the presentation on this before. four big ideas and I'm going to touch on them very briefly because the amendments to the design
code are um done to encourage this kind of development and very often in many places where we work the comprehensive plans say everything right and then the zoning doesn't allow it. So um we've worked to modify what we felt or make suggestions as to what could be um
tweaked to allow this to happen. So it's a boating community first and foremost we hope with a very vibrant waterfront center. Um this is and the images you see are from projects we've done. So um we we are like um Andy said I'm very
committed to if DPC's name stays on a plan like this to to see it through uh develop properly. So activating the waterfront is a big part of this as part of the marina and we imagine um mixeduse buildings with retail and restaurants on the ground floor and residential above
and a a a wide prominade that's activated with uh many different kinds of activities as you can see here. But the water is sort of comes is woven through the site as well. So there's the of course there's the there's the big waterfront but there are
also canals and the canals take um take shape very differently and they are some of them are fronted by residential buildings and some of them are fronted by um residential buildings. So in this case, this is commercial. Yeah, sorry. In this case, um this is an example of
where as you can see with the yellow box around a it could be a water a water um feature that's actually quite narrow but that traverses the site in a way with um uh commercial buildings facing it on both sides. There are also more private
areas with the residential uh with canals with the canal and the water circulating all the way around. um that is just of a quieter nature and a place where the residential can be a little bit away from all the noise and the activity that that the center will um
will bring along. And this was just one of the renderings, one of the early renderings that was done for the project. The idea of it being inclusive is important. And inclusive, why is it inclusive? We like to say it has a robust civic infra infrastructure. And what we mean by that is that there's a
lot of open space and different types of open space. It's not only the amount of open space that's pro provided here, but it's the it's the way in which it's programmed. It has to be usable. It has to be uh visible, and it has to be programmable. So, this is a drawing that shows you the different kinds of open
spaces that exist here. But we see um we we see opportunities for um yoga on a green. We see opportunities for um for for families to gather and have uh have activities. Of course, playgrounds and then even places to just go and sit and
and and and think in a place that's actually quiet and um can can bring people a little bit of peace in the way it's landscaped and and designed. Um, and then of course there are some residential streets as well that are on these pedestrian greens and
they're very popular wherever we go because there places that are safe for kids and elderly people to sort of come out and gather and um it's a way to connect you to the water. So everybody, you know, we're bringing the water views deep into the site. We're not blocking the views by running the streets really
perpendicular to the waterfront. So everybody when they're walking in that direction, they know they're going to hit the water at some point. So it's a way to orient folks as well to the water. and um other green courts as well. As you can see here, once you leave the bridge, as you're coming in, single
family homes fronting a shared green. So, our research shows us that people are willing to trade a smaller home and no backyard for a shared green. And that's especially true for elderly folks who don't want a backyard to take care of. Um we're staying within the uh the
uh imperous u area, of course, since we're not allowed to exceed it. This begins to show you what's pvious, what's partially pvious, and what is impervious and ways in which we're integrating civic buildings as well. Um, there are in, if you saw on the master plan, you'll see it in other plans,
there are red buildings and those red buildings are intended to indicate community amenities, whether it's a clubhouse, whether it's a beach club, whether it's the um a little pavilion on the waterfront, or whether it's a pool. And here's another view of that from the
waterfront. Now, resilient. Now, what creates a resilient community? This is a 20 to 30 year project. So, it really does need to have the mix of uses and building types that can appeal to as wide an audience as possible and wide as market as possible. So, this is a drawing that shows the different
building types. Um there is one uh and I apologize we put in the wrong drawing but one mistake here and that is that the LDR on the small out parcel does not allow townouses. So this that will come out right here as you can see right there there we we we threw we drew town
houses um surrounded by single family. It doesn't allow it um so we won't be showing it. Um and then you can see the mix of building types. There's single family, there's small multif family, there's walkups, there's the mixed use, there's different size town houses as well. And these are town houses that are
rear loaded. I'll speak about that when I show you the parking. They're not the front-loaded town houses, which um which are typically not very pedestrian friendly, which is why most people oppose town houses in their own neighborhoods because they feel it's just an inferior building type. But town houses can be really beautiful when
they're attached to a town where people can walk to. Anyway, so here's the here the these are the different building types. Um and as um as you can see a great a lot of thought has gone into how those building types are laid out. The idea of the mixeduse buildings is that
there are um little courtyards where shops can spill out um and then there's pedestrian circulation that happens through it. I'll show that to you on the when we get to the uh to the streets. Um so that there's a circulation that happens on the street but there's a whole pedestrian network that connects these buildings to each other and a
variety of building types as well. So, the apartment villas or the walkups, the idea of these is that they're large. Um, they're two or three story multif family buildings with two units on either side um that get windows in on all three sides or can let light in on all three
sides and they just look like a very large mansion or a very large villa, but they're actually well integrated into the fabric of the community because they're not much much larger and the parking is in the back of course or offsite. Um, town houses, live works. That's the idea of buildings close to
the sidewalk with either commercial on the ground floor or residential with residential above or a townhouse with a stoop where the windows are raised so there is some privacy and the parking again is in the back. That's super important for these types. Um, the intimate cottage courts,
I've shown those uh to you. Um, they can be uh they don't have to be very wide. This one is less than 30 ft wide and a a very fun place to gather and be. And an idea that the buildings have to have a street presence. Every
building is going to be designed in a way that makes it pedestrian friendly. So the cars will be hidden. The it shows some vibrancy and activity at the level of the street. And when there's not a car in the front yard, all of a sudden you can get beautiful gardens and beautiful streets. And then the walkability. And
you know, we can't be sustainable if we're not walkable. That's a key component of the work we do. Um, so what does it mean to be walkable? It means that streets have to be comfortable. They have to be shaded. They have to be safe. And they have to link destinations to each other. So, um, a big part of
making a walkable community is hiding the parking. And the parking here is hidden by either putting it in the back of of the lots as lined by buildings in the front, which is the blues that you see there. There's a big central parking garage at three that's three decks that provides nearly 1400 parking spaces that
is also lined by buildings. And then there's the raised um platform in front of the water which is where the parking will be sort of semi- buried in there and then the housing and the mixeduse buildings raised above it. I ask one quick question. Yes. What's the one
level below ground parking mean? It means that there so these the the the ones that you see with the purple line around them that means that the the buildings will be raised off the ground a little bit and so the parking is going to be maybe 3 ft down 4 ft down we're not sure quite sure
but you're driving down and the platform is raised above ground so you don't see it so that um so that you we can reach the flood elevation that's required uh to avoid flooding. Thank you. And then this is the pedestrian and the vehicular network. So the black streets you see
are the vehicular network. They're going to have on street parking. And as you heard Andy say before, there's a tremendous amount of on street parking once you begin to um once you begin to count all of it. And um parked cars also make people feel more comfortable when they're on a sidewalk because that
you're not walking on a sidewalk right next to a car whizzing by you. But as you can see as well, there's a there's a very um there's a very sort of robust pedestrian network that weaves you in and out through the site as well. And that's that's an important component for
us. And we have tagged each different street type to its land use. So there's a great variety of building of of street types based on whether they are along a single family street, whether they're along a multif family street, whether they're along a street that has
commercial uses, or whether they're along the main boulevard. And the package includes examples of what those streets look like. And you know, we've worked to to identify how wide the parking is, how wide the sidewalk is, where the trees should go, how wide the
travel lanes are, all of that to ensure that the public realm reinforces the p the private realm as well. So, for example, in the commercial area, the sidewalk's going to be wider, the trees will be in planters, right? Whereas in the residential areas, for example, you may have a green verge, the sidewalk may
be narrower, but you have a bigger landscaped area. So that when you see different building types, there's also an expectation that the landscaping and the and the public realm is designed somewhat differently. The street has to feel residential in a residential area and the streets have to feel commercial in a commercial area. So every one of
these streets is tagged. So when you see NS, that means the neighborhood street. 84 ft is the public right away and 34 feet is the width of the pavement. And we want to see the pavement as narrow as possible, ensuring that it meets all the fire um inspectors requirements for the
fire trucks of course and of course and then the other part is how do you move from vision to implementation? A lot of that is the code and you know the um and the standards that have been put in there. This is just well this is the phasing plan. Sorry I thought I had one more
slide. Uh this begins to show you the phasing is going to move from move from west to east and um you can see the phase three is the last phase which that little out parcel that's surrounded by the industrial buildings. Uh but we'll begin with the single family and then move our way to the single family on
both sides. Um and move move your move into into the site into the second phase. And this is where Andy was saying there is a mistake here. the MU actually extends where it says LDR all the way to the LDR and we'll fix that and submit it again. And where it says HDR should be
LDR. So, I'm not sure how that happened, but we will fix it. But we're not changing the the the lines of the flu. All right. Staying it's staying the way it is. And um yeah, this is I think is one of my last slides. It's essentially
showing the uh the standards and the dimensional requirements for the different land uses. The setbacks of course big part of it, the lot coverage, the F is not changing, the density is not changing, what uses were recommended to be removed
because we don't anticipate those uses being there, of course, and then what uses were added. We did that for each one of those um communities of those land uses. Thank you. Happy to answer questions. Right. Are there any questions from the
commission? I wanted to point out one thing because someone one of the uh residents um brought up about children and running out into the streets. These the way the the site is developed where the house is around the greens. really wonderful
thing to have either foot traffic or or um pedestrian streets and and these central greens because I know when my children go outside I uh my youngest is eight, you know, I'm always worried is she running out in the street or
something like that. So I I think we've been very sensitive about uh trying to create family oriented uh uh communities. Right. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, my name is Robert
Vulpi, 119 South Monroe Street, Tallahassee. I represent Merrick Industries and um also Little Oyster Bay Point LLC which owns the property of the northwest of Marina Island Overlay
District to the west and actually to the north of as you mentioned Commissioner War the um the later phase the future phase that is the industrial land and I want to start off by saying that uh my client supports this project and thinks
that this is a good project for the City of Linhaven. Our main concern, you'll hear me say this word several times, is compatibility. Um, compatibility is required by Florida statutes. Compatibility between adjacent uses. It's in um, section
163202 of Florida statutes. That's a requirement for your comprehensive plan and for your land development code and for all development in the state of Florida. Um your comprehensive plan requires compatibility between adjacent uses and you have addressed that in your
land development code through your buffer standards. U buffers are the primary tool for ensuring that compatibility that it uses can be compatible with each other adjacent uses. So looking at this the Marina Island
overlay and the existing industrial park that that Merrick is a part of um we believe that a type D buffer a 60-oot type D buffer with a wall would ensure compatibility between these long-standing industrial uses and the
new development whether it's mixed use with residential and commercial whether it's town homes whether it's single family all of those uses would be allowed in both the mixeduse area and in the future phase industrial area in this Marina Island overlay. It would allow
single family in that area. Um a 60 ft type D buffer with a wall added as a condition to this ordinance would ensure compatibility. Um and that is based on on your land development regulations as it is. I do if you if you would indulge
me I would like to ask Mr. Mr. Tanahill to come up and just um explain quickly about his operations and then uh Mr. Darren Taylor is a planner AICP certified planner um who will testify as
to the compatibility requirements. Thank you. Have a quick handout. Joe Tanahill, 10 Arthur Drive, Lin Haven. If you'll give those to the city [Music] attorney. Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Uh I am industrial
user. Um my father uh built the existing site there for his boss back in 1977. And I have employees who were at work today who have over 47 years of service at this
site at 10 Arthur Drive. Uh we make industrial weighing machines. We make them out of steel and thank you for all of you who have come out to see what we do. We are an industrial site.
We use in Arthur Drive for wide loads, industrial loads, a lot of trucks. We have worked three shifts, which is 24 hours a day in the past. We would like to have that option in the future. We have about 150
employees. We've never had a complaint from a neighbor. We'd like to keep it that way. Usually, good fences make good neighbors. Uh, in this case, we need more because you can see on the back of the handout how close the lots are for
residential homes, single family residential homes to our fence. And that's why we're asking for a solution, a buffer that's already in your unified land development code. We're just asking for the max of 60 ft. We're asking for a
fence that's solid and we're asking for notice to pro prospective buyers that they know what they're buying, which is you're buying up against industrial property. We have welders who are
blacksmiths. They pound steel to shape our machines. It can be really monotonous to hear. It can be really loud. Even when it's within the city of Linhaven noise ordinance of 75
dB going 20 feet, you're still going to hear it very loudly. I don't want to create problems. When all this is developed so beautifully, I'm going to be the one left getting the phone calls with complaints. Unless you buy something
next to my fence, nobody else will complain. So, I just this is my chance to ask you for your support to let us continue to do what we do in Linhaven with 150 jobs, hopefully more in the
future and let us grow and not have angry neighbors hating that we're next to them because you don't see industrial plants in neighborhoods for a reason. This is a situation where we're going to share a common boundary. We're
asking for a 60-foot buffer, a solid fence, and again, notice to prospective buyers that they're buying up against an active industrial plant. Thank you, commissioners. Darren Taylor with Holtzman Vogle, planning director. I'll
be very brief in my comments. We certainly appreciate the comments that we heard in the workshop about the uh the willingness and the importance of uh MER for this for this community and uh and really when when you when you
consider the industrial park and commissioner as you were mentioned when you're looking at the long-term viability which is really what we were hearing from you is that um you know if you think about a military base or you think about an airport the big threat that they have is ongoing residential
coming on their their border. That's the same thing with an industrial park. And that's the fact because when you have residential, what's your expectation when you go home tonight? You want it to be quiet. You don't want to hear noise. and uh the industrial activities that
are occurring there as uh the client just mentioned having the ability to have 24-hour operations occurring with residential single family multifamily abuing the property. What ends up happening typically is the fact
that once this is developed, you're going to begin to hear the complaints. you're going to begin to hear the issues where the industrial user will begin to have the pressure of wondering am I still thank am I still welcome in this area and so that's why it's so important
to be able to provide that protection that ongoing viability and uh when we were looking at the solution one of the issues with the type D buffer and uh which is the standard as uh Mr. Vulpi mentioned the requirement for compatibility. It is in
the statute. It is in the comprehensive plan. It is implemented within your land development code and in the table. Um as far as the appropriate standard and if we look at the standard that's established in your code, there's a little bit of an inconsistency within
the standard. Um this is very unusual. And uh if if typically when you consider the proposed use and the existing use, the standard would be the same where if you have commercial next to residential, if both require the type B or type C
buffer. Your code's a little different. It says that if if industrial is in place and I'm proposing a mixeduse development, I only have to do a type C. However, if I'm a mixed use and I'm coming and I'm proposing industrial, I
have to do a type D. Now, I'm not sure why you would have that difference. So, the only reason I can think of would be from a planning standpoint would be mixed use allows you to propose a transitional use like commercial or office, which could have been done on
the border, but that's not what we have here. We have single family, residential, multifamily. In fact, when you do typically have that across the board in your code, a type D is proposed. And finally, your code includes when you do have a situation of
an inconsistency when you're looking at a standard, your code compels you to apply the most stringent standard, which in this case would be a type D. Commissioners, any questions you might have? Be happy to try to answer them.
Any questions? Thank you. Thank you for recognizing us as an affected party. Um the right to answer any questions in the future after the public comment if that's necessary and we request the
additional conditions to this approval. Thank you. Right. Thank you. Um this time we'll have public commentary. Let me go to my list first and then we'll come to the general audience. Sean
Mullins. Is the Mullen still here? Okay. Bruce from White Western Lake. Okay, you're okay. All right. Left. Jim Prrowder. Hi, Commissioners. Uh, I'd like to thank
you for your dedication to public service. I know this isn't a fun job sometimes. Um, I've been following this project for years at this point. Uh I'm familiar with the history of the property before that. I was working with the Air Force as they were getting ready to turn over uh the property and I've
been looking forward to development there and an opportunity to clean up the bayou. I am very excited about the uh uh the the development and the developer has been uh really I couldn't ask for a a better partner as far as keeping us informed on
what they're doing and listening to our concerns. Uh so w with that said, um I really feel like they're going to go out of their way to make sure that that this this development is a is a benefit to the uh city and I would encourage all of you guys to uh to to vote for this as as
quickly as possible. I just hate to see anything get delayed. Uh because I have been literally working on this for years and I not the development but working on the restoration of the Bayou for years and I'm really really excited about it. Thank you. Right. Thank you.
Additional public commentary. Yes, Miss Walker. And Mr. Walker, did you want to comment also? Okay. I may be under the wrong impression, but I was led to believe that the industrial
park would stay industrial. Am I incorrect? Because on the phase three, there's residential properties being developed. According to what we just saw a few minutes ago, what happens is that land use is actually mixed use. So, the part that's being residential as of
right now is not industrial. It's actually mixed use, which allows for residential. So, we're good with that. In the in the industrial park, right next to the lighting store and just before the $7
million property that used to be ACMI, there's going to be a strip of residential properties. Mr. board. So, and the way I understand it, well, in the industrial use, it actually allows for multifamily units
and which is actually kind of unusual when you look at other cities. Normally, they don't allow that in industrial for for land that's coded industrial, but ours does. And until we go through the comprehensive plan and unified land development code, that's what it is. And
the second problem is I don't know whether or not the contamination has been solved but there is contamination dirt and soil on that property and we were led to believe that would be taken care of. I heard nothing about that tonight. Okay. Thank you Mr. Walker.
Um you know to answer this we have a saying where I was born and raised. Uh, you go ahead with this project. I also have a bridge in Brooklyn I could sell you. Um, I discussed the ownership of
the title to the property. When uh it was turned over from the air force to uh the city of Linhaven and then turned over, they said in the contract that you will not disturb the ground without permission from the United States Air
Force. certain areas due to the fact of the contamination that was there that's in the contract and covenant between the United States Air Force Linhaven and they passed that on to developer have to
address that. Uh they're going to take care of the storm water. So there will be no storm water assessment. You won't get that. They'll take care of that. uh the ownership of the water state owns the water the high
level high tide mark they should know this you're not going to prevent anybody from coming in doing like they do in Shell Island putting an anchor up on the high water mark and backing off and using the beach
at state property the water underneath peers and underneath the walkways out belongs to the state. The land underneath those belong to the state. They have to tie get an agreement
with the state. Similar to the marina downtown and the marina at St. Andrews, you have to get an agreement similar to us with Bailey Bridge. We don't own the water and we don't own the land
under bridge. We have a contract with the state. canals are going to be natural waterways. Are they going to connect to the ditch? Are they going to widen the ditch? Then the questions you've got. Uh you don't have to pass this.
You're not in a box on this one. This is not a development order. You don't have to pass this. For example, the houses of buildings on the commercial property and the commer and the private property can be five
stories. That's what stopped them in the first time when they put this plan up. We didn't want to line up the whole bayou with condos. You don't have to pass this. You get the development order, then you have to think about it. So if you don't
change the UDLC and the comprehensive plan with the overlays, they have to live what we will have to live with here when we develop. We live within the rules. Thank you. Thank you. Is there additional public commentary? Right, Mr.
Gray? Um, couple of things that got said since the workshop that I wanted to talk about is one is u the 24/7 operations and the banging and the noise. Um, I mean I don't know what the decibb are on the mosquito truck, but that thing wakes me
up if I go to bed early and that thing's not that loud. I would imagine that getting here and the hammering and stuff and whatnot will upset people. And I've seen this in other communities that I've lived in where it happens. Residential,
they start building um residences next to next to a racetrack, a car racing track that's been there for 35, 40 years. All of a sudden, the track's a problem because, you know, they they stop racing at nine o'clock when the curfew hits, but the residences are
like, "Oh, it's dusty and it's noisy and all of a sudden the tracks closed down." So, I I don't want to see Merrick closed down because of a noise. Um, also on the industrial part there, that's not planned yet. I think the fact that they
he said that they're not they don't have a plan yet is a great opportunity for us to have some goodwill in this plan and say let's exclude that piece out of this overlay because it was referenced earlier we can always bring it back and
edit edit the overlay and include it later when they have a plan. So um I think that's a good way where let's wait and see what the plan is. I mean, we have a non-binding referendum for zoning on the ballot tomorrow night. Have you all thought about how zoning could
affect this in the future? Um, that's something to think about, too. Uh, so yeah, I would just say maybe if you can exclude that industrial portion from this overlay for now and revisit it in the future when they have a better idea of what they want to put there. Um, and
then also, you know, I mean, I'm sure it's going to cost some lost revenue for the project, but the 60 foot buffer seems like it's going to prevent or at least give the best opportunity to prevent problems like like what I uh talked about
earlier, you know, with the example of a a racetrack. I mean, obviously, they're not as loud as a racetrack, but it's the same concept. So, thank you. Thank you. Is there additional public commentary? Yes, sir. And then we'll come to you,
sir, with the nice cowboy hat on there. Good evening, uh, Randy Whitehead, 10005 West 12th Street in Len Haven. Um, appreciate y'all's willingness over the years listening sterns and continue to push forward to figure out how we make
this for everybody. Uh, I live on the bayou. very looking forward to being cleaned up and seeing this great opportunity come. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you again for listening to me. Uh
my name is Jack. I'm Jack in the in the black hat, by the way. Anyway, Jack. All right. me. Um, I used to work at Merrick Industries. I I worked there for four years and uh, yeah, they do a lot of good work. Uh, I know that there a lot
of their previous was around coal fire plants which have been shut down, but the recent administration has bringing it back up full life. So, I expect their business will expand greatly. Being a resident of Linhaven and driving to and
from the plant, it wasn't that far from I I live over near Simply Seafood and driving there was was no problem. But you add a huge group of of buildings and and community a large density project like this and that's going to make
transit times and everything else. It's you're going to have to widen roads and you're going to have to take up people's property to do that. I don't think the existing structure from 7 highway 77 back to that property will allow you
without having to do some taking away a property to allow the widening of the streets. So I'm just want to make sure you understand what you're asking for when you approve this project. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any additional
commentary? Yes, sir. Commissioners, I'd just like to speak to uh some of the comments because there was some um I think a little bit of misinformation uh floating around and I think it's good to to clear the air there. Um first um I'll just mention the
gentleman just came up. Uh the project is actually lower density than the area surrounding it. So the the generally most of that property is 20 um units per acre, which would be like 3,600 residents. We're maybe half of
that um at full capacity, full buildout. Um and in regards to um um just an understanding here on the um issue with the buffer, uh it's a very good issue
and I I applaud Mr. Tana Hill for for taking the initiative to to look, you know, before uh uses foresight to to see that that could be an issue and we certainly don't want it to be an issue either because our buyers are not going to be happy if they're they're hearing beep beep beep
at forklift backing up or something like that. However, there is a misconception here and that is that 60 ft is any different than 20 feet or 10 feet. If you don't have something in that space, you have to break the sound up. So the
the way the code is uh written today, not our code, but the city's code today, it states that in a between a mixeduse and an industrial property, it requires a C buffer. Um, now we we'll get into C and
D and so forth, but I just want to point out that um, and I don't know how I can do this, but I can show it to the commissioners. That's okay. If you look on page 76, anybody can look on look up the the PDF is downloadable from the um, city's website, but you can see there's
actually four different um, variants of a sea buffer. the smallest being 20 feet with a high density of vegetation, trees, shrubs, and medium-sized plant uh
trees. Um going up to a 35- ft uh buffer. The same thing on on type D where it states that there's a 60ft buffer down to a 30ft buffer. So there's
actually if we go to a type D, it doesn't mean that we would have to do a 60-oot buffer. Our concern is uh um let me just bring up one other point too. The map is not a development order. This
is a a general idea of what's going to be where when we bring the development order up that that's uh u going to be what's going to set the standard based on you know the map. There's several things that we look at here now today and we'd say, well, we probably won't do
that. You know, we'll probably just make that a green in there where there little tiny houses behind surrounded by big houses uh and so forth on the border with Mr. Tanahill. So, I I I would suggest that whether we do a type D or a
type C, uh the problem being with type D is you're making a a special exception from everywhere else in Linhaven for Marina Island. In other words, you're saying our standard has to be more difficult to achieve than every other place in Linhaven. We're trying to be good stewards. We're trying to we're
doing a very expensive causeway cut and things like that. So, we're we're asking for the mercy of the commission and the public that let's let's deal with this in the in the development order stage or if we go into type D that it isn't set
to a 60 foot because f first of all, it's not acceptable the the tree density. We want more tree density in that space. Even though it's more expensive to do, it does deaden the sound more. And it also aesthetically will look a lot better having
a, you know, a nice beautiful green um backdrop there. Um same thing whether we use a burm or or sound delineating uh wall or anything like that. We would like to deal with that with engineers and not sort of on the fly and and with
with statements that you know um Mr. Tanahill's attorney said that it requires a 60 foot. It does not require 60 foot. Type D can be as little as 30 ft. So we think that it would make more sense to have maybe a sound engineer
that would come in and and give us what we need to put across there to keep the sound down. We don't want it. He doesn't want it. We don't want our our customers to be unhappy because one unhappy and this is the very first phase. This is one of the first things that we're doing. So if our if our clients there
are unhappy, they're going to tell one unhappy client means everybody's everybody knows about it. 100 happy clients, nobody nobody hears about it, you know, and that's just the nature of of business. So I think our interests are aligned. And that's my point is that I was going to say Mr. Tanahill's
interests and our interests are aligned. I would I would like to see it done in a in a more um uh educated manner than just to say, "Okay, well, we're going to do 60 feet because 60 feet is a bigger number than than 30 feet when the 30 foot or the 20
foot might be might offer better sound protection." The the other thing I wanted to bring up is that the code is 75 dB. I'm not saying that that's, you know, going to be the case all the time at Mr. Tanahol's factory, but 75 dB is a
is a toilet flushing, you know. It's it's not it's not super loud. It's not. And I've never and I've walked that site a 100 times and I've walked his fence line a hundred times. I've never heard anything over there. I mean, occasionally I've heard a beep from a,
you know, a vehicle uh vehicle backing up and so forth. It's um it's it's definitely an issue and I'm respectfully I'm I'm very appreciative of Mr. Tanahill bringing that to our attention
because in fact it's important. Um one last uh last point um uh in regards to the environmental issue that uh uh gentleman over here brought
up. So, the the site has been cleared by FD, by the EPA, and by everyone else. Um, there's a small section that has a slightly higher arsenic level, which arsenic is naturally occurring material
that says we need to put 2 ft of dirt on it. So, we we we understand that, you know, and that's I mean, that's in the that's on the deed. So, we're not uh impervious, but it has been I would say that the the United States government spent a lot of money testing and and
cleaning that site for years before they handed it over to us. Thank you. I have a question, Mr. Bell. So, earlier you mentioned that you wanted us to stay within the ULDC and not give you any more stringent qualifications for your
overlay, right? Mhm. My question is if that's the case, why did you bring us a overlay? Because you're asking for exceptions. No, I I I'm the overlay is setting the Marina Island overlay district. Uh Mr. Mayor is is setting the
ethos of the development. Correct. But design standpoint, but you're asking for things in here that are not in Ildc. Um am I correct about that, Amanda? Are there things that are here that are not in ILC? But but it is which we're making
exceptions for. It is um within the uldc to set up a overlay district. I understand that. But you stated that you didn't want us to do anything to you that was not in the ulc. But you're asking us for things that are not within the for your overlay, which is
exceptions. I understand what the mayor is saying, but I I also I also see in this it's just a simple question. Are you asking for do you just want us to go back to the ODC and say, "Hey, let's just do Marine Island versus
the ODC or do you want us to look at the overlay and make adjustments as needed to the overlay?" We're we were proposing to go back to the overlay to the uldc standard because our standard that we proposed in our marine island overlay
district is not to the uldc. It uses a 20 foot buffer and it doesn't give any of the language about the the landscaping and things like that. Although we would do that, it's not in there. So what we suggested as a as a means of of trying to come to a
compromise is to use the ULDCC standard and to approve with that exception. So I apologize if I I wasn't clear on that. Yeah, I was a little confused. So no worries. All right. Thank you for the clarity. No problem. I don't think there's any questions
about traffic right now. Questions about traffic? Uh, anybody have any questions about traffic? No, we'll talk about traffic when we build a road, but thank you for being here tonight. We appreciate you. Right now, we're talking about buffers and
decibb. All right, commission. So, we've heard a lot. We've talked a lot. Um, and I know you've thought a lot. Uh I think from what I heard in our workshop earlier is that some of us wanted to
update the language of buffers to coincide with what was presented to us by Merrick. Um, from what I heard earlier, is is that what I heard from the commission is to update the language to what we received from Merrick in regards to the buffers, the 60 ft with
the wall and the language of the oid. Um, so that they won't be held liable for that. Um, okay. Are there any other concerns in regards to the uh
overlay beyond the buffers? Just what I brought up about the industrial district and that other phase they don't know what they're going to do with. Okay. Did you want to leave that in there or take that out? Yeah, take it out. Okay. All right. So, Commissioner Ward wants to
take out the uh industrial right now from the overlay. Are there any objections to that? All right. Um, anything else in the overlay that needs to be addressed? All right. So, is there a
motion to No, sir. Thank you. We're going to make a motion and then you can speak then. But yeah. Well, and we might make a motion. I don't I don't know. Uh so is there a motion to update the language of the buffers to what was
presented to us by Merrick Industries as well as remove the um industrial portion from the overlay at this time and I'm just talking about the future phase one right. Yep. That's I'm good with that. All right. So we have a motion by
Commissioner War. Is there a second? Second. All right. Motion by Commissioner Wart, second by Commissioner Vandergrift. Um, is there any additional public [Music] commentary? Any additional public
commentary? Mr. Bale, anything? Um, I I was just going to say that uh in that um we we do have u industrial language in there even though it's not showing a picture. The picture is only for
reference. So that's all right. Thank you. All right. Any additional public commentary? All right. Yes, [Music] sir. Just a quick clarification.
Um, I live on a house fifth in in Michigan Avenue. My property is approximately a third of an acre. If you count my neighbor to my right side and and behind me and and over to the right side behind me, that's a total of four
houses in an acre of land. So, I don't know where this gentleman's getting that that the density is up as 20 or 30 units per acre. I I think that's ridiculous. That's that to me is high density. Thank you. Right. Thank you. All right. City
manager, if you call the vote. Commissioner War. Yes. Commissioner Vanigri. Yes. Commissioner Peebles. Yes. Commissioner Pero? Yes. Mayor Nelson?
Yes. Motion passed. Public hearing closes at 7:47 p.m. And we're going to take a five minute recess and be back at 7:52. Right. Calling our meeting back to order. Picking up with agenda
item number 20. Uh discussion and possible approval of resolution 2025 amending policy number 96 EX5 as adopted by the uh city commission April 9, 1996. City manager, if you would read this um resolution by title, please. Yes.
Resolution number 20250454 4554 a resolution of the city of Linhaven Florida amending the city's policy for the appointment of board members and providing effective date mayor this is the policy that the commission asked us to bring back to
them um with some updates and uh making very explicit how we advertise uh and uh pointing to the the city commission would appoint board members efforts and um I think those were really
the the highlights of the updates and city attorney can can make any other remarks. Anything from you, city attorney? Okay, awesome. Thank you all for working on this and getting this back to us. Um commission, uh are there
any questions or amendments you would like to make to this proposed? Uh I have one. This is more of a I think it may be a typo or I'm just misreading it. On page 120 um number 6A at the very end
end of the sentence it says uh city commission on either an informal wow I'm going to hard to say this five times fast. City commission on either informal or informal basis. I think that probably is supposed to say formal or
informal. Mhm. Okay. Um, other than that, I guess if by reading this, I just want to make sure that as an overview, basically the way that it reads is for advisory boards where there's
five members, each member of the commission will appoint one. And then for advisory boards with that are larger than five, that's my alarm to take my trash out. Um, don't forget. Yep. So for
where there's boards with five members would each appoint one and then boards with more than five members then we would all have a consensus. Is that how I'm reading it properly? Okay, Commissioner Ward. Um the only
question I had was do we want to list the boards on here or is there something that already lists all our boards? I know we have them listed in the charter. Yeah, that doesn't have all our boards, does it? Mhm. Yeah, they're probably not. You're
right. They're not all in the charter. We have I guess the initial board. So, uh yes, if we could, I guess add a page just with all the boards on there. That's about it. Other than that, I'm good with it. So do a question for the attorney
because there are some boards that are maybe um addressed in a charter. So what about those boards that are addressed there or do because a lot of them are done by resolution. So you just want to add the ones that in charter as well as
these here. Okay. Right. Uh Commissioner Vandergri, anything for you? Commissioner Perau. All right. Uh, is there a motion for this? Motion to approve. Second. Motion by Commissioner Wart, second by
Commissioner Peeles. Any comments from the public? Yes, sir. Have one question. Um, so the two that are up after this, because he just said each person appoints somebody. So, what two commission seats are appointing the
two vacant seats tonight? That will be on the board of five. So board of five, each of you gets a board member to appoint. So who's appointing the two tonight? But what seat number do those seats belong to? You usually start seat one
and then you go around. So who originally appointed those people? Because would that seat number retain that spot? Well, originally they weren't. Correct. They weren't appointed per the procedure. Correct. They applied. Yeah, they applied and then they went by the the previous procedure
that we were using which is just to come to us and then we all approved it previously. So tonight it would be for the first seat it would be whoever seat one suggests and then you guys would decide on a consensus and then seat two.
Is that correct? Seat one has already been decided by consensus prior to this. Y'all just asked that it be removed but we had already decided that that person would be grandfathered in. the old rule. So you guys would just be deciding if you agree with that consensus formally and then seat two would choose the
person for the next seat and then you would again decide if you guys agree as a consensus with that person. Okay, thank you. Any additional questions? All right. City manager, if you call the vote. Commissioner War, yes.
Commissioner Peebles, yes. Commissioner Po, yes. Commissioner Vanderg, yes. Mayor Nelson, yes. Motion passed. Right. Agenda item number 21 A. And this is in regards to the
appointment to the um board of adjustments. There any questions or concerns about that one? So the question I have is on fiscal impact. It says 12 million.1 million since the last budget amendment was passed. Commissioner Ward, we're going
to do Great. We're going to do uh the the appointments first. So we're going to do I'm out of order. Sorry. No, no, no, no, you're fine. So, what we're going to do, we're going to do 21 A for the first appointment, 21B for the second appointment, and then this will be 21 C so that we can keep the numbering for the minutes. But, but
yeah, so just rewind that back and do that again when we get back to it. Um, so 21A that is in regards to the appointment for the board. Are there any uh questions or concerns about that appointment?
So, A would be Barnes, right? based on cuz we basically kind of already talked about this in a previous meeting just so it's on the record that in a previous meeting we talked about this that because Barnes had put the application in previous to this uh us discussing
this ordinance the the the way they had done in the past it was not necessarily written but it was implied that it was first in first out basically and so we thought it was only fair that Barnes has that spot. So, I just wanted to um put
that out there on record. That's why that is happening that way. All right. Is there a motion for Miranda Barnes to be appointed to the city's board of adjustment? A motion to approve. Second. All right. Motion and
second. Comments from the public. To the manager, if you call the vote. Commissioner Peeles. Yes. Commissioner Perno, yes. Commissioner Vandergri, yes. Commissioner Warick, yes. Mayor Nelson,
yes. Motion passed. And then now moving on to 21A, which is the approval to appoint one new member of the city's board of adjustment. Um, and so that'll be seat two. Mhm. Yeah. But
this is Commissioner Vaniger's last commission meeting probably though. So, Commissioner Vanig, would you like to appoint that person to the the board of adjustment or make the make the I can find the uh go to page 15. I think it is page 15.
That's Yes, ma'am. It's more toward the top because we moved them. Yep. I mean, since this is a new order, you know, new resolution and everything, I mean, just Do they get walk out music? Um the Yes, ma'am.
You need you need to I'll find it. I think for future we're going to have to assign like every board member a number in order to alleviate this in the future. And walk out music.
I'll tell you in just a minute who it is. I just have to find it. No problem. The Jeopardies. All right. So, while she's looking for it, I just kind of wanted to point out to anyone in the future that wants to apply this procedure we just approved is if you put
your application in, it's in our system for two years. So, if you're not selected tonight, please know that we want you. I reached out to all five people, all five excellent candidates. I've never since I've been up here, we have not had five people. I don't even think we've had
more than two. So, thank you for applying. If you're not selected, please know that we we are very appreciative of you and you probably will get contacted in the future. Thank you, sir. I I would like to piggyback on what Commissioner Peeles just said, know that these these
all these applications are dates stamped. So, I mean, we can we can prioritize, you know, if they're if they're all willing again and we know we know who put their who put their application in first, so to speak. I
mean, because honestly, any one of the five is a is a good enough candidate if they want that they want to do it. So, Commissioner Vanigri, you have any recommendations? I recommend Jeremy Wood. All right. So, we have Jeremy Wood
being recommended to uh the city boards of adjustment. All right. So, there's a motion for that. Is there a second? I'll second. Right. Uh any comments from the public? See man, if you call the vote.
Commissioner Vandergri. Commissioner Peebles. Yes. Commissioner Pto. Yes. Commissioner Ward. Yes. Mayor Nelson. Yes. Motion passed. Now to 21C, discussion and possible approval of
resolution 2025 amending the fiscal year 2425 meet budget. Uh city manager, if you would uh read resolution by title only, please. your resolution of the city of Linhaven, Florida, amending the final budget for
fiscal year 2024 2025 and providing an effective date. Good evening. Um, as was mentioned a moment ago, this adjustment does include a 12.1 million increase to the budget that
you approved in December when I came to you then. Um, there are just a few factors. one is four um million400,000 of purchase orders that were not used in fiscal 24 that are
rolling to 25. Typically I bring that to you in January. I did not do that this year. So it's part of the budget that you're seeing in front of you now. We also have um $500,000 in the sewer department for our
new screw press and that's to be paid for by impact fees. The storm water budget is taking the largest increase and that includes the West 10th Street infrastructure improvement project that's being funded by CDBG and it's
required that we include $5.2 million of expenditures and a corresponding $5.2 2 million of revenues. It's budget neutral. And then the last is 4.3 million in debt service that you approved in December when we paid off
the 17 17th Street ditch note. That was not included in the budget that I sent you because you approved it after the budget. So that makes up the the $12 million difference. Questions? Yeah. Could you
explain it to me like I'm five about the CDBG grant and how that works for our budget? Okay. So, the CDBG grant, they're going to pay for the West 10th Street infrastructure project. Mr. Light would be able to give you more better
information on that. They're requiring us to finish $5.2 $.2 million worth of expenditures before September 30th of 2025. I am booking a receivable. Excuse
me, I'm sorry. Um, I'm booking a receivable, meaning that they're going to send us back that $5.2 million. We're going to do everything we can in our power to make sure that we get them the documents as quickly as we possibly can
because this is a cash flow issue. So we want to get that money reimbursed back to the city as quickly as we possibly can. What did I understand correctly that? So that's a wash the two five. Okay. Got it. Increase of revenues and in increase
of expenditures. So it's budget neutral. All right. So that one's budget neutral. The four plus million dollars that we're paying off, that's just us transferring that or paying off that money. That was taking the ARPA funds, the residual ARPA
funds, and transferring it to the storm water department so that we could pay off the 17th Street note. Got it. So 9 that's been done. So $9.5 million of the 12.1 million had to do with grant and ARPA funds. Correct. Okay. Thank you.
So then the remaining three million or two or three million or so is that basically increases to different budgets within the departments. It's less than that. The 500,000 is for the screw press for
the um uh sewer department and then the the rest is little things here and there all across the budgets. I can go through the departments if you want me to. Are there any particular questions about the departments? All right. Is there a motion for
this? Motion to approve. Second. Right. Comments from the public. City manager. Call the vote. Commissioner Warick. Yes. Commissioner Peeles. Yes. Commissioner Vandergri. Yes. Commissioner Perno. Yes. Mayor Nelson. Yes. Motion
passed. Quas judicial public hearing. opens at 8:13. You want me to swear? And Amanda, are there any other witnesses or applicants that need to be sworn?
This is the Ark of the Bay, I think. Yeah. Yes. Stand up if you might be asked questions. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you'll give tonight is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you. This is an application for a
development order for the Ark of the Bay St. Andrews Bay Center parking lot. The applicant is the Ark of the Bay and the owner is the Ark of the Bay. The agent is Richard Fner, PE from Dubris Engineering, who is one of the gentlemen
who stood up. Parcel number 10872-0000-0000 and the location is 1804 Carolina Avenue. The property is approximately 3.44 acres. It is public institutional. The project engineer was Chris Short um and also Rich Richard
Funner. The reviewing engineer is Doug Crook from Panhandle Engineering. And the project basically is just additional parking with improved landscaping um and um supporting uh infrastructure such as you know the storm water pond. This
shows the future land use map. That's the arrow there showing the public institutional parcel. This is the aerial. I have um drawn in the corners the areas that will be affected. This one with the storm water pond and the parking and this one over here will be
additional parking. This is the site plan and this was the landscape plan. Thank you. Are there any questions for uh Miss Amanda or the applicant?
Motion to approve. Second. Right. Is there any comments from the public? City manager call the vote. Commissioner War. Yes. Commissioner Peeles. Yes. Commissioner Perno. Yes. Commissioner Vanigri. Yes. Mayor Nelson.
Yes. Public hearing closes 8:15 p.m. Our quasi judicial public hearing opens at 8:15 p.m. Application for development order circle K convenience store with fuel sales highway 389. Uh Amy, do we
have to do this again? Yes. I'm sorry. You swear affirm the testimony. You'll give us the truth and nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank you. This is an application for development order from Circle K, uh, convenience store with fuel sales. The
applicant's name is 390 Linhaven LLC, as is the owner of the property. The agent is Sandy Owens, MDM Services, Inc., who is one of the is the lady who stood up. Parcel number 11573-000000-10 and the location is the
southeast corner of County Road 389 and Highway 390. The property is approximately 2 and a half acres. It has a commercial land use map designation. The engineer was Damian D. Leslie PE from MDM Services Inc. and the reviewing
engineers Chris Shaw PE and Richard Fner from Dubrey Engineering. The reviewing traffic engineer was uh Vinnie who was here earlier, but as it was a um it's on a state road and a county road, it was the county who um told them what needed
to happen. Um so the convenience store will be 5200 square ft and there'll be seven covered gas pump stations plus parking, driveways, utilities, and landscaping. If you recall, the development order for the storm water facilities was approved by you all on
August 27th of last year. That was for the parent parcel. So, it was for this project and also to accommodate other future development on that parent parcel. And Bay County has issued a right-of-way use permit for the construction of a turn lane on County
Road 389 south of State Road 390 because that is a congested area. So, the county um told them that they, you know, in order to proceed, they would have to put in a turn lane. This is the location. It's got
commercial land use. I think you're all familiar with the property. I had a big load of um soil on it for a while. Um here it is on the aerial. This is the site plan and the landscape plan. And
also there's some renderings of how it will look. Um it's going to be the same as the one on 77. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Just quick question. Um, says Bay County approved the permit for the turn lane on 390. Would that not
come from the state since that's state road? 389, sir. 389. 389. Okay. I said 39. Construction of a turn lane on 3 389. Okay, good. Motion to approve. Second.
Questions from the public? City manager, if you call the vote. Commissioner War. Yes. Commissioner Pero. Yes, Commissioner Vandergroup. So, we need another gas station across the street from a gas station. That's across the street from a
gas station. Sometimes it's hard to turn left whenever there's a lot of traffic coming down 389 to get to Chevron. Yes. Or Exxon, it it is difficult sometimes. Okay. Never enoughies. Commissioner Peeles. Yes. Mayor Nelson.
Yes. Motion passed. Public hearing closes at 38:19 p.m. Public hearing for the discussion of Mer Marina Island development agreement opens at 8:19
p.m. All right. City attorney. So, Florida statute requires two public hearings before entering a development agreement. This is the first of two public hearings you'll have on this development agreement. There's no action required of you tonight other than to receive public comment um and discuss it
to the extent you want to. The content of this development agreement is largely the same. Um there's a lot of overlap. It does do some different things. However, it sets some timelines. It requires a dedication of a public safety building before the completion of phase one. Um, there's also a blank that we
need to fill in before the conclusion of the second public hearing with regard to the timeline for their construction and dedication of public parking spaces. Um, and a number that is equivalent to however many parking spaces can be top accommodated on the top floor of their
parking garage. Parking spaces don't have to go there, but that's just the the variable we are using to determine the number of park public parking spaces they will provide. We didn't put a timeline on that. Um, so there was a blank that I am requesting the commission pay attention to. It's on
page 248 um that we do need to fill in before we adopt this uh development agreement. It does have a term of 30 years. Something I want to point out is the legal description of the property for the overlay district and for this agreement were the same. So since you
have revised this the the land that is subject to the overlay district, I want to at least point out to you that you can keep the originally proposed legal description which will bind the entitlements on that land. Um or you can
also remove that that unprogrammed industrial piece from this development agreement to revise to undo it. Uh for both the overlay district and the development agreement also will require two public hearings. So the procedure is the same. It's up to
you whether or not you want to leave it in or not. Right. Thank you. Um are there any questions about or concerns input about this agreement? Mine was on the storm water impact fees.
I know it says um provided that doesn't connect to the city storm water, but how do we know that it's not going to impact other areas? And and I know it's on the coast, but um and I thought I read maybe I misread
it, but is there somewhere in there where it exempts them from paying storm water assessment fee or did I misread that? Uh it definitely exempts them from storm water impact fees. I don't know that I saw an exemption for the assessment.
All right, additional questions, input. Of course, we're not voting on this tonight. Um, but any additional questions or input? Um, if so, please uh provide those to the city manager, especially if it's something that we need Marina Island to uh to respond to.
and thank you for responding to to those questions um that we sent earlier which allowed the workshop to go a lot quicker. Yeah, I I don't have anything to do tonight. So, I mean just just hang out, right?
Um Yes, sir. You can come up. Yeah. development agreement has the buffer language. Um we would ask that the same buffer language from the overlay district be Yep. We'll cover that. Thank
you. Uh any other comments from the public on this agreement? Nothing. Mr. Gray, I'm sure I hear from you before the next meeting. I appreciate it. Thank you. All right. Uh moving on to All
right. So, closing public hearing at 8:23 p.m. And moving on to number 25, discussion and possible approval to appeal the board of adjustment decision by Obsidian ML1 LLC form signed variance
request. Right. City attorney. Um, I will introduce Robert Bulb who is representing the applicant um who requested this appeal. All right. Thank you, mayor and commissioners. And I promise um after
this this is last time you'll have to see me for a little a little while, but I appreciate your indulgence tonight. Um this is an appeal from what was really a a non-decision by the board of adjustments. There's an existing Tom Thumb store. Um and we have applied for
a variance uh from the sign height standards. Um going through the this this location is going through a conversion from a a rebranding from Tom Thumb to Cumberland Farms which a lot of the stores are going through that
rebranding um which is refresh revamping of the interior the exterior and as a part of that there are two signs on the property. Uh, one is 16'9 in high, one is 15 foot high. Um, we were asking for
them to be 14'9 in and 13 feet. So, reducing both of those sign heights by 2 feet. Um, and changing the colors and the, of course, the logo. Uh, not changing the structure of those signs, but the existing signs are legally
non-conforming. Your your sign code says 10 ft is the max height. Um but these signs were in existence before then. The the reason for the two-foot reduction is mainly the change in the shape of uh Tom Thumb has a diamond shape and Cumberland
Farms has kind of a curved shape. Um we were told we needed to go through the variance process for this and uh as part of the the procedure here we applied for the variance. It went to the board of
adjustments and appeals. There was a a testimony and discussion and a motion to approve. Um it was a two to two vote. So that motion to approve failed. There wasn't a fifth member there that night. Um so the proc the procedure is to come
to you for an appeal. Um the first appeal here that we have before you is that we're appealing the need for that variance. Um, we don't believe because this is a reduction in the
nonconformity, the case law says that a reduction in the nonconformity, you maintain your legal non-conforming status. And so, because we would maintain the legal non-conforming status, you could approve the signs at 14'9 in and 13 feet with the Cumberland
Farms logo. The only thing that's changing is the logo and repainting the the structure that's there. Um, and because it's reducing that nonconformity, it does not lose its legal non-conforming status and you could approve that without a variance.
So, as I think the city attorney could maybe clarify a little bit, but the first request to you um is to approve that approve the the signs without the variance because we maintain the legal non-conforming status.
So, as a threshold matter, you'll need to determine um is this a modification or not to change not only the branding but also the sign structure um to match that Cumberland Farm's unique shape and branding. Yes, it does reduce the
height. Um but the first question you'll need to answer is, is this a modification? If you decide it is a modification, you'll continue to with the hearing to determine whether a variance is appropriate. If you determine this is not a modification,
we're done. Right. Is this a modification? I I feel like it's something that's been required by, you know, Cumberland Cumberland Farms in order for them to have to do this and not something that the I mean, you are changing it, so I guess it is a
modification. Well, and and I apologize. I It's all good. Second, it's it's really kind of a legal question and and it does come to you all, but you the modification language is defined in your code and um
I believe it states that uh the modification is a change, an expansion. It lists another a few other words that um to the to the structure of the sign. Um what I was referencing to is in the case
law there related to signs and I actually have a case that I if you would like to see but uh the 3M case u if the modification it's not it doesn't use the word modification that's the word that you is used in your code but if the change is a reduction in the
nonconformity then it maintains its legal non-conforming status. So even though it might fall under that word change in your code, the legal non-conforming status stays in place and therefore you could have a sign that is
over your your sign height limit without a variance. Um so that's that is the argument. Um got it. So I guess tonight we just deciding whether or not we want them to have the sign or not. I mean is this just the nuts and bolts of
ultimately the decision? Yeah. So, if you decide they want them, you want them to have the sign, there are two ways to get there. One, you decide it's not a modification. Um, or two, it is a modification, but it meets the criteria for variance. Okay. Can we do the it's a modification that meets the criteria for
variance? Yeah, I that's where I was going with it because Sorry if I may ask a question. So, I if I understand it, you're using the same pole or whatever it's on. You're just changing the top part of it. That's that's that's correct. And I I
appreciate the city attorney explaining it better than I can. We do have to go through these two steps for Yeah. I mean, I like the Tom Thumb sign better, but I mean, if Cumbland forms is what you have to do, then that's fine. No, I'm just messing with you,
man. Understood. Okay. Miss Vandergri, why did the committee um choose to It was a two- two vote. Why did why were there two descending? Because they know that when a variance
request comes to them, they have to look through the list of uh criteria for granting a variance. Um and um they know whatever comes before them, they have this list in their packets. They know it's in the ULDC and so they
consider the request against these things. they I believe also would have thought it was a modification because um the way that we've always read it in the code it says that you can maintain if something's non-conforming you can
maintain it but you cannot modify it you can't change it and so that's how we've always applied that and plus the variance findings have things like special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land structure or building involved and which
are not applicable to other land structures or buildings in the same land use district. I believe that they probably felt I mean I can only say probably because I know they look through these things. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant. Um granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the OLC to other lands, buildings or structures in the same land use district. So there's there's a number of criteria that they go through.
So when they spoke no, they didn't specify though. They should have specified and they didn't. Um but they say no when they feel that it doesn't meet these criteria. All right. Thank you. Um so what's
what's going to take longer? the the the modification and the going back to variance going through the whole process again or just saying the darn things it's it's it's like in kind and then and we're changing a name and it's the same monument sign right it's the same
cabinet with prices and everything right and it's going to be two foot shorter that's correct let's just get let's just let them change the darn sign I think that's what we're agreeing to you you were saying to to yeah we're going to give them the variance though we're going to modification with variance. Are
we going to are we allowed to do it now or does it have to go back to board of adjustments if we do it that way? We're the final decision maker. Okay, let's do it. All right. So, he makes a motion that we do a modification with variance. All right. I'll second. Second. All
right. Any comments from the public? City manager, please call the vote. Uh, Commissioner Perno. Commissioner Perno, yes. Commissioner Peebles, yes. Commissioner Ward, yes. Commissioner Vandergraph, yes. Mayor
Nelson, yes. This time it pays to be last.