ready very good we're going to call the meeting to order ladies and gentlemen thank you for being here and for being interested in the business of the city Terry can I ask you to do our invocation absolutely our heavenly father we thank you for this day you've given us we thank you for this place that we live Lord and we pray that all the decisions made here tonight might be to your glory and to the best interest of the citizens Jesus name we pray Amen to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and Justice thank you jry madam clerk will you conduct a roll call please yes Mr Hall here miss huto here Mr Merritt here Mr Striker here chairman R yes here thank you everybody get a chance to review the minut from last month yes sir everybody in agreement with what they say yes sir I make a motion to approve the minutes second very good Madam clerk will you take a vote Please Mr Hall yes yes Miss Hut yes Mr Merritt yes Mr Striker yes chairman Rinko yes thank you any additions or deletions to the agenda gentlemen ladies that you wanted to add today very good okay ladies and gentlemen at this time uh anybody that would like to come and speak to the uh Commissioners uh on items that are not on the agenda please feel free to come forward and and speak Mr Libby how are you afterno good afternoon uh I met the new two new people yesterday welcome aboard glad to see you all good afternoon welcome to the planning members and the planners themselves our appearance today uh is an opportunity to ensure our petition was received and thank you Mrs Greger for making sure that happened you're welcome and to offer comments regarding the petition while you are similarly scheduled to address a variance for the same objective ldr 202 uh 20202 631 uh we were made aware of the 2022 ldr effective elimination of the grandfather clause as a result of viewing the planning package documents and specifically the pending variance case of Mr and Mrs Roso all although not part of the rouso case we feel there is informal connectivity through the same subject matter Mutual support all other affected Property Owners within a Donaldson Point area were notified and it was found that none were aware of the 2022 rewrite affecting their property rights and civil are appearing uh this afternoon we acknowledge a long-term solution and review you will be required and offer our assistance in your deliberations and response to the petition thank you for allowing us the opportunity to address you and I ask for your recognizing of Mr Gary Brandon very good this is on the agenda yeah this uh this is on the agenda so uh is it something and we are going to have a public hearing Gary and Mr Libby so if you wanted to address your comments actually while we're involved in that particular variance that might be more appropriate is that okay I was uh I had asked earlier U because it was not part of the uh the schedule item and it was a separate and it was identifying the petition itself and I was steered so it's more of the cause re regarding um notification and able to view the changes as opposed to the specific okay very good I'm strictly speaking about the petition thank you Mr liby appreciate that Gary please my name's Gary Brandon 1034 Brandon place I wasn't aware of this uh Grandfather Clause till a week or two ago I would have thought I would have been informed if something this important would come up for investment property investment property sells differently than single home properties when you have investment properties like duplexes and you put it on the market investors buy them not people that want to live in homes to live there so when you change a clause like this it does not do anything to help the city it just hurts the people that own the duplexes if it's a duplex it doesn't involve Parker in any way if it's a duplex and it's grandfathered in versus saying you've got to have a uh variance if a new owner buys it if you have to have a variance for a new owner buy buying a piece of investment property they're going to walk away or they're going to offer you 50 cents on the dollar so you're going to lose a lot of money in your Investments uh I wasn't aware of this to a few weeks ago when I walked into City Hall and they asked me if I owned a duplex and I was kind of shocked to uh Mr liy came and we went over this I don't know why we weren't informed of this because I come to most the meetings and I've given the city Kos on pretty being transparent and now I feel like I've slapped in the face and I'm one of the Parker five on the duplexes uh I don't think it would be uh we just want you to review it and see about changing it back we're not here for a big fight with the city over I think maybe it was Overlook but it doesn't make sense for my a duplex was built in 1955 period it's called non-compliance nonconforming grandfather but uh to have changed it formed us I don't know if any buyer want to buy a property that you got to get a variance on so they're going to buy it and maybe it can still be a duplex you know maybe I know it's $150 for the variance it shouldn't even be a fee it should just be uh back to what it was we were not informed first of all when you two gentlemen come to the to the podium I appreciate the high level of respect you always show thank you because that's who we are uh and I guarantee you we'll re we will review this we'll review what the findings were I do have to tell you though that uh I think if we go back one of the things I did because I get Mr Libby in your letter which indicated that um there was limited exposure to the public limited times where the public was allowed to join and see what was going on so I asked our planner and our city clerk said look we we want to be open uh the the planning commissioner's whole concept is to involve as many people as possible uh because that's important for us to grow our city I have a stack here Gary and Mr Libby of 19 different meetings that dated all the way back now uh to October 5th of 2021 and then ended on the final reading and I know your argument is both exposure to the meeting have input and allow the public to see what's in it uh we had eight workshops those workshops uh rang from two to four hours the public was invited they were advertised uh they were agenda the agendas were advertised yes ma'am they they were advertised a variety of different ways and in fact um there were some substantial changes to things like mobile home parks RV parks and many of those people attended so uh we put it out there we put it out there that we wanted the The public's input and we put it out there we were interested in what you had to say so that we could alter the ldrs at that time excuse me one of the things you're talking about well Bill let me let me finish what I'm gonna say and and then and then I'll I promise you I'll hear you again so um and I and I know you part of your piece is ability to review what was done so these these 19 meetings which were meetings workshops special meetings and readings the last three were readings occurred uh in that September until uh November time frame and uh and then the public in one of my meetings as well as advertised the public was given uh from October until sometime in November an opportunity to see the final reading the final device uh okay and that was advertised as well that was adver let me ask oh yes yes yes let me let me actually let let me show it g g I actually have it I'll show it I don't get the bullets yeah a variety of different ways so uh I do have an address though I do have five addresses important so here's here's how it here's how it went out it went out it was advertised in the bullet and it was advertised um uh affidavit by the editor because we have to do that as part of the notification certain individuals that were impacted in this particular case including Miss Roso by email we have those emails uh and uh it was put on the Marquee and it was also put on the information board here all of that said we're humans maybe we need to look at it again and I appreciate that okay but what I heard was we didn't know and when you've got 19 meetings and you advertise those four different venues and you you allow people to come into those meetings and actually provide their input and many did I can't go along with your assessment that we didn't let people know because there are a number of people we had hundreds of people during those 19 meetings that came in and provided their input and like I said many of them you know came from mobile home parks RV parks things of that nature because they were being impacted as well anybody that had duplex come do you think I anybody had a duplex or Triplex come to any of these meetings there five in Donaldson estate they could have at least mailed out five stamps they could have mailed it uh to bring it aware because I I come to a lot of meetings but we don't always see everything on your Marquee and I don't do the bullet oh yeah uh and I agree and I I just want y'all to uh relook at this oh yeah and it doesn't affect me as bad as some of the other people in the room that have duplexes uh mine could be converted if I had to to a single family I wouldn't want to have to do that but it wouldn't be a nightmare but my mine but my friend the Walsh is here they've got two duplexes side by side they couldn't be converted to anything you know what and and a buyer wouldn't want it if he's got to get a variance now it depends on where it's at now those duplexes if they happen to be in an mu1 mu2 no issues there um one of the things that we have as our Mo in the city is that these low density residential areas which are designated as single family dwellings on single Lots um the goal is to migrate towards that um there's a variety of different reasons for it beautification purposes U those individual Property Owners uh values of their homes protecting those people who are already there that's very important uh and in fact if you look at the compren of plan there's segments in there which dictate that planning and the council members have very specific Direction in order to make sure that those districts uh maintain the concept of what they're designed for and that being single family residential dwellings and I agree with that 100% yes sir you know just not grandfathered or non-compliance non-conforming properties that are grandfathered in oh yeah should be left alone there's not that many of them there's five of them you know it's not like it's flood and we need to and we need to bring it back we need to bring it back and take a look at it because uh maybe we have to take a second look we did get input though and many most of the input came from people who had properties that ultimately had single family homes that were next to multif family homes and they too felt as though prop property values were impacted as a result and I suspect can't remember unless I go back and look at the notes from a year and a half ago but I suspect that may be why we took that stance well see those homes of people that aren't happy with a duplex next to them were built years later than the duplexes so they shouldn't have bought the property if it was next to a duplex they don't like yeah but we there first Gary I appreciate your comments appreciate your comments and thank you and thank thanks again for the the way you communicate you too Mr liby thanks for the info on that yes sir what I was uh depending on was the uh the uh the notices going out on on the emails and uh the agendas simply had Workshop yeah there was no did you put out anything and I'm not I just want to know myself I'm I'm the bad guy here so you're not the bad guy but I didn't know and and I took it as an example because I don't have a lot when I when I heard you all were talking about RVs and I showed up and I was the only one there and I made sure you all didn't do what you plan on do but I was I was available and and I just thought that maybe my case might have been a little bit wider than what it was that's all that's all and when you change were all the people notified when they were changed of this of this change in the uh in the lbr I know that the emails are extensive the email lists are extensive I know that I know the mar I know the Marquee uh is was run for a significant number of days I know the information board was and of course the newspaper those are the things that we're legally required to do if you're a community believe it or not less than 155,000 people uh you can't just use electronic media be you can but you have to show that at least 75% of the populace has access to that and we didn't even want to do that research we just said let's do it in the paper let's go ahead and do send out emails let's go ahead and and uh put it on the Marquee and let's put it on the information so that's what we did and I suspect that some of the affected people uh weren't as uh as lazy as I was but I bet there was a couple cases where you didn't get representatives for things that you were working on yeah and that's all I'm and that's you do what you can and which is reasonable in order to get the word out and I I'm confident we did that I know you I know you all were hustled I know you I it was a it was a grind you're right because we had will over it we save the city um tens of thousands of dollars in in doing it this way and um and in fact I think for the most part we ended up with a pretty darn good product yeah thank you for your comments gentlemen uh anybody else okay let's let's get going on the first item of the agenda here is Mr Johnson in the room he is oh hey Mr Johnson how are you sir hey Adam Johnson I think this is Lake Drive is that sir yes sir it's just a lot split yes sir we demo the trailer and you know all the Der stuff on the proper just want to split that single thank you sir and I did get that s that site survey so thank you yes sir everybody had a chance to look at the site survey and uh the lot split request here yes gentlemen just to give you kind of a you know it looks like in total it looks like it's about eight Acres looks like about 02 Acres of it's going to be split off uh to become a single family dwelling is that right that's well within in the guidelines he has to have single is this low density residential here yes sir low density residential he's got to have 02 acres in order to do that he's well well beyond that well beyond the 7500 square feet anybody have any questions for Mr Johnson this is just out of curiosity it's about a third of the lot why not split well and the engineer inves US that if we wanted to do the third one in the future have 3 60ft Lots you know we have to replat the third one so that gives us the opportunity to build the first two and then have to replat the third one if it becomes if it provides it we want them all the other two that we're doing that we're building now those are 65 200s so ultimately we would want you know hopefully we would get the three but we know the two are good and then we have to repl to get the third how big was the was the parent track when it started you know I'm not8 three I think is what they correct yes sir and it would and and obviously under the under the ldr it would have to be platted to be the third one we've had that discussion gotcha okay very good but we're just doing a simple split two yes sir about about a third of it's going to be siphoned off very good I'll make a motion to refer it to the city council for them to look at very good with a recommendation with a recommendation to move forward with it okay very good so uh the motion on the floor is to go ahead and approve it and send it over to the city council for their review and approval or review and and uh determination all right do I get a second second second okay to recommend that that okay very good mam clerk can we I'm sorry who was the second I was Mr very good can I get a vote please yes Mr Hall yes Miss Hut yes Mr Merritt yes Mr Striker yes chairman R yes thank you thank you Mr Johnson appreciate improving neighbor yes sir thank you and the question on the followup on West Street did we get to that I have uh talked with the engineer and U I'm waiting for her final review but U I don't have it yet so okay all right thank you very much ladies and gentlemen at this time uh we're going to migrate over to variance requests and these are going to be public hearings um so the way the public hearings will work is we'll ask the applicant to come up and tell us what they're doing uh what they're what they're doing with regard to the variance what their intentions are uh and then the public will have an opportunity to review uh and ask questions so do we have um let's see here Brian Mr forand Mr forand very good thank you I I get Mr Hall would like permission to build a shed is that Mr Hall Mr Hall is my understanding he is the property owner and you rent from him but it is your intent to be the one who rebuilds the shed yes okay I I didn't it wasn't clear to me when I got paperwork what's your name sir I'm sorry Ken foran Mr forand thank you Mr foran if you don't mind uh just kind of give us an understanding of what you're where you're at what you're trying to do here I'm I'm on 10:39 East Park down there in a mobile home and I've had a shed down there it's been there forever and ever and the hurricane did some damage to it so I took couple of feet of it off and closed it back up and it's it's not very eye appealing to look at but I have two large oak trees in the yard that stoping me from coming over to the limit to if I come over to the 10 foot or whatever they're talking about then I can't re got two two big oak trees that stops yeah yeah I drove down through the is that a road or Public Access so Davis Lane so that's a it's a marked Road it's a marked 911 Road it's a road I reckon but it is not paved yeah it's a little Old Road looks like a looks like a looks like it's an just an alley unpaved alley that's what it is yeah well but it's not an alley it actually has a name to it and a green like State sign for the so we're not talking about 5 foot shed sidey yard setb we're talking 7 foot right oh this would so this would so we're really just talking about an 8 inch 8 Ines because it looks like he's got the building parked about 58 52 inches off the his property line that's why I want to do it it was two it was 16 18 in or something like that and I'm move it 52 in to be able to build it but I can't come over no further and have a shed of any size because I got two big Oak TR yeah I got you okay well so in reviewing U you know the the protection trees particularly the the new ldrs there's a real strong desire to protect the trees that we have there there are Provisions in the ldrs which do allow us to uh provide variances based for example parking you know if if you got a builder who has a required number of parking spots we have the ability or at least Council does to determine that they can have one or two or three or four less parking spots that are required in order for the greater good to protecting those trees so we're just talking about an 8 inch change right 8 inch here is that is that accurate 8 inches and and so that we can protect a number of trees and you're taking another shed down which is complain at this time is that right I've have a actually a tent that's over a concrete slab and I've took part of it down because it was too close to the road and I will take it all the way down my my table saws and the tools that I need to build my shed or in it and as soon as I if I can build this new shed then I the tent will come completely and if I can't the tent's got to come down but if tent comes down I'm going to have tools and stuff that's open to the environment on the concrete okay and it's not I mean I'm going to build a nice looking shed right now it doesn't look very feeling and way I look at my window so look at it it's it's been like since the hurricane and I this is the first time I've really got serious about building a new one because I've been told no no no no but not only will it be better for me but it'll be better for the city to look at I mean and the neighbors and all that stuff they don't have to look at this Mr for so the front of property is that Fifth Street the front is West Park I'm I'm on the corner of East Park excuse me I'm on the corner of East Park e and then uh Fifth Street and then the Davis Lane I've actually got I'm in a in the front the front of the property though your your your dwelling it's called it's called 1039 East Park so that Davis Lane that is then that would be like your if you're standing at the front it kind of be front door faces Davis land my front door space DAV there's nothing on the on the rear side of no is on F Street Davis is to the left East Park is to the right okay and if you drive by at Christmas they normally have lovely Christmas decor okay Mark please please I I've I've got it here but thank you um so really what we're looking at here is the preservation of trees pretty important um um gentleman wants to take down kind of a shed that's already there which is probably non-compliant but that'll sort of help beautify and it will and the one that I'm going to rebuild take down and rebuild it will be so much better it's a shed it's a wooden shed and the tent will come down that'll come down but I wouldn't take my two oak trees down if I if I can't build it my oak trees ain't coming down those so ultimately um now you you are is that shed going to be 14 by 16 so you'll need a permit for that okay because it's beyond D Minimus D Minimus is 120 ft and Parker um he's looking for an 8 inch variance guys let ask you question about that is that to the hard end of the building or is that the overhead uh or the overhang because the you know you're I don't have the pipe work I can show you looking at well I'm just trying to deter whether or not that's actually a okay originally there was 26 in so the new one at 52 in it's going to be over and the con it's going to be past the concrete slab that's there a little bit like here here's concrete slab I can't that but the 52 in that's to the hard part of the building that's the wall to to the wall okay because and that was okay because some people look at the eve and interesting enough the eve doesn't count it's to the hard part of the building thinking if you had at least an 8 in Eve maybe you didn't need any kind of a uh you know variance at all but it looks like you do so we have any questions I drove by that place it's impeccable it keeps it extremely nice so I Got Confidence whatever he puts up is going to look good Mr chair for the benefit of the two new planning Commissioners I need to make sure everyone understands the requirements for the variant so ularly for you two in order for a variance to be recommended to the city council uh the applicant in this case this gentleman has to show by clear and convincing evidence uh and with having the burden of proof and persuasion the following items that there is a specific hardship affecting the development of the property resulting from the strict application of the provisions of these regulations number two the hardship is not a result of actions of the owner and is not based solely on a desire to reduce development cost number three proposed variance is necessary to preserve a substantial property right where such property right is generally available to other property owners of adjacent or nearby Properties or other properties in the land use category number four the proposed variance will not materially increase congestion on surrounding streets increase the danger of fire or other Hazard or otherwise be detrimental to the health safety and general welfare of the public number five the proposed variants will be compatible with adjacent and nearby development and will not alter the essential character of the land use District number six the effect of the proposed variance is consistent with the purposes of the regulations and number seven the effect of the proposed variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan so those items have to be uh shown by clear and convincing evidence by the applicant uh in order for you to recommend approval to the city C on any variance so I do have a question for clarification so if you get the variance you would not have to remove the trees no sir I'm not normally remove my okay they're not I mean my trees are it's like no I'm not taking my trees down the hurricane got a couple of them I don't these these actually soak up a lots and lots of water takes lots of water to feed these trees and I have lots of plants and lots of strawberry in my yard it takes a lot of water to keep them keep them F I have actually have another I have another big Oak Tree in the front but it ain't need I trimmed it because of the you know the big LMS coming off of it over my mobile home that I don't my mobile home and I tra these that I'm talking about so the lens ain't hanging over my mobile home Mr forand this is a public hearing so I'm going to ask the public if anybody has any comments regarding this particular uh variance does anybody else uh have any any thoughts ideas uh that they want to share with the public very good very good all right well if that's the case then let me just ask uh your thoughts ladies and gentlemen impeccable property the greater good to preserve some trees he's answered the affirmative and all seven of the variance questions uh he's come before us he knows he needs a permit in order to build it because it's beyond the 120 sare foot di Minimus um um make a motion that we recommend this to the council I'll second very good Madam clerk will you take a a vote Please Mr Hall yes Miss Hut yes Mr Merritt yes Mr Striker yes chairman R yes we'll build a nice shed sir proud thank you thank you Mr you still have to go before the council members you there yes yes sir yes sir very good and then then after that I can they'll give you their blessing or not ma'am they'll give you their blessing or not but hopefully we'll see a lovely showed okay yeah make me happy very good item three 1440 to Road it's another variance we're still involved in a any public hearing um M Roso are you going to be speaking George miss m Roso Mr yeah yeah it's somebody say Mr Roso he said M Ros maybe different name how do you pronounce your last name George just like Smith haras very good very good if you don't mind kind of tell us a little bit about what it is that you want to do and just give us sort of a summary uh so we have probably one of the most unique multiplexes it's a Triplex you know you're across the St from us so uh two of the apartments are on DOA Road the third one is let's say one level below it's facing the water almost impossible to land in one hand so you also know that at least in my case uh in my wife or whatever who don't live here permanently uh it we did get an email I don't remember one I know I look at the water ones piure the water build is getting paid or whatever but uh I didn't know that the grandfather CL was removed so we're obviously coming here because we have several pieces that you know we bought in the area we're trying to sell uh one of those pieces is the 1440 DOA Road House and like the gentleman here said uh we've had several let's say offers but they're all contined on one on the possibility of this to being a Triplex now that doesn't necessarily mean that a person wants the triplex to rent potentially maybe you know I know one had a sick mother or whatever they might want to share different apartments uh but someone might actually want to use it as a tri so you know keep one apartment and rent the other two or whatever the the combinations are U but we need to have that granted so that we can let's say when we sell the house and we're under contract in fact right now to be able to pass that all along to the new owner uh so that's where we are do you need us to go through one through questions now I mean I wrote out a very detailed response right to the criteria I don't know if you want to do you did file the Vari request so I know Mr SLO when you go through number one you ask the question do you want me to respond to each one M Roso I I think it's probably an appropriate thing because it's a public hearing and there's a number of people that probably don't have the the detail do so um if it's our with you could we do that yeah I mean I think that would be helpful to everybody to understand what's going on Mr SLO will you uh read through that or I can just give you a copy of there and it's got the questions on it well I know sometimes we don't so to be clear we're requesting a variance concerning the Land Development regulation section 6- 3.1 number six our aim is to secure permission for for the continued non-conforming use of our property a Triplex uh in a residential neighborhood in the event of ownership and we ar change own chair the again the burden of proof and persuasion is on the applicant and they must show by clear and convincing evidence there they entitled to each of the following elements or an affirmative answer to each of the elements the first is there is a specific hardship affecting the development of the property resulting from the strict application of the provision of these regulations our answer is yes because but also too we're not trying to develop our property we're just trying to sell the property and it is a Triplex built in 1950 and um as my husband said we didn't realize that um the zoning had changed on our until a actually a couple perspective buyers brought it to our attention so we've already lost at least one buyer that definitely is a hardship for us so that's a yes okay so that's a yes but also too okay well carrying out the strict letter of This Land Development regulation would require us and or the new owners to discontinue the use of the home as a multif family dwelling which is extremely impractical and is causing us economic difficulty so I guess that's it I mean there's more detail here I don't want to read off the whole thing they have copies of that right yeah only let me let me ask you a question though um because the city the city has documentation from you that shows that you were converting it to a single family dwelling we had plans to do that and we even hired an architect and at the time that you were writing the ldrs we had an architect working on redeveloping the property but by the time that was like you were November 2022 is when you guys decided to or whatever voted to confirm ldrs and so we were we were in process because at the time Architects were backlogs and it was hard but anyway that architect said that it was was going to be more cost effective for us to tear it down so then we took a we took a step back but also in October 2022 is when the mayor started to code us and we felt unwelcome in this community so we took a step back and we thought well maybe we should be leaving and then let's let's leave it as is and to be honest I think you might know that too Mark because like I said at the time you were at the neighborh across the street uh we were working on the beer wine Gard right so we were using those two apartment and storage units for all the stuff that we were going to put in that so when all those things fell apart and fell through then we just decided okay fine we're putting up everything for sale uh we know exactly how some of the people feel about us being here so we decided to sell everything El Le so now we're at the stage of selling it and now oops now we have another issue which is obviously this so I I would call it a hardship I don't know what you would call it you're able to but but the I guess my point is this um there's actually even if I this is the old ldrs this is the one that you guys purchased now yes and and so it sounds like you discontinued the use of it being a Triplex and even in the old ldrs when you discontinued the use of of a multif family home in a low density residential area and you do that for more than 180 days you then you then lose that right to keep simply use this temporary St until comis all my my point is that if if these guys are calling balls and Strikes here okay okay and if I even if I don't look at the new ldrs which is this big book right here if I look at the old one and if we just apply the rule directly as it states what we really got is a use change already when you migrate to a use change and you preent and you no longer use it as a multif family dwelling then after 180 days you lose that right because then the importance of it being a low density residential dwelling and the neighbors and the neighborhood and the district that's in takes precedence that's the old ldrs that's not even moving to the new ones that's about and and you probably read this because I I know you're very very uh Adept at this but there's also a section there that said this the old one again it's a change in use should a non-conforming use be converted in whole or in part to a conforming use that portion of the non-conforming use so converted show lose its non-conforming status okay English so what we never Chang kept the apartment you never changed the structure right you changed the use you didn't use it exactly didn't use it as a multif family dwelling so so we should have kept renting it if that was your or or had multiple families in it because the way that they the way that these are written are that if you stop using it like it was intended because the concept is over time that a single family low density residential area will migrate entirely to that for the benefit of that district and that's why these laws that's why these rules were originally written now so are you tell me that even now for example if I don't sell it I can rent it or you can rent it but as a single family dwelling because it's in a low density residential area do with single family because it's three distinct units you know that I mean one is AUM one of the things that I one of the things that in our due diligence we had asked the um our city hall for uh was the past variance because I remember you Jamie was our right our clerk at the time and and M Roso so when you said that we intend to convert the first floor into a single family dwelling um the city was alerted at that point that you were changing you you can but this is documented documentation okay that you went for a variance you gained that variance based on the information you provided sure and after that you told me I didn't need a variance that I was grandfathered in for what I was requesting but okay the variance was for the garage yes what the architect somebody told you that you didn't need a variance for that you did when I sat down I said that yeah I didn't say that fine it's fine I wouldn't that was for the what we were thinking of as a matter of fact I have an email where I explained to you that you would need a variance you want to see it no okay are you gonna take your words back then because I didn't tell you that but I didn't need to pay $150 for the Vari because I was grandfather in you this variance you were granted you were granted this variance okay my recollection is that you had said I didn't need to get a variance no okay my recollection was that you didn't have to come to planning because it was a minor and You' need to go to council you went to councel and Council granted the variance based on your words that you were converting this to a single family dwelling okay okay so that's a use change that's documentation that this is a use change Mr Sloan am I am I off the rail here or or is this accurate well based upon the representations uh that were presented to the city the city took an action in Reliance upon those representations they granted a variance in Reliance upon the representations that were made so those representations uh were the basis of that variance yes it doesn't lock Us in to you know doing what I mean we it's our property and if we change our mind we don't want to build then that should be our prop right our bested writing you you were Grant you're you're you permitted you gave the city architectural drawings that you were converting it to a single family dwelling but the use has changed at that point when the VAR Vari was allowed so it was we were trying to keep the same footprint and we just didn't I think there was something about it had to be eight in away the very you're talking about the garage I'm talking the property changed it use but you're we never developed it as a single family when you filled out the variance requests that you took to councel what they read is what I just read to you that you're changing it to a single family dwelling and you're requesting the variance on the garage you were hoping to it say hoping to it says your intent is to and then the variance was granted would said an architect to see the visibility of doing this and part of what he had to do is make sure if a variance is needed like it was needed in that particular case the city would give us that variance to be able to do that happen the the city doesn't Grant a contingent variance the city granted you a variance based upon your representation your representation you started with a duplex I believe it actually says a duplex on the existing plan and the the plan you were proposing was a single family resident the because you represented that to the city the city in Reliance upon that representation granted you a variance it didn't say we're only going to give you this variance if you really do that no the city said you've applied to do that the city's granting you a variance to do that so what the chair is talking about is you have represented to the city that you converted that property to a single family resident we had that based on that we were going to right but you've submitted an application that said that's what you were doing did not happen right well that was the plan part of the and and one of the other documents that the city was provided was we have these Backwater certification requirements for rentals of multiple family dwellings um a letter was sent um you responded to it you identif that you no longer needed that Backwater certification back flow certification because you were no longer going to use it as that so the city had the variance the approval of the variance your words about uh the the backflow preventer that you were going to stop using it as that so if I Resort back to the old rules and I don't have to I don't have to go to the new ones right because the new ones definitely prevent it because of change of ownership but but when the use changes then ultim and there were three pieces of information that led the city to believe that the use had changed so as a result of that uh it's you then lose the non the legal non-conforming structure a legal non-conforming use so that's that's where we're at okay so I guess you don't need us to go through the other pieces well there's there's a piece of I mean we're we're going to hear from anybody else that wants to speak as well but M Rosie you would identifi that you hadn't heard about any of these these things and and in fact uh what what they provided me were documents where you had attended some of the meetings where some of the new ldrs were discussed so when you had said this is the first we heard of it since 2021 it's the first thing that was glaring is because you know these ldr's probably better than anybody I mean you you site them right when every okay if you really want me to critique your meetings on the ldrs one the agendas only said ldr review I I also printed off all 2022 and it doesn't spe specify like even chapter six non-conforming use and really to aen what is non-conforming use does it I never really knew that's why people come to the workshops that's why people come to the workshops it's why they come to the the meetings it's why they uh you know engage and ask question questions and um so anyway that's that's where we're at so we go to the next question or well but it's cusing us if the question is uh economic hardship for question number one it would definitely cause US economic hardship yes and it's I still believe it's an unjustified expense for us to transfer it into a single family dwelling time okay get go to number two uh it seems like but it seems like uh you know the variance test the very first one the concept was that the that moving to the new ldrs caused the hardship it it didn't the hardship was you guys change in the use of the property and documenting it and then asking for a variance B B on it and then being granted that variance based on the use change those things all happen I I'm not saying they didn't happen but understand also just as somebody coming in right you're coming in oh the back flow I don't know what the heck the black flow is sure the letter was specific George it specifically said if you're going to stop using it as a rental piece of property multiple family I get that I'm just saying I'm just trying to explain that that when you're saying we never change the use we just hire an architect see if we were to do this you didn't change the structure you change the use there's two different things very different all I'm saying is be used as a by the way uh is shortterm use available to us is what shortterm use available to us I don't think there's any rules that indicate a structure short term unless own Association that might prevent it but the city has no Pro no provision to prohibit short-term rentals of a single family residence okay but you're saying we have to convert it into a single family home which we don't have to you all have done that you've converted it so shortterm use can still be a a for single family for single family see the issue is it's in a lowdensity residential area and um that we have an Mo to keep those things pure and uh so that means that when the old structures either go away they get blown away by a hurricane or a use Chang or somebody comes in and buys the property because they love the view and you know bulldoze it and build a beautiful new home it's got to be a single family structure when the use changes which it has and there's documentation which clearly pointed to that to us to the city then ultimately it becomes a single family drilling at that point so that's where we're at right now and again that that's old ldrs that's not even migrating to the new one so the original intention was that the new ldrs which stated that the trigger for that had to do with ownership change but even the old ldr and the new ldrs both say if you stop using it is a multiple family dwelling bottom and you lose that non-conforming structure that you will not consider this is something these people have to vote and then the council has to vote uh we are an advisory committee so whatever happens here uh they're probably going to hear what we had to say sure absolutely and and then you get a chance to go before them but this is a public hearing we're going to hear what other people here in this room have to say no it's a public hearing not a not a Judicial okay but this is we' still answer in the affirmative that this is a specific hardship affecting the development of our property right okay so I still I still say yes that should we continue to number two do sure do it number two is the hard ship is not a result of the actions of the owner and is not based solely upon a desire to reduce the development cost all right well I contend that the hardship was not a result of anything we did although Mr Ria has pulled out a couple of uh variances or documents that I didn't realize would affect the use of my home I thought I could change my mind should I have gone back to the city and said you I mean who should I have talked to that changed our mind about the use of the property you told the city that you were changing it to a single family dwelling and you went for a variance based on that information the council members then granted you that variance based on the information you gave them we were having designed to do it it wasn't for sure he just was in the middle of Designing and he wanted to make sure the designs would be again I'm bringing that up because your initial contention was that it was the new ldrs that were preventing this it's not it's the old ones which have been in place for many years before that and the current ones the old ones were 2012 yeah I thought was 2018 all right well I do want to make a case though if I I thought for the new ldrs that we were never notified and and there's state law that said you should have mailed us that Mr Brandon was trying to point out and yes's emails but um so we never got notified we never had deess Mr chair did I see some emails where they were on the email list receiving a copy of the proposed ldr there other duplexes in the city of Parker besides Donaldson point there are were any of those people notified they all of the notifications went out via newspaper via email okay via Marquee and Via information on the on the information board on City Hall okay but Florida statute 166 says that that the local governments are required to notify Property Owners when there are changes to Land Development regulations that may affect their property and there are certain procedures and you didn't follow it it says that you were supposed to the notice show you're supposed to M Rosa let me come back to something different even if we don't notify you about what's in the new one the old one before you got here disallows it so what you're talking about is irrelevant that the old one the old one says if you change the use which you did then you lose that non-conforming status so whether or not you were notified about what's in the new information even though I think we could argue that notification went out as per law it's the old one that's preventing and that one was here well before you came to town but even you're you're saying that change to use but that is a hardship on us that we are not the city is not allowing us to change our mind listen here at the end of the day we're advisory committee again we're supposed to be calling based on what we know and interpret the ldrs to be I'm showing you a very specific very clinical understanding of what the ldrs are I read your argument I went ahead and then looked at the old ldrs I saw that you were wrong the old ldrs even prevented you from migrating it to uh selling it now as a Triplex so that wiped out the first argument then I went to the second argument you hadn't been notified I saw emails that were sent directly to you which showed when those meetings were occurred I then asked the prior clerk how they were notified she said newspaper we have those AR we have all of that stuff which shows that you receive notification but the information and I did attend some but we are out of town and I even had to make a public records request because I was so frustrated when I went to a meeting of Planning Commission meeting and you read off the section information was never even at a meeting for us to pick up that's why there were three weeks from October until November that the public was invited to come and read the new new regulations and that was notified it's in the newspaper it was on the Marquee it's on the front billboard and it was emailed to people uh throughout the whole document for people to review Advance just that they could come and pick up a copy of the document okay another question could this be considered selective enforcement because I think Mr Haney didn't he have a u an automobile business whever I forget the address of it and then he went to Springfield as I understand and then he left it unused and then he was able to come back if if that happened that was you allow him to do that but you're coming down hard on us I don't know that we could say that as a categorical they because we don't know all the fact I'm saying if it happened the way she just described but you know I'd have to look at the detail it's it's you know we'd have to look at that so at this point should I continue going through the seven like you already made up your minds right no sir simply identifying the people on this Planning Commission so you've heard the chair we're public hearing and the public can speak on this item right and then it will come up to the coun to the Planning Commission for the Planning Commission discuss very good I have another question should should my neighbors recuse themselves they canuse he sat there and saw our property and he knew the rules but never as a neighbor said hey you know 180 days you're not using it Whatever happened how come you didn't build it the first email you sent me you want me to give you the email you sent me the email you sent to April Gibson which got bounced back to you and then you sent it back to to her and then you sent it to me he said you're changing it to a single family dwelling you want a copy of it okay but I was hoping to do it but you're standing here right now saying that I came and viewed your property thinking what that I was going to read your mind and and think you weren't going to do this you notice you notice none of that plays none of that plays that's a bunch of it's It's respect and you do too Mr Hall and is so potentially you guys should be recusing yourself because you can't be fair well and impartial because you may not want I will ask anybody to recuse I will ask any of these voter uh now again we're an advisory councel so ultimately uh if someone chooses to believe that they cannot be uh completely impartial then they could recuse they'll have that option but again uh it'll go to the council after this okay thank you it's a would please Paul Palmer you all know me 11:35 West Street so I did not know about her requesting a single use Varian so what I really have to say Paul let me tell you this you were on the board when it came before us that's okay it came before the Planning Commission with a representation it was currently at the time a duplex not a Triplex as I said I do not remember it nor that was my thing but I do have some case law that shows that I'm going to re I I'll give you copies of these sites so that you can record them this will reflect more on Mr Libby's uh request for a change in ordinance what does the case law state in Florida about uh following Florida cases support the position that a non-conforming use runs with the land and is not terminated by a change of ownership again this doesn't specifically apply because of this but it applies in an indirect way C Lewis versus city of Atlantic Beach 467 s so2d 751 754 Florida 1 DCA 1985 summary it is clear that the concept of grandfather non-conforming use relates to the property and the use thereof not to the type of ownership or leasehold interest in the property C Hobs versus Department of Transportation 831 s so 2D 745 748 Florida 5ifth DCA 2002 citing Lewis and holding that non-conforming use did not become illegal simply because the entity which applied for the permit to use the sign change see also 83 a.m. jurisdiction second zoning and planning paragraph 555 a non-conforming use is not personal in nature but runs with the land and is not affected by the user's title or possessory rights in relationship to the owner of the land accordingly a change in the ownership or tency of a non-conforming business or structure does not affect the right to continue the non-conforming to does not affect the right to continue the non-conforming use the right is not terminated or destroyed by change in ownership of the property loan so this gives credit to at least that we didn't do all of our homework when we made the changes in the ldr we chose when we did the ldr to not use a consultant when we did the comp plan we had here's a copy do you want do you want to copy of these sites so you don't have to write them down sure that would be great Mr so we we had when we did the comp plant change we had a consultant why is that well the comp plant is a requirement placed on us to change I think it's every 10 years if I recall I'm old I don't recall all the details but and the reason for that is that laws change the state will change things and then when those changes then have to propagate it make it down to the cities okay a good example would be maybe the imposition of uh um handicapped access that's a perfect example originally that wasn't considered then it became a state law and then it had to make sure it got filtered down into the city so they can incorporate it in their plans um but when we were doing that comp plan we would have ideas of what we could do and couldn't do and the because these people had been doing this professionally and they had to be aware of State statues that we had no clue about okay we had no clue and we also had Dr Sloan there at times most of the times and uh so we had to and they also had the experience of going into other cities and seeing what worked what didn't work what got challenged and so that accumulative experience really did help us to write the comp plan now when we got down to time to do the the ldr there was a lot of unusual circumstances that happened I'm just going to kind of review it real quickly because it has a point that I want to make okay A little background on the creation of the ldr 2022 and factors have played in this revision and you'll at the very end I will make the point that actually that had we properly vetted the the changes in our ldr possibly it would not have created this problem however I do have to defer that you guys have pointed out that something that I don't remember and did not was not made aware of by Cynthia that they had made a use change but it is important for going forward so we had um a little little history CR ldr 2002 20192020 I was a member and vice chair of the Planning Commission and we at that time vetted several CR contractors who were specialists in rewriting and ldr we picked one based on my recommendation negotiated a price around 80k ldr and the comp plans follow a state mandated periodic review and rewrite and we were close to a deadline there are deadlines imposed on us prior I was part of the let me turn that off please sorry about that no worries I was part of the overwrite of the comp plan we had again I already talk well I I jumped around here we already talked about that part then we had a new mayor mayor Kelly took office April 2021 all but one city administrator Personnel quit um I was replaced by Mark re as a as a Planning Commission chairman and we were dealing with something that we were not expecting there were Financial uncertainties associated with how much money we have what color was the money the color of the money has an effect on how it can be spent okay that's my best way to describe that well anyway um part of the UN part of the the problems in the financials were the original system was not set up by a really an accountant chart of accounts the general ledger was a mess and it was all a PC based system and all of a sudden we're taking information and and the procedures that were used to post on that old system were not being followed or were invalid they didn't follow Gap General accepted accounting practices I reviewed all this personally to try to help them with the transition so where we going the where we going you'll hear in a second so in the transition to the new system okay bad info being put into new system that was being installed during covid with a complete change with and then we had to change in staff we really we we we now have an an a new Administration and we're looking at spending money where can we cut we're afraid we also had lost a third I think of our income from the toilet tax wasn't it roughly a third no 20% I don't remember well but it was a significant amount prior to getting the ad valorum tax we were basing our finances on the number of toilets we call it the toilet tax just kind of a strange but anyway so there was some serious concerns about money and to look at this $80,000 it was like well and Mark regga stepped up the place says I think we can do it and we did the best job we could you know we did not have the expertise that these other people could bring so we did make mistakes okay we didn't have time to research out all the various uh ins and outs so we did the best job we could we did save 880,000 but I I believe these uh these did I give you a copy yet you gave me a copy of sheet that has case law yeah the case law there are a c and d is yeah right that's it okay so that that's that's the problem so how does this affect fit into this whole current situation well I was sort of thinking that had we written had we been more careful with that Clause of dis disbanding the grandfathering had we done more research then maybe this whole need for them to have applied would have fallen through H but again you've explained something to me that I was didn't remember or was unaware now I do have one question though well let me let me let me just one get my last question I'm not cutting you off I'm just because you said something it Bears a response right now so in 2021 the reason that we did this is because Florida law 70. Z1 under personal private personal uh rights protection specifically identifies this situation we wrote this rule regarding when you have a a sale if You' got a distri like a low density residential area and it is it is all single family dwellings uh item two specifically says that those protections go away this is the state law Supremacy Rule now it says that you you lose the if for example for Real Property um anytime you've got a situation where you've got uh an adjacent land uses that are in opposition of the district you can put that law place so this was that's I'll have you this if you're interested no so ultimately this is Florida state law and of course Florida and this is based on home rule home rule does allow you the opportunity uh to go ahead and make your own special rules as long as you don't directly conflict with the state so the rule you're talking about that maybe we shouldn't or shouldn't have it was based on the actual private property rights protection this was this was why 6.31 was written because we asked for homeowners participation they said if it's a low density residential area we'd like it to be low density residential so and that's item two right in that 2021 Florida Statutes it hadn't that piece hasn't been updated okay now we also understand how case law Works Dr Sloan when when the state makes rules and then people challenge those rules and then you get case law case law overrules that particular clause and this these cases overrule that wait wait just a minute the statute may be interpreted by the court but the statute that Mr regga is talking about from the 2021 statutes is long after the two cases that you have here good point you have a 1985 case and you have a 20 in 2 Cas but again from the sounds of what I'm hearing it seems like we're missing the trees for the forest on this particular issue in the sense that the 2012 Land Development regulations and the representations of the owner of starting with the duplex if you look at the sheet on the variant it identifies a duplex not even a Triplex and I'm going to a single family residence and a variance is granted based upon that representation correct and the the owner has represented so not to have to do a backflow prevention check as represented to the owner I mean to the city that they are are a single family residents all of that predates any changes to the Land Development regulation okay well I said my piece um Paul thank you we always learn something are there anybody else that would like to please Janette Howard 1123 East Park Street I think what um what didn't happen during the ldr change and I would recommend it in the future is uh what I'm hearing is that everybody was aware that you were meeting and having workshops but what I would expect in the future is before you get to the final ldr you come out with a um summary of proposed changes we're going to eliminate the grandfather claws we're going to prevent you from parking your RVs in your driveway that should have happened a summary of proposed changes that goes out to the community and then you say does anybody have reservations about what we want to change I think that would have been helpful it's a good I agree with you J that's a good idea what we did do and it's it's short of what you just said and I like what you just said a lot I think that's a great idea because there were a lot of changes uh what we did do is we did invite the public to come and view the final piece for three weeks prior to the final ad by the council members so I don't think we ever did what you just said where we say okay here's the new thing and look at section one look at section two look at all the way through Section n concurrency whatever uh these are the changes what we did do is we said here's the final document please review it and then let us know I like your I like your idea a lot about hey let's point out what those changes are when you pece meal it like recently we did with the the recent changes uh where you're only working at one component of it it's easy to keep track but when you do a mammoth job like like we did that's a good idea okay for for the future especially thank you um and I am confused about um Cynthia's case um the way I understand it is she had a prospective buyer who came into City Hall and was told um you'll get a variance simple as p somebody said that yeah that's okay so so I I understood okay so maybe not simple as pie that was my words but okay okay okay that's good that that's not the word on the street um but but what I'm what I'm understanding now having sat through the past 20 minutes is there was no intention to give Cynthia the opportunity to have a variance and I don't know it's be if it's because of what Mr Brandon said um because Mr Brandon said well you went ahead and you changed the ldr so I want you to change it back but then Cynthia comes here and you say well you keep talking about the old ldr well her variance has nothing to do with the old ldr it has to do with the new ldr and she paid to get a variance J it actually does because what she was telling us is that the reason she was losing some Rights was because of the new ldr then she shouldn't have been wait she shouldn't have been given a variant is not true was done before the new ldr okay so my question is if if she was already um not allowed to get a variance because she was relying on the old ldr then why why give her why give her say please don't cut me off please no let me finish let me finish let me finish you have a you have a great way of interrupting people a great way of interrupting people and I'm not going to let you do that to me wait a minute now he's the chair know he runs the meeting he controls okay the speech at the podium okay go ahead let me just make sure you I just want to for all the people that get interrupted Mark we got you we got you well I'm glad I'm I'm glad I'm gotten you got you so at the end of the day what I was going to tell you is that the original concept here was that was flawed it wasn't based on the concept that the ldrs had changed it was because the the new ldr certainly prevented it but the concept was that it was the change that that triggered it that wasn't true at all it was the furthest thing from true and there were three or four things that mandated it these kind these guys here are are supposed to call these things as the rules are but I want to correct on one thing they have not been denied this variance I didn't hear the seven questions well they have they have not been denied this variance and I think they know that but I want to make sure you know that I do not know that these people here are advisory people what we do is we we we try and put together the technical information and we go to council and say this is what happened now it's up to them to make their decision we're advisory we're not not governing we're we're not the governing board they've not been denied they may not get an appropriate vote they may get an appropriate vote I don't know that yet we haven't voted yet but we're because there's still more people that probably want to speak the final governing body is who makes who determines whether or not these people get this variance we know that I just think that the fact that you cut them off on on question number two speaks volumes it speaks volumes J when somebody accuses you doing something wrong you have to respond right then and there and what we were told in the write up the write up here was that they had never known they were never alerted we have email chains that show they were alerted so I can't let something like that go without retorting it it's just wrong if you're G to speak please be fat not you anybody if you're going to speak my goal is to be factual and if you're telling me something I know isn't right then maybe maybe the dialogue beyond that is going to just build on it and it it's senseless to go there you have to stop it when it occurs and I'm sorry you feel interrupted but if if anybody says anything that I believe is in air or wrong I have to point it out immediately and you are the chairman I have one other question does it okay so um Mr uh Kenny is gonna build a shed and he gets permission he gets a variance or I get a variance I get permission to do something is there any mechanism in place for you all to follow up on whether I actually did that or do you automatically assume that all the variances that you have granted have come to fruition we don't Grant variances ourselves oh the city council the city would be in charge of that so so with with Cynthia so everybody everybody in Parker that ever got a variance you are absolutely 100% sure that they followed through on that variance I'm not but if your point is that uh for some reason she was able to back up that's not the point here the point is that the variance was granted based on the information given to us so the city had no belief structure to believe anything other than that okay and then my question actually was um is there a I I would recommend a followup okay this body recommends to the city council that the variants be approved the city council approved the variants maybe six months from now a year from now somebody follows up and says did you did did you act on that variance we granted you that would be beneficial right is a variance um I mean does it have a time that it runs out right the variance does ride with the property for the life of it s yeah and that makes good sense because let's say that the rosos did build their garage and that garage was built and but it's a variance because of the distance to one of the side streets it wouldn't make sense for that to run out because then they'd be in they somebody made them tear it down so the variance remains with the property as long as the property is absolutely there and so it's not the city's responsibility to make sure the variance was carried out but that the variance was granted is gred it's granted and so if now um the gentleman has the ability to build a shed that he wants to build but it's not our job to police or the city's job to police if he builds I promise you one one last question if I build um something on my property I get a permit and that permit goes forward with my house right so the the the buyer of my house understands that I put a sprinkler system in I got a permit and it goes along with the house there's there's nothing that a variance doesn't go along what I mean how do how does the third buyer of Cynthia's house know that there was a variance in this particular case um uh the variance they were actually given a letter I believe from City Hall is that right that the variance was granted yeah yeah but in the case of like the gentleman who was just here a little earlier with the sh that shed requires a permit so epci will submit the permit and then you know they they'll receive a letter from the city and and then and then there's inspections that go along with it to make sure that it's built the code but variances do stay with the property forever for example the the variance that was granted to the uh to miss Roso uh stays with the property at this point so no matter who buys it so where where is that where is that so I understand when when the guy with the shed needs to get a permit that that goes along with the house but a variance that does not require a permit I don't see how it goes along with the house well it it was the garage yeah the variance was for but are there variances that don't require permits oh of course and how do they get how do they get translated to a future buyer the city tracks them and the buyer in their due diligence could contact the city and confirm whether or not there is a variance on the right and what we all understand um on the street is that when we buy houses we don't come to City Hall we don't come to City Hall when we buy a house okay I mean that that is highly unusual so I would also recommend that you know there is some sort of because Cynthia was caught off guard by this variance that she applied for because it didn't require a permit and and all that but once again this had nothing to do with the new ldrs it was the rules that were already in place and there are legal requirements out there that let the buyer be aware you if you if you buy a parcel of land uh let's say in a low density residential area and you want to build a you a high-rise you can't do it and if they bought it for the purpose of building a high-rise there you would be prevented from doing it because that District doesn't allow it so you do have to do some due diligence to determine what's acceptable what can be built how are they built municipalities do have the option uh based on home rule to to make sure that their city is built in the vision that they wish it's that simple generally those things are designed to protect people though in this particular case the concept is that's a low density residential area and we wish to keep it that way I said it was my last question but let me ask one more question if she had not gotten her variance in 2021 would you have approved her variance speculation that's that's something to sleep on would you have approved it because all she wants to do is sell her house she just wants to get out of this town and sell her house that's all thanks for your comments J um so let me to interject yes ma'am one other thing um one other thing though before M Roso s uh Jamie I understand that there were some letters that were some some people uh so let's do this let's hear from other public members we heard from you and George and then you can come back okay but I want to hear uh anybody else that had some comments as well you read first I'd like to hear the letters now so it's my understanding that these are individual ual that could not be at the meeting and they wanted to uh convey their opinions correct okay are you allowed to share their addresses with us Mr s they put them on just as though they were speaking whatever their name and address is just as though they were standing at the podium David McDonald 1446 Parkway Drive okay it's my opinion that the request should be denied a major attraction to this neighborhood is the single family homes and the low density population it provides I assume the owner of 1440 do Road will no longer be living there and that they are no longer concerned about the welfare of the community they would make it a commercial Enterprise to benefit them at the expense of the rest of the community I'm against the approval of the variance David McDonald thank you for that and the second one is Gerald and Diane hiken in of 1438 Dober Road 14 14 38 for their next store the neighbor yes sir okay okay um dear Council commission members I'm Gerald hekinan and I live at 1438 Dober Road I'm sorry that I cannot attend in person tonight due to travel commitments out of state with my Air Force employer I received a notification from the city clerk that a variance has been requested to the comprehensive plan and Land Development regulations for the neighboring property at 1440 DOA Road I kindly ask you to uphold the Land Development regulations as written and keep the land use of the property as a single family home not of multif family use although there are bound to be differences of opinion on the matter I politely request you to continue your support and keep your determination to maintain the character of all our low density residential areas single family residential areas within the entire city of Parker I believe it's meaningful and positive step in in developing the city as we want it to be in the future as a permanent resident and CI of over 24 years I am invested in the long term as we try to keep the kind of community and surroundings that are laid out in the comprehensive planned what was that gentleman's name again it's I'm not sure please don't approve this variant's request respectfully Gerald hiken and and Diane that's those are the only two letters that were turned in thank you but um Mr had a letter do you want me I always say hinin but it's not no they've all gotten they've all got you know you know that yeah okay very good yes ma'am so I Bas my Varan request on what the professional planning technician told me it was it was based on the you know I I I I cut and paste the email from Jamie telling me what I needed to write a variance for and I feel kind of Bamboozled like now you're switching it saying it's not that it's this so I would have appreciated some counseling from her like oh well you know it's also based on these two other documents that you submitted and these educate me because it's also my understanding that the gentleman that applied for the 1039 East Park variants he had help from her she she wrote or helped him write the variants I was on my own I thought I did good legal research on what she told me the Planning Commission or planning technician told me what I was applying for and now you're saying it's not based on the 2022 L is dis or something that's tipping the hands isn't it well then oh then you everything's not okay but if she if he's a gentleman that doesn't have the ability to write or something like that and and she's helping him she using his words to write it down are you opposed to that yes I am you're opposed to somebody helping yes I feel like she could she knows the way to get things approved she's on the inside and she told me that this is what my variance should be based on in an email it was based on whatever the section six whatever 6-12 6 d3.1 number six and I focused on that Mr Sloan should we ask Miss hinr she used her words or the gentleman's she can she can speak she's helping help me this is this was my focus she's the professional staff that said this is what your variance needs to be written variance application needs to be written for this and then I get here and you're telling me now it has nothing to do with the 2022 ldrs so my question you're the one who said that it was the change in the lvrs that made that knocked you out of the ballpark here those aren't our are those your words I was basing aren't you the one who said it was the change in the ldrs caused you to not be able to sell it as a multif family dweller okay that's wrong it was the old ones she and the new ones she's not a mind reader she just testified represents she just testified that you didn't ask for any help is that true or not I asked her did you ask her for any help it yes I did ask her this is what the buyer said they came in for did you ask her to help you to help you naate I was allowed to ask for help okay so you didn't ask her for help scales you didn't ask her for help she is a professional Roso it's it's getting argumentative because you're taking it that way and and it's it's a shame because you're it's just this is just baloney listen at the end of the day we're going to we're going to advise whatever we advise you can bring this to the council city with the city council let me just ask should I have asked for a variance to get my use restored is that because I asked for the wrong thing based on what your planning technician told me to do she didn't know that Sunshine rules prevent all of us from Talking she's a professional planning person on we can't talk but much much of what happened here happened because these people went home they brought out the rules they looked at the state they looked at the county they looked at the the ldrs that that we have here and they came to the these conclusions independently the first time that they're being shared is right here in front of you guys she didn't have the benefit of that information because we didn't share it with her she sent the agenda out you asked who who researched all this who found my old documents uh you know my variance application they sent all the documents to all of the members for us for consideration so she was aware no no the the the city clerk does the planning person does everybody does okay well she's a planning person yeah and but you're making an accusation that she did something wrong because she didn't help you and you just testified you didn't ask her for any help so what am I supposed to think of you no excuse me excuse me you just accused her of something wrong this was digressing it's not a matter of help but I did I emailed her and I said this is what I was told that I needed to do and then she wrote me and said yes your variance needs to be based on these this ldr that's what I focused on let me is there anything we can do George there absolutely is again we are the we are not the governing board the governing board is next week I recommend you reconsider uh your variance uh and want the variance I mean you know that because well I certainly wouldn't go to them and tell them that the the the reason that you're being violated is because of the new ldrs because that's flat out wrong okay I would probably just go ahead and think it through read through that section go to the governing board and ask them for their approval because all we're going to do is listen to anybody else here who has any comments about your property uh and uh and then we're we've got a few other things on the agenda and then we're going to go from there okay because I also told you it's that property that particular property is is a little strange because of the way the the three unions don't talk to other so let's say they talk to each other maybe you can make a nice big Ranch out of it or something but you can't even do that and that's why we're trying to get a an architect to say okay can we have any choices here how do we increase the space so maybe we can keep it as a one apartment downstairs then we'll live upstairs or whatever and that's how the variance thing all came out that 8 in or whatever the heck it was based all that but we ended up you know so right we're leaving well question is how do we minimize this right without well and and we do have to take into consideration I mean you guys had a direct neighbor who took the time to write a letter who said he'd be opposed to it because it may harm his property I mean we have to take that into consideration right we had another neighbor who brought up a really good point said and said something to the effect of um you know if if it's allowed to go through what do you guys care it's just about you guys are moving on and that that's fine I get that but that's their concern okay so all of those things have got to be but theoretically that would be a concern to be honest if any of the other triplexes or duplexes or qu plexes or whatever you know just one complaint and two complaints does that make rule change or whatever it only the council will be able to do I mean our goal is to is to collect the facts and the faxes we were giving them was again the accusation was that it was the new ldrs that prevented you from doing that and that was an easy one to pretty much come to the conclusion that even the old ones back can we get a variance on the old LD about restoring the use of that property and get a variance on that because that's not the way we were directed but maybe that's what I think I think what you should do is uh you should go before the council members uh ultimately U you know tell them your story okay then what happens let us say that they accept the story then what happens well then then they appr they're the ones who vote they just make they're the governing they're actually the the lawmakers for the city okay do we need to make a recommendation i' like yes please thank you a long night patk 1344 Stratford I'd like to take a step back because it's obviously become very heated we're very passionate about our homes and our community and all of that but I'm I'm sitting here obviously Cynthia and George and I are friends you like it you don't like it I don't care who your friends are but I'm looking at what the Planning Commission is doing and how they're evaluating VAR es it wasn't too long ago and please don't time me I'll be brief thank you thank you Jamie I figured you would um I'll be as brief as I can much briefer than he is oh we left um was it too long ago that a property owner someone who bought some property came into the Planning Commission you gentlemen were not here and he asked for a variance to build a commercial building and despite and I don't have this 100% committed to memory but it's on video despite Mr Sloan saying do we need to read the variance questions should we read the questions the commission didn't ask the questions they weren't read they weren't read to the audience they were answered uh I'm trying to remember because there's been a couple of these one of them the way that the questions are written you have to answer all yes in order to pass the variance test and the the first time the applicant didn't write yes he wrote yes and no he answered them honestly frankly that it wasn't a hardship but this is what he wanted so we didn't hear the variance questions we didn't hear the answers and the variance was granted we had another situation where uh another variance a land use change was made and again variance test was not administered um but yet it was granted and we went from TR from changing residential low density residential lots to commercial not mu1 mu2 to commercial so we went like two stages up and then we approved someone to run a business despite the fact that they didn't comply with the new ordinance that was created that changed the ldr allowed our Seaside Community to have people that could make birdhouses Pat do me a favor because I I do want to look into it okay tell me the I'm not sure with I'm I'm not able to what I'm hearing is we made some we made some mistakes okay and and uh but I do want to look into it because that's just who I am okay so and will I have one more yeah but but I need to go back Mr santor sentur okay uh there was a gentleman that came in Mr um he lives next to um Sandy Gorman's house Mr Lynn with his garage that he put on the front part of the property when he has this huge lot that he could have done I know about that one and then there is also a fourth one and I cannot remember who it is but I will get it for you please and I will I will send you an email well there were unique circumstances at least in the Lin situation really yes ma'am do you remember that was a 60t but again that's the rule the rule regardless of how that happens sometimes when the rules are in place you have to question the rule to find out why it was there if it was a mistake okay Mr Sal questioned it and I believe Stacy was still here at that time and Miss galberth said she was opposed to granting the variance and she said if we're going to do this then let's change the plat let's look at all the other roads and Parker I think we agreed that there was only two that have a 60 60ft setback and let let's change them rather than just say oh yeah you can go ahead and ignore the rule if the rule is wrong let's change the rule that never happened so again we it seems to be that we're not consistent and it's it feels unfair so I think when you hear people that are frustrated that um maybe become argumentative or the emotions get involved it's because many of us have sat here at these meetings and seen this happen with the council with the Planning Commission and um there's one other thing that I wanted to bring up please forgive me oh back to the Planning Commission meetings where the ldrs were reviewed I went to some of those meetings Janette brought up some good suggestions I'd like to bring up one too and this is something that again from a uh as in part of my previous life we we wrote standards for scuba diving if we had to change those standards which we did we looked at them every single year we would do What's called the red line I know Mr Sloan knows how to do that because I've seen some of his work that wasn't done when we just one moment I'm I believe it was for the ldrs yes ma'am where is it well well that was that's the three weeks so because I got one of those and I got them in the same electronic version the original version was Redline with the new version that was the 3- week time I've never seen it never even knew that it was available but when we came to the Planning Commission meeting we were not we were not given the existing ldrs to look for or to look at I mean I sat here and you guys are up here you're reading the Clauses you're reading the sections okay what do you guys think what do you think we don't even know what you're talking about and I remember not not so much at the ldrs but there was something else that I asked Mr Sloan how am I supposed to get this I have to know to contact the city clerk to say hey I want this and forgive me I don't remember what it was it wasn't the ldrs but I think we need to enhance our communication and I really think we should be consistent I mean there are at least four examples three I can give you the names but the four the fourth one I'll have to research that where we didn't go through all the Hoops we didn't stand up here and challenge someone qu answer to the question we had one gentleman who even answered them incorrectly and we told him I believe someone said you need to answer them all yes that was told to him really you know that's not fair um it's it's unfortunate that it's come to this and and again I mean um we all have to get along you and I had a conversation just last week we all want the same thing for the city philosophical convers and one other thing too with Mr and Mr lbby I mean I live one lot over from from Mr Brandon's duplex one of your duplexes over on statford I live right there when I saw that I thought the same thing what is he going to do with his building what's going to happen with the quadplex that's over there across from Stacy's house I don't know where the others are that are within Parker but what's going to happen to those Mr Libby made a great presentation I haven't seen the petition I don't know what he's talking about but he said hey we've got a petition for you to look at you were so accommodating and kind and said you know we look at that so we're going to consider it after they lose a sale or after they deci I think we have to revisit it but come back to it it's not the current regulation that is the problem and once again the original accusation was that the new regulations prevented them from selling the house okay I don't think it's an accusation I think it's an understanding was it was the accusation was there that we had written an ldr that was non not able to allow them to sell their property it's the old one that did that and the new one is a little bit more stringent but it followed suit but yet we're willing to talk about it you know what if you just want to use my words to hammer with that's okay at the end of the day to do that Mr re listen listen both M Mr Libby has always been respectful and kind and so have you yes uh at the end of the day uh we are going to look at it maybe we could make it a little bit better we're not robots we're not perfect I agree and at the end of the day and thank you for pointing that out I heard somebody laughing that's probably an appropriate thing but at the end of the day we're humans and we do the best we can and we come to we come to the council and we make the recommendations based on a very very uh specific set of circumstances where we have to explain them like I said when we went through the 19 different meetings there were eight of those being two and a half to three hours in duration the councils would say why should we change it why are we doing that and then we would bring things to them like okay these are Florida you know uh rights protection we did a lot of research so yeah maybe we made some mistakes but we've got a thousand hours into trying to get it right so at the end of the day do we make a couple of mistakes maybe right I'm not I I don't think this one was a mistake as of yet okay because so far it looks like we're just following through with what the intent of that particular District was okay and I recognize all that and I respect and appreciate all the work that you and the council members did and the two previous council member uh Commissioners that sat here but I still go back to Fair application of the rules and the laws I agree with that one more one more question um Mr Johnson who I think is left he came in if I'm not mistaken uh the last Planning Commission and asked for a variance on a single family or low density residential to make it into a five uh duplex parcel he wants to subdivide and he wants to put duplexes up there I know it hasn't been decided however here's this was interesting I I I thought this was an interesting perspective and sort of goes to something that Janette was saying so initially his thought is to put five duplexes in there let's say that the variance is granted but then he thinks you know what I can actually make more money if I put three single family homes on there so he decides to do that he comes in and he gets a lot split are you then going to be say no no no sorry you can't do that it's I'm not going to answer a speculation like hype hypothetical it will basically become mu1 and now he wants to make it low density residential can he do that I'm sure he can because mu1 will allow the the Lesser if you will the first designation ldr mu1 accepts mu1 plus anything that an ldr accepts but again the process should be equally applied and I think people should have I think it's hard to do that though Pat because there are unique circumstances for example you brought up Mr Lynn Mr Lynn lives basically in our neighborhood no I asked I and that didn't we didn't just show up one day and decide that we were going to make a decision we went to Tony and said Tony why does that road have a 60 foot right away he said I don't know we check with the state we said why does that road have a 60 foot right away it's the same road we've got and they all said we don't know right so then we came back to the Planning Commission and said everything else has got a 50 foot right away and this guy's compliant if it's 50 foot that was a unique circumstance so I know you you hit us with it but that's the research that went into it we couldn't figure out why it was 60 we said to Tony are there fiber optics on the road are there bigger sewer lines are there water lines he said no it's everything you've got at the end of the day we couldn't determine why the state made it that way okay so here's the good news municipalities can't can't change the 60 foot but what we can do is we can provide a variance based on the on the setback so that's what we did we tried to correct or wrong so it wasn't just an expect an answer and I know it's getting late and we have places to go um I wonder what the unique stance circumstances were for Mr sanur's property thank you that's a good one can I ask a question please we're it's still an open hearing sooner or later C jous about the definition of single use uh single family right so can I rent to one family all three units or two of them absolutely right is a single family okay so as long as it's one family yes we can rent one two or three of them or whatever right you entire structure which is now a single family okay use absolutely it it's like I say it's the multiple family thing that was the use issue it's but Mr slon you heard I don't need to repeat what he said there is there anybody else that has yes please CJ how are you sir I'm good CJ Patterson 615 street I'm using my actual home address because I'm asking an assistant not as my other position which is a volunteer for the city so I wanted to lay that out right away one thing that was brought up was the backflow and those are two different times because I'm trying to again I've had a lot of questions and going through everything I'm trying to get all my answers correctly so you said you have the letter that she said she's making it a multi family so if her variance was in April of 21 was that back flow letter the backflow letter was that within the same year actually the city has a copy of the letter but that's what I'm saying is is if it was in the same year then no I think the back flow letter was 22 wasn't it early 22 Vari was de yeah the variance was December 21 and then the backf letter cuz I remember seeing the backf letter because somebody asked me so when that was sent out she then requested and said hey it's going to be a single family this is what we're doing going forward okay so I I'm just I'm not trying to be mean I'm not throw anybody into the bus but one of the things that Mr Salone said and came up with was hey she said at the back flow so I was just trying to throw the dates out there so that way if it was the variance was December and again sorry about the dates been a long night uh if the variance was December and this backf letter was in January or March then obviously it was she was still working with the architect same architect but if the variance and the backl were two years apart at what point can we about two two or three months apart okay so so before we threw both of those at her that was just the one thing of before we separated those and use them as two different reasons that would be the one thing well it was just further confirmation that the use said it the variant to date was December 28th of 2021 the letter was January 18th of 2022 so they were close by so that way she it was still under the same thing and under the assumption that we've done this so we're going to do a single family and I mean you know acting under that so around the same time it wasn't separated any other uh any other individuals like to make comment Please Mr public hearing and and then seek a motion very good okay question please question what varant should they apply for because according to new ldrs noning status ACC to older ldr she L hering stat she's a single VAR or dup well and I wonder about Triplex when she submitted an application in 21 that says it's a duplex and the property appraiser carries it as a duplex so that being said uh the variance as I understand it is she is asking to allow her to go back to a duplex or Triplex a multif family situation from the current uh status of the house as a single family resident now transf stat it's already loss but if you allow to get rid of the first first no this commission is not voiding what the council do I'm say coun when she goes to counil she goes to counil either Council can confirm that the variance that they granted was based upon the the single family residence representation and that if she wants something other than that she would be submitting an application to change the use in a in a low density residential district so but I think Jamie's question is if they did that and the the the council said okay fine now we can have the three unit then when someone purchases it because of the new ldr it's back to being a single family it is not you see it's kind of like a I don't know Catch 22 if you will this might be a catch 44 I don't know where we're going the variance remains with the property the variance is based upon a single family residence that has already been granted so she better off that it's a single family if she wants a different standing of the the use of the property and that's her variance request now which it sounds like it is then she comes back to the city and they would have to void the the the last variance and Grant her this variance very good did you have something so my question is and I just want to reiterate and also to make sure I understand correctly um it has not been used as a multi-unit for over 180 days um and currently designated as a single family yes okay when you say designated by the variance that was approved even theer does dup and missing two bedom a yeah to be honest the can I the taex accessor misses a lot of things all the square footage it's got a lot of stuff and it's been trle I mean Jesus I mean lives in that neighborhood knows it's been a Triplex forever and never it didn't just appear from a duplex to Triplex or whatever so let me something do we need to have another permit Vari another variance uh whatever uh you mean to go to Council next week right I don't know the right terms or whatever like we filed today uh whatever we got a permit for the variant right do we need another one or no you're seeking a variance under the current ldr that would allow you to sell it as a and again I'm just looking at what this city was presented the representation was a duplex you're saying a Triplex but the city would have to void the last varod right they would have to in essence Grant you a variance on the current ldr provision and as a part of that they would have to Grant a variance on the old ldr about your abandonment of the uh of the property as a multif family property and as the abandonment uh of a single family resident so but does that requ they have to undo all that to Grant you a variance to allow you to transfer but does that require let's say Le us talking or do we have to sign some paperwork and file some paperwork with it like we did for today that's the question um because SS I have to go back and review your request I think it's going to get to the Council next week as I'm understanding from staff the the council will consider the entirety of what you're asking for if you're asking do you have to submit a second variance request after the first one uh I I don't know this group is looking for you to do that okay so we just have to tell them our story and they choose one way or the other but we don't need any additional the council would have to un basically undo and the whatever what you told them back in 21 and what was told to the city in 22 and what has occurred uh since you purchased the property but you do understand it was a hypothetical if we were do this we wanted to make sure that all the ducks in a row were lined up or whatever that we weren't going to have any other issues that's why the variance was not because we were ready to do it we were thinking about it okay not to as as I said got it okay the variance was granted based upon your representation so no other paperwork is required for next week's meeting I think Mr Sloan's given us the answer I think I would go to the Council next week tell them your story tell them that you learned some things here that you maybe hadn't thought of before and but you're still wishing to be able to uh rent it or or sell it as a multif family if if that's where you still want to be and that's that's what the variance is and I think Mr identif we have it under Court theoretically theoretically okay okay thank you thank thank you anybody else you want to close the public and then bring it up to the to the plan Commission was a public public U hearing uh and I think we still have to we have to take a vote there would need to be a motion and a a second and a vote like to say something for sure I'm probably going to be the L man on the total poll after I say this but I moved out to Donald point about 35 years ago there is a duplex down at the end of Cedar my house used to be a was built as a Triplex it was used as a duplex until right before we bought it I just found out because I've used it as a single family home can't go back I can't read it out I just found that out two hours ago there's two other houses on Sunset three houses down and four houses down they were apparently built as duplexes there razo's house that's a Triplex the quadplex the dup your duplex over there there's a house around on Sharon that as long as we've been there it's been a single family resident but you can tell it was a duplex it has two front doors you know it's just part of the life back there and I don't see anything wrong with what they're asking they bought it as a Trix they want to keep it as a Trix and I get it I'm I'm conflicted with what we have on paper and what I think here you con single family home it's considered single family home and you can't take a single family home andt it back we didn't we didn't convert ours conru point point of order guys I I think the uh I think the issue there is understood what we're doing is we're continuing to conflict structure versus use those are two very different things right and and that's and the ldr speaks to each of them um you know an easy way to think of it if you need to kind of correlate it in your brain is if you have a ice cream parl you want to turn it into a bar that's a different use even though the ice cream parlor still had sinks and refrigerators and everything so your business slies would change the use it's the same thing here single family multif family those are different uses but anyway so appreciate that Terry you always offer a interesting perspective um what I'm looking for is a motion either way um uh either in opposition remember you have three options here you can approve you can approve with conditions or you can deny well recommend or well you can recommend to approve you can recommend to approve with conditions or recommend to deny if nobody else is going to speak I'll make a motion that we recommend to the council that they Grant the variance based on the on the questions I'll ask for a second if I don't get a second then it dies in The Vine you want me to leave it out hanging there for another few minutes no no very good right I'll ask for another motion then please at this point I think what we do is we say the uh the Planning Commission is conflicted and U are we forced to have a vote the council really looks to you all to make a recommendation I'll ask one way or the other I'll ask you to dig deep then and uh you know consider a motion for again either approval approval with conditions the approval with conditions can be that uh you know the council review it in its entirety for what it is or it can be something different than that I'm not sure what that was what that the council review yeah I'm not sure what said the condition the condition would be that it like something like that they paint it green or something that's a condition well it would be may maybe it would be exactly as you said Mr Sloan that they would have extract the well that would the recommendation of approval and that would necessarily require the unraveling of all the statements that have been made since 2021 very good or to recommend disapproval of variance I uh I make a motion to recommend disapproval of variance based on it has not been used for 180 days and based on that uh it was cited now are changed to a single family and based on the letters from other neighbors so I have a motion to disapprove based on the ldrs and the uh public input do I have a second interesting and very unique well we're conflicted I know I'm conflicted I didn't know everybody else this is a very hard it's a hard one it's a difficult one I'll second Kyle's motion and I'll tell you why when we sat down and did the ldr I was kind of new to all of it and I took this book home and I studied it and I studied it and I studied it trying to understand everything tonight we have been kind of accused of not being smart enough to do it and we did have guide because you started with the ldr what like 85 or something they started out here you've been around a little bit okay so that being said we had fairly decent guidance not to call you out there but just saying um and I feel like this was done because we as a Planning Commission have to look at everything Citywide not just just Donaldson Point not just east side which is my side of town not just west side which is out there you know towards tental Air Force Space it is the entirety of the city and how these things impact and when you you know you get down there into Donaldson point it is a ton of little you know single family homes and I know there's some duplexes down there there's some over in my area um but I also o feel that when we did the ldr there were quite a few people that spoke about kind of wanting to slow that down keep that you know on in certain areas and not down in that area back in the 50s you could do whatever because that used to be an old turpentine Farm down there they did all kinds of stuff down there but you've got you know multi-million dollar homes down there or at least half million to million dollar homes down there you know we have to stop and think about how we affect everyone not just one or two people and as much as I think you know it's your property and you should be able to use your property and and those kind of things I also think that that is one of the biggest things that you say all the time is we have to think about what harm we do to our neighbors you hit the nail on the head for me to so I have a I have a first I have a second motion on the floor is denial because of the detail within the ldrs and also some of the public comment Madam clerk will you take a vote Please Mr Hall if I would like to recuse myself from the vote did I say that yes you have to have a financial interest or some pecuniary interest that you would have so my the reason is is the perception that I because I have a property three houses down that I can't be impartial of his vot so I'd like to accuse myself from the vote just to be fair you'll have to fill other form by the way okay Miss HUD Mr Merritt yes Mr Striker no chairman rer reu I'll fill the form up now that doesn't mean that it doesn't go to city council they can still look at it they can still look at it they can still do on their end of things we have had our say we still have a rest of the meeting that's very good um we we had uh we had two additional items uh and thank you for everybody's input still meeting yeah we're still meeting um so uh we had two items remaining on the on the list but it's quite late uh due to uh all of the activities so what I'm going to do is I'll just pass them to the next one what I'll ask you to do is um um the clerk had sent out some information regarding the federal laws and billboards the state laws and billboards and some of the local laws and billboards and the arrangement the St that the state had with uh the feds so just to make sure you're aware of that because Mr Sloan has asked the council members to provide us with directions in terms of what to do currently um there is a six-month moratorium on billboards being built uh and uh we need to determine if we're going to extend the moratorium or eliminate Billboards entirely or uh ratchet down the laws that are there or something else I think you'll find what the what the state has said very interesting and also the the feds have said uh they call it their beautification America beautification measures because they obviously think Billboards are ugly and uh so does the state so they they actually prevent from being in certain areas of the state particularly those areas matter of fact there are four states that have completely eliminated them and I think if I remember they're Alaska U Maine um two more up in the Northeast there I can't remember the other two U maybe Hawai Hawaii's on there as well beautiful there's yeah there's a yeah Alaska Maine Hawaii and one more I think it's Vermont we couldn't do that nobody know how to get to Disney there you go there you go there you go me just saying or bies exactly so so you can have uh we we can have ultimately uh you know just what I'm what I'm looking for next time we meet will be your recommendation that we could potentially go to uh the council members with regarding how we handle Billboards please go to the signage section of your ldrs I think it's section eight seven or eight look that over you see that there are certain limitations there already we don't necessarily have to recommend elimination we could recommend perhaps enhancement of what those rules are and then ultimately the last thing is is um you guys are brand new and I know you probably just loaded up with information at the end of the day uh annually we have to review the comprehensive plan for any conflicts that exist with the Land Development rules we've recently had some changes to Land Development rules uh so uh look look over those changes and then uh just review the the comprehensive plan for um you know any conflicts that may exist there was also a thing listen I I about Vice chairman We need oh that doesn't mean that you need to hot foot it out of here get any bright ideas I know where you live listen listen I'll make a statement and then uh we have a lot of really good people on on this you know on this commission and you're right right um we've been accused of a lot of things uh you know that's okay I've been had it worse the the good news is is that we're all grown adults and uh we can handle the you know the U accusations and the you know the criticism that's just uh part of the game but I appreciate each and every one of your's input and you guys have got a got a mountain to climb because there's a lot of stuff you got to learn um but at the end of the day I think we got a good team now um I am willing if based on your desire I am willing to stay uh the chair for another year next month we vote if that's what your desire is uh but we also uh have a lot of really great people here that could easily handle this role as well uh so second piece of that is that we need a vice chair so if you don't mind uh selecting or thinking uh who you would like to have as your Vice chair that will be something we'll do next next month now I believe this seat comes up for Renewal next month as well um so I don't know how we handle that since he was just put into into the seat and then KES I think is good for one more year because what we do is we we alter them it's two-year term and then we alter but there's no term limits as long as the council uh puts us back into that role okay they vote on us continuing to be in the role uh but there are no term limits any longer uh so I think seat will need to be on Council agenda for next month yes sir and first meeting of next month now I did uh our meeting is first so uh well okay that's okay let's see yeah I got you okay so anyway those are the things just think about that and uh thank you for all you do ladies and gentlemen thank you um you know for all of the input that you've provided we appreciate everybody thank you