this uh Monday, September 22nd commission meeting for the city of St. Pete Beach. Uh please join me in the stand uh please stand up and join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Commissioner Robinson here, Commissioner Rzniki here, Commissioner Maldonado here, Vice Mayor Marriott here, and Mayor
Petrill here. We have a quorum. Um, all right. Do we have any changes to the agenda? Vice Mayor and city commission. Um, tonight I'd like to remove presentation A. We are rescheduling that to a future
commission meeting. Also, if we could move 6A to occur immediately after 2D wastewater inflow and infiltration updates since they are both related to each other. All right. I have an item for
discussion. Sure. Backfill. All right. 7A will be backfilled. Anything else? All right. Do we have a motion to approve the agenda as amended? I make a motion to approve the agenda as amended.
Second. Vice Mayor Marriott? Yes. Commissioner Robinson? Yes. Commissioner Isniki? Yes. Commissioner Maldonadoano? Yes. And Mayor Petrilla. Yes. The motion carries. All right. And so I think we're starting
off with a couple of presentations. Right. Correct. Good evening. Laura Canary, community development director. So tonight we're going to continue our hurricane recovery and preparedness effort update and beginning with looking at historic
designations to date, permit processing, demos, elevations. Then I'm going to hand it over to Camden again to talk a little bit about what public services is doing as it pertains to recovery and preparedness. And then we're going to talk about training and personnel and the Tampa Bay Coastal Master Plan.
Beginning with historic designations through the 19th of September, we've had 62 applications submitted. 49 approved, nine are pending and four have with been withdrawn. For certificates of appropriateness, we've had 27 for demolitions. Of those 27 have been
approved, and there are none currently pending. When we talk about restoration and additions, and again, this is where any elevations would be captured. We have eight applications submitted, four approved, three pending, and one has been withdrawn. There is one application
that's a flood plan management FEMA variance in connection with a certificate of appropriateness. And this is pertaining to a historic home where a small addition of about 44 square foot was added and the home is not being elevated posttorm. When we look at permit processing
through the n or through the 14th of September, we had 5,57 applications submitted. As you look at our daily average, again, we were very excited because we met that goal of 60 and then some. The last two reports that we provided and you'll see that numbers declined significantly. In talking with
our team, it's really just a matter of looking at the intake looks a lot different now. So, we have many less coming in and it's more a matter of just processing those. Hence why you also see that yellow color going up which we're very excited about. We're up to just over a thousand that have been closed at,045.
And again, just those continued challenges, just the back and forth and documentation. Really nothing has changed since um we're just in a in a different kind of stage in the recovery and the permit processing right now. For demolitions, we've had 144 demo
permit applications. 90 have been issued and 20 have actually closed. That average time has went down significantly. We're now averaging approximately 7 days to issue a demo permit. When we look at elevations, we've had 34 elevating structure permit applications.
15 of those have been issued. None have been closed to date so far. And again, similar with a 7-day average for issuance. Just a reminder, wanted to put the Elevate Florida information up on the screen. Again, if anyone has any questions, whether they've received
correspondence or maybe haven't heard anything, we encourage you to reach directly out to Elevate Florida. I'm going to hand it over to Camden to talk a little bit about what public services is doing. Thank you, Laura. For the record, Camden Mills, public services director. Um, so
I'd like to give you a recovery update related to our utility systems and the cleaning and inspections um that's ongoing. So for our wastewater system, um we have a contract on tonight's agenda for um systemwide cleaning and inspection. Um that's with Roland
Incorporated and then also internally with our city staff. Um we've been um completing inspections and and cleaning as well. And we've just recently completed um pass a grill area from 1st avenue to 6th Avenue, including the manholes and the underground pipes. Uh
one of our goals as as staff is to provide our commission with more updates regarding areas that have been completed and then areas that we look to address in the moving forward. Um and we plan to include those in our city manager weekly operations report. And then related to
our storm water system, uh we had a request for proposal solicitation for a systemwide contract for that as well. Uh that request for proposal closed on 910. We're now in the process of selecting that vendor through a evaluation committee and we're targeting to bring
that contract back to commission for approval on October 28th. Um internally, our staff again has been has been working to um clean this underground system, inspect it. Uh recently we've had some more favorable tide conditions where we've had low enough tides where we can um flush and clean some of the
systems with the equipment that we have. Some areas that were recent completed were the Leo neighborhood um 55th Avenue, North Tessier Drive, Bay Street, and then East Vina Delmare Boulevard. And then upcoming on our list is Pasigrow Way and 26th Avenue. Um these
areas were selected um based on frequency and and severity um from cclick fix reports um as well as staff reports when when we're observing. And next I'd like to get into hurricane preparedness. Um part of the initiative
of of increasing our emergency prepared uh procedures is our staff at the director level uh looks at these 7-day outlooks frequently when our fire chief sends these out. Uh so these are just a few uh of the disturbances that are out in the Atlantic that that we're tracking
right now. Um first is Hurricane Gabriel um that that's passing to the east. Um the swells are um expected to impact the US uh east coast from North Carolina north. Um so we don't expect much impacts to our area from this storm. Um there's also a couple disturbances that
are out in the Atlantic. Um both of those are moving west northwestward um and and don't seem to um propose an immediate threat to our area as those move across the the Atlantic. And with that, I'll turn it back over to Laura. Thank you.
Okay, so moving on to talk a little bit about training. Staff continues to take the NIMS training and ICS training. We had during an all management um meeting last week, we had FEMA grants management training which was great to have that in blue sky during blue skies to really
talk also about things that we can do just on a daily basis to kind of be in a position that when and if this ever happens again. We're kind of dotting our eyes and crossing our tees. So that was very helpful information. And then chief, the chief is taking his final class to receive an EOC manager
designation. So that's very exciting. And then I'm also very excited to say that we have our deputy building official that started today. So we're very excited that this is the first time in years that we now are fully staffed as far as having deputy and a building official. So it's going to help us even
more. And then when we talk about personnel, as we know, we've had to issue we issued the RFP for additional community development personnel during blue sky and gray sky days. Well, this is something different. This is actually a county RFP that the county issued for
very similar services. And so they've now selected, there's about seven different firms on their list. And so what we've been looking at is as a subsequent step, we'll basically be coming back to you to piggyback on that county contract to pick one or two or
potentially a few of those other firms to again just kind of have them um as a menu, if you will, so that we can tap into them on an as needed basis. So, we'll be taking that before you sometime in the near future. At this point, the county has just selected which firms
they, you know, are moving forward with. We had a meeting last week with representatives from the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council and the um the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission. And this is basically to talk about the Tampa Bay Coastal Master
Plan, which is the first of for Tampa Bay. So, we've never had a coastal master plan. It's well overdue. It's going to be an exciting project, a long project. They're anticipating a four-year time frame for the project. They received, I think it was about $2 million in funding to go towards the
project at this point. So, we're going to have them come back in early November and they're going to give a brief overview to you guys to talk about what the plan is going to entail and then make the ultimate decision if we want to be a partner or a collaborator. We know we want to be a partner. Collaborator is
just a little bit more involved. We anticipate that we'll probably be a collaborator, but again, we're going to have them come back on, I believe it's on the 3rd to give that presentation and then give you all the opportunity to ask any questions that you have. But it's very exciting and again well overdue for for Tampa Bay.
And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. But before I do that, because I did realize I had updated one slide and the update didn't go into this, I do want to just for the benefit of the public announce that we're going to be having a community development staff forum this Wednesday, the 24th,
from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. in commission chambers. This is going to be staff's opportunity to share our substantial damage administrative procedures plan. So this is really how we look at things, how we're doing damage assessment, our kind of internal operations, something
that we would normally develop and have as a it's it's our tool in our toolbox. But because of the importance that it has and in the community and rebuilding, we really want to just give the community an opportunity to kind of hear from them and let us know, you know, what they've ran into thus far so that we can kind of tweak and, you know,
modify the the plan accordingly. Once that's done, once we have that feedback, we we will be bringing it back to you all for um acceptance, not adoptance. Again, we want to have some flexibility in that plan so that if things change, whether it's at the state or the federal
level or something that we just think we need to change, you know, pretty rapidly, we want to be able to be nimble with that plan and again be able to just react accordingly at that time. So, I'm sorry the slide wasn't up there, but we do have that this coming Wednesday, 5:30 to 7 here in Chambers. That'll be it.
Hey, uh, happy to answer any questions. Go ahead. Um, have you considered, uh, changing the, uh, 9 to one hours for permit intake to just because I've noticed it's a lot slower. Um, it's the there isn't
the the lines that we had before. Um, just curious if if there's the opportunity to do normal business hours on the intake. So, we have not discussed changing it in in recently. Um, we kind of decided that
we were going to um based on the stage in the recovery that we were in, wait until we absolutely could confidently say that we think that we could probably tailor that back. And I think to to your point, I think we're probably at about at that point for sure. So, it's definitely something that we can talk um
internally and with the city manager about. Thank you. Um just for um if you know this off off your head, maybe you don't. Um you mentioned there was 5,57 application or permits let's say that
have gone into the city in almost a year because we're close to our the the year from the time of Helen. Do you know how many were the last year? Just so that as a public they could for us to hear what's the difference in a typical year outside of a hurricane. how many
applications go in in a year versus what you've received this whole entire year. I can get you I'll bring back that information. The last time that I looked at it, it was over three almost four times the amount, but it's been probably about four or five months ago. It was
right when I got here when I looked at that. So, we'll definitely bring that information back and and show that. And I think too when we come back cuz again with us you know coming out of hurricane season I think what we anticipate doing is still continuing to track this but maybe not bringing it back to you as
frequently. And so I anticipate there's some really good data there and we have been we've been trying to not change the way that we're presenting that to be consistent. But I do think there's some good metrics that we'll be able to kind of pull and show more year-over-year or show you like where you really see that uptick and things like that. So that
that'll be a good thing to not only show how it looks during blue skies, but then also be able to even get into some of the trends that we saw within the recovery and kind of how that looked because hence like the the tw going from the goal of the 60 down to 20. At first I was like what happened? But it was it
was really good news once you kind of dug a little deeper. But then also because even though the applications might start reducing, you still have open permits, right? So, those still have to be serviced, right? That you still have people and you have to go out
and inspect. Um, you're still going to have questions. People might do a change order on their plans or what they're doing in their home. So, they're not closed, right? So, that's still um a lot of work, right, for for a city. So, just to know like staffing wise, is
it still I mean, I would not say reduced, right? because you still have to manage all these permits that are still open or applications that are still being processed as well. So that that would be good information too cuz you're it's almost like you're still at the beginning and have received but
they're not all closed. So, it's just possibly 4 thou I don't know how many have closed of the 4,000 versus how many are still out there that are still working on it because you like you mentioned there's been demolition permits but there there might not be they've been requested but they haven't
been activated right so no one has moved forward so you'll still have a lot of work you know in the coming year so just interested to know like what the need of the city is and then a question this would be a Camden question on the the time frame that you were mentioning
about the cleaning um of the storm water drains. You mentioned pass a grill um from first to 6th Avenue that had been complete and I hate to say completed but at least looked at or cleaned um and I know you're basing it off of the cclick
fix um but I know even in district 3 there's been a lot and a lot of questions from um people in my district or residents saying you know why haven't they come to clean this? you know, there's probably sand in there and there's probably something in there that's not letting it drain. And I'm sure it's going on citywide, but how
long did it take to do from 1st to six and this is just for kind of figuring out what the time frame is for it to progress all the way down to the rest of the city or is there a way that you know that way people will know, hey, we are in the process. Um, but it's kind of slowly I actually I shouldn't say
slowly, I don't know if it's slowly, how long it took to to do just those avenues. Thank you. Um yes it we would like it to be much faster than it is of course um some some measurements that we've taken recently because because we would like to identify like what that performance
metric would look like. what can we expect to complete in in a period of time? Um, for instance, the the storm water completing recently completed at the Leo neighborhood um 55th Avenue and the North Tessier Drive um that included
about 29 um or 27 different assets as far as you know the gravity pipes, the inlets and the outfalls. And it took us um about or 27 assets and it took us about 29 crew days. Um, so if you break that down, it's about one area a day is what we're able to service. Um, given
that if the tide conditions are favorable, like a street or a street or Yes. Yep. Okay. Okay. So, about a month maybe for like a neighborhood. Correct. And and that's with the city's in-house equipment. When we contract this out and then have more available
resources, we'll we'll expect to to speed that process up. Okay. Thank you. So, that was going to lead into my how much in the way of linear feet have we accomplished so far as far as overall percentage. I'd have to come back and and give give that
number. Okay. Because I think we were at 2700 before. Um I'd have to come and the last uh report on that. Um I'd be interested to know um where we're at. Okay.
And um also I I mean I know that the city does have um a uh storm water master plan and they do have critical areas. Why are we not servicing those critical ones?
We we do we we take in conjunction of of critical areas that that our staff is aware with and and also the cclick fix. Okay. because I I know that there's a m there is a storm water master plan or there has been one with critical areas on it and that that's a good point too and and especially after we have heavy rain
events those are the first areas that we go and go look at and they're actually numbered as critical as to their their priority. So I would like to see that being definitely part of the mix. Um and then I had another question for Laura. Can I
uh Cam, can I just ask that we get more pre-notice on where we're going to be getting service for the cleaning and inspections? I was pretty surprised to see them out in Vina today. I'm happy to see them, but at times when folks are getting work done, it would be nice to know in advance. So, yes. Yes, sir. That's one of the goals
internally we're working towards is is better structure of reporting what's been cleaned as well as where we plan to go to next. Thank you. Uh I just had a question in regards to you know the letter that went out about people uh having you know uh not
responded um having any permits. Where are we at on that in response to that as well as after the fact permits? How are we how are we moving forward? Are we at a good pace? How are we doing on that? No, we're a little delayed. We have not
gotten that letter out yet. That is that letter has not been sent out yet. There was a secondary letter going. Yes. Correct. Yes. Okay. So, that has not gone out. No, it hasn't. And for those that did respond and did put in permits or those progressing well and and
so of the first batch we had about it was like 200 of the 800 that we kind of narrowed it down. And so we'll be casting the netwide again when we send this next letter. and and really it's just been a matter we have the the letter drafted and it's really just a
matter of going back through each of them and and adding the more specific information to the properties. And so it's been a little bit timely. We're we're very hopeful in talking to the team now that we're going to have closer to a full team on the building and permitting side that we'll be able to
kind of re re- uh assess who's working on what to be able to get those letters out. Um, but part of it has been that there's just been, you know, a lot of we're working with the ones that have permits, you know, and and focusing heavily on those as our and I would just like to say
unfortunately I won't be able to attend the community meeting on Wednesday, but I would like to to be on the record for saying uh, you know, I would like to see us, you know, for future if this does ever happen again that we look at after the fact permits immediately.
that that is a consideration to be done so that we are not behind the eightball like we have been and that people can get the work done and I I had mentioned that early on in this whole process and it kind of got nickaid from from the commission and and
and everybody. that we'll we'll definitely um circulate the the draft plan once we before it's going back to you. And I think that you'll be really excited to see in there that there is um we actually the building official has come up with a method to be
able to have placards already ready beforehand that basically we can put on the properties and it's essentially issuing that permit and then if you end up not needing it and you end up, you know, you can just close it, no penalty, but it's going to be a really proactive way to then just everybody has what they
need on day three and to begin doing whatever work necessary. So, um, so we did hear you loud and clear and we in incorporated that into this draft. Um, again, the draft we anticipate that as we it's going to be tweaked and, you
know, finessed probably continuously. It's going to have to be. Yes, exactly. And, um, where are we at on the new uh, FEMA letter? I mean, what is the, um, what are we looking at for, you know, a
method to handle that? As far as what we would look to have people provide, um, you know, my advice would be everybody to take pictures of what you have now. Um, once you do do your repairs as well, um, because I don't believe an actual,
you know, an actual um, uh, getting another appraisal, an ACV appraisal, um, that's only good for how long? like my as an example, somebody's ACV appraisal that they got last year for last year pre- storm. How long is that
good for in light of this 2025 new FEMA letter? Am I able to use that again or am I looking at having to get a new one? And then we have a lot of people with sales and other things going on. So
that, you know, you've got new people coming in and buying. So I'm just trying to get a handle on that on how to advise people what to do and be prepared for, especially in light of this new letter. And so I know we're going to be touching on that a little bit in the presentation
on Wednesday as far as depending on where you're at and what events have occurred, which letter to use. But then the second part of that of course is the appraisal part because we know that there were major concerns with individuals that got the private appraisal and then what was in say even the title base and bad data was very
comparable you know maybe not you know to the do to the sense but I mean very comparable that why would you have you know why would you want to go through the cost and time for an appraisal. So, one of the things that the city manager has asked us to do is to really um get exactly the the correct guidance and
guidelines as far as how much flexibility we have with regard to the appraisal and what we're looking at different from the FEMA letter because we get it. It's on the property card. It's the county, but what can we consider, you know, for that appraisal? And um our understanding so far is that,
you know, we may have some flexibility. I don't want to misspeak. We may have some flexibility, but whatever we end up doing, of course, has to be that method. and consistent throughout. So, it's determining, but we know that there's probably definitely a better way and methology than than what we had in place
or the parameters that we were working within this last time. So, um I I hope that we'll have a little bit more detailed information to go in tandem with that on Wednesday, but if we don't, we'll be able to at least communicate to the public that we're continuing to to figure that out and that'll be again
incorporated into our plan. Um, and yeah, and I I would question or or want to know what are our acceptable cost sources because that that had been a question that took forever to get answered. Um,
um, again, I know everything is new. This was a new experience for everybody, but it would be something that I think we should have at hand in be able to advise. Um, last time it was ACV um from a appraiser and it went from that to a
local builder cost um and now we're talking potentially um 4Erunner, right? What 4ERunner is projecting. So, um, just would like to be able to to
advise people what those cost sources are available because there's a big difference between a local builder and I'm sure for that um I would just ask because I would believe that we want to be as flexible as we can as long as we're in compliance
with FEMA, All right. Thank you. Mayor, do you have any questions? Okay. Thank you, Laura. All right. And so I think next we have uh amendments to regulations for
substantial improvement. Brandon Good evening, Brennanberry planner. This is a followup to a discussion item that was held at the last city commission meeting talking about front yard stair encroachment. This all ties in with elevation and reconstruction of single
family homes above the flood plane, not new from the groundup development, but um those projects where the living level is being elevated generally in the same footprint of the home. There were a few other items that we've noticed over the last year of reviewing these permits. We also wanted to bring forward uh to you
under this cover. So, prior to this year, we received an average of one of these type of permits per year. Since January 1st, we've received 35 requests. We know that there are dozens more queued up to be submitted for permitting. Late last year, um the city commission recognized
that these permits would be coming down the pike and they amended the land development code to allow for in place elevation of residences even when they're non-complying with the setbacks um without needing to go forward for a variance. But there wasn't any
supplemental criteria addressed. Um the requirements for elevation of equipment and stair encroachments and so on more or less stayed the same. Uh based on the last meeting we were directed to look at these projects where the living level is being elevated either through actual
elevation of the existing level living level above the flood plane or reconstruction of that living level on top of the existing structure and conversion of that ground level to parking storage and access which are treated the same under the zoning code.
So the existing standard on the left here shows a home that is being elevated in place or reconstructed where the existing home's front setback is non-conforming to the setback requirement in place today. So in this example, the home has a 12-oot front
setback. It has a jog and the front entry is at that jog approximately 20 ft back from the front property line. Under the current code requirement, the stairs could not encroach any closer than the 17 feet that is provided for in the code despite the fact that the stairs is
shown would encroach no closer to the front property line than the front of the building as it exists today. One of the options staff has explored and one of the options that um we we've seen and I I'll show some examples in a moment would be allowing stairs to encroach no closer than the established existing
front setback of the residence. Another example uh you can see on the left where the front door is at the existing established front of the structure. Again, this is a structure that does encroach into the required front setback. Under the zoning code as it
exists today, the home can be elevated in place, but stairs cannot encroach into the required front setback without a variance. The proposed standard would allow a minor incidental extension of stairs into the front setback. We were evaluating a potential 10-ft
encroachment. That's usually within our land development code. The limits of staff approval powers is about a 10- foot setback from the front property line, which is where that came from. It would also accommodate for those structures that were built compliant with the setback regulations at 20 ft to
allow uh to allow two rungs of stairs. We have heard from homeowners, from contractors that um to ease and access, having those stairs that aren't 15 17 feet um or 15 to 17 stairs in length, having a landing that um they can rest
on on the descent or ascent to the front door um is something that many homeowners want to undertake and and that would accommodate that based on the Florida building code. Florida building code requires about a seven foot encroachment to have two runs of stairs parallel with the front of the residence.
So, here's some recent examples. Um, this is one that went to the board of adjustment earlier this or sorry, late last month. Um, this shows an encroachment. The residence is existing. It's being elevated in place. There was a landing set into the residence that
was made a balcony. The applicant was seeking to have a two-level rung of stairs um encroach into the required front setback. Now, this encroachment was proposed to be less than 10 ft. So, if a 10-ft standard were to be applied, there would still be a variance required
for this arrangement. But it does show an incidental extension that would accommodate those two two rungs of stairs. And here's the front of the structure showing how that would look. Here's another example. Um, this one proposed a staircase at 16 ft from the
front setback, front property line. uh the existing front of the residence, the garage which is being elevated in place. The garage I believe is being turned into living space. Garage below is being reestablished. This residence has an existing front
setback of 16 ft. They were proposing stairs that would also meet a 16 ft front setback. So based on that first proposal, this would be permitted by Wright. They could run out stairs to the existing established front setback of the home that is being retained.
And here's showing how that would look from the front elevation. Here's another example going back to that first option that was proposed. These stairs encroach no closer than the existing retained front setback of the home. In this case, the home is set much
closer to the front property line, 8.3 ft. But again, those stairs, the front access is recessed from that that front of the structure. They would encroach no closer to the front property line based on that first option. This would also be permitted without need of a variance.
And this is showing another option went to the board of adjustment last month. Um, this was a brand new development and this is not something that we had proposed to look at under this scope, but just showing that this type of staircase encroachment would not be allowed for new developments. That's
showing this here. This is a newly developed home. Those stair encroachments would not be permitted under this scope unless we're directed otherwise. So, there are some additional considerations. We did bring these up with the planning board last week at their meeting. Um, looking into the maximum width of the landing at the
front of the structure. A landing needs to be at least 3 ft deep to meet the Florida building code for a residential single family home. It needs to be at least as wide as the doors at the front of the structure. We were looking at potentially limiting that landing to prevent it from becoming a significant
additional mass. I believe this was discussed by the commission at the last meeting. Not having it as a significant balcony or deck feature, just allowing for that incidental access that would be required to get up to the new living level from the outside of the structure. Uh, as I mentioned before, Florida
building code has fairly limited requirements for the width of those landings at the at the top of stairs. Our code currently does not allow for any kind of independent roof overhangs. We do allow for stairs to be covered by incidental extension of the primary roof eaves. So if the eve overhangs the
stairs, that's fine. They don't have to modify or cut it back, but it would not be able to be further extended out and become another mass at the front of the structure. We had discussed with the planning board whether there should be some kind of a limitation on exterior stairs when interior stairs are accommodated in the
structure. There seemed to be consensus that having a front staircase an incidental extension um is something that is reasonable. It was conveyed that it was it was unreasonable to expect guest and deliveries to come through a garage entrance at the at this um
interior of the home. There were a few other items um that we wanted to address in tandem with this. The first is allowing for in place elevation of non-conforming permitted ancillary equipment. We typically see condensers and generators that fall under that umbrella located within the
required sideyard setback when a home is substantially improved. So, this would effectively just allow equipment to be elevated in place to match the flood plane requirement on that side of the home. Late last year, we did amend our code to allow for those homes that were not substantially damaged but still have
to comply with that Florida building code requirement. We'll talk about that ordinance later tonight to elevate their equipment in place. But this would allow for those homes that are being elevated in place to also bring the equipment up in its current location.
We've discussed increasing shed square footage from 80 square ft to 120 square ft. This has been a recurring request from homeowners. The reason why it's brought up under this scope is because whenever a home is substantially improved, all the accessory structures on the lot need to be brought into
compliance with the current code requirements. We've seen many sheds that are slightly over 80 square feet. They're required to be removed or pursue a variance. So, this is something we wanted to bring up for consideration under this scope. It can be addressed further down the line or not at all. We
just wanted to address it because it it's a recurring issue that we see with these permits. And then we have also discussed allowing a one-time exemption for pools, gazeos, and deck covers to remain in required setbacks when the home only is substantially improved. So when it's elevated in place or converted
and reconstructed, this would not apply to structures crossing property lines or in easements. It would also not apply to those structures that were substantially damaged, taken down post storm and then reconstructed. These would largely be permissions for those homeowners who were voluntarily elevating their home.
They have an existing pool, gazebo, or deck cover that is in a required setback. Just like sheds, they would be required to comply with the current code. Under this exemption, they would be able to keep that structure through the elevation. Should it be damaged in the future, should it be replaced, it
would need to comply with the setback requirements at that time. We did take this to planning board last Monday. Um there was support for a few of these items and there were some split opinion on opinions on others. Uh the first was allowing for front yard stair
encroachment as proposed. That did receive board's support. They made some great recommendations. The first is that the base of the stairs should be open when they encroach into the required yards. Having those breakaway stairs, again, going back to the massing and and the the visual impact of these stair
encroachments, having that that base of stairs open, as you saw in many of the examples I presented, and that the front landing should be limited to the necessary side size to allow access, but not turn it into a new balcony or deck feature. It should be limited to the the opening requirements under the Florida
building code. There was support for allowing in place elevation of exterior equipment when they exist inside setbacks and allowing pools specifically in required setbacks to remain following substantial improvement. Again, that's not a significant visual encroachment, allowing those to remain at the setback
that they currently possess. Uh there were more split opinions on allowing for larger sheds. Um, one opinion that was expressed was a concern regarding unsecured sheds during storms as this is a more permissive standard. A potential solution to that would be allow to allow
those sheds to remain, but they would need to meet the hurricane tie down requirements and um allow them to remain should they be made compliant with the current building code tied down requirements. And then um there were split opinions on allowing gazebo and deck covers to remain in required setbacks following
substantial improvement. Um there were there was more of a visual concern in that regard than there was for pools. So we're seeking really your input tonight on those four items. We don't have any ordinance to present to you. This is something we plan to take back uh draft code language take it forward
to the planning board and then bring back to the city commission at a future meeting. And again just to go to those four items allowing stairs to encroach during elevation. Um that would be to potentially the existing non-conforming front setback. the residence is being retained or
potentially no less than 10 feet from the front property line provided that they also encroach no more than 7 feet into the required front yard. Allowing in place elevation of equipment during substantial improvement, allowing gazeos, deck covers, and/or pools to
remain when the primary residence is substantially improved and increasing shed size from 80 to 120 square ft. As I mentioned, uh, just seeking your input tonight and we will draft language to bring back. Thanks, Brandon. Questions,
Commissioner Rob. I'll just do some comments. Um, shedwise, if you're elevating and now you have all this open space underneath, why do you need shed, extra bigger shed? Just I'm just going to ask that rhetorical question. I think it comes
from if you have a a if you're elevating a relatively small house and now you have parking under your house, right? But you're also allowed to have storage underneath your house as well, right? But it may not it may not be closed in storage, you know, like like you could elevate your house. You could
of closed in storage. believe that I I think it's a I think it could be a cost issue, you know, like what is what does the builder charge you to enclose your downstairs like a garage versus what does it cost to get a 10 x12 shed put in your backyard that you can put your lawn mower in? And if you have a
thousand square foot house, right? An 8 by10 shed you can get your lawn mower in as well. I mean, you're talking 10 by 12 in a small home, that's the size of a bedroom. That's at least the size of my kitchen. So, um
I I just I would agree with I just don't see the the need on on the shed aspect, especially on an elevation type of scenario. Um I'm just putting my two cents in. Um, I thought though when we were talking about the nonconforming, we
originally started this whole conversation I thought was in regards to new construction, not necessarily um non-conforming as far as staircase and the setbacks with that. Um, and so we are this is only drafted as I see it is only for non-conforming
elevations. Correct. that's that's what we addressed today and all those with the exception of the the last example that we showed was all existing construction that's being elevated. But if that's something the commission would like us to look into, we'd be happy to do so. Um because my concern is too that you know
it's an opportunity right now with a lot of current residents rebuilding their homes to make them more resilient. And you know what are we looking at here? you know, is there any grace we can give for the ster sterile cases?
Um, I like the idea of it being open at the bottom that that makes it more airy. It doesn't look look as um um you know, closed in. Uh the idea with, you know, you can't do extend the roof line other
than what it is, and that makes sense. Um I will say the landing, a three-foot landing is tiny. I mean, it's not even an OSHA standard for for people in my business to be on. Um, you know, 3 foot by 3 foot is tiny. I mean, you can't get
your groceries up there without wanting to fall backwards. Um, I would say look at that again. Okay. Um, you know, at least 3x5. I mean, there's got to be something. Your door is going to open up and you you've got a 36 inch front door. You're going to you
have to stand on the stair behind you to open it up. I mean, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Um, so I think that needs some work on the landing side of that. Um, and again, I I I I would look for
something for whether this be uh new construction on current owners um or what, but I I just think there should be some a little bit of grace on um you know, new new construction for current owners that were hit with the hurricane. Okay. I don't know if there's a way to
do that. If that's called discrimination on buyers, I'm not sure. But, um, I just think, you know, there there's a lot of old codes that we have in here that aren't as functional as they as they were. Um, you know, I'm not looking to
do something where we have zero setbacks or anything like that, but a staircase is something that's needed for for the for a home. I mean, for sure. and actually having a landing because in my old age I know I'm going to need the
landing. I currently need it landing to to stop somewhere and rest or put stuff down and and move on up. Going straight up would be I do that in other things. So don't really like that stadiums and stuff.
And just because you're mentioning landings, where does the 3x3 come from? Is that current code for landings? So, the approach of a landing needs to be at least the width of the stairs, which is three feet. Um, and talking I spoke with the building official just before this meeting. It's a it's a
that's a minimum. That's not a you know, we could allow for an additional encroachment. That's just the absolute minimum we could require. That's a Florida building code requirement. Yes, it is. So, just a minimum. So, they they could still request it for for it to be wider. Correct. And this would only be and I I
will say the majority of these 35 permits that we've reviewed so far, they completely comply with the setbacks or they provided stairs on the side or interior and there haven't been any encroachment issues. I don't think we can address every single every single situation with this code. But what was
brought up where we have those examples um this would be a benefit to those. So and all those examples that you brought up are elevating current homes not except I think you said one right that's a new construction. I did give an example of new construction. That wasn't something I was directly addressing
through the presentation, but we can certainly look at it. So, and just so I can get it right from the commission standpoint, I I thought we were talking about just elevating homes, not those who are demolishing and building new home like someone to me
building a new home if they require um a variance would have to go to the board of adjustment, right? But, you know, that's a different scenario like that home did. You know, it that was just a partial part of that staircase that was in the setback. It wasn't the whole
staircase because of of the position of that lot being I guess that's a culde-sac by just by the shape of what it looked like. Um, so in those cases, because it's so specific, um, you need to be able to talk to a board about it, right? we if you just had a blanket ordinance that said any
elevations go up that I think it could become a problem for the neighbor right if we don't um let the board of adjustment you know look at what they are um but for the el those that are there
already if it's just the staircase just to elevate your home we're talking the front of the house correct pardon talking the front of the house not a side not a side right anything section We're talking just the front. So, I'm not sure how that interferes with the the
neighbor. Well, it depends. It depends on it depends on where your home is. Like, for example, where I live, water is is across the street. So, that becomes a visual impairment for a neighbor, right? If you have if I'm staring at my at the
staircase of my neighbor from my home, I mean, I could see, you know, water basically, but you if from side to side, you know, so it depends, you know. Um, that's why you ask for variances because then your neighbor might support or not support and give their side. So, that's
why I mentioned that because it could happen depending on on the home um where it's located. Um, anyways, that was that was just one of the the things that, you know, there's some that I think that you I don't know like what could be a
negative. I guess that's my question. Has any have we thought through what could be the negative of doing this? So I think for those and that was part of the basis for just assigning that 10- foot front setback. We have that standard elsewhere in our code. That's typically the limit where a board or
some other entity needs to get involved. Um for example, we have a front yard averaging standard for those lots that were built largely before um zoning regulations in our city where they might have a 12-oot front setback. Someone building new can use that that front yard average, but no closer than 10
feet. Um, in some cases we have easements, in some cases we have other improvements. Um, not that we have a lot of rightofway acquisition here, but things like that tend to come into play when you have those improvements and a potential future sidewalks and so on that um would be inhibited by allowing a
setback less than that, right? So it could be right into the rideway. I mean I think of in some of the Dawn subdivision um they don't have sidewalks, right? But there was error of their use. There were going to be and
then now they're not. But um I said that would probably be the only thing that that you would think of could be negative. And that that would be the major impact. Visual impairment is the other. Um I I will say in most neighborhoods in the city outside of pass typically the right
of way from curb edge to the property line is anywhere between 13 and 18 feet. That's a standard. So even a 10-ft front setback is in most cases 25 feet away from the curb. So it is it is fairly far away. Pass girl is a little bit
different. It's it's more like 10 in most cases. So it's a little bit closer. But um you know just there is a there is a point where there's such an encroachment into the front yard that it does start to become a visual impairment and just look out of character for the neighborhood neighborhood.
Mhm. So, it's potential could happen to a neighborhood if many homes are doing this, especially with the significant encroachment. I think that one additional run of stairs, especially because of the them functioning for for descent, it's not going to have a significant um visual impact, but going
with maybe a five foot setback could in certain situations. And then another last I think question for the non-conforming that you showed um plan because I know I've seen some people who have been elevating their home that have the the garage which is a
typical style in some neighborhoods that have the garage like that L shape let's just say um by saying the staircase only um but they have let's say the the space for um you'll get to it the space for a
terrorist or deck up on the top because of the way not that one like one your very beginning like the ones that you kind of made yourself. I know not actual plans so I can keep going back. Yeah, there you go. like um there's like you see how there and I don't I know you
don't have numbers on this is not actual plans but where you see the wider in front of the door like if somebody wanted to have a deck from the wall all the way to the end of the home can they still request it from the board of adjustment?
Yes. I don't think we're we're looking at closing any variance pathways with this. This would just be to allow for some administrative exception to what we currently have in the code. But I don't think we're proposing any um prohibitions on variances at least at
this stage. Okay. Because I think I've seen a couple homes right now that have gone up that have that kind of design and they do have or they are adding a deck basically on that inside part. Well, they may be back enough that they have plenty. I'm saying like from I know
you all can't see because I'm pointing to my screen, but just from that side all the way over, you know. Okay. Thank you. I think that's behind the setback 17. I can't see what you're pointing at, but yes, in that one, because that's um that
L shape, but if there's another one, let's say that goes in further, but we would just say no. They have to just be it would have to be in the Well, no. That my question is then it would still go to um the board of adjustment, right? if it was not within the 17 depending on the zone.
That's correct. Under the current code, any landing or staircase needs to be within that 17 foot setback. So in this case, the landing does meet the 17. That part of it's fine, but you can't get down from there. So the stairs that extend, right, because they could still design
it the other way, too. It doesn't have to be straight out towards the street. Correct. Yes. Um, thanks Brandon. I have a couple comments as well. I think that um I think this is great and great that you guys put this together so quickly. I think that um the planning board made
some good comments about um the the desiraability of having a staircase on the front of your house both for you know welcomingness of the neighborhood and safety for fire response and those sorts of things. Um and so I think that
what you guys have proposed for the for the elevating of existing houses I think is is probably spot on. I agree with Commissioner Robinson that I think um I think there's a lot of reasons to look at extending that to new construction as well. Um, and and I think I look at that
through the lens of of district one where so many of the lots are small um, and your your neighborhood as well where um, you know, you you you can say that you know, you can design a house to fit the setbacks um, and if you want something different, you can ask for a
variance, but the board of adjustment isn't supposed to consider financial reasons for giving somebody a variance. But I think that there's a lot of lots in this city where people would be in a position where they'd go, "Well, I probably could build a new resilient
house on stilts if I can build a modular house or something like this, but one of those doesn't come in a dimension that fits on my lot with stairs, but I can't get a a variance because the board of adjustment isn't allowed to use financial considerations for giving it giving a variance." And so then they're
like, "Well, I guess I can't have a new house." And so, um, you know, I think that that 10-foot front setback for stairs, um, you know, and and and if we're real concerned about about massing and sizes of house and that sort of
thing, I don't know if there's some way to, you know, allow a percentage maybe. Yeah. percentage or or or let people have an extra five feet into the front setback if they're giving up five feet on the sides or you know there may be
some some creative way to extend that to new construction. Um you know for people who aren't going to be able to get a variance um because financial concerns can't be used. Um I think that the in place elevation of of exterior equipment makes all the sense
in the world. Um, uh, for for me, I think allowing larger sheds is it seems totally reasonable. I mean, I don't think it's our business to tell people how much stuff they should or shouldn't have. Agreed. You know, I I think most of us probably
just just lost all of our stuff and uh and are are hesitant to get any more stuff. But but if uh if somebody wants to wants wants, you know, if if they feel like they need a shed, I don't know that we should be telling them they shouldn't. Um and then uh similarly on
the allowing existing structures that are non-conforming to stay. I think that also makes sense. I think that um that's probably been really hard for some folks who have um you know come to the city with plans to elevate their house and then and then to be told like, "Wow,
that's awesome. We'd love for you to make this more resilient, but now you have to tear down your gazebo and and fill in your pool." Yeah. So, um, so I think those are are really common sense, logical logical things to do. So, I think those are great ideas.
Mayor, did you have anything to add? I am in agreement with the staff's recommendation on the uh on the setbacks with the stairs. Thank you. I would say on the new construction side, um
there's a lot more since you're building from scratch, you certainly have a lot more flexibility in designing something that fits within the setbacks. I think where the issues have come up with the new construction is when you have, for example, with the second
example and a third example and a fourth example, those odd shaped lots that you have. um and many of the uh culde-sac uh properties looking at Delmare
um the shores 55th 64th up and down uh Bay Boulevard where you have those odd shaped lots that's where you run into issues because um so there may be something that needs to be looked at is you know what happens
with those odd shaped plots um because a lot times between all the setbacks um you're very limited in what you can build you thank you anybody else have anything to add I would just add that we're not going to
be able to cover every situation but uh the key takeaway is that variances could still be required so that gives us a little bit of latitude and it certainly favors the residents. So, I I agree um with the uh the city staff's recommendations on moving forward with this. Thank you.
Okay. Thanks, Brandon. Thank you. And did that give you what adequate information what you need? Okay. Yes. Thank you. Vice Mayor might not have given me adequate information. I'm not sure I have majority on new construction. I just wanted to see you want us to bring
back ideas on new construction. I would think so. A lot of it I I would agree on odd shaped. There are a lot of odd shaped lots in here. Okay. Um in our city. So maybe it's something inherent to that. Um, and like you know,
anything pies-shaped because I know that on a pie shape or corner, you're you're sitting here looking at especially on a corner, you've got two easements and and so you you have that and as well as on on a on a pie shape, you've got
half of it may be within within uh the setback and the other half may not be. So, um yeah, I would say I would s I would be in agreement looking at those. Okay. Thank you. Would it help to look through zones by any chance like neighborhoods like the way that they're
designed? Just thinking about the negative that you're saying like the I don't think it's going to happen, but let's just say like Gulf Winds redesign, right? It if people were too close to what the potential spend on a sidewalk or something, you know, is it going to mess it up? you know, like I don't know
every home there, you know, but should we be looking at the zone or you or like you said, maybe district one has a lot of smaller lots. Um, you know, and the new construction if you do it by percentage, you probably could see it, you know, like pass looks very different
than another neighbor, you know, another neighborhood in our city. So maybe we should look at them as a zone too and see you know what are what's what's district one suffering more from or or two and you know it might help you know like the ones that were saying the bays
it has a lot of culde-sacs you know we don't have that in the donsar there's no culde-sacs you know but some neighborhoods that do um and how that would look like understood all right thank you thank you all All right. So, I think we're on to
our uh wastewater inflow and infiltration. Good evening. Uh for the record, Camden Mills, public services director. Appreciate the opportunity this evening uh to give you an update on our wastewater utility system and our inflow
and infiltration. Um at our September 8th commission meeting, our city manager gave a report um that St. Petersburg, the city of St. Petersburg has observed observed elevated chloride levels um from saltwater intrusion into our wastewater system. Um so we wanted to
come back and provide you a more comprehensive overview uh related to that report um in in the uh essence of transparency. So first um to give you a brief background on the wastewater system in St. Pete Beach. Um the system was
constructed from 1954 to 1957 and a large majority of the original infrastructure from that project is still currently in place today. Um the allocated uh wastewater flows that we send to the St. Peters or city of St.
Petersburg um on average has been about 2.62 million gallons per day. Um and as I mentioned all of that is conveyed over to the city of St. Petersburg Northwest uh water reclamation facility. It is important to note that we currently do
not have a full extent um of the condition of our private um sewer lateral lines that tie into our public system. Um so what is inflow and infiltration? Um INI is the process of groundwater or
other water sources other than domestic waste water entering our sanitary sewer system. um ini can cause dilution in our sanitary sewers um which can decrease the efficiency of treatment and also could increase the volumes to exceed our design capacity. Um the picture shown on
this slide here is a before and after of a manhole structure. Um so on the left is is an old brick manhole structure and then on the right is the replacement structure which is is your typical concrete um pre-cast um structure. It's important to note that an increased water table uh creates higher rates of
infiltration into the cracks and pipes and in the voids in the manholes and greater storm surges uh result in an increased flooding and and inflow into our sanitary sewer system. Back in 2016, uh the city inspected our
wastewater collection system in order to identify repairs. And then in 2017, we hired an engineer to prepare an inflow and infiltration report which was completed uh to assist the city with prioritizing those identified repairs.
The results of that 2017 INI report showed about 62% of the city's wastewater conveyance system, so our underground gravity pipes required rehabilitation. This image um you see here is a heat map of some of the specific pipeline point
repairs that were identified in that 2017 INI report. In total about 25% of the wastewater system requires those specific point repairs. Um so what a point repair is it's either a structural um replacement of the pipe where we
excavate and and and replace in in that specific location or or a maintenance point repair where we remove roots or or some grease deposits that are preventing that conveyance from functioning properly. And um also evaluating that pipes and
separate from those those structural pipe repair point repairs is pipe lining. Um, this is another method of repair where we install a liner inside those existing pipes um to shore up shore up that system and extend the useful life. That 2017 report showed
about 42% of the wastewater systems gravity pipes required pipelining. In addition to the pipe point repairs and the pipe lining, the 2017 report also identified um our manholes and and manholes that needed to be uh
rehabilitated. About 59% of of our wastewater system manholes required rehabilitation. At the time the report was published in 2017, we evaluated 815 manhole structures. Um since that time we have we have found additional manhole
structures and our current um asset inventory that we have in GIS has 864 manhole structures. And here is a heat map of of those manhole repairs proposed in that 2017 report. Um again about 59% of our
wastewater system manhole require rehabilitation. Here is a summary of estimated cost and and of the recommended repairs from that 2017 report um split between the the pipeline point repairs, the pipelining
and the manhole rehab. In total over a 5-year period, that 2017 report recommended over $5.8 million of improvements in order to bring our our system into compliance with industry standards. changes were made to to that previous
manhole report in 2021 um to capture additional priorities. And in 2023, uh we issued an asset management plan that relooked at our our INI situation um since it was last evaluated in 2017 and proposed a plan forward. Um, in that
2023 report, the five-year total um for recommended investment in order to address INI and our wastewater system was about $3.1 million. And this slide here uh just shows a comparison over the years from when we initially started this INI program with
that report in 2017 carried through today in 2025. Um, so the column labeled ini investment, those are the actual dollar figures that the city has spent on improvements, whether that's point repairs, pipelining, or manhole rehab
and replacements. So in total, since that 2017 report was issued, uh, the city has invested about $5.2 million into into addressing our INI. And in this middle column where it shows estimated cost, these are the
recommended um investments in in costs associated with those two reports that were previously done. So you see we have the years from 2017 to 2021 associated with that 2017 report. And then in 23 24 and 25 um recommended from that that
2023 asset management plan update. And total between those two reports, they recommended about $7.9 million of improvements to to address our INI. And in the column on the far right is just a running cumulative total of showing what
the difference is in the um INI investment versus uh those estimated costs from that report. So when you when you look at that cumulative running total uh between 7 2017 and 2025, we're about 2.7 million short of our
investment compared to what was recommended in in those um in those reports. So as we look at at our INI program and and how this impacts our city, um it's important to to look at our wholesale wastewater service agreement with the
city of St. Petersburg. Um city of St. Petersburg maintains our our wastewater. Um they receive and treat the city's wastewater and we have an agreement in place with them uh for an established wastewater flow rate of 2.95 million gallons per day on on average. Um it's
important to note we also have a future allocation of 3.15 million gallons per day and that's based on permitted um design capacity that that hasn't been allocated yet. And in St. Peter's city of St.
Petersburg Code of Ordinances section 27307. They speak to specific limitations um regarding the the local limits on wastewater strengths in in the treatment capacity within that wastewater that we're sending them. Um specifically to
saltwater intrusion uh which which is our main focus of our INI is the pollutant of chloride. Um and and that code of ordinances that city of St. Petersburg establishes has a concentration level of 1350 mg per liter
um average daily limit of chloride um being measured um allowable in in the wastewater that we send them. This graph here um just shows a monthly average of flow in million gallons per day from August 2024 to August 2025
relative to our reserve currently reserve capacity of 2.95 million gallons per day. Um so that 2.95 is is that red line across the chart and then our monthly averages are are those fluctuating um bars there. And as you can see during during our typical rainy
months is when we have higher flows into our system. Um that can be attributed to to the high tides that's that's increasing the pressure underground and that um that salty groundwater getting into our system as well as storm surges um from events that we've had um here
recently. So you can see in those typical rainy months we exceed u that that allocated reserve capacity, but then on our drier months that we are below that capacity. So on an annual average limit uh we are operating within within our established capacity.
Um and then this next chart here um this shows a historical flow um that that we sent to St. Petersburg over annual basis from 2015 through 2025. Um so you as you
can see here in about 2021 is when our chloride concentration limits exceeded um that limit of 1350 mgram per liter established by the city of St. Petersburg in in our contract with them. Um it's important to note that our flows
in 2025 significantly decreased um post hurricane. So it is expected that chloride concentration levels would increase um since there's a reduced flow into the system um that that isn't diluting that that saltwater ioni. Um so a good a better reference point than 25
would would probably be tracking back to to 2023 when we were operating on that that 2.6 million gallon per day flow and and seeing the the elevated chloride levels there. Um, so in summary, the the main issues with with our INI is is not so much of a volume or or capacity
issue, but more of a condition and of of our system underground and and how it can function. Uh, it's important to note that many days um the city of St. Petersburg Northwest plant is not able to produce reclaimed water. Um, so when we when we send our wastewater to the city of St. Petersburg, they treat that
and distribute that out to their customers as reclaimed water. So when we are exceeding those limits, it puts the burden on them to be able to provide that reclaimed water to to their customers. And this chart here just shows uh a timeline of recent coordination uh with
the city of St. Petersburg. Uh based on conversations with staff here at St. Pete Beach, it's it's my understanding that discussions of the the elevated chloride levels started with city staff before November of of 2023. Uh an important date was on January in 5th of
2024. Um the city of St. Petersburg emailed city of St. Pete Beach staff um that we have elevated chloride levels um well above the rest of the system, specifically in our lift stations four and five and those two lift stations are
located in our pass area and receive flow from everything south of 21st Avenue. Um so city of St. Petersburg, they routinely in um measure the chloride levels at our different lift stations and as a result of that they perform more targeted sampling uh within
those hot spots that they identified in in the pass area and they recommend holes to to target for for further sampling. In addition to evaluating our our contract obligations with the city of St. Petersburg, we also wanted to to evaluate how the this impact of our INI
program impacts our our city codes. Um so first off with our comprehensive plan and specifically on our infrastructure element five, our goal number one is to provide necessary sanitary sewer services by a safe, efficient and cost-effective system which maintains
adequate facilities and provides for orderly growth and inspection and expansion. in order to achieve this goal. Um it's it's pretty evident that s significant investment is is needed. And then as it relates to to our land development code, um that's where we
have our language which ties to concurrency. Um with that uh moving forward, we plan to notify any applicants that that are applying for site plans of of the um the concentration levels in in our system. And with that, we would be seeking guidance from from the city of St.
Petersburg on whether um concurrency could be issued for those pro um developments on on a projectby- project basis. We're also evaluating our user connection fee um for developments in proposed developments and that's a component that's currently underway um
with our our fee study. So, I wanted to highlight a couple actions that that the city is underway with to to help address this program. Again, uh we've had this INI program in our capital program for for some time now. Um but as as we saw on the previous slides, what we've invested and and
actually put forth in the ground hasn't matched what what the recommendations are um to get in compliance with industry standards. Um so first, which is a wastewater system cleaning and inspection program. Um this is one of the items that's on our agenda for approval tonight. that would be and not
to exceed $2 million a year um to clean and inspect our pipes, laterals, and manholes. Um some of the images shown on this slide here um were pictures that were taken back from that previous uh 2017 study. Um so these are type of the issues that that we plan on seeing from these inspections. Um on the far left is
is a disjointed pipe where where the two pipes don't line up any anymore. And the middle is where a a franchise utility board a line that that punctured through our pipeline and and and caused an issue. And then the image on the far right is is a grease buildup deposit
which which inhibits um the capacity of the system. And then the next major project that that's going to help address our inflow and infiltration situation is is continuing on our INI program. Um this is a a project that's on the books again
proposed for fiscal year 26. We're proposing um just over $ 1.9 million and this money would be used for the pipelining, the pipe repairs, and the manhole rehabs. Over five years, we're proposing $3.9 million. Um but but this
will be an ongoing program. Um INI is something that that we'll always that we'll always target to to address as as our system ages. So our goal is is in this five years to to really tackle especially in year 2026 to to have a large impact and then over the coming
years we will reduce that investment um between years 20 35 through 2042 we're recommending to to reduce that that investment to about 250,000 per year and that's where we want to be is where we're on top of our of our maintenance and we can keep this this program
manageable. Um in 2026 our goal is to target those hotspots that the city of St. Petersburg has helped us identify and we also um plan to coordinate with them regularly. Um we've established bi-weekly meetings with them. Um they have a great helpful staff on board that's willing to provide resources to
to help us um accomplish this goal. Um it's important to note the the outer years of this program may be adjusted um once we complete the the cleaning and inspection this coming fiscal year. um we'll we'll adjust those outer years um as needed if if further prioriti or
priorities um come to surface. And then as I mentioned that the fee study is underway um to help update that connection fees to offset some of the city's investment um into this program. Um and with that I'll open it up to to any comments or questions.
Questions? Commissioner Robinson? Um, I'm just I'm disturbed by this whole thing. Um, because I don't understand how and why this happened. We had the reports back in 2016. And what happened
in 2021? Why were we not getting any reports from St. Petersburg back in 2021? What you're showing here is 2023. What happened to the communication prior to that? I would have to do some more research. Um I have reached out to to
the city of St. Petersburg to see if they could provide some more background on on what prior conversations have happened. Um but but in my limited research, this is kind of what I could put together. I I know this kind of came about to you pretty quick and as well as to everybody else um as well. Although I must say
that, you know, I I brought up about 4 months ago a consent and a compliance order that the city was under and whether we had a we we were in compliance with either of those for our sewer system
and never got an answer back on that. And that was four months ago. and and that is the backbone of this that we're finding out right now because that said that there were things that we had to do. There was the the
studies that we had to do. Hence, we had the study by Kimley Horn done and we found out that info and I just don't understand, you know, what is the the root cause analysis on this? H how
how could this how could this happen and how can we prevent this from future happening? I would say um you know how we prevent this in in the future from happening is is is doing the projects you know rehabing our manholes replacing the pipes and and lining them and and
maintaining that and keeping up with that plan moving forward. You know, I I this is before your time, before the city manager's time, but you know, there's there's been articles written in the paper about how how poor our sewer system has been. And we've known this.
The city has known this. Prior administrations have known this. And we we need to make sure this doesn't happen again. And we need to make sure we take care of it. Um, you know, and and there needs to be some sort of investigation into the root cause of this. Who knew?
Who all knew that this was going on in 2021? Why were we not doing the repairs necessary that we needed? Penelis County was going to buy Treasure Island's sewer system from them and pay
them to buy ours from us. We had to pay them. It's it's just it's been a problem. And and we're at a situation now where it's not about physical capacity, it's about functionality.
And what can the city handle from a functionality standpoint for all this development? We're looking in all this extra density. We're looking at adding. We've got more sea level rise. That's not going away.
We're we're trying to combat that. But we've got a basically a sewer system that's failing failing us. And I'd like to know who all knew about this. And I and I think the residents and
everybody paying into to this that's going to end up paying for it one way or another, they deserve to know. and all in all transparency and all accountability they need to know.
So I'll go back and ask are we in compliance with our consent order and well we were released from the consent order in July 19th of 2022 by D. Um, the
consent order that was signed in 2014 in case 14-0021 required a number of things. Um, one of them uh was to conduct the INI study by the end of
fiscal year 2016 and agree to budget sufficient funds to complete the citywide infilowin infiltration study and capital improvements program to reduce ground and surface water intrusion. And it says, "Honor before June 1st and
December 1st of each year, the consent order in is in effect, the city shall submit to the department a written report concerning compliance with the consent order. One of the reasons that the consent order was issued is that we had unauthorized releases
um in 20 November of 2013 um October of 2013 and I actually three times in November um that we discharged wastewater from the collection system and didn't report it.
Um and then we met with the city staff met with the D staff to discuss these operational improvements and we were supposed to notify of any spills which I think we were doing
within 180 days of the consent order. We had to submit an operation and maintenance policy to address unauthorized releases, environmental sampling, and public notification. Um, we were supposed to complete rehabilitation of lift station number
two by December 31st, 2015. um by the end of fiscal year 2015. The respondent, the city agrees to budget sufficient funds to complete a permitting and engineering necessary to completely replace pump station 3 and
relocate force main number three. And those projects were to be included in the 2016 budget and completed by December 31st, 2016. And then by December 31st, 2017, the respondent, the city, must investigate,
draft, and implement a fats, oil, and grease ordinance. And also in the event within 3 years of the effective date of this consent order, which was 2014 to 2017, the city must complete construction improvements and rehabilitation of the collection
system to significantly reduce wastewater overflows. So we had a number of things that we were supposed to do and D, I guess, found that we complied and they released us from the consent order.
in um 2022. And as far as any of the utility companies um drilling through our pipes, do we have a legal recourse on that? Well, we have to fix those. Yeah. And uh if we can find out who put it in,
um certainly we can notify them and see if we can um sue them if we have to. um statute of limitations might apply, but it would depend on when we found out about it and if anything had been filed it prior. So, I'm not sure where that particular bore hole occurred, but we
could investigate that. It may happen in other locations. I think we'll find it when we do our television survey or video survey, right? And we we do find some of those too when we have emergency situations of of blockages and we go and and we find those type of pipes that
we'll track back and see when a rightaway use permit was pulled to identify, you know, when when that construction took place because a lot of times, you know, it it may not turn surface, you know, for a couple years, right? Um but that is something that we we do try to track down. We'll pull our locate
tickets um when when we located before that franchise utility project and then work with that company to recover those funds because we just had a lot of boring done up and down a lot. I mean I I know you know up and down Gulf Winds and side
streets as well. Everything for underground was bored. So it'll be interesting to see what else we find. Commissioner Rzniki. Um, Kamden, just a question because you said two million again to move like to moving forward in plan. I I know you
were going to be televising all the the pipes. Um, but at if we're um allocating the 2 million, right, or 2.2, I forgot the exact number. Um, do we have the funds being allocated so we can be repairing because we're just televising.
So, um, what additional funds? I think from one of your slides, it was like 1.9 that you needed just in a year-to-year budget to be able to repair as you find these things that that are happening throughout the city. Are are we in that position right now?
We we are in in your proposed uh fiscal year 26 budget, we have a CIP project called wastewater collection system improvements, and that's specific for high repairs. Okay. So we would be falling somewhat in the plan that that you you're going
through to saying that every year what we needed financially to be able to address what we're televising and finding. Correct. Yep. And in order to stay on top of that maintenance. Okay. And is there um anything that the city can do proactive so that when
rightaway permits are put in place um is there a way for the city um when those permits are closed to be able to see or detect or inspect or should we hire someone to inspect to make sure
that something wasn't broken? You know, because once they close it, they're gone. And instead of waiting two to three years down the line to see what happens, um when there's a good indicator that something could have happened, is there an easy way um for someone to inspect it to determine if
there is some kind of um water spilling or or whatever it may be? That's um it it's difficult to do on on larger projects. Say for instance, if if like Duke Energy is in doing a whole block or something, that that would be harder to to identify and and trace back
because we would have to, you know, camera our entire system just to see if they potentially did hit something. Um that's not something that that we have done in the past. If it's a rightway use permit um associated with a specific project, um they are supposed to televise their their private sanitary
line um to show that the connection that they made to ours is is sufficient. Um but that that um getting in place a better mechanism to to track the impacts of the franchise utilities is something that we need to continue to work on. Can we make a requirement for them to
televise after they've done it after they've done the work? Well, they um I guess like ask them to televise sewer that would be in the vicinity of of their work where they did their work. I'm I'm not sure if we have a nexus to draw to that, but we can look into that. That way, you know, we're not trying to
see if we meet the statute of limitation, right? If if we're ahead of it, then you know, we could sit here and think, okay, probably wasn't that because they've been televising after they've closed, um we could possibly include it in our RFPs. It'll probably be be a cost that's
passed on to us obviously in what the bids come in at. It's an additional task. Thank you, Commissioner Baldonado. Um yeah, so first of all, let me just say that uh thank you for your transparency and it
looks like you have a very robust action plan to deal with uh what is not a new problem. So as I see it, INI goes back to 2013. It was brought up to the attention of staff. I'm more focused on the future as opposed to you know who to
blame or what happened. and um I am very much looking forward to this effort that you're making and that um we just need to stay on top of it. So that one of the big things is as the other commissioners have expressed is that we need to
anticipate problems and we need to get ahead of those. You know, whether it's inadvertent uh boring or whether we run into unexpected expenses, we need to budget for that and we need to keep the uh the public uh informed as we're moving forward with that. But thank you
for uh for your transparency. I know that you're you're taking this on. Uh you haven't shared responsibility and I commend you for that. Thank you. Uh Cameron, I've got a couple questions for you. Um on the on the slide that has
the the flows per year, I believe along with the chloride overlaid. Yep. That there we go. um in I I think on the the previous charts about when the study was done and it looked like a fair amount of money was
spent in 2017 on the INI program and then in 2017 our total average daily flow dropped quite a bit. Am I making too much of a leap to assume that those two things had something to do with each other? That that that big relining or or
INI project that happened in 2017 could have kept so much inflow out of the system that that's why our average daily flow in 2018 is lower or is that bad logic? That that very well could be a direct correlation. Um the the essence of of
shoring up the system, getting rid of those leaks would reduce the amount of groundwater and and flood waters that enter the system. So it would it would be logical that if um we do address the INI and rehab our pipes and manholes that we would expect a reduction in flow
in flow overall. Okay. And uh um and yeah and and thank you for laying this all out so clearly. I think that's very helpful and I agree with Commissioner Maldonado. I think that you know our focus needs to be on where do we go from here? How do we fix this problem? How do we keep ourselves from getting back in
this position again? and and uh um and and I and I think we have have a start of a really reasonable plan. My only other thought was um if you know I don't know what percentage of the total system is private private
laterals from from residences and businesses but is there any kind of um federal or county or state funding available for you know like matching grants for homeowners who want to replace their laterals or I mean you know is there a way to to attack that
problem from a couple of directions so that um you know because because as a city we can only we can only fix the city-owned pipes. Um and I'm sure those aren't I'm I'm certain that that's a lot of the problem, but I'm sure it's not the only
problem. Yeah, that's a good point. Um and as I mentioned, you know, the the extent of of those private sewer laterals is still an unknown at this point. Um with this upcoming sewer cleaning project, we are proposing in there. there's a a line
item to in or inspect those laterals as well so we can get a good idea of of what those laterals are, where they're at, and then we can get those plugged into our into our GIS system. Um, just just a rough estimate, you know, if you assume 30 30 feet per lateral at 7,000
homes, that equates to about the length of our gravity system itself. So, it could be a pretty large um portion. Yep. Okay. Um, regarding the grants, um, that that's something that we can research to see if if there's grant opportunities to to help out with those private laterals.
Perfect. Thank you, Mayor. Do you have anything to add? Yeah, I've got a few questions. So Ken then you um you're you're in a tough spot here and uh I agree that we should focus on looking forward and how do we address this and how do we make sure that we
don't repeat the mistakes of the past and the way we're going to do that is by understanding how we got here. And so looking at the reports that you provided, we had 65%
on the first slide uh third slide of the presentation, 65 uh% of the pipes needed rehabilitation. Um in your estimate, how much of that do you think was actually done? there there was a good portion of
pipelining done um especially in those initial years 2017 2018 as well as um significant amount of manholes repaired. Um I can collect that data and come back and report that to you on where we're at as far as addressing that at least that 2017 report.
Okay. going on that based on that slide that you provided where we have the INI investment re um what was recommended versus what was actually spent. Looks like we've had significant shortfalls starting in year
one. So it looks like year one we had a $623,000 shortfall. Is that am I reading that accurately? That that's correct. Um and and as it's running through um that's it's adding up over time. Um, so in 2018 we were, you
know, less than $100,000, but um, you can see relative to that to that prior year, it's it's just a cumulative running total. So yes, in in 2017, we were started out in the hole. So would I be reading that correctly to say that
let's say going back to the the lining? So you had 42% on the lining. Of that 42% I'm assuming not all of it was done if we had a $600,000 shortfall the first year.
That's correct. Okay. Same with the manholes, same with everything else. So we were told you need to do this much. We have 65% of failure on one side, 42 the other. and the manhole covers and we did 50 60
based on this roughly maybe 70% of what was required. Is that am I reading that correctly? If yes sir if you're if you're matching up um the dollar figures of of course you know in in the report those were estimated costs. So you know the actual repairs may have been more expensive or
or less than than those estimated costs. Um but kind of gives you a rough idea. And you've been doing this for a while. So, how often do you get projects that come in under budget? Not very often. Would you say it's closer to zero or
closer to 100? Closer% of the time. Probably closer to zero% than than 100%. There's a reason all of our contracts have a 10% overage allowance, right? Correct. Yes. We we like to bake in that
contingency just for those those unknowns and unforeseens. Um just could help me understand where where did you get all this data from? I mean you've got some very very detailed information here. I mean you down to the
pennies. Where's all where is all coming from? I've got pictures. I've got graphs. I've got overlays. A lot of the the pictures and graphs came from those prior studies, the 2017 report as well as the 2023 report. Um on this slide
that that you see with the INI investment, um that came from our our budgets. Um so looking back at what was actually spent in those fiscal year budgets. Um and then again that those estimated costs were just taken from those two previous reports.
Okay. So you would say that let's say previous city managers, previous public works directors, state, they would have been aware of this information. Um, yeah, I think that's that's would it be reasonable to assume so? I'm not I'm not asking to read their minds or but would it be reasonable that
somebody in that position because clearly St. Petersburg notified somebody. So who did they notify when um they reached out to me um last year just before the storms to schedule a meeting? um that that was my first
time um in in correspondence with them. But yeah, I think that would be a reasonable assumption that um you know the city knew this based on studying the previous reports. Um I would note um the chloride the chloride level issue was not something
that I've seen was specifically addressed um in in those previous studies. Um they were more towards the ini um holistically um but they didn't really pin pin into to the pollutant levels. Um, that was something that was that was brought up to us separately by the city of St. Petersburg.
Okay. So, you have this timeline here. So, November 23rd, who notified who of what? I think it's your 15th slide. So, in um September of 24, that was when the city of St. Petersburg um wastewater
or department had contacted the St. Pete Beach public works department in order to discuss uh that previous sampling that they did in January and February of 24. Um that contact was was directly with me. Um we had a meeting scheduled
um that we canled due to the hurricanes. um we we rescheduled that meeting in June. Um and that's when the the chloride level data um was was first shared um with me personally and and we evaluated and and saw that you know we've been we've been out of compliance
here um for for some time. And then in August uh is when we had a follow-up meeting um with myself and our city manager um with the public works director at the city of St. Petersburg as well as their city administrator.
And then the January 24th and November 23rd. The January 24th um was based on staff um with within our department. Um they had shown some emails um back and forth with with the city of St. Petersburg. Um
and then they that um in in consultation with staff, they they advised that they think, you know, prior to November 23 um was the last email they had um recorded, but they they thought those discussions may have taken place previously. Okay.
So again, I'm not an engineer. I don't think any of our city commissioners are wastewater engineers or So when we have this high of a level, like how do we how do we get this high? This is not is this just
simply a little extra water in the system? I mean, how do how do the levels get that high? I I think relative to to the chloride concentration levels, it's it's really attributed to saltwater intrusion. So either the high groundwater tables um when we have our
high tides putting extra pressure and leaking into that system or when we have um flooding events like we did from Helen um where we have storm surges um and in that salt water entering our environment. But but we believe the chloride is directly associated with
saltwater intrusion. And so for them to be this high consistently, I'm assuming we're talking, you said they can't take our water most days. So this is not hurricane was one day, right? That hurricane that one day isn't going to
contribute for high levels for every single day thereafter. So are you expecting to find massive catastrophic pipe failures, collapses, or is it just a little bit of water trickling into the system? What are we what are we looking at here?
I think it's a combination of both. I mean, INI is is a systemwide citywide program. Um, but I do think the the saltwater intrusion specifically is probably targeted to some specific hotspots within within that pass area. Um, that's something that we're going to
continue to study further. Um, especially in our um consultation with with the city of St. Petersburg. Um but in in the conversations that I've had, we do think there is some hot spots that are significant or contributing more more than um some of the other manholes.
Um when they did their testing back in January um to see that those lift stations four and five were elevated um they came back in February and targeted some specific manholes and and it does look like um some manholes are are contributing more than others. So, I think we in this first year in in in
2026, I think we're going to be able to hit some of those hot spots that should make a significant improvement. Okay. And um one last question here. So, I I know our next item on the agenda is going to be talking about this $2 million
uh contract. just so that we're on the same page. I know we haven't got to the contract, but the contract is for inspecting and cleaning, right? And it's doesn't
actually include fixing. So, we don't really know what we will find, right? So, this is just inspections and some rudimentary cleaning that you know that we're not talking lining, we're not talking manhole covers, we're not talking fixing collapses or anything
else, right? Or that's that's correct. Yeah. The contract um brought forward tonight is just specifically for the inspection and cleaning. Um the actual repairs and rehabilitation will be handled through separate contracts. Um,
currently the city has a contract in place for the structural point repairs and we also have a a contract in place for the manhole rehabilitations. Um, those were contracts that we just recently had extended. Um, what we don't have in place currently is the
pipelining contract. Um, and that's something that we we will put out to bid and and bring forth to commission for for approval at a future meeting. Okay, Camden, I appreciate it. I appreciate it very much. I appreciate you actually answering these questions
straightforward without uh trying to beat around the bush and and trying to give us a clear and accurate picture so that we can make solid decisions based on actual factual data so that we can move forward with this. Thank you. So,
thank you, Camden. And I think that leads us um should do should do we go to immediately to 6A or should we have um general audience comments for 6A? Okay. So, I think you're back up.
Thank you for the record, Camden Mills. Um I I didn't have a specific uh presentation prepared for this item. Um, but I would like to note um that the city did advertise publicly a request for proposals u for a qualified contractor to perform sewer cleaning and
inspections throughout the city. Uh we received four responsive sealed bids uh back in August and uh Roland Incorporated was determined to be the lowest and responsive bidder that met all the city's qualification requirements. Um, this proposed contract
provides a not to exceed unit prices uh for the sewer system cleaning inspection, including pipe cleaning and and um television inspection. Specialty cleaning uh which could include rooting or cutting out tree roots um and grease
removal, the manhole inspections, um any bypass pumping that's required in order to to perform those inspections. um the private sewer lateral cleaning and inspections and then also has an ultimate um bid item in there for artificial intelligence uh platform and
licensing. Um this contract we do plan on um execute or implementing um if if approved for a citywide cleaning and it would be in place for three years with two um options for for one-year extensions. So, we would continue um to
use the unit prices on on this contract uh for for the foreseeable future. Um the the contract deliverables associated with this um again would be used to analyze the current conditions of our system um so we can compare it to those previous reports and and rep prioritize.
It'll also be used to update the city's GIS asset inventory um so we can improve our our asset management and then again most importantly be able to pri prioritize future wastewater repairs and replacements. Um we do have proposed funding in our fiscal year 26 CIP for
this project in the amount of 2000 um or $2 million. Um so that's why we set the contract with a not to exceed limit u for that amount. All right. Any questions? Does that include televising as well as part of the whole inspection process?
Yep. Thank you. Um, do we have any public comment? There are no public comments on this topic. Do we have a motion? I motion to authorize the city manager to execute a services agreement with
Roland, Inc. for sewer system cleaning and inspection services in the amount not to exceed 2 million annually. I second. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Commissioner is Nikki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott,
yes. And Mayor Petrilla, yes. The motion carries. All right. I think we're finally to general comments. Do we have any general public comment?
George Smith. Thank you, sir. Please state your name and address for the record. George Smith, 5940, Bimy Way North. Um, I want to talk about a couple of things here. Uh, the amendments to the regulations for elevating homes. in
general in favor of what the staff has has put together, but there were a couple of uh commission comments that concern me a little bit. One of those is I believe I heard somebody suggesting that those uh regulations could be extended to new construction as well,
and that's not a good idea whatsoever. Um builders and homeowners are going to abuse that. and if you know you're just changing the whole regulation, the whole plan that the city's gone with for a long time if you do that. So I think that uh the new construction needs to
stay as is. In addition, there was a comment about uh uh storage sheds. And if you elevate a home or build up on the second level, you're going to pick up a whole lot of space underneath. and I don't see any reason to have a crappy
shed sitting outside that gets washed away and into your neighbor's yard next time the the uh hurricane comes through. Um so those are my two comments about that. The other comment I have is regarding the uh storm water infiltration. And um uh I can't tell you
how many times I've seen cleanouts on PVC pipes cut off by lawn maintenance companies. And so maybe a a public awareness that if they see something like that to bring it up and and you know report it because uh when you have
a situation like that, you're going to have water flowing in there anytime that somebody's sprinkling. All the rainwater runoff goes in there and uh it won't have a huge effect on the chloride levels except when you have a flood situation. But in that situation, you're just dumping storm water right down that
pipe. And uh so uh maybe a community uh in information program to let people know would be good. Thank you. Thank you. There are no further comments. Okay. Um all right. On to the consent agenda
and unless there's any specific discussion, we can have a motion. I just wanted to make a comment not not to discuss anything in particular just because there's so many contracts on engineers or engineering contracts and and um when you look at all the packets
and I don't know if it was a lot but um that hopefully as a city um I saw so many interesting projects in the qualifications for a lot of these engineers in different cities throughout Florida um whether it was on storm water
uh shoreline um you know um strengthening stabilization I think that's the word we're using around there are so many examples out there and some people who were actually you know like Cummings is one that I know I've been working with um for shoreline uh stabilization in the Donsesar
um and some engineers that have been in the city before that I hope that this is something that it's a huge resource of being able to get some great ideas of what potentially could be working in other communities before we invest
so much money on on the conceptuals. Let me just say that way that there might be some cities right now that have had something that was successful for over a period of years that hopefully with this big group of engineers that that Candon you're going to have to your disposal
that that we can be picking um their wealth of knowledge and expertise to help improve the city of St. Pete Beach. All right. Do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Make the motion to approve the uh September 8, 2025
budget and regular commission meeting. Second. Just to be clear, you mentioned just the first item on the consent agenda. Oh, correct. You're not approving the rest of the consent agenda. We can do the whole thing al together. Okay.
Yeah. in its entirety. There we go. I second the entirety. A through Q. Commissioner Rzniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado, yes. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes.
Commissioner Robinson, yes. And Mayor Petrilla, yes. The motion carries. All right. So, on to ordinances. Um, I think we're finally to the millage rate, correct? Yes.
Yes. One second. Ordinance 2025-18, an ordinance of the city of St. Pete Beach, Florida. Establishing the millage rate for fiscal year 2026 beginning October 1st, 2025 and ending
September 30th, 2026. Providing and announcing the name of the taxing authority, the rolled back millage rate, the percentage increase over the roll back millage rate, and the millage rate to be levied, providing for reading in its entirety, and providing
for an effective date. And because it says providing for reading in its tarity, I will read the rest of the resolution if you'll bear with me. Whereas Florida statutes section 200.065 requires the adoption of the millage
rate by separate vote prior to adoption of the annual budget. Whereas Florida statute section 200.065 requires that prior to adoption of the millillage levy ordinance, the following be publicly announced. the name of the
taxing authority, the roll back millage rate, the percentage increase over the roll back millage rate, and the millage rate to be levied. Whereas, in no event may the millage rate adopted exceed the millage rate tentatively adopted. Now, therefore, the city commission of the
city of St. Pete Beach, Florida, hereby ordains, section one, the name of this taxing authority is the city of St. Pete Beach. Section two, the rolled back millage rate for the fiscal year 2026 is 3.1189.
Section three, the fiscal year 2026 proposed millage rate is 0.889% lower than the rolled back rate or $140,229 in adorum revenue.
Section four, the millage rate to be levied for fiscal year 2026 shall be 3.0913 mills per $1,000 of taxable value. Section five, this ordinance shall take
effect immediately upon final adoption. All right, so this is our second reading. Nothing has changed since our last meeting. It's exactly the same. Any discussion or questions that anyone has? All right.
So, we just need a motion to approve. I make a motion to approve ordinance 2025-18 establishing the millage rate as 3.0913 mills for fiscal year 2026.
Second. Commissioner Maldonado. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott. Yes. Commissioner Robinson. Yes. Commissioner Rzniki. Yes. And Mayor Petrilla? Yes. The motion carries. All right. And so now we have our final
reading of uh ordinance 2025-9 adopting the budget. Ordinance 2025-9, an ordinance of the city of St. P Beach, Florida, adopting the budget for fiscal year 2026, beginning October 1st, 2025
and ending September 30th, 2026, providing for the incorporation of the adopted capital budget as the capital improvement element of the comprehensive plan, providing for reading in its entirety, and providing for an effective date.
Whereas Florida statute section 166.241 241 requires the adoption of a budget each fiscal year. Whereas the amount available from taxation and other sources, including balances brought forward from prior years, must equal the
total appropriations for expenditures and reserves. Whereas the adopted budget must show for each fund as required by law and sound financial practices budgeted revenues and expenditures by organizational unit which are at least
at the level of detail required for the annual financial report required under Florida statute section 218.32 parent one. Whereas the adopted budget must regulate expenditures of the municipality
and an officer of the municipal government may not expend or contract for expenditures in any fiscal year except as pursuant to the adopted budget. And whereas the city of St. P Beach fiscal year 2026 budget is balanced is presented at the level of
detail required to file the annual financial report and shall regulate the expenditures of the city for the period beginning October 1st 2025 and ending September 30th 2026. Now therefore, the city commission of
the city of St. P Beach, Florida, hereby ordains section one, the fiscal year 2026 budget document attached as exhibit A, the budget is adopted by reference and made part of this ordinance. Section two, upon adoption of the budget, the
capital improvement element of the city's comprehensive plan is hereby updated to reflect the fiscal year 2026 through fiscal year 2030 capital improvement plan. Section three. This ordinance shall take
effect immediately upon final adoption. All right. So, same as the last one. This is our second reading. Nothing's changed. Any questions, discussion, comments? No. No. All right. So, we just need a motion. I make a motion to approve the final
reading of ordinance 2025-9 adopting the budget for fiscal year 2026. I second. Vice Mayor Marriott, yes. Commissioner Robinson, yes. Commissioner Isniki, yes. Commissioner Maldonado,
yes. And Mayor Petrilla, yes. The motion carries. All right. And then moving on to our final final reading of the night. Ordinance 2025-17
specifying elevation requirements for replacement of flood damaged equipment. And this also is um unchanged. Correct. I'm Yes. Brandon will or Laura will present. I'll read the title of the ordinance. An ordinance of the city of St. B Beach
Beach, Florida for the purpose of amending code of ordinances chapter 98 building buildings and building regulation to specify minimum elevation standards for replacement of flood damaged exterior equipment and
appliances not associated with a substantially improved or damaged building. Providing for codification, conflict, severability, correction of scrivener's errors, construction, publication, and an effective date. Good evening, Laura Canary, community
development director. Nothing has changed. This is the second reading. The only thing I think that's worth mentioning is we have given a commitment to the state once they gave us the green light to go ahead and move forward with this. We've given them a commitment that we're going to be looking at the code as a whole and kind of the flood plane
regulations and just making sure that we're dotting our eyes and crossing our tees if there's anything else that needs to come forward. And back to you all. Thank you. Uh any comments, questions? Uh do we have any public comment on this
one? There are no public comments. No public comments. Okay. All right. So I think we just need a motion. Motion to adopt ordinance 2025-17. I'll second. Commissioner Robinson. Yes.
Commissioner Rniki. Yes. Commissioner Maldonado. Yes. Vice Mayor Marriott. Yes. And Mayor Petrilla? Yes. Motion carries. All right. So, we're on to items for discussion. Commissioner Robinson. Um, I wanted to bring up Vat Phil. It's
come up a couple times in regards to there are folks that are out there building their homes and there's some concerns about with how much they're allowed to do as far as back fill at 16 in over the the uh grade of the road.
Um, and it puts different people at different degrees. And the problem seems to be there are folks that are still having their garages being in a situation where they get flooded. And we're looking at being resilient and
we're looking at affording people the opportunity to do this. And there are precautions such as swells and and doing the knee walls and things of that effect to prevent basically the whole idea of being don't
flood your neighbor. Um and in some areas this is maybe it's just a bit of overkill for some of the neighborhoods where there everybody's on the water and if everybody's on the water they're all going to get the same amount of water.
Um, and especially if you're going, like I said, you do kneew walls, you do preventative um, items for that. I just think it's something that needs to be looked at. I know Treasure Island is addressing it. There's other communities addressing it, and I I believe it deserves a look at, and it might be an
outdated code that we need to look at. I Isn't this something that the city's looking I mean, I know we brought this up already. Um, aren't we looking into this already? I've not received like a report back. Yeah, I spoke with staff today about this topic and we have not started any
significant research. It is a very complex issue in the context of to be done right, you need to have studies. It's beyond the capacity of staff. We would need to bring someone in to help us with this type of um project.
So, I would uh just ask the commission to possibly consider adding this to the list of items to discuss at your upcoming priority work session check-in, which is tracking towards December as promised and really contextually tell us
where you would like to pri how you want staff to prioritize because we would have to go get outside resources for this kind of endeavor. Can we piggy back off of anything that Treasure Island or other communities have done and look at their research or is it or you're saying
it's indicative to our community? I don't have a planner here. I would say it's going to be indicative to the community, the neighborhood. Well, they're going to have to look at the elevation rise would be, but the
overall concept wouldn't be. I think Treasure Island is still wrestling with this issue. So maybe if they resolve it then we benchmark we can take a look at them as a model and and use that perhaps they they are struggling with it as a
community. So I think I would want to be just very thoughtful on how we approach it which means the correct level of effort. I wouldn't want to try to do it quickly or Okay. I just wanted to bring it up
because it is coming up again and again. Yeah. So, I'll have staff add it to our list. You know, we started a running list, but we've sort of been responding in real time, but this is one of them. One of the topics that I think this would require quite a bit of community outreach
and and uh time. So, we just want to make sure we're putting it in order of priority of how you would like us to approach it with the other things going on. All right. All right. Uh, reports. City clerk. I have nothing nothing to report this
evening. City manager. Thank you. I have two announcements this evening. First of all, you we have a free concert series at Haram Park. Starting with our first kickoff on Friday, October 3rd, 7 to 9:00 p.m., we will have the band China Grove with
special guest Supernatural, the Ultimate Doobie Brothers, and Santana Tribute bands. We um hot dogs and burgers will be sold by the St. Pete Beach Fire Rescue and beer and wine will be sold by the Tampa Bay Beaches Chamber
of Commerce. It's free to attend. Pets must be on leashes and outside food and drinks will be allowed. Just no glass, please. So, invite all all the community to come on over. And then um code enforcement has uh been working on a
project called the code enforcement corner which is supporting a education first initiative. So, we've been talking a lot about um how we would approach code enforcement in the community from a proactive standpoint versus just
reactive. And uh they're going to be starting a monthly educational spotlight on social media that highlights common code enforcement topics for our community. The goal of this program will be to inform residents about the why behind our codes, encourage voluntary compliance, and reduce the need for
enforcement activities. In fact, one of the metrics we're looking at right now is can we reduce the number of times we show up to the special magistrate. That's our ultimate goal. Um, each month they're going to focus on one to two specific issues. For October, we're
focusing on overgrown vegetation and trash and debris so that residents clearly understand expectations and the resources available to them. We are um going to be reintroducing the purpose of our hang hang tags. So, this is a colorful, so if you see one, don't
get scared because it's a courtesy notice. Um, so they're going to be meant to be a friendly way to let people know what they uh need to do to come into compliance. They're easy to spot and clear and simple to explain the exact concern on the property. Also have the
phone number and um email listed on them twice. And uh just want to say for the record, if you have questions, uh please call Jen in code enforcement. she is our main contact with the community um when they call in at 7277481122. We are really here to help. So, we're
looking forward to the community's feedback on this new approach. Thank you. End of report. Could um can I ask you one question because I think it's such a great idea to do that. the the little kind of helping people educate, you know, what's going on. Um,
uh, waste um is one thing that just popped in my mind because looking at all the cicklic fixes that I've been seeing in district three, a lot of people are talking about um like the piles of debris that are on on the side of the road. Um, another learning that some
people don't realize is that WSI waste services is not going to collect debris that's just piled up in a in a pile. um you know uh confronts and so forth need to be either put bundled or in a trash bin. So is that going to detect that
because I I know in my in my area in district three we've been seeing piles which people residents have come to me piles of debris on the side of the road but it's because they're not going to pick it up the way that it's put out. I can certainly talk to the team and see
how we promote how how to get it ready for pickup. Yeah. And I think it's confusing to some people because the the the trash service used to pick all of that up a few years ago. You could pile anything in as big a pile as you wanted and they'd pick it
up, which was amazing, but they don't do it anymore. So, yeah. Thank you. All right. City attorney. Nothing this evening. Thank you. Thank you. uh District 4. Just a couple things to uh pass on. I'll
be hosting uh cookies with the commissioner this coming Saturday from 9:00 to 10:00 a.m. at Vina Delmare Park. And then my next community engagement meeting will be on 6 October from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. at the Warren Webster
Community Activity Center in Pasigril. And our city manager will be joining us. So happy to have her out there with us uh so folks can engage with her directly. That's all I have. Thank you. District Three, just a reminder of the next meetings um
for District 3. Uh Belvisa has their um neighborhood meeting October 9th at 7 p.m. at Triangle Park. And then the Dons Casesar um neighborhood subdivision is doing their November, it's not a meeting, it's actually a celebration. So don't expect a meeting, but the 100th
year um anniversary celebration at the Donsesar Hotel at 4 p.m. um inviting the community meeting. go to their website because there is a cost to going to this event. Um it's it they're going to have things offered to those who attend. So, thank you.
District two, um just wanted to say two things. Um I had to change my library hours on October 7th to now be October 1st. I apologize to anybody that that would inconvenience. Um again, it'll be
October 1st, not October 7th. Uh again, time prime is 5 to 5:45 p.m. In the meantime, uh this week I have a resident in the Bayside Edition area holding a bit of a um a uh open house for me to
speak and discuss with the residents there. um Corey Landings and the impacts that that will have on that uh Bayside Gulf Winds and all the adjacent streets for ingress and egress for that development. And if you're interested in
coming or attending, please call my cell phone number that's listed on the website. And again, that's at it will be 5:00 pm this Wednesday. Thank you. Um I have nothing to report. I've been a little under the weather for the last couple weeks, so I apologize
for not having any meetings available. My only report is you can get a shingles vaccine at Walgreens. So, if you haven't gotten one, go get one. Um, mayor, do you have anything? Thank you. Nothing at this time. All right. Thank you all very much.
We're adjourned.