e e e e e e e e e the March 2025 city of St Pete Beach Board of adjustment meeting if we could
all please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible and
Justice city clerk roll call please member Cy here member core here Vice chair Gara here member small here chair Chase here we have a quorum fantastic um to start we'll make sure we
have approval of today's agenda um Kristen any changes Madam chair no changes are proposed all in favor approving the agenda approve I I fantastic um we'll next move on to item number two which is
audience comments this would be the time if anybody's here today that would like to speak on an item that is not on the agenda you have the floor otherwise if there's an item on the agenda please fill out a yellow comment card provide that to the city clerk and you'll have your time to speak during that um period hearing none we'll move on to
approval of the minutes did everybody have a chance to review the minutes from last yes meing any concerns no no do we have a motion move to approve I'll second roll call please yes yes yes yes
yes moving on to action items the first item for today is election of officers um I know when I saw this on the agenda I was kind of surprised because I feel like we just did this but I think it's something of the election cycle is that why Kristen it it does happen every March
that's correct it's in the ordinances that every year first meeting after the election y okay so that's um so I'm happy to remain um in the chair seat um if there's any you know concerns with that um but I'd be happy to continue representing in that capacity and um
member Gara are you interested in remaining yeah unless somebody else wants to I'd make a motion to keep the current members as the officers I would gladly second that roll call please member small yes member Cy yes member core yes
Vice chair ghaw yes chair Chase yes motion carries fantastic uh moving on to our first case for this afternoon case number 24104 um prior to the city's presentation can we just um disclose any
expar member small expone I've done a site visit everything today site visits perfect um this is the continuation of the case
that we heard back um in on the January meeting um I'm comfortable with you know the presentations that we had from the past from the city and and understanding of the presence and I'm just mostly curious to hear an update from the applicant is that are we in agreement as
a board on that capacity from them they were they were left to have a a joint association meeting yeah I believe what we said is that um Mr Johnson and Janee is Jane here I'm sorry there you are that you guys are going to get together
and tell us if you came up with a compromise that we could all live with exactly that was our goal so if we could hear from the applicant to start on an update on those discussions have the clerk SAR in the witnesses oh please thank you um anybody that would be um is planning to speak today if you could
please stand and be sworn in do you swear or affirm that the information or factual repres presentation that you're about to give to the board is true thank you thank you and if I may um I have visited that site
okay okay well good afternoon uh my name is Dan Nelson you might remember me from the last time I appeared before you so like you said that we're basically here to give you an update on what you asked us to do so I'm just going to read a brief statement so I keep on track here um the board voted to continue until
today's date any decision on granting the variance to replace two additional shed as you know we had three in two variance requests and the tennis shed was approved uh the board made two requests of a ytc the first is that the ytc would attempt to locate an alternate
location for the sheds and number two that the ytc and Captiva K homeowners or representatives there would meet to discuss potential landscape enhancements that would address concerns raised by some Captiva K owners the ytc We Believe has satisfied both of your requests on
March 12th 2025 J mccroy our board president met with Ann and Nicole the two board presidents of the Captiva K Condominium Association and Captiva K Town Home Association during this meeting there were discussions regarding our comprehensive propertywide landscape
initiative that is already underway at the ytc as well as a more attractive style of bungalow type shed I submitted several renderings of our Landscaping proposal showing the sheds in both locations with the strawbery which I think Kristen you have pictures one or
two and four do you have those pictures I do have them as part of the presentation but they were included as part of the posting and in the packet so they've seen those then okay um additionally additionally copies of the shed images were provided to the Captiva
K presidents along with names of the proposed shrubs these shrubs are fast growing and salt tolerant and one such species I learned because I was looking at them as I was walking is right across the street at your St Pete Public Works it it Shields around their 8ot high fence so you can see or wall so you can
see what a shrub would look like of the type that we're discussing the Captiva C presidents were receptive to these options along with a fenced in pen for maintaining maintenance materials that are currently stored in the open due to
the storm damage jamee mccroy also explained to the Captiva presidents the limitations on other locations for relocating The Sheds mainly due to needed accessibility however one possible location was identified in close proximity to the current shed location
which are also in pictures four five and six this new location itself would be acceptable to all parties however there will be an additional cost of just over $16,000 for ytc owners to move the sheds which involves trenching and some other things a recent ytc vot a vote of owners
indicated they did not feel it was reasonable to pay additional cost to relocate their sheds especially since we like many communities have suffered extraordinary losses to our infrastructure due to two hurricanes and we are now looking at over $300,000 needed to restore our
Landscaping our owners feel that with the landscape improvements restored fencing for the maintenance materials and a new more attractive style shed that these Aesthetics issues raised by some Captiva neighbors have been adequately addressed without ytc owners incurring the additional cost so we hope
today that this board has will approve our shed requests and we've done basically what you've asked us to do that's all that I have any questions comments for the applicant no I'd like to hear from CA
yes thank you good enough okay thank you do we have a representative from the Captiva please thank you hi I'm an John low I'm president of the Captiva Condominiums and Nicole Meyer is here for the other Association too um we did meet with Jane um my
concern is and this only came up after I talked to Kristen the other day that the materials for the new sheds weren't submitted as part of the variants so if it can only be approved with what was
originally there we are we are opposed because part of the agreement was them making it more attractive with kind of a cottagey bungalow tile uh style um look but as long as they do the the Landscaping um there were two more
concerns um one that we discussed with Jane and that was if moving the sheds had to um reorient position if they rain if the pitch of the roofs were such that that would come right into our property
that they have some kind of mechanism to you know gutters or something to take care of that um and we would like to ask that that fence that they put up to enclose their area be 8T rather than 6 ft and I understand that that is within
the code I do not know what height the previous fence was maybe Jane no it wasn't six feet how many what did you say how many feet it was six prior feet with so if if the sheds remain in the current location that 8T of fencing
would be um would help to Shield it because even fast growing plants it's going to take a few years for them to to fit in but we're agreeing in agreement with their Landscaping we certainly think that moving them was preferable but as long
as they are you know that they look nice that they're in keeping with their Community color paint schemes and they do something to Shield them that that is a compromise we could we could live with and the other thing and I think that the Y and Tennis Club has indicated that
they want to be good neighbors that they do better job of patrolling that fence line that typically has a lot of debris and just rubbish things that the wind blows in and it gets there between the vegetation and it's all on our side but
we can't get to it to clean it up so um thank you both so much for um taking the time to meet and so what I'm understanding is you've come to an agreement assuming the beautification of the C of the sheds and the cottage type feel the fencing mooved to 8 ft and the
Landscaping plan as discussed right I think that many homeowners would prefer that they be in the other location that is further from from our view and from the fencing um but we're hearing you're willing to compromise yeah yeah I believe we're
willing to would would you agree Nicole I mean I know well we'll have we'll give time for everybody to come up and and speak to don't worry okay yeah I don't want to speak for the other Association I can only represent mine okay so thank you thank you com she said sure sir
we did at our initial variance um application packet was all the specifications for the Wally watch shed so we have a board meeting tonight to discuss if this gets approved if we go with that or another company but there was at least an initial spec specification she put into the packet
that includes the design component that they're looking for okay what are we referring to that style and materials sorry Dan matal change just what was the style and material change what are you calling that um well another company calls it
something else it calls it a bungalow style it's pretty close to what the Wally watt design was it's definitely not the straight aluminum walls that it is now which is I mean that's 25y old technology so it's going to have some trim boards and things like that but the two companies are similar just just different names okay and is now like is
that a product or is there further discussion that needs to happen so I will note that staff did not receive any kind of material change Landscaping plan we receive very limited information and I do have the pictures in the narrative that was in your packet but I do have a
slide if anybody would like to look at that um to make any determination if any additional variances are required if it were be to be relocated I haven't had the opportunity or staff has have to be conditional on yeah we haven't made sure additional variances would be necessary
so okay I'd have to look at that based on but we would be able to condition that absolutely I may I have one question on the f that is 6 foot are we talking about the chain yes sir y going to go to 8T are you going to do chain link again no we would we would probably
do a white rail fence like we had before but we were hoping that with the the the hedging behind it would be more attractive to Captiva rather than seeing a white fence but if that's what you all decide for us to do then then we'll have to do that I think the thought was it's going to take a little while for the
Shrubbery to grow right so if the fence was 8T to start that would at least provide some visual we had a meeting with our landscaper Friday last week and I specifically asked him about what Hedges he was going to put back there there's three choices one of which I explain was over here across the street they grow 12 to 24 inches a year and he
was going to give us six foot high plants to start with their 17 gallons so they're already almost to the top of well they're at the top of the current fence and they would probably grow one to two feet each year after that I don't think we should be expected to put in 12T High mature plants either because that's quite a burden on us to do that
so your preference would be to keep a six foot fence but start with six correct up okay take fence col was requesting an 8ft fence but there would prefer to remain with a six foot fence in put
Shrubbery that would start at um yes Colin would you like to go ahead um I guess my concern with that is that I thought the fence was
there to kind of pen in there materials that would not be in the shed so a chain link fence you're going to see their Landscaping debris their parking stops their ladders that won't fit in there so he said they're not doing no chain link
okay that was a mistake Miss from our side that we clarify it is thank you for clarifying all right thank you both for um providing the context on the conversations that we had in between meetings um I will we will open up for a public comment I would like to just
remind that we've already had public comment on this case so if you've already shared kind of your position that hasn't changed since the last meeting um and being respectful of everybody's time um let's just be you know mindful of that there's one other Association though at in Captiva that needs to speak still why don't you lean
um and then following um her comments if there's anybody else that would like to speak on behalf her um against or provide your um position we're happy to hear from you hi I'm Cole Meer I'm the secretary of um Captiva K homeowners association
and I did meet with Jane and an in the conversation um an and I do have a difference of opinion at this point in time um I feel that the Cottages that were presented obviously after the
Varian proposal that you now have received um have a cottage look and Jane and I requested that maybe some windows in the back facing us would have it more Cottage looking versus a solid um back
to it also um I was the one that recommended the um button button brush button wood button wood um plant that grows quickly and is salt tolerant um and the other thing was the shed going
around the material uh for their Landscaping um Etc so we wouldn't see it um I spoke with our other Homeowner Association people um on the board and we felt that um knowing they would be incurring
$166,000 just to move them um and we're not talking about very far that um we as being good neighbors also because we have suffered tremendously too with the hurricane that um there is some grace and mercy that has to be going both ways
uh so we felt um our the board that I spoke with the members that we felt that um if they follow through and um meet those requirements that Jane proposed that we would be okay with it um and um
I also want to reiterate that I was on the board before as just a director and I'm now the secretary and some of my community has suggested that the reason why I'm not being a fair player is that I have been Vendetta to the old board
and I want it to be on record that is grossly inaccurate and uh very disappointing they think that because I think as um an association for the yacht and Tennis Club and the homeowner ass Association of Captiva K we need to work
together and make sure that it's uh works for both of us and technically they can do what they want on their property so thank you thank you is there anybody else that would like to share their thoughts on this
case before we close for board discussion is this for the people that requested to speak or something yeah if we have yellow cards now would be the time okay even if they spoke previously okay um if they've already spoken and they don't want to speak again then that's
fine so um I want to say that it was um I found a productive conversation with um the two women from Captiva um not only just to to talk about the sheds but to talk about common things that we're
facing as communities and we even talked about perhaps putting a group of local presidents together especially in this post storm period so that we could discuss other issues that we're facing in common and how we've solved them which we were able to scratch the
surface of during our conversation so besides the shed's topic um there was something good that um came out of you putting us together so thank you for that um regarding the the model of the sheds I mean it it doesn't matter that much between Wally Watt and tough sheds
whichever it's the Bungalow style that we're interested in and that's what our owners have voted on and approved because it's a material change um I did give a print out of what it would look like to um Nicole and an when we met so you know they felt it was okay if it's
important to them to to get a window in the back they're Custom Sheds so we can design it however we want I think the window will probably be obscured by the um the hedges but it it doesn't matter if if the window makes everybody happy let's get a window um regarding the
fence the fence is not really part of the sheds the fence is kind of up to us for what we do with a fence it had six foot before there's no big stuff protruding above the fence um it's over to the far right side of the sheds which
is not necessarily directly opposite any of the town homes so it's not something that they're necessarily looking down into I think we're probably okay at six and just thinking about what could go wrong with this as you have to do I I
think if you put up something that's 8 foot it's more susceptible even more susceptible to blowing over and what I'd like to explore one of the fences that has the opposite kind of posts like this so that the wind can kind of go through it a little bit I mean the old one we
had is in Smither so you know if if it takes an 8ot fence to make this work even though this isn't a fence discussion it's a um a shed discussion if that's what we have to do we'll do the 8 foot fence if that makes people happy um I think people will be pleased
with the landscaping and I've had the discussion with the landscaper about it Captiva expressed a preference for the Buttonwood fine if that's what everybody likes let do the Buttonwood so I think we can make it look make it look quite nice and I appreciate the opportunity
for throwing us together thank you thank you John wild um no need for me to speak this time David reinold Gary
star Aaron Zion thank you Al Johnson can't [Laughter] resist um Al Johnson I have the U duest distinction of living closer to those sheds than anybody even the people from yach and tennis and um I thought this
would be an ideal opportunity to them be good neighbors and move them because you only have to move them about 50 or 60 feet I live 40 feet from these things so moving them just around the corner have the same access and everything else I would I don't care what they look like
if they put a fence up there that's fine but uh I'm still opposed unless they relocate them to the the I believe the location that you saw before that I brought was uh I think the best option I just find it kind of uh borders on
idiocy that the only common property you have with a neighbor for that whole complex is right where they've got those sheds they could there's other places on the property where they could put them that wouldn't be infringing on anybody's view or anything so U that's my comments would the would the six foot versus the
8 foot make any difference to you I'm I can still look right over them so the answer is no it isn't no it I I'd like to see a solid thing I mean the thing is horrible now and I've lived there 25 plus years and I've been looking at the backs side of those ugly sheds for 25
years so it's um anything's an improvement uh I would like to see it go around the corner where you know they they're right next to their shule board court it'd be a nice area to put them they'd have their tools and stuff like that in their maintenance all sitting in
the inside the shreds and it'll be closer to the the keys for the the um handyman room that they have in one of those is at the guard shack which makes them closer to that so it be more convenient in my opinion and uh but anyway that's uh that's my comments I
appreciate your time thank you thank you I just have a card from Stuart schrod but the case is not on the agenda steuart thank you that's it we'll close the public discussion and
open for board discussion I think this is um I think that they did a great thing sh down and got together um's placees right there but if I heard him correctly it was 25 years ago
hasn't been there for 25 years so it's not something to do so anything they could do to make it better for him I think the proposal is is going to do that the Shrubbery and and the
fence that's my yeah I the reason I asked that about if he cared about six or8 foot is because to me it it seemed to be 8 foot without any holes in the middle I that's what I have in my yard and it didn't blow over during the hurricane believe it or not so uh um that would be my but it's not my
business because I don't live there so I think if they use post wood post in the fence supports that probably won't blow over meaning to go ahead and and increase it to yeah I don't think it would make a difference on the
Wind between six and eight M if you use the wood post the not the the in the core being wood instead of just the fiberglass yeah I I mean I I think the Landscaping
plan of having six foot buttonwoods installed that are fast growing and in alignment with the preferred Direction the style the materials if that was conditional based on the fact that they're an approved material having drainage addressed in in
the event that those create some drainage problems and then to me it seems that um it needs to just be a side s ID screened in fence that's in alignment I think with the look to me 6 foot or 8ot would be at their discretion based on what they want to do as
neighbors versus a force from us I would agree with that as well I feel like they're going above and beyond to be good neighbors in this instance and the button would can surpass that fence you know within a year or two as well so that could be there up to them
yeah are we at a point to make a motion so how do we put all that in terms okay I I think I'm G I could take an attempt unless you want to help well I do have some questions thank you if if you were deciding to have conditions placed
against it um such as the installation of the fence I just wanted to kind of um put on the record the length of the fencing if that is to just be a certain length directly behind the sheds is it to extend past the sheds um is Ju Just
from a visual standpoint um would you prefer it to go further um and not just having a couple panels directly behind the fence um also Landscaping plan if button Woods would
suffice for the the Landscaping plan is proposed just behind or would you like staff to take some additional look at it when it comes in for permitting um and just to confirm again that there's no exterior lighting that's proposed that was one thing that staff um mentioned in
the staff findings report I was going to recommend that we have the Landscaping reviewed when it's you know completed so I think that's something that we can add in there my understanding for the fence is it's was replacing the current Fence location that is currently chain link
but it was just improving it is that not the case um if you could please verify your plan for the fence so we can ensure that that and the the plan that was agreed upon in your joint discuss so I want to separate out the fence topic the fence is a pen that goes around maintenance stuff the
fence will be there excuse me whether the sheds get approved or not because that's our maintenance pen and that's where we keep parking stanions and ladders laying down on the ground and things like that right now it's all open because the fence blew away in the storm
so that fence will go back and no matter where the sheds go the fence pen will still be in that spot so it's not a fence to go behind the sheds it's it's a fence to keep the the maintenance stuff from being seen okay
okay and the the um reference to the chain link fence that is currently the chain link fence is already there and that's a divider between the properties that's all the button would would go up against that chain link fence and act as a natural barrier and
screen and the pin that would be replaced that was blown away is that going in the same location that it previous was regardless of where the sheds go who owns the the chain link fence we do we do they they used to have a fence there it blew down they chose not to
replace it so we put up a fence thank you for clarifying thank you madam chair based on the survey that was submitted where the previous sheds were located they did have the PVC vinyl fence but it did go behind and I have a copy of the survey I can bring up on the overhead
just so you have an idea if they're saying a direct replacement it does actually come around the back of the sheds and then going from west to east just so you have a you put that on so this is actually the PVC fence
that went behind the sh and that kind of went around just for reference okay where's the pen the pen that's being talked about so Captiva would be here mhm and then they have a
chaining there is there yeah right here's our land P okay that's where we had our materials and behind there's no so the initial just to make sure that we're understanding the initial proposal
had a fence and the new idea is to instead of that fence to have a landscaping plan okay so Landscaping plan except for the pen and the pen that is sitting to the West I don't know if I have my is this okay think that's to the
West I think yep is then what is to be okay great so the west side of the sheds will be where we're talking about a new pen that will have a solid PVC material that is either six or eight
feet okay and just kind of indate so everybody's on the same page it's just going from here yeah we basically surround this even from the front side come front sides like that that would be our our pen we St materials and she's yeah Christ is correct this this L the
yellow or the red line that was our original because we didn't have any Landscaping right the alternative is to put than a white wall and give that kind of design back there and then of course that area here would be the 6 high or 8 foot high PC
fence okay okay and nothing to the east side just confirm me well we put more we would put more button withs here probably wrap around just to kind of camouflage those okay but no additional fence no okay correct want to make some buttonwoods or just tree symbols just so
we can see and when they come in later Leaf little needs a green yeah Jan that would go along the entire fence correct the um chain fence not from start to finish in the in the vicinity of the shed and because there's
other trees and stuff in there so it doesn't make sense to have hedge that's that is but just for you know for that section beyond the end of the shs and then there's a tree and then maybe we'll put another plant but the whole steps will be landscaped okay so you will be
Landscaping the whole will it go along the western perimeter with buttonwoods too or no no trees there no that doesn't interface with Captiva at all well that's that's on their property yeah that doesn't make any difference so the circles you've
drawn for trees that's the trees that would be going in the button Woods yes okay so it would extend if say this portion here and the fence comes around buttonwoods because it's just showing here that it's joining the back of that shed I would recommend that it starts
here behind the PVC shed and run more East but where it ends that would be up to you I'm just trying to get an over overall linear length yep to the West
they do have some big trees there yeah and again I could bring up the the power point if that helps I think to cover the the the distance from the pen through to the other side of the shed on the south side is what we're talking about of button Woods correct
and it's approximately four like 4.8 ft from again just showing what was the previous shed or the proposed shed between that and the property line where the fence is and we can have them submit that landscaping design with permitting
to confirm I just want to make sure I'm 40t cap was indicating they're okay with it there was a misunderstanding about the okay okay and Kristen thank you for clarifying any um else that you wanted
to make sure that we're um just the lighting was the other thing I know we had received prior testimony on that but that any lighting if to be installed they no lighting okay would be facing north and not towards Captiva yeah
okay okay you got this all right I'll give it a shot let's see I make a motion um to approve case number 24105 on blind Pass Road um parcel maybe I don't need to read all this uh 25
3115 I'm going to skip that part we're going to go with the case number 24104 um with the condition of final review and approval of the materials being used to construct The
Sheds by zoning and the fence and fence um I would also say that is contingent on the commitment to do the Landscaping as discussed with the
buttonwoods across the South border Captiva addressing any drainage ISS issues that may arise and ensuring that any lighting should it
be considered would be facing away from Captiva towards the north can you repeat that what about would anyone like to second that we have should we have something in
there on the fence height correct um so that would be a minimum fence height of 6 high to create the pen on the western side can we amend this then to add it's still okay I still have the floor sort
of um and for a minimum of a six foot solid fence PVC to be used for the Penning of their equipment on the west side of the sheds and staff will confirm that the if
there is a change from the original um buildings that were submitted because they are limited to two buildings each 160 square feet and 10 feet in height and that is what you're ultimately approving so any change in the new sheds will have to meet that
requirement great yes with those conditions yes got it we have a motion we have a second I second and I do apologize for interrupting oh thank you roll call please member core yes Vice chair ghaw
yes member small yes member Cy yes chair Chase yes motion carries thank you all again for your time and collaboration all right moving on to action item C case number 25015 Brandon
you can pull the PowerPoint up please can we make that full screen I can work from this okay good afternoon Brandon Barry senior planner this is Varian case number 25015 it's an unnecessary and undue hardship variance for the property at 3115 West
maraton Drive the applicants are requesting variance relief to restore a zoning lot that exists today to its original platted Lots those being Lots seven and lots eight of block 21 of Don CeSar Place both of these Lots if restored will lack the minimum 60t width
required with 48 .8 ft on the southern lot lot 7 uh 50.3 three feet on the Northern lot lot 8 and both of these lots are proposed for subdivision or lot split for the purpose of single family development this is made pursuant to the
R2 zoning District standards Land Development code section 9.6 A2 this up here here's an aerial property it shows the property as it exists today there is currently a single family residence on the parcel that spans the two platted Lots there is a
pool at the back and there is also a single family dock on the owned Waterfront strip uh to the western side this is a common make up four properties in the Don cazar neighborhood here's an existing survey of the property again showing those
improvements you can see the dock on the western owned 10-ft water front strip uh this is a platted Reserve strip that was provided through the platting of the neighborhood it is currently owned in Hole by the residential property owner this is showing the proposed lot
layout the applicant is proposing to completely demolish the existing improvements on the site and split the Lots as proposed you can see lot eight the platted lot eight on the top uh this is to the north side it has roughly 6,400 Square ft um it would have an
average width this is average of the front the rear property lines of just over 50 ft and a depth of 128 ft lot 7 would have just under 6,200 square F feet in area an average width of just
over 48 feet and a depth also of 128 ft so going through the request detail um sorry yes did you go back yes and I'm just what about the easen on the other side where the docks are so those weren't count split those and I'll get
into that in a moment um I haven't received information from the applicant I'm assuming a direct split based on the Upland property so going into detail on the request uh the city's Land Development code allows for these lot splits to be
processed presuming that the underlying platted Lots meet the required lot area and width uh the Land Development code does not allow for variances to lot area the applicant has met the lot area requirement for both of these pla Lots as proposed um and as as currently
exists based on the underlying plaid they will be they will both meet the 6,000 square foot R2 zoning District requirement uh this is also a comprehensive plan requirement so they would not be able to proceed with the variant if this were not to be met uh
both Lots will meet that requirement both are deficient to the 60ft lot width standard um as I mentioned before the northern lot will be just over 50 feet in width average width Southern lot will be just under um 50 ft 48.2
approximately feet in width this is a fairly standard condition for Lots in the Donar neighborhood most platted Lots do not meet the R2 District requirements that is also the typical standard for a developed lot in the neighborhood being
one par or sorry one platted lot or just just larger the condition that the applicant um currently has which is two plaed lots combined together is not typical for the neighborhood on average as I mentioned before they would be splitting the existing lot to the exact
platted Lots um based on the underlying plat being Lots seven and eight and they are both deficient to the minimum lot width here's some photographs of the site uh you can see here the existing
residents on the property this would be completely demolished um prior to the lot split commencing this is showing the existing developed dock across the street it does meet the requirements for a residential
dock you can see here the two um individual slips as well as the layout of the dock this is showing toward the center of the photograph the existing conditions that would be in place for the northern lot if the lot is split as
a direct extension of the Upland residence if it's just split as a continuation of that lot line which is the typical condition for that neighborhood it tends to be the Waterfront is associated based on the Upland residents uh you can see there are fairly extensive um a fairly
extensive depth of mangroves in that location this is brought up in the staff report as well but to summarize uh there is a very limited Waterway width at this location looking over to Fuller Island uh this is an estimate but there's
approximately 140 ft in Waterway width at this location based on the land devel code this would allow for a dock of approximately 35 ft in depth it appears that the mangrove stands do extend extend out further again this is based
on an aerial it is an estimate but that appears to be the distance I did speak with the county about what would occur if these Lots were split were were they to be just a a continuation of the Upland residential Parcels they did say that a 4ot strip of mangroves would be
able to be cleared out to allow for a walk out at this location however given that distance it's unclear that a wet slip or a boat lift would be able to be installed at jent to those mangroves um so there may be potential for a walk out
but without a variance it does not appear that there could be a slip established at least a permanent slip established within that Waterway given the depth of the mangroves so I wanted to point this out and I'll bring it up briefly in a moment as well as far as the Upland property split is concerned
um staff does not have significant concerns the southern lot would be slightly narrower than a typical lot based on the average for the neighborhood however as I mentioned before the standard width of a lot in the Don CeSar place neighborhood is
approximately 50 feet uh the southern lot would be 48 ft in width which appears it's it's a fairly imperceptible difference one of the items of testimony that I would like the applicant to provide is that if these Lots were to be split as proposed back to their plotted
PL Dimensions um that they do and they have assessed and found them viable for development we want to ensure that their this split does not lead to the need for further variances based on required setbacks and prvious service limitations other development limitations um that
would need to bring this case back in the in the future for either Amendment or for new variances um I I also have some concerns as brought up in the previous slide related to development on the adjacent Waterfront strip I want to ensure that if it's separated whether whether it's a direct extension or some other kind of
arrangement uh that there be assurance that it will remain with the residential primary property although seawalls can be developed independent of a residential zoning lot the applicant would not be able to have a dock unless it was associated with an Upland residence so I do want to ensure that
that remains in place to prevent any issues down the line um as mentioned before shown on the Aerials um I would also like them to discuss the proposed development for a dock at the Lot 88 the northern water front uh given the extensive depth of mangroves at the seaw
wall The Limited Waterfront width for permanent moing encroachment beyond the mangroves I did briefly speak with the owner prior to this meeting I understand that they are looking to potentially Orient the dock toward the northern part of that Waterfront uh to avoid some some of the major impacts to the to the
mangroves um that would require a signature from the neighbor and as with the the lot development in general I just want to ensure that they've either had a discussion with that neighbor something along those lines to avoid this case needing to come back in the future so staff recommends one condition
if this case is to be approved by the board we do ask that um both a building permit for demolition of the structure as well as an initiation of the lot split occur within one year of issuance of this approval typically these cases are tied to the enaction of a building
permit because there's a demolition but there's also a need to split these Lots formally through the property appraiser we would like to make sure that that takes place within a year of this approval should it be approved uh the board also has the option to deny this case or continue the case pending submitt of additional
information that is all I have I know the applicant as well as their attorney is present do you have any questions for me no thank you Brandon the applicant would like to come forward thank
you excuse me my name is Lauren Rubenstein I am with Hill Ward Henderson here on behalf of the applicants thank you Brandon for the presentation and for the very comprehensive staff report I appreciate that I do believe a um clean
version of the applicants narrative was distributed I know in the backup there was some redlining which may have been confusing so we want to make sure you had a clean version to look at I want to start by going through uh the criteria that you'll be looking at
for this hardship variance um the first thing of course is that special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land structure building involved and what's really you know I think important about this case is that these plotted Lots were plotted back in
1925 almost the entire neighborhood is still the existing plotted Lots this was well before even the city was uh St Pete Beach was incorporated and before there were any restrictions related to lot size and lot width so the original plaed
Lots do not meet the required lot width they do meet the required lot size which as Brandon explained is certainly very important on your comprehensive plan as well as your code the way it's written but what is being proposed is really just going back to those original ploted
Lots other thing I'd like to mention is that my clients nor anyone that a predecessor of them has ever actually officially combined these there's no Unity of title certainly they've been developed across they've
never been replatted so our position really is that if this home was demolished there are two existing ploted Lots which under your code could could be developed um they certainly weren't the ones that created that circumstance that goes um to your next criteria again they
didn't replat they didn't combine them back when this was developed as a um single parcel if you will that looks like that went back all the way to 1967 based on online records and that was in your staff report from Brandon as well
and so that was even before those minimum lot width requirements were adopted by the city so again there was probably no intention or any awareness that one day they couldn't be back to their original ploted lots and that's exactly what they are seeking in this
request your next criteria of literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC deprive the applicant of Rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the neighborhood um again any property owner in the R2 Zone Don CeSar
place neighborhood that owns one original ploted lot despite it not meeting the width requirements can build a single family home and what's being requested is to go back to those ploted lots for the purpose of single family development nothing else so they are not
um looking for anything that somebody else is not allowed to do and the literal interpretation right now um based on staff's interpretation of it is that it can't be done without this variance uh the hardship was not
deliberately created to um create a use or a structure that's not otherwise allowed again same same thing we've kind of gone over the lots are the original ploted Lots they're looking for single family homes just like everything else the neighborhood which really will go
with the character of that neighborhood as it is already developed uh the applicant's desire ability to achieve greater Financial return or maximum Financial return from his property does not constitute the hardship uh that is true yes the applicants did start looking at this
when they actually bought the property and one of the reasons they did was because they knew that it wasn't up to FEMA standards it wasn't compliant they knew if there was a storm there could be a problem and and if it needed to be redeveloped they may need to split the Lots in order to financially do so
unfortunately as we are all very well aware and have suffered personally they had to go through the storms this year their home is um damaged and in order to rebuild and to do so and make it economically feasible so that they can
build up to current codes and maybe Beyond to make sure the resiliency is there in the event another storm they are seeking this lot spit to do so so it's not for financial gain it's really in order to be able to utilize the Lots in the way that they uh originally
intend it uh granting the variant does not um convey any special treatment um it's the same treatment to the applicant as to the other owners again if you look at the existing Don CeSar Place Neighborhood you'll see most of the lots
are the original ploted Lots with the single family homes this is the minimum variance that could be requested both staff uh agreed with us as well it's just looking to go back to the original ploted Lots we're not looking for any additional um
changes there and finally staff um concurred that it is in harmony with the Land Development code and consistent with the comprehensive plan and that they would be compatible with the neighborhood as well now Brandon did bring up several questions that he had a
lot of those questions have to do with the Waterfront some of which I don't I I don't know is relevant to this variance request uh it is a separate plot strip um they are looking at where they would be splitting
that what they do guarantee is that yes of course those would stay with the Upland residential interest they would not be sold off separately they would stay with those Upland residential interests but because of the existing docks that's there they may not extend
the lot line exactly out through where you would split it evenly they may want to deed you know an extra 10 feet to one of those residential lots um but that's something that hasn't been you know finalized by any mean this is the first
step in that so um I put that out there so yes it's not going to be separated that doesn't really go to any criteria in the code as far as minimum lot size or anything like that but certainly it it would stay with that residential Upland interest it just would depend
whether matches the exact dimensions or whether there might be a little jog there which would be in the deit language of course um one of the other things they wanted um my client to address and I am happy to have them come up if you want to hear it from them but I have talked
to them about the buildability of these lots and that they are developable based on your code and they have spoken with contractors they are confident that they can both be developed veled as single family homes I cannot guarantee that a future
owner or somebody else may not run into a situation where they require a variance you know I certainly understand the city wanting to make sure and somehow have on record that there will never be a variance but I think that you all sitting up there probably know as well as I do that we can't predict the
future I don't know every pipe that's in the ground I don't know everything that could come up so it's not something that could be guaranteed but again these are PL pled lots that are similar to every other ploted lot in that neighborhood that's built with single family homes a
conforming single family home can be built on these properties I want to make sure there's no other questions that he had as well on that but I think those were the main things that I heard Brandon bring up um
I do have like I said the property owners here with me if you have any questions for me or for them we'd be happy to answer those I have I have some questions yes um was was the the house that's there the original house was it substantially damaged or are they living in the house or is
it substantially come up you well my my question is are you living in the house now no if you can provide your name and address toel Rosen 3115 West Mariana drive yet we are not living in the house the house does have substantial damage we did not get a substantial damage
letter because of I guess some people will appraise their house again to get a higher value the cost of fixing hours because we have uh crawl space was underestimated so reality is it is substantially damaged if we were to go
and try to get per would you would you be wanting to do this had the Hurricanes not happened we had contemplated that it might be something that we'd want to do but what we've actually realized is that living in the house as it was was a
great option for us because it doesn't add any more money for us to have to rebuild or do anything and for the two of us it was a fine house and there's a there's a pool behind whichever the South Line I guess that is uh is that going away too then I
mean the pool will be removed it will as well and just while you're here I'm sorry what was your name again Dan Rosen Dan um and your expectation is that you would be doing the Demolition and be getting this um
replatted for the two properties within the within a year so it's not replatting I'm sorry what is the word you have to do is get a letter from you breaking up the two lots lot split so we need a new person number to be attached
to seven so we'll get a new address within the next Year yes all of that is planned within a year we we've got a demo permit in process it's just a There Was You know it's delay there's all sorts of programs and thema and everything else you start to say well
what can we do so no concerns with a condition that this be accomplished within a year's time in other words those two things no okay um has there been any conversations with your neighbors in regards to potential dock placement or just the project in general
um so so with regards to the project in general yes and both both neighbors our North and our South neighbor um we've had discussions about the dock as well because one of the things you know some people don't like their mangroves we love our mangroves because our seaw wall
is actually intact um the neighbor to the north has lost is starting to lose their seaw wall and if we were to put our path through the mangroves towards the north we'd only be cutting through five or six feet of mangroves as opposed to around
um and you know and with regards to that other thing on the dock I permitted the dock that we have existing and um the concern that Brandon has and I think we had worked through this once before on my other one is that it's really that you're allowed to 25% of the navigable
Waterway which is not including the mangroves and you actually start counting from the end of the mangroves as to way you can put it out so we believe based on current conditions that with the exception of the sign off well two different sign offs um the reparan
right sign off for it coming closer to their property in addition to a reparan right sign off where I think the county requires that you can only go out as far as half of your lot withd at the water um without getting a sign off for
reparan rights and that actually would be the limitation that we would have to have a sign off from our neighbor for repairing rights and we've spoken to her and we believe that they would be agreeable with doing that we have good relationship on both sides we did the dock on the other side we had no issue with getting that and certainly
the southern neighbor to that new lot would agree because that's us okay sorry I didn't track on that so what so the ne what would you have to get approval from your neighbor from are you stating there's when you get a dock permit if it
goes outside of um this center onethird of the property if it's on any closer to that um to their property line or if you extend out from the seaw wall more than 50% of the width at the Waterway you
need to get a sign up from both that when you need both neighbors because caring rights very specific to any placement of a dock half of that lift would as Brandon get out would hit the mangroves now the mangroves do come in a bit there so there is an opportunity for
us to be able to do something there but we do believe that with current with the exception of those two things that we are actually get ducking without any issue and I know the state of seaw walls in the area in general are not great so
you're you're stating yours is in good condition well ours at is at 2 and 1/2 ft so the height is not to the current ordinance of the 5 foot nav but the cemented pieces that are in there um are in great condition because we've had
mangroves okay forever but the Northern neighbor once you get past those mangroves there's a section of no mangroves those are becoming dilapitated and that's starting to sink in so when was your seaw wall done there was no seaw wall done any on either side of us
it's all no your seaw wall when was it put built 1920 we your seaw wall is an original seaw wall when we built our dock it was just prior to the seaw Wall height changing from 4T to 5T and we requested a variance to be able to build
it at 5T anticipating the seaw walls being raised yeah but then we go out with our Dock and we have it sloped down so that you're at a closer level to the water but we do you're saying you have an original seaw wall from the 20s yes yes then I don't understand how it could be at 2 and 1/2 ft or 4 feet and be in
great condition because it has the mangroves that are sitting in it it in so we have grass on one side and the mangroves which are pushing that wall and it's like I don't know okay I I've seen it around the neighborhood The Originals the neighborhood based on whatever the
comprehensive plan is and everything else you know we could have done that when we did the dock it wouldn't have made sense though at that point because as you probably know as well we're looking to see how are we going to pay for that we get County money or City money we don't know but as it stands we
feel comfortable with that given that everybody else is lower than the five or six feet that been be and and what I would like to just highlight is obviously there has been a lot of thought in contemplation about the dock and future development and all
of that but certainly when any lots are split if this Varian is granted and the lots are split there are codes and ordinances both City and countywide that are going to control the placement of that Doc and certainly they would have to comply with those codes and sure and
and obviously they have thought long and hard about that and what those possibilities look like but would you be open to the condition being that the seaw wall gets replaced to being a 5 foot na seaw wall with reconstruction I I I only because I don't think that's a
fair thing for anybody to have to do that given that we don't know what's going to be happening with the entire neighborhood and if we do it and the neighbors don't their lot is already falling in to the water and if I do that I'm going to have to have a return that's hugely large because their land
goes in because we're going to have the water coming in and in King Tides several times a month in in the right season we have water you can't leave your house because you can't do that so I don't think that would be reasonable yes we're willing to rebuild the seaw
walls along with everybody else and do it in the same manner that the entire neighborhood would but okay at this point it doesn't really make sense and the other option I think we might have as um Betty did is the sort of the natural seaw wall thing because we do have a full set the biggest set of
mangroves of anybody by frankly in that neighborhood already there so you know there might be an opportunity for that I don't know how that works as far as I know living the living Shoreline you're talking about still needs a seaw wall it's just how they work together compatibly right and and ours does I imagine we wouldn't you have a storm
drain and then you have it down and then it's falling and then it's protected and then it's around the corner but just to address the damage part of things I it's a 1948 house that was hodge podge and so some is cross face some is slab we had
four over four ft of water couldn't get in house 4 days so black mold and uh 23y old of air conditioning units three of like it's just not sustainable nor achievable
to renovate and comply or and to be able to withstand future storms we're going to be blown out we lost half of you know half of our stuff yeah next year we won't be able to do it if it wasn't this year it's going to be next year one other thing I want to just was on the uh
the 10 foot strip piece the um concern that I thought that Brandon had as well is as you go out our property line it hits our existing dock by a very small bit I was trying not to have that happen just because I thought maybe it
shouldn't and so our only anticipation of moving that would be if we have to move that so that it can stay or we can get a permanent easement or perent right agreement through deed but that would be the only reason we'd want to move that and as it turns out the northern
property is 60 feet at the inside property line close to 70 65 or 70 feet um at the Waterway where the Southern Property is 50 ft at the Waterway so so there's a lot of which one would you sell if you were going to do this we
would sell the north we're going to keep I don't know if the bigger one is where you're keeping as you walked in so we we're going to keep the the southern lot with the do and it's going to it's the smaller lot as well I mean it's the other lot actually nice lot thether ft of the Waterway just so that
there's never an issue of that we're sitting on somebody else's repairing right and you know I don't know exactly how that language Works nor how that would fit into the split exactly because that's in the deed language on on the individual deeds and we're going to have
to write that deeded language out it's going to be L eight and this many feet of the adjacent SE okay thank you is there anybody else here that would like to speak on behalf or in
opposition to this case any cards city clerk no right we'll close the open discussion and open to board conversation well go ahead then sorry goad um this is going to require the idea
then eventually is to sell this lot build another house another house is going to require more sewer capacity it's going to require more water it's going to be it's like everything else when you add another house and we're already sort of stressed out in the city with over capacity is this a good
idea I think the counter to that would be there are originally two plots in the neighborhood was was designed for there to be you know two houses right but that was in 19 25 or something correct I I hear what you're saying and I agree with
you um that's that's the way it was and and I I don't think it it's going to attx the sewer systems and everything else with with the way that we've been moving forward on that my question is the
Waterfront was Brandon did you address that um does the Waterfront get divided equally between the two lotes should it that's the on the second lot if the person who gets that they're going to
have 50% of their their lot that they can put a dock out correct so typically it's a direct extension I can't say that's the case for every single lot in the neighborhood but that that tends to be the case um it's not necessary for density or any other kind of development
purpose so if the applicant wanted to move the the line 5T One Direction or the other I wanted to have any concerns with that what I was mentioning before was I didn't want to create a condition where a variance would be necessary for
the dock by the lot being split in an unusual way and them having not engaged with the northern neighbor and creating a condition where there would be a need to come back to this board for a further variance because of action taken today it sounds like they have engaged the northern neighbor they're of course the southern neighbor if this splits
approved um so it sounds like there's a path forward in that regard but it doesn't necessarily need to be a direct extension of the up I mean I think this is a pretty creative way to get around you know needing to rebuild and being able to have the financial support to do that they're obviously in a unique position
to have the double lot to have that flexibility um and now we'll have two homes that are built resilient for future hurricanes as well so I see that you know as a positive particularly since they're not looking to change the plot size in any way from the historical
you you know sizes so I feel like they're really asking for um the minimal need to get their project underway it's a fair ask I really do um and I agree with Brandon's um suggested condition on the year timeline because we want these things you know to move forward as as
well and they seem to have no concern with that agree and you know the neighborhood is need help has a lot of uh different probably lot sizes I can say so um
knowing that it still meets the minimum lot size even though we're plus or minus like two feet something maybe 10 ft um it's still in alignment and character with the rest of the neighborhood that as long as the design and development
doesn't require coming back for the home itself to require variances it seems like that it's reasonable are we ready for motion sure yeah small do you like to make a motion i' make a motion that the board
approve case 2515 as am with condition with the conditions that Brandon set forth we have a motion do we have a second well the condition of the year yeah and and was there another condition besides the
year there's no other formal conditions okay so just the year I I would I would second that yeah roll call please member small yes member Cy yes member core yes Vice chair Gara yes chair Chase yes motion
carries moving on to case number 25033 this one's yours Kristen it is Brandon Brandon you give me the clicker thank you yeah okay moving on to our last variance case
yeah go ahead are we doing this one yeah yeah yeah he's still here our applicant and owner is still here and then we have another item for discussion after all good okay so moving a little
South onto pass Grill variance case number number 25033 property is located at 3103 1 Street West uh the request is for a practical difficulty variance steuart schro is requesting a variance for the proposed replacement and installation of
an 8x10 or 80 Square ft um maximum square footage of 8T High residential storage building that has a proposed front yard setback front yard setback of 50.3 Ft from the front property line where 60 ft is required and looking for relief from Land Development code
section 6.13 B4 here is uh the property it's outlined in red and it's located in the RM P paser overlay District um an existing survey of the
property it is an interior property and it's improved with a one-story dwelling with a shell driveway and a residential storage building here's just an enlargement with the survey with the proposed Improvement um again 60 ft is required and 50.3 ft
is proposed just a little bit more detail that was included in the staff Bings report the size is compliant it would just be the front yard setback requirement it is important to note that this new structure is already in place
on the property um the applicant has submitted a variance request related to building permit number 24189 which was mistakenly issued on August 23rd of 2024 for without receiving zoning approval zoning approval was denied based on the front
yard setback but the permit was subsequently issued by error while the applicant initially applied for the storage building the zoning review was denied due to the non-compliance with the required front yard setback however the building permit was erroneously is permit was erroneously issued and an issue that was discovered when an
inspection was requested just to give you a background um this was supplied by the the applicant this was the previous storage building that was there and this is the recently installed storage building um photographs bringing you on
to the property so noticing was completed as required and um legal ad published with notices mailed on March 12th and the sign posted on March 18th on the property this is just a view from the
front property line I will note there is a serious line of Hedges that would immediately to my back but I wouldn't have been able to take the picture if I actually did it from the street so it's adequately shielded for sure um this is just one closeup of the
shed or the storage building my bad uh this is a view actually from the alley so you're seeing the rear of the uh little Bungalow with the shed on the left and just another view of uh from the side property line
so as part of the staff findings report the the applicant should be prepared to provide uh their own testimony and respond to comments that were included in the the staff findings report the applicant should provide testimony as to the materials to be stored on or within the building if the board does not Grant the variance the applicant should
provide testimony if an alternate location exists where the goods and materials currently located in the building could be stored or an alternate location that would meet the required setback um and the applicant should provide testimony as how the storm water runoff shall be directed and maintained on the property to ensure compliance
with the Land Development code and there are your motion options we did receive a late entry um which I did provide to you a letter in support from an adjacent neighbor um and the applicant is here as well any questions for
Kristen what the so there is a shed there now correct is that the original shed so there was a previous shed if I go back right but the one we're looking at there that that is that exists now the
one on the right the one on the right is currently in place that's there so it's I don't understand the way so it's a replacement of a shed that was there I got that but I could not find any previous variants approval that was Granite um oh I see for the location
again it doesn't meet that front yard setback requir but it's exactly where the other one was it's exactly where the other one was it's not any bigger or well maybe it's a little bit it's designed differently but yeah mhm but it's not egregiously bigger or anything like that correct the square footage meets the height meets Land Development
compliance it's the location it's better looking too and how was this caught I guess in terms of inspection at time of inspection that was called in and then it was noted that zoning hadn't correct had any okay yep got it yeah zoning did
do their review it was denied based on that but okay the permit was still issued we're we're all human yeah with the applicant like to come forward you can please state your name and address for record uh steuart Ro um
3103 um First Street South St Pete Beach 3376 if you can just share your um explanation for the project and request um the old shed was pretty tattered and I went to Tough Shed and I said hey I'd
like to put a new shed in and you know they said okay they got the permit to do it they installed it then they said whoa hold on it's in the wrong spot it's not see cuz we have like a 10 or 12T easement in the front so it's actually
60 feet from the road but it's not 60 feet from my property line because there's a easement in the front the right of way the right of way yes so that I don't know if that had anything to do with why it was approved or not approved or whatever but so basically I have a shed that they weren't allowed to
finish put a roof on everything else so here we are so is there any setback rule in the back of I drove down the alley behind your house to look at it is there does it have to be set back from the alley at all no it has no rear uh yard setback requirements or side yard setback
requirements um but it's my understanding that the applicant actually utilizes the alley parking so if he were to locate it further towards the back in compliance with the 60t he'd have like a 12T long or in depth parking space where
an average one is about 18 or 19 or 20 so I think that's also part of his testimony as why he's requesting the location that it's in I couldn't park there without cutting down quite a bit of stuff in the front because I couldn't do it in the back I don't have room you said it didn't have a roof on it it has
just a plastic sheet on it right now that's what it is ex during inspection they finish it without can we see the picture of it again we didn't sure so I could have the PowerPoint kind of stopped it right in the middle um I could also give you a better
picture I don't know if one of the pictures shows there's the roofing on the side on the ground right there oh I see it looks like it it looks like it does have a it does look like it yeah and when I drove by it it looked like called me and said hey it looks like it's got a rip on it okay I don't know
how you know but they put a just a thin PL plastic yeah I got it I see keep it from getting ruined you and that shed is in the same location as the previous shed okay um out of curiosity Kristen so the company that builds the shed they
pull the permit and so when zoning was denied would that have gone to the shedding to yes that would not have gone to the homeowner like they wouldn't have had um I could check in general though General usually that contractor if we have the owner's information not always
do we have it or contact email um I can say I would apply do both just so everybody's aware but it's not always the case okay any other questions for the applicant no thank you sir thank
you if there's anybody else here that would like to speak on behalf for an opposition of this case now would be the time do we get any cards caring none we'll close public comment and open for board discussion I think this is a case of you know human
error on the city's part and um a prettier shed and seem this comes up a lot where we don't know what the original we did this one of these last meeting where nobody can remember what the original plot was because it was way back before so this is just going to keep happening from time to time mean part of being we have to use good sense
I I I think we should say yes to it I don't see any reason not to if a motion is appropriate I'm sympathetic that that this happens to from time to time so I thank you for going through the steps to
make it right um in in alignment with yeah I wasn't getting your email she took the time to call me and go hey uhuh you know are you coming or I haven't seen any email so thank you oh good I
his his email has a Spam Blocker on our beach is kind of what we figured out so I'm like you know what I will just yeah good good we have a motion yeah I would make a motion uh to approve case number
2533 um yeah storm water I guess the one recommendation I see here maybe before I hit pause on that storm water runoff shall be directed and maintained on the property to Insurance
compliance okay so that that wasn't discussed but I'm just before yeah and the building itself is on St but the condition being there that and you would whatever water runoff
would need to be maintained in compliance with that Land Development code is something that you would look at ensuring occurs as with with your vendor sure yeah okay so that's I think okay so let me restate then I uh I make a motion
to approve case number 25033 um with the staff recommendation and Direction and condition that the storm water runoff should be directed and maintained on the property to ensure compliance Land Development code we have a motion I'll second that
roll call please member Cy yes member core yes Vice chair Gara yes member small yes chair Chase yes motion carries thank you right our final case for today is a progress report on case number
23072 this emailed it to me like right before the meeting okay a letter in support so I didn't have a chance to email it to you but I wanted to give it to hand it to you in person neighb yep exactly have a good morning I'll be in touch with you I have
to write I um given we're looking for a priers report from the applicant I think we can go ahead and move forward and receive that update good afternoon H bass on behalf of applicant uh red white booze um we are here this
is case number 23072 um we were awarded our pursuant to a de development order number 23072 we were awarded back in October of 2024 um a hardship variance to do um
some updates and upgrades to the building um um uh there were different conditions that were put on that and we were granted our hardship variance and one of the conditions was that we come back on a periodic uh schedule to give updates
and Status checks um we came back a few months ago and we were permitted to uh well I guess a few months after I think we came earlier this year um and we permitted to continue uh working on the project and um to make progress was it
earlier this year or was it last year was the beginning of this year this year um I think it was last year it was it was actually October 30th of 2024 we did 120 days which was to be in February due to clerical area error we put it to
March okay thank you for yeah so so this will be the second time we're coming back for status check there was a there was a a communication uh oops um and by the time we got that clarified it was too late to move schedules rounds we had to bump into this month we should have been here
uh last month uh to be completely transparent that said I do have an update in the city uh Miss Coman just provided me with the print out um uh of all the open permits and so if we can go through them one by one or if there's
any specific questions um I can answer those or I could just keep going go um go ahead I mean I think what we're most con like interested to understand is where you are um in adhering to the conditions that we had laid out with the
project sure so uh I did bring our contractor here uh so he could speak to it more directly if there's any specific questions about uh what portions of the project like where we are specifically with what's going in and that kind of idea um I can tell you though just kind of broad spectrum more of a thousand
foot view yes there have been setbacks obviously we had we had the storm issues um we had the um uh uh some material supply uh delays but given those delays
which I think are customary in in construction projects uh we are relatively on schedule and we are moving forward um again if you want more specifics about what portion of the project we're in I can I can uh hand the floor over to our contractor pleas yeah there's a yeah
since there's so many open I mean I just think it would be good I can address some of those right now you would prefer so the 2024 number 24573 regarding the dock piling um we've got to get in contact
with the company it was our understanding that the company was working on getting that closed it's supposed to be closed and we thought it was closed um and so we've got to get the company to close out their permit so the work's done correct work is final work is done my understanding that there
has been a final inspection or there there supposed to have been a final inspection and the company just hasn't gotten it scheduled yet okay these are the docks that are already in right correct yeah and they're being used every day correct yeah well if the fin inspection hasn't
happened they wouldn't that would be a concern that's the confusion is why hasn't it been so we've got to get back on the phone can we just look in the system and see if if final approvals on this one Kristen or do you already know I'm assuming it's not because Kristen you just handed me this today as of
yesterday well sometimes the final inspection does get uh passed and they sit there open okay for a little longer than you anticipate so that's why that would be important to know sometimes just a matter of
paperwork so it'd be good to know if it's on the city part or if it's on your contractor it would be fantastic but you can just go into the system and we can see that pretty quick just for me to address the next one while you're looking at that wait um go ahead okay so
the next one I think is is easy um it's this is the generator this is uh permit number 24 02122 um we have that scheduled they're coming out they were supposed to come out earlier this week uh they got bumped and they are coming out tomorrow to do the final inspection or
to to do the work or to the your done with the work work I'm sorry okay is there a difference in the wattage between the one that you have and the new one yes they had to upgrade to 100 watt as opposed to I believe the the
previous one was a 50 watt yeah so it wasn't sufficient enough to run the entire restaurant and when they would hook everything up um the generator shut off the series um from the from 2022 so the shadow box fence
permit number 220 2218 that should be closed that is regarding the fence that was installed my understanding between the warf and my client's restaurant so that should have been
closed years ago CU that permit date is not is from 2022 2022 yeah it still shows open though yeah October of 2022 so that should have been closed I'm not sure why that's showing that it's open frankly um and then the same with the
with the ecoton that's these are the um AC units um again we're unaware that these were both open this is permit Numbers 22 01633 and 22255 six both of those are also from uh
the second half of 2022 those also should have been closed um and again we're not sure why they haven't been closed are those units were they saved in the storm or those I don't have the specifics on that I don't know I know I
know the restaurant saying some I can comment on that one um it looks like the mechanical final was cancelled by the contractor on 42423 and also a fire final needs to be um scheduled and who who needs is that the
contractor contractor okay that's that's what I was afraid of yep so we we need to get back in touch with our contractor from back then um to get that all of it's being operated then I'll say illegally because you're
not I will not closed on yes that that's a problem well that's why we thought it was closed so so Kristen thank you for handing me this because this is news uh okay we have set of status um and then
the the cooler so this is I don't know why this is a two-part um but the the open permit is 2354 this is the the walk-in cooler and I just spoke with our client with my client today and we are working on
getting that issue closed um currently as well so one of those things with the open cooler is it needs to be shielded it correct um and I still haven't received anything on how that's going to be accomplished that was shielded pursuant to like with siding is that
what you're referring to yeah like it just can't be hanging out there on top of the Monolithic Pore like I think there was going to be a design change from there was supposed to be cedar shakes that were supposed to or planks to Shield that or to kind of enclose
that and then there was going to be a design change but I haven't received this outside of the building itself in the parking lot in the parking lot mhm so the so the cooler was permitted the pad that it's on was permitted um but part of the issue is that the uh because
they're redoing the restaurant pursuing to this hardship variance they want the side of that cooler the siding to match and so that's part of the issue they haven't been able to do the siding of the building yet um which is part of the reason why it's not uh it's still open
why haven't is there is there do side of the building they haven't been do you want to speak on that they haven't been able to do the side of the building because where where we are on the project um and we had the delays so the sighting is is it next is it is it April or is it yeah you can come up and speak
to that you know that better than schedu if you can provide your name and address to the record John S with ranmar development uh 12645 Racetrack Road Tampa Florida 33626 um the general contractor not on all those other ones
uh this is on the remodel we'll call it the fascia and everything uh the siding is going to be ordered here probably this week uh we had a slight delay uh because the After the Storm the owner said you know something I think it'd be
better to put impact windows in now so we are in for a revision or to add the impact Windows on this permit uh which we should I would think it should be just a rubber stamp so we're in for that and of course the windows need to be in before I can put the siding on because
you butt into the into the windows and we need to get an inspection on the Windows is part of your remit to also do the sighting to enclose the cooler yeah and that was always my understanding that that was part of this phase is to do the shielding I'll make uh no I I
have no plans on that the plans that were provided yeah no problem was just for that front enclosure okay so any additional work I can say from a zoning standpoint hasn't been reviewed any site work like we looked at just the restriping of the front parking lot okay
and I sort of came in on the back end as you know uh they asked the other they asked me to step in I'm glad you're here now that I know that I'll get something to you okay um uh to show you what we're doing uh and I'll let you hopefully approve it um or at least give me your
comments on it so I'll work on that getting back to something you said before why are there why are these two separate permit numbers for the exact same thing that's not me don't know do you know Kristen um I know that the outdoor walk-in cooler let me look and that's
the one in the parking lot let me just take a look at they looks like they're the same thing that's why um it could be an interior one so let's see let's that permit's not even issued yeah since I mean the dates are different on here from what the permits
were issued but let's see to member G's Point 2201 725 was never even issued it's still in you know it says because I see because it went from being uh 2007 pass AG LLC to col properties perhaps yeah so I
think that one's probably so what void then right yeah um Kristen while we have the the new contractor here outside of the updated plan to include the sighting for the cooler is there any other pieces of information that the city's been waiting
on that we can now um request with their new team um see TR to think I know that there was um some as part of the property across the street the parking lot there was to be
um compact parking spaces labeled um that haven't been done done when that was when the um trash enclosure was put in um and I was told that had to wait until the whole restriping of everything was completed I will make sure that's done for you okay but yeah we'll be
restriping the parking lot that's there so when we do that I'll have the crew out there and I can go across the street some of those are to be labeled on that property across the street to be laid compact um as per the approv plan some of the spaces in front of the um restaurant now are to be golf cart
spaces and labeled appropriately so yeah if you have any questions about that or which ones or anything just please let our office know okay uh yeah uh let me pull up my plans make sure I have that site plan across the street because I think that dumpster was permitted
separately uh from this so let me make sure I can get a my hands on that if not I'll I'll contact you guys and get a copy of it I would also to add I know we have an ongoing issue I think I might have referenced it last time with our neighboring
restaurant to the South to Warf there's some there's been some oil spills or some some grease spills I guess is is what it's more appropriate and they actually were cited I believe last month by the city uh for a Code Enforcement issue so that is almost a monthly occurrence uh we're getting it is uh
some grease bills uh onto the parking lot so we're trying to work that out as well you're getting grease Builds on your parking lot correct it's from from over there from the warf correct cor yeah our our I know I know you I I've
been there many times both places yeah so so they the property is a they're they're adjacent yes I know I have pictures but I don't I don't want to disparage anybody that's okay I mean I understand this is a separate concern concern yeah so that issue is something that we're dealing with um and
it's it's not we're not able to necessarily redo the parking lot yet or we're trying to work that um what about the Landscaping plan Kristen is that something that has that we've received the Landscaping plan has been submitted and received do we have a
timeline at this point an updated timeline for all of this to be completed well uh we're going to start the roof uh beginning of April which should take probably it's going to be a standing seam roof so that's probably going to take a good week to put on it's a little
harder than shingles uh and then the siding should commence so if everything goes as planned let's say by the end of May okay so we know construction doesn't always go as planned um but I well yeah and the problem we're having too is labor I
understand it's it's a challenging time for all of us in in the rebuild um but I do think given the attention to this project and the continued um transition with your teams and whatnot that having a final review of everything being done would be warranted um if you're thinking
end of May um I'd say maybe to be safe our July meeting like well I would just say end of May let's reconnect because there's just a million of these it looks like um that could be or should be closed out Kyle right and
so at a minimum we can get a checkpoint on absolutely having them all closed out or we're identifying where we're at on the status yes so I think that would be great so you'd be more comfortable having them come back for the main
meeting yeah I say okay that's fine what the difference June meeting Dan I like Dan's idea June June meeting that's fine Kristen do you have that date handy I do June 25th yep June 25th I do have a question is that going to tie into my
certificate of completion then or this is finals and we hope that you'll already have that you and me both I I just want to make sure that wasn't GNA no this this is separate not no okay that's fine and honestly yeah if everything is buttoned up and addressed
then we may just punt the topic based on agreements on both both sides yeah so all right thank you guys for the update good luck as you continue to to finish the project we appreciate it thank you okay I put that all right is a bit confusing
concludes all agenda items for today was there any other items for discussion City attorney kisten no no no other items how does next month look um next month uh which our meeting is April 30th we look to have one um practical
difficulty variance coming in we there's some still in the works that just need to come to to fruition and completeness so all right and one thing yes are we supposed to declare experte on every case before
the case you have one is there any exper from today's cases that we was not declared no no okay we'll do a better job in the future of making sure that we do that case by case thank you all right meeting adjourned