with Thursday's November 6th, 2:30 historic preservation board meeting. Call to order. Uh, madam clerk, roll call, please. Excuse me. Let's all stand first for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Madam clerk, roll call, please. >> Member Hurley, >> here. >> Member Young, >> here. Vice Chair Hawkinsmith >> here. >> Member Dashill >> here.
>> Chair Lowry >> here. >> We have a quorum. >> Okay. Um, first we have the approval of the agenda. Has everyone had a chance to look at it? Number one. And number two, does anybody wish to add any items to
the agenda? >> I would like to add uh for the discussion the fees for demolition of historic and contributing structures. >> What was that again? The >> fees uh the fees for the demolition.
>> Yes. Okay. Thank you. and then an update from the Gulf Beaches Museum. >> Okay, we'll call uh Miss Dashel's 5B. I'm going to slide one in as 5C since we always like to wind up with your
updates. Okay, so um um I would like to add a discussion or open for discussion about the potential of moving a historic structure on 24th Avenue to replace the shuffleboard clubhouse. Uh there's been some late
recent information on that. So I'd like to discuss that and then we'll make that 5C and then 5D will be an update. >> Chair. >> Yes. >> If I may, can I add public services update as well?
>> Sure. We'll make that e public service. Anything else? Okay. Does anybody have a motion on the approval of the agenda? >> I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. >> Second.
>> Uh, Madame Clerk, roll call, please. >> Vice Chair Hawkinsmith, >> approve. >> Member Dashel, >> yes. >> Member Hurley, >> yes. >> Member Young, >> yes. >> Chair Lowry, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Um, we don't have a big audience out here
today, but this is an opportunity for any audience members to make a comment about anything uh they would like to make a comment on limit limited to city business and the and for three minutes. If you're here to make a comment on a particular action item or something else
is on the agenda, you can hold that back until that actual item comes up. So, does anybody have an audience comment or general comment? All right, seeing none, we'll move forward. >> Oh, yes.
Does anybody have any comments potentially for any action items later on? >> I have no cards. >> If you intend to provide testimony for any of the action items, this would be the time to be sworn. >> But does that does that apply to any of
our staff people too? >> Yes. >> Okay, then go ahead and let's swear in anybody who might testify. Anybody who will be testifying today, please stand, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the information
or factual representation that you are about to give is truthful? >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Next, we go to uh heading three, approval of minutes from
the October 2nd, 2025 meeting. Has anyone had an opportunity to look at the minutes from that time frame and have any comments or motions? >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes of October 2nd, 2025.
>> I'll second that. >> Madame Clerk, roll call, please. >> Member Dashel? >> Yes. >> Memberurley? >> Yes. >> Member Young? >> Yes. >> Vice Chair Hawkinsmith? Chair Lowry? >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Uh next we are going to action item 4A
which is review and approval of the 2026 meeting dates Lynn. >> Good afternoon. I'm Lyn Rosetti. I am the contract a contract planner for historic preservation for the city.
Oh, >> Lyn, one moment. It's not for your case yet. I think we're just looking at the >> Sorry, Lynn. >> The meeting dates for 2026. Did anybody have any conflicts or >> I thought Lynn was going to present that to us. Okay. All right. Fine. No,
>> thank you, Kristen. Okay. I think everyone's pulled it up and looked at the calendar for potential dates. As you can see, they're all the first week of July, excuse me, the first week of first Thursday of every month other
than I think January where we've got it on January 8th because of the holiday. Um, does anyone have any objection with those dates or have any conflicts they'd like to point out? At this point,
>> I will not be available on January 8th. >> Okay. Um, is every since that's just >> that's just once. >> Yes, that's re coming up soon. Does anybody else think they have a conflict for January 8th? >> No. >> Okay. So, we should be able to have a quorum anyway. All right. Then you're
excused. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. You're welcome. Okay. Uh, anybody else have any conflicts? >> Um, >> July >> the >> Okay. I'm just thinking that that is a holiday weekend and people might want to
stretch that out to make it a >> four day. >> Yeah, that frequently is a a problem. Um, >> so if we were to move that to the next July, that would be July 9th. Does does the city have any conflict with that as far as you would know, Miss Coleman?
>> Not that I'm aware of, but I will uh look to Jenny on that one. >> Okay. certainly makes sense at least at this point to tenatively approve this with a change of date of July 9th if that makes sense to the rest of the board. >> Does everybody agree with that? That
we'll do that. So, can we go ahead and make that change and then if we have a conflict, we'll just bring that back up. >> I do. >> All right. So, >> um I would suggest then as far as I would make a motion to go ahead and
approve the uh meeting dates for 2026 with the exception that the July 2nd date be changed to July 9th. >> Anybody want to second that? >> I would second that. >> All right. Madam clerk, roll. >> Member Hurley. >> Yes. >> Member Young.
>> Yes. >> Vice Chair Hawkinsmith. >> Yes. >> Member Dashel. >> Yes. Chair Lowry. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> All right. Next is 4B, which is >> I'm listening to myself over here. >> Having technical difficulties.
>> The volume can be muted. >> She just happened to get it turned on. She got it. >> All right. Not that I don't mind listening to myself again, but I'm kidding. 4B action items which is certificate of appropriateness for the restoration of 3401 Casablanca Avenue
which is case number arrest restoration number 25126. >> Thank you. Uh Lynn Rosetti, contract planner for the city of St. Pete Beach and um this property is located at 3401
Casablanca Avenue. Earlier this spring, you took a look at this property where it needed it had had its um porch area badly damaged and they are in the process. They asked for COA to restore
that and that's in the process right now. Now they've come back and they are looking at redoing the windows because those windows leak and they are problematic and deteriorating. You know, the material is actually
deteriorating and they are asking to go with the color black for the window frames. And just as a side note, when I saw this was going to be a case that I was going to be looking at, I went and I drove
around some of the some of the municipalities, including St. Pete Beach, but also the city of St. Petersburg, for example, and Gulfport to take a look at what their mission, Mediterranean revivals look like with
respect to windows and window colors. window colors, you know, for the mostly for the framing and, you know, some are white, some are black, some are different colors. Nothing extravagant, you know, like circus or anything like that, but you
know, black is frequently used rather than white. So, I really didn't think that it was a particular problem. Um, this property was included in the city's first historic survey that was undertaken in the mid1 1980s
and 3401 Casablanca was locally designated a historic landmark in 1996. Unfortunately, the city was not a CLG at the time. So once the city became a CLG in about 2005, then that property had to be redesated
as several others did as well. Um it is surrounded by other residentials. It is directly across the street from the Donses. And in fact, this was a house that Thomas Row built when the uh
his the researchers couple years uh couple years back were taking a look at and surveying the Donsesar and Bel Vista neighborhoods. They determined that this particular house is likely eligible for a listing
on the National Register of Historic Places. So, it is a significant building and I wanted to be careful as I looked at this request for COA to be sure that I thought that it wasn't going to hinder
anything that way or or you know interfere with its status as a historic structure. and looking at other properties around the area, I think that the color black is is appropriate and acceptable.
The um let's see, let's just take a couple let's take a look at the PowerPoint. Okay. So, they're seeking a COA for appropriateness to uh replace the
exterior windows on the locally designated structure at 3401 Casablanca. Formerly in 1920, as I already have brought up, they did receive a COA and FEMA variance for um window replacement, stucco work, and
other repairs. and upgrades totaling approximately $90,000. Um this was a former owner as you know and and I think that um that work has all been done and quite appropriately.
Now the outdoor screen patio is being replaced and the current work to replace the exterior windows is being sought. This is an older historic picture of the house on the left side. And then this is
a current photo of the house as it exists today. And in the back, some of the windows are are black. You can see the way the old port area used to look and it's under construction
now. When you look at the current one, just few more pictures of the property. Staff supports the request for the certificate of appropriateness to replace the deteriorating and leaking window frames with new black window
frames throughout the structure and feels that it's an appropriate choice for this request. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed certificate of appropriateness. be glad to answer any questions that you have. Otherwise, thank you. I believe the applicant is
>> question or comment if uh if we approve this for the black windows and down the line when the owner decides that they do or don't want to apply for the designation on the national register if this choice affects that approval for
the national register. Is there any recourse on us for saying yes, you can do it and we still consider a historic structure and then they get declined for some reason on the national register. Um,
some of the houses that I looked at in St. Pete were part of a National Register historic district. So, you know, I I don't know that the National Register actually disapproves that. What would
happen if there was some question about the coloring that would come from the state prior to it going being transmitted up to the National Trust for historic preservation. So, >> right. So, I'm not referring to its
impact on the historic district. I'm talking about its potential impact on a future application for local histo or national historic designation individually on that property. If this decision hinders that
>> award >> there there are others that I've seen that I know are on the national register that have changed colors. Also, you showed an original photo where it had black windows, too, right?
>> Possibly. >> Yeah, I think you mentioned that. >> I think so. >> And I They have They have some in the back. >> The windows across the back are black. >> No, no, no. There's the first set of photographs she showed had a old picture >> next to a current picture and I believe
they comment was they had black windows, but I can't imagine that that would be a stickler. That seems so minor compared to what's going on. windows that were standing. >> Yeah. >> Very hard to tell. >> Yeah. I'm just saying I just don't see where that
>> would be a real problem for anybody. But that's just my opinion. But I think Lynn did an excellent job in finding other similar homes from that same time period that clearly did have black windows. >> So, first I was looking at this photographs, I go, "Wow, I didn't
realize this house looked like this." Then I realized they were different houses. And a lot of them have black. >> This is really great. Yeah. >> A lot of them also have that black grill work. Yeah. >> On the windows. >> And it's a beautiful house and I really appreciate what you're doing to make it
what it is today. And you've done excellent job and it's a great great addition to the community. So, does anybody else have any questions for anybody about this? >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Okay. Um, I'll make a motion for
certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of exterior windows on the locally designated structure at 3401 Casablanca Avenue, which is case number 25126. >> I'll second that. >> All right, Madame Clerk, roll call, please. >> Member Young,
>> yes. >> Vice Chair Hawkinsmith, >> yes. >> Member Dashel, >> yes. >> Member Hurley, >> yes. >> Chair Lowry, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> All right, very good. Okay, now we go to 4C, which is certificate of appropriateness for demolition case number, excuse me, 25134, which is the
residence at 21107 Passigirl Way. Mr. Martinez. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, board members, Gil Martinez, senior planner, community development. for you today is a request for certificate of appropriateness for demolition for the
property located at 21107 Pacic Railway case number 25134. The applicant um was stated in the application and and in the report is Fabian Wrangler for Hillrest Contracting LLC for Keith and Britney Goan, but I
was just informed that there has been a change and now the applicant is Juan Morajan. I'm not sure if he is in the room today, but okay. >> In case any questions come up. >> Okay. >> The property is at 21107 Pastor Grilway
is a one-story frame vernacular. Residents built circa 1945 and identified as a contributing resource in the pasil historic district. It reflects the modest mid-century coastal character typical of the area. Features are are
stated right here. um rectangular plan, gable asphalt roof, partial original three over one wood sash windows, and an enclosed porch. A garage, a one-story connected by a breezeway consistent with the home's historic style. the
condition. It was severely damaged by hurricanes and FEMA's valuations declined it from $120,89924 to76206 in 2025. Repairs estimated at 84% of depreciated value, indicating a substantial damage.
While demolition would remove a contributing resource, staff recognizes the need to balance preservation goals with the structures conditions and environmental risks. Here are some images of the structure. These are the considerations under
section 28.11 of the low end development code that we need to consider the historical or architectural significance. The importance of the building of the character to the district. The difficulty or or impossibility of reproducing such a building. Whether the building is one of
the last remaining examples of its type. Whether the building is capable of earning a reasonable economic return on its value. Staff findings. The circa 1945 frame vernacular residence at 21107 passailway contributes to the pasil historic district but has sustained substantial
hurricane damage. Restoration is economically and practically unfeasible due to its conditions, flood zone constraints, and high rehabilitation costs. While rare surviving example of its type, staff finds that the reasonable measures cannot preserve the structure supporting the applicant's
decision to demolish. Recommendated motion motion to approve case number 25134 for demolition of the contributing structures at 21107 Pasigril Way without stay on demolition.
If there's any questions or comments, I'll be glad to take them. >> See if I can just hear. Sorry. Let me see if I can find it. You had it on. Can you go scroll back a a few slides? It really has to do with the question of
um before the photos. Yeah. Let's see. Well, it's on the Oh, here. Yeah. For the FEMA evaluation. This is this is a question I have in general, not just for this home, >> but I see FEMA valued it at 120,000 in
2024. That would I assume be pre-torrm? >> That's correct. >> Okay. And then they evaluated at 76,000. That would be posttorm, I would assume. Right. >> 2025. >> As I say, it's 2024. 2025. And so I
guess my question is when we and this has nothing to do with the demolition aspect of it, just for like I say my edification, if if we're using a 50% rule in a non-historic house, are we going from
the FEMA valuation before it was damaged or after it was damaged? them. That seems kind of, you know, >> you know, if they're saying the house is worth $50,000 or less because it's been damaged, you know, I I don't know if you know the answer. That's the first time
I've seen where they've done evaluation two years in a row when one year was pretorm or one year was post storm. >> I think as a rule of thumb, we've been using the 2024 valuations because the storms did happen in 2024. I I I would assume so, but I just, you know, the and
I understand how it's relevant to, you know, whether or not fixing it up is, you know, is worthwhile to do, but I just wonder, it's first time seeing that. I just wondered if there was any guidance as to what FEMA if if now people come in and they're saying and
FEMA suddenly using the 2025. Miss Canary, do you know the answer to that? I guess. >> Hi, Laura Canary, community development director. So yes, 2024 because we're going by the date of the event. So um but of course it created a lot of confusion once the 2025 letters were put
out because as you can imagine even up until the storms, people weren't even really aware that the letters were on the property card. Right. So yes, 2024 for anything. Now, if there was an event, heaven forbid, that occurred tomorrow, we would be subject to looking at the 2025 for the damages associated
and the improvements moving forward that occurred based on the event that would happen tomorrow. >> Thank you so much. That clarifies that. Appreciate that. Okay. Um, does anybody have any questions for Mr. Martinez? >> I just have a question. It's more of a technicality. So, for the application
that the uh homeowner filled out, the address that was provided is not a residential address. It's a business address. And I'm not sure if that's permissible or not. As far as the address goes, um we go and just verify what's on property
appraiser. Um being that it is the mailing address, it is the correct contact information and the owner information. But I don't know if legal has any opinion on that as well. Well, I I notice and I apologize. I didn't get the full name. Was Yes, sir. Would you come forward?
>> And and couple things because you came in a little bit late. I think the clerk has to swear you in. >> Okay. You just have to raise your hand. >> Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the information or factual representation you're about to give is truthful. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Come forward, please, and just
state your name and and address for the record. >> Juan Modon uh regarding 21107 Pasigril. I'm sorry I'm new to all this. first time I've been here or any meeting for that matter. Um the valuations I just want to also add to that uh since
receiving more information on what we needed to provide. I have ordered a home inspection and also a mold test as well. So there is live mold in this property. There's a lot more damage that we found after the fact that is not addressed on even the previous application. I don't
know if you guys want me to go into details on that or just to let you know I could drop off the inspection report and the mold examination as well. >> Okay, let me tell you how this kind of plays. All right, it's fantastic. Write your last name for us. >> M O R E J O N. >> Okay. Um
to get a certificate of appropriateness for a demolition, you have to come through us on a on a contributing or old historic kind of house like that. All right. But with that being said, we can't stop it. All right. The the law says if you the property owner wants to demolish a house, they can demolish a
house. The only thing we can do is delay your demolition by 30 days if it's a contributing structure being over 50 years old, which your structure is, or if it's been historically designated, which I'm not sure. I don't believe it
has. >> No, sir. >> If it had been, we can delay your demolition by 90 days. And during those time frames, we can work on you and encourage you to build a historic type of structure. >> Understood. >> Okay. So, that's really the whole thing here. So,
>> you almost don't have to even justify why you want to demolish it. I appreciate the fact that you do have done a good job in showing the damage. Of course, you're not the first home we've had this with and telling us about the the mold up, you know, problems as well. So, at the end of this when we
vote, you're you're going to get your We can't stop it. Okay, not that we need to, especially in a situation like this. But but with that being said, one of the reason I wanted you to come up here is to ask you, have you got new plans for a new structure yet? >> I haven't even started on the plans. >> Okay. So, what I would what I'm this is
the encouraging part. Okay. I'm going to ask you or the board would ask you when you start putting your plans together that it would be say advisable. It would be nice if you would talk some to the staff people here to get an understanding because you know you're building a home in a historic district
and we want to try to encourage homes to be built in a architecturally the architectural aesthetic to be similar to the old neighborhood. You know, we can't necessarily force people to do that, but we want to encourage that especially if you know the area and know
>> Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. That's why we wanted this property. >> Excellent. You know, we got a lot of people that say we love Pascal and they build a brand new totally modern looking place. >> That's not what we're after either, but I but I appreciate you letting me know. We did interview one uh architectural firm, didn't really love the the
feedback that we got from them, so we're going to interview two more. >> Okay. Excellent. >> And see if we can find a good match for us and for the property. >> All right. Well, I just wanted to this is the you know, sometimes people already have their plans drawn up, you know, so if you haven't yet, please utilize the resources we have if you can. I think people will be very
agreeable to >> Okay. give you information. Uh, anybody else have any questions for this gentleman? >> Okay. >> I I believe the name on the application, the last name. Could you spell your last name again, please? >> Model. M O R E J O N >> and you're the owner of the property.
>> So Keith Goen and I own the property. You you probably saw Keith Goen and Britney. >> Yes. >> Out of the country right now. So we had to sign a special affidavit for me to join today. >> Okay. So your co-owner, I guess your co-owner >> and the address that they provided, the
3705 Northheims Avenue is not a residential. >> That's what we use as a business address, that's Keys law firm. >> So we use that for a lot of our mailing address just to make sure that we don't lose anything. >> And that's actually that's okay. Yes. Because uh the line where it says property address and legal description,
that's where the address of the property to be >> purch >> and I just want to put on the record that staff does kind of review it. We look at the property appraiser, making sure names, addresses, mailing address, everything kind of matches up as well.
>> So then for this application, should it have the additional owner owner's name on that application or not necessarily? >> Not necessarily. We're going again by the what the property appraisers records hold, but we do have a um certified
agent authorization for this gentleman. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. >> Other questions, but I do have a comment regarding the application where it says specifically the trees will not be re removed and I'm so thankful for that. >> Yeah, I don't think we have any. Well,
there are palms on the seaw wall, I believe. But I mean, just in general, a lot of homes are coming down and the big beautiful trees are coming right down with them. >> Yeah. >> And >> so, thank you. >> Just to spin off that for a moment, uh, on that subject, that might be something
we want to bring up at a future meeting because a lot of the homes that have been demolished, it looks like they've knocked all the trees down, but they they haven't necessarily, but they've knocked some trees down. So, I had a question for staff and Mr. Mills gave me some information, but I hadn't quite
followed up on it about homes that are demolished and if they come in and knock all the trees down, is there a record of the trees that were present? Number one, and is there a record of the age or the maturity of the
of the trees? So we're not getting five, you know, 30-foot palms replaced with five two-foot trees that take 20 years to look the same. So, and that might be something we want to just as a board want to deal with as far as landscaping in the future because we, you know,
obviously we've had so many demolitions since the storm uh that and you obviously recognize too that some of these look pretty barren. >> Our neighborhood is looking very barren. >> Yeah. So for for so for a future meeting and maybe we can at the end here I'll
suggest uh in fact I'll do it right now that we could for the next meeting perhaps >> chair and board members Gil Martinez once again indeed this is a request for a certificate of appropriateness for demolition for the property located at 10324th A property owners are Michael
and Penza. They are requesting a certificate of appropriateness for demolition. Case number 25135. These are some images of the property dating back to 1940 all the way to current photos of 2025.
The property the the structure is circa 1940 one-story colonial revival style residence and a detached garage. They're both contributing structures within the district, reflecting Pasigril's mid 20th century coastal cottage character. The owner proposes to demolish the primary
residence due to flood vulnerability while retaining the detached garage, which will be converted to a flood compliant parking or storage area under an approved variance case number 255096. The proposed elevated replacement
dwelling was reviewed under historic preservation board case number 255039 with prior board comments incorporated. The owners have explored relocation options for the existing home without success. Due to their request for the certificate of demolition, the applicant
will need to formally withdraw case number 2581 for local historic designation. These are the LDC um considerations for demolition permits under section 2811. Need to consider the historic or
architectural significance of the building, the importance of the building to the character of the district, the difficulty or impossibility of reproducing such a building because of its design, texture, material details or unique location.
Whether the building is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the neighborhood or city. Whether reasonable measures can be taken to save the building. Whether the building is capable of earning a reasonable economic return on its value. Or whether the
perpetration of the building considering its physical condition, its location, and the anticipated expense of rehabilitation would not be economically feasible. Staff findings. The applicant requests
to demolish the contributing circa 1940 colonial revival style residence and construct an elevated single family home due to flood vulnerability. The detached garage will be retained and converted to a flood compliant parking or storage
area under an approved variance, previously approved variance. The replacement dwelling reviewed under HPB design review case 2539 incorporates prior board feedback. The applicant has pursued but not secured
relocation of the existing structure. Staff presents this information for the board's consideration evaluating the balance between historic preservation and resiliency objectives. Recommended motion. A motion to approve
case number 25135 for demolition of a contributing structure at 10324th A without a stay on demolition. and I'm here to answer any questions or take any comments, any feedback. I believe the applicant may be here as well.
>> So, there is a pending application for his local historic designation hasn't come to us yet because I I don't remember seeing this. >> No, if if if I can and Mr. Pez can confirm some of this and this is part of the discussion I want to have later on about moving a house.
>> Okay. So, just so people are aware, uh I've had contact with these folks for numbers of months and they've been very very generous in suggesting that this house which was not damaged by the flood, I mean it never got into the house
uh that they would be willing to donate it to move to some location. And so, and we can talk about that more later, but in the interim, because it has to be a historic structure designated historically to be moved,
they filled out a designation to have the home historically, excuse me. Yeah. Application have the home historically designated when and I spoke spoke to Mr. that if in fact it worked out that they structure
could be moved, can we hear both of those certificates at the same time? And he said yes. All right. So, we did we held off on doing the historic designation because we didn't know what was going to be happening with the house. And there had been a couple
citizens on Pastor whose homes were older homes were significantly damaged or destroyed by the hurricane that had interest in moving that house. Those did not come to fruition, but a lot of work was done on those and a lot of time went
by. Uh, and now that the city has made the move to actually demolish the shuffleboard clubhouse, there's a movement and uh, Commissioner Maldin's involved in it. It was in front of the
was brought up to the city commission just last Monday, the potential of moving this home uh to that location for the shuffleboard clubhouse, which we'll talk about later. But the question I have is this first I this popped up that I have for you um the city the city
attorney is do they have to pull away or remove their designation or application excuse me for historic designation to get a demolition permit because okay because I think where we're
at as as I spoke before about demolition permit and and Mr. Pez can add to some of this if he wants. I'm just trying to move things along. Is that by the time they actually demolish this house and try to start on their new structure, which we've seen. We did a
design review on the home before, then we should be able to have made a decision and potentially moved the house before the demolition obviously occurs. And so time is of the essence, but the staff
has been working on it. I think as we speak there's, you know, things going on and so, uh, I just want to make sure that we can issue this demolition permit and then if we determine it can be moved that we can then get it historically
designated and do the moving permit without having jeopardized that by granting this the the certificate of appropriateness. Obviously, we can't move if it's been demolished. So, that's not really the problem. move it if it's been demolished and we can't move it if it's not a local
historic >> right. But that can be done at the same time. We can have it the paperwork's been filed. We can get it locally designated and do a a certificate to have it moved at the same time. So we don't have to wait 30 days between each one. And so the way that
would work essentially is uh we would be able to hopefully have that done within the next, you know, six weeks or whatever. I don't know. We might have to have a a special uh meeting um for us to do that so we don't
lose because the Pez said have been very generous. They probably aren't going to start construction till the beginning of the year. So that gives us some time frame there. So there's some little wiggle room. I don't want to put them in a position where they have to delay what they want to do because they've been very nice so far. >> But in the event they could move it, is
the application for local historic designation in a in a state that it can be on the December meeting agenda or >> Well, I don't know. I think what do we have to have like 10 days beforehand >> for the agenda for December? Yes.
>> Um, >> let me check on >> this is a new wrinkle to me. I I didn't that of the staff requesting they have to withdraw the the work >> and I can answer that because I'm the one who put it in the PowerPoint and and I am requesting that just from one I
would like to talk to the legal about that but two I in our um in our software I have open cases so if if a home is demolished and I would follow it through because I personally do the demo permits
as well and I approve those um just so I don't have any cases open um and it's trying to close that. So if we're following through with a demo and there is the question of can the pezes continue that application that they submitted in May
if it's going to be designated and then relocate it to another location if the city is maintaining the responsibility should the city do it. We haven't even gotten into that conversation, right? >> So, I think it's more just from our standpoint where I think the PESAS have
been through every board by now at this point. Um, and for multiple different things, if they don't want to continue with that, and I know this came up on Monday at the commission meeting, but that was something new going on this path that we're on. If you're not going
to if you're going for the demolition, then you're probably not going to designate it. >> Okay. We'll see. I I understand what you're saying, but I have had conversations with the Pezes. Okay. >> And I know the time frames that are associated with it. Okay. So, so there is time that >> Would he like to come up and put that
on? >> Yes, we can do that, but I just I just want to so you understand. >> Well, I'm not privy to that information. I'm looking at it from our our staff city standpoint. >> No, I understand that. But >> Okay. >> And from the side of demolition, if we say yes, you can demolish it today, that
doesn't mean you have to demolish it, >> right? decide not to, but at least you have that green card when you're ready to make that choice. >> Of course not. And and Mr. I'm sure he recognizes that the the sn potential snafu that I don't want to happen is if
we we issue the demolition permit, which we should be able to do because it's at his discretion whether he's going to utilize it or not. And then we say, "Okay, we need to get it historically designated to move." and the city says, "Oh, well, you did a demolition permit, so you had to remove the historic
designation." Then we got to start all over again. And it and and it adds time to what they want to do. So, I guess the answer would be I know we do this all the time where we make decisions subject to information we get back from staff,
you know, and so uh and and and Mr. Pez can talk about this and what his feelings are about it, but I I like I said, it's the first time I've seen where there's a request to remove the historic designation because I firmly believe they would love to have the
house moved and not be demolished, but they don't want to wait forever for that to happen. And so that's kind of where we're at right now. So, I'm hopeful from was said at the meeting on Monday that there's a fire that's been lit and we're
going to get some decisions on some of the things really quick and later in the afternoon when we discuss that I will bring up more information for the board so they get a better idea what's going on. But with that being said, Mr. Peza, do you have anything you want to say about this issue?
>> Not really. That's exactly the way we're looking at it. Right. So, you know, we love the house. uh when a storm came through, I was there and saw the water coming up and made a decision not to lift it. Let's take it down, right? But
from the start, we had interested parties that wanted to take the house and move it. So, we said that would be awesome and we really wanted it to go to where the shuttle board court was because now it's always going to be in passive grill. So, that was our big reason why going for the historic
designation. Then when those kind of fell through, we're just, you know, we're probably about 60 days behind schedule right now what we had planned. Um our our building permits, I'm assuming, are going to be approved pretty quick here because we put them in
in August 26th or something like that. So I'm assuming we're pretty close to that. But that that's the whole thing. We have no problem with it. We'll do whatever it takes. But we don't like you're saying, Bill, we want we don't want this to drag on for, you know, two, three, four months, something like that.
So, if we can get it done quickly, we'd love to be part of it and, you know, donate it to the city. >> And I would point out just because it has some relevance to what we were talking about when when it was first brought up and I never talked to anybody on the board about it because it was never that there's sunshine rules and
things of that nature, but and you're my neighbor, so you know, so when we first talked about it, um, you know, I had mentioned it to some of staff and and about the shuffleboard courthouse. I'm just kidding. Clubhouse, you want to call the courthouse clubhouse. And there
wasn't so much interest at that point, but that was way back in like March or April when there was so much stuff going on. And and at that time, we had gone from where we were going to demolish the clubhouse, which we signed a demolition permit in January, to relook at the
clubhouse and determining it could be saved. And so we're on that path of of fixing the clubhouse up and not demolishing it. And that's when we started other citizens there started talking about potentially moving your house to their location where their
damaged houses were on pass grill. Well, those kind of fell through recently and then just within the last month when the city got all the estimates to rebuild the clubhouse, they were so high the city and the city commission decided we
want to go back to demolishing the clubhouse. And that's why this popped up again because your house is still there. It hasn't been demolished. Now we know the clubhouse is going to be demolished. Is this something we can do? >> So that you know is part of the reason
why the timing is is is the way it is. >> Um so I guess I would say we're kind of back to that original issue. I don't want Well, I can say this. Okay. One thing we and I
mentioned this to you earlier, one thing we can do with which is well within our rights is is grant the demolition permit with a 30-day stay. And within that 30 days, the city ought to be able to find out whether we're going to be able to move
and the community, this could be a joint operation, okay? Whether in the next 30 days we can get that moved. My understanding is you don't plan a de demolition in 30 days, >> right? You're probably talking about mid December or something, right? >> We have not applied for the demo permit.
We've we've talked to Duke. >> They've given us a date of like December 1st, but my wife and I have been talking that, you know, we're willing to push that back. So, we don't want to go with the permit until we know exactly what we're >> So, why don't we do this? Why don't we go ahead and talk about because since we
have to make a decision on this, we have to essentially we do have to grant the demolition permit, but do it with a 30-day state, which only means that you get the paperwork in 30 days. And that ought to give us the breathing room to find out where we're going on. >> Yeah, we we're f we're fine with that. >> And if it works, and if we can do it,
great. If it doesn't, it doesn't at least >> we would like to donate it. So, I mean, that would be our our first choice for sure. So, >> well, and truly with Duke Energy, whether you're moving it or demoing it, they need to do their thing. >> Yeah, right. They will, but they have
they have the uh December 1st date on it. >> We would be willing to push that back because we're still living in the house. We we've got a you know, got a lot of stuff been taken out already. You know, we're getting ready, but uh we got an apartment down in St. Pete. So, but
we're still living at the house dayto day. So, and their plan was to live live there until December 1st. So, even if Duke came and took the the power out, the meter out, the house is still standing. Yeah. Right. So, that's not a problem. >> Okay. >> Okay. All right.
>> Does that make sense? All right. >> Thank you. >> Anybody have any more questions for anything on this? >> We do need to have a motion. >> Pardon me. >> We do need to have a motion. >> Yes. Yes. I know. I' I'd like to make a motion that we grant a certificate of appropriate appropriateness for
demolation number 251135. >> No, hold on. >> Got too many ones. >> Yeah, too many ones. 25135. >> 25135 at 103 24th Avenue with a 30-day stay. >> I'll second that motion. Roll call, please.
>> Vice Chair Hawin Smith, >> yes. >> Member Dashel, >> yes. >> Member Hurley, >> yes. Member Young, >> yes. >> Chair Lowry, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> All right. Okay. Now we are on to section five discussion items. Uh
and that is 5A is design review on 2808 Pass Way. >> That is correct. Um good afternoon everyone. Kristen Comman Coleman uh planning manager here for the city and community development. Today we have a design review before you at 2808
Pass Girl way. Case number 25132. Uh Sean Rooney for Rooney Design Group for Mark and Lorie Sullivan. Um it's a design review for a new house medium structure located at 2808 Passil Way. Uh this board has seen the certificate of
appropriateness and approved the demo um for demolition in June 5th of 2025. And this is the proposed site plan. It fronts on Pass Girl way. It also has a front on Sunset Way, which we would consider on the planning end of it in
the land development code a through lot. They are looking to have the entrance off of Pasigrow Way. In the prior um dwelling that was located there, the the entrance and the access was off of Sunset Way. So, I just wanted to to pull
that out for you. This is the proposed front and rear elevations of the home. This is the south um north and south side elevations. And I also just threw in there our floor plans because I know we have in the past
had a couple questions on those. So with our planning consultant um Terara Alamary, she did have some design comments um from elevations. The structure appears visually distinct between the ground floor and upper levels, both of which contain similar features that contrast with the garage
floor front facade. The shakeup or story projection is similar in color and texture to the garage door beneath, but the southern side of the structure does not maintain that consistency. The applicant should demonstrate how the visual continuity standard of LDC code section 20.21 is met. And the applicant
should describe and show which of the private frontages, porch or stoop are included and reference dimensions as required by the land development code. And then also uh a comment about landscaping materials in future renderings to show that the minimum frontage landscaping standards are being met. And it's my understanding um staff
has been in contact with the designer and he is going to address those from the zoning side. Again, this is a double frontage lot. It's a considered um a through lot containing two front yards and two sideyards. While it does meet the required setbacks based on that determination, the applicant should be
aware that there are limitations imposed by a double frontages such as fence height limitations, visual encroachment standards for future access established at the frontage along Sunset Way that do not apply to a regular interior lot um or lots that abut alleyway. landscaping
requirements of the land development code applied to the Sunset Way frontage as well as the Passil Way frontage and that while establishing a driveway access from Passway um which is a much higher volume roadway than Sunset Way at this location and again while such
access is not currently prohibited, the applicant should address why the access location was modified. And if I may, I would just like to get some testimony um from the designer with regards to if any of the palms would be removed along that way as well. I didn't see anything on
the site plan, but again, we are kind to our trees. So, I just would like some additional testimony on that. So with that, the board may make comments that assist to ensure compatibility of the structure within the district as well as this is a single family use. So there are no form or mass
limitations other than those required under the design regulations. Okay, you sir, you want to take a big drink of water and come on up. All right. Hey, good afternoon. I'm Sean Rooney with Rooney Design Group. Um we're down
Central Avenue in St. Petersburg, Florida. Um and uh yeah, just to kind of go through the list here um with starting with >> Kristen. Yes, thank you. I was going to ask you to go back to those, right? Thank you. >> Yeah, starting from the uh staff
comments. So number one, um so the section 20.21 describes screening of elevated buildings. Um in the design we've created a projecting front entry structure at the ground level to have the appearance that the house was constructed at natural grade as stated
in the code section. Um so we opted for this method to eliminate the need for large exterior staircase um that would have an appearance of an elevated building and u so secondly we designed a carport with the garage doors recessed to allow for parking um at the ground
level. um uh that that's due in part to the minimal setbacks for the House medium. Um so th those are um kind of my comments on on number one and uh I don't know if you want to me to stop at each one and have you have feedback on those or >> I have a couple questions just on what
you said. >> So because it's hard to tell from this drawing are are the garage doors like recessed back in there a little bit because you mentioned carport. >> Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. So we have a cupboard area in front of the garage doors there. You kind of see u on on the
far left image there. Uh so so those dash dashed uh X's there. That's the garage doors. >> Um so that'll allow for >> drying, you know, just so we're since we're so close to the the front allow for car parking out front.
>> Um and then the entry is on the on the right hand side there. And then where? Yes. Where the entry is. I know that obviously you're allowed to have a foyer or whatever on the ground floor level, which you've done there, right? Correct. The entrance. >> That's correct. Yeah. The the building code allows you to have believe it's a
299 square foot maximum uh just building access only stairwells, elevators. Um >> yeah. No, I was going to say I a lot of homes used to be built that way, but a lot aren't nowadays. And I think the interior stairs are so much better than putting them on the outside. So, I
applaud you on that little >> appreciate that. Yeah, that's something that we've picked up years ago that um we just weren't a fan of the and also it takes up a lot of uh real estate to add these large staircases and ends up pushing the house farther back. Um ends up taking up more room in the rear. So,
uh then you're inevitably having to put stairs on the inside anyway. So, we saves the client a little bit of money and also has an aesthetic appearance to uh you know have the ground floor entry. um again. So, so um that's kind of why
we uh did that entrance that way to kind of follow what the intent of the the screening is for that that that section there. So, >> okay. And do you know I mean Kristen do you know whether or not
when I guess Tara made some comments that are that are on here on the design whether this gentleman is just explaining the design did or or did you modify the design to answer her questions? >> Uh no we have done uh we just received the comments a few days ago. Okay.
>> So we have not made any com uh revisions to the plans. >> Okay. So, uh, that's kind of what we're assume here today to gather comments and make revisions and then from there those will reflect on the permit. >> Gotcha. Okay. So, so what about the
comment in that first bullet point about the shake upper story projection is similar in color and texture to the garage door beneath, but the southern side of the structure does not maintain that consistency. >> Right. Yeah. So, it was a little confusing to me because the southern
side is the side of the house. Mhm. >> So I I guess I would need a little bit more explanation on >> Well, I assume the northern side wouldn't either, would it? >> Well, correct. They're both north and south or the side. So I I'm I'm not really sure if I 100% understand
>> what that comment >> referring to the front facade but on the south side of the house. >> Okay. >> Left of that shake component. >> Okay. Is that is that >> maybe >> distinctively different? I It's hard to tell on some of these because of the size of them. >> Um
>> right. So, so on the on the sides we have the horizontal lap siding and then the front is the shake to uh kind of break up the the rhythm of the of the the flat uh material of the of that. And
then we also have some uh panels uh that are around the windows to give it some distinctive uh design elements as well so that we're not just looking at all horizontal siding on the front. Well, I I guess yes. I I guess the question
would be not so much what your front looks like there, but the sides I guess the northern southern exposures of the house. I'm not saying they have to be, but they aren't the same uh visual of the the siding that's on the front. Is that fair
to say? >> Uh yeah, I I could see where Yeah. And so I guess what I would say to that is that um you know the the the setbacks are 5T uh to the property line and then therefore the neighboring properties would be 5T. So to have uh ability from
a pedestrian standpoint to view that um you know it would be very difficult in my opinion. So >> unless the neighbor tears their house down for three years. >> Well, right and that's >> which it does happen. >> Yeah. And that's completely up to their own time schedules and whatnot. But um
so so if you notice I mean we do have the horizontal siding that wraps around um and and and and for a cost standpoint and uh just having that shake siding is a lot more expensive than the uh than the horizontal siding and for it to be a
non streetf facing facade. Uh in our opinion we don't feel it's necessary to to carry that um shake around. And if that is the intent of what they are explaining in this comment, I'd like to maybe discuss that with that uh person who did the review to see if that's the intent.
>> On the other side of it, there's no requirement you put shake on the front so you can make it just like the site and save more money that way. But Right. Exactly. We don't want you to do that. >> Right. >> Yeah. Exactly. So, you know, we went through a deliberate design process uh with the with the homeowners to uh come
up with different iterations and uh this is this is kind of a lot due in part to the the input from them as far as what they wanted. Um and so a lot of the times that when we have uh you know these these front entries as well to you
know projections those are usually carry different material. Um so uh we see a lot of that pattern along pass as well. Um especially with the different levels. Um so we felt it was appropriate to to add that that feature as well, but certainly open for discussion if there's
a a better solution. >> And can you tell me on the on the since you're looking at the the front and rear elevations here on the front elevation, I'm going to call them those kind of eyebrows that are above the the windows, >> right? >> How far do those project out? Um those
usually uh no more than three feet uh that project out. >> And are those the same on the second or I guess I'm going to call it the second floor, the third floor and and call the ground floor the first floor. But is that the same depth they come out? >> Yeah. So on the level above that that's
just your general roof uh overhang. Um and what you're seeing is a uh louvered Bahama shutter and a different color there that's directly over the windows. >> Okay. Okay. I couldn't quite make that out, but I see what you're saying now, I think. >> And again, just to just to kind of break
up the flat facade there. >> All right. >> Will you go back to the comments, please, Kristen? Oh, and anybody else have questions on the like the first bullet point here? >> Um, just there's not a lot of green
space out front. So, as far as the screening with landscaping, I'm not sure how that's going to be masked or screened at all from the from the sidewalk side. >> And I think that is both on the design aspect that Tara um had as well as the zoning aspect that staff.
>> Yeah, that's that's kind of like bullet point three here, right? As well in a moment. So, >> both sides. Yeah. >> Yeah. And there was a a landscape plan submitted. Um I don't know if that was included in this presentation or not, but we did um obviously on either side
of the driveway we've um put the requirements for the shade trees and the understory trees and the hedges and mulch areas. That's shows clearly on the uh landscape plan that we submitted. >> And of course there's always the visual of hands around necks whenever we talk
about driveways on Pascal Way. >> Yeah. Um, but let's can we go >> try to keep my hands in my pockets. C >> can we go you to the zone requirements or something where there were some things >> for >> Yeah, I think they're on here. Yeah, I think they go where they talked about uh
where you talked about >> uh on the rear entrance how it might be difficult with fencing and things of that nature. Yes, right here. This comments comments on zoning. So, I'm going to make the big assumption that the reason you want a front entrance is so you can have a pool in the backyard.
That's exactly correct. >> Of course, and that you don't want to drive your car through a pool. So, >> Right. Or put the pool in the front. >> Right. Right. Um, but what I'm what I'm I don't know the answer to this, but thing that I'm concerned about, and I'm sure this is what the staff had had
mentioned, is whether you'll get the privacy you think you des you want around a pool because this is this is a through. >> Is that fair to say? Yes. Because this is a through lot, >> right? And so it's kind of like, you
know, uh I I don't know exactly, but you know, most people want a privacy pool around fence around their pool to some extent. I don't know if you'll be able to get that. I don't know if you've explored that or not, but >> yeah, I believe there was some comments with the zoning staff when we were talking to them on the planning and they
had mentioned to us that of the uh fence height requirements as it gets towards the rear of the property toward closer to the street. Uh there's a I believe it's a 4 foot fence um in the in the 10- foot um area from the street and then after that it can go to six I believe
but I'd have to double check from that. Um but but the way we feel is that sunset is uh is more secluded than pass with the pedestrian and and car traffic there and the road noise. Uh those are just uh individuals pulling down the air
street going to their home. it's not a main uh drag there. So, uh with the the road noise and and whatnot is is kind of the and the pedestrian sidewalk there. I don't believe there's any sidewalks on Sunset Way. So, that would be eliminated um from consideration on was kind of one
of the main areas that we decided to >> Well, a lot a lot of people walk, but there's not a sidewalk. >> Correct. Yeah. >> So, um so that was kind of the main uh um reason for that to to flip that around. Um
and uh and then we also are planning on doing landscaping in the rear. I think it's one of the comments that indicates that we are required to do landscaping in the rear. Well, in the rear, same as we would be doing in the front because they're both uh it's a through lot, so
they're both kind of uh facing the street. So, >> well, well, let me ask you. I don't know if you know the answer to this question, but the way this is designed with the pool and the the pool surround or the the patio around it, does it and the
front yard with having, you know, a double wide driveway that goes up to that? Are they going to have enough green space in the front or back to fulfill the landscaping requirements? If you know, >> um, I was trying to see if I could find the landscape plan, which I haven't personally looked at that. um as of yet,
but I think in the back uh along the frontage along Sunset Way, most definitely >> that can be met. Um the applicant is correct in the fact that your maximum height in that area up to the 10 ft coming to the east um is a maximum
height of 4 feet and then they can bump that up and then it would have to go back down as you come to Pastoral Way with another max height of four feet. Um, but he seems pretty comfortable that that is uh plenty of height to secure the yard. Um, and just getting back to
the landscaping, it does to me look a little tight here. Uh, being that they have a walkway again coming from, you know, the sidewalk around Pasigrow Way to the front entry as well as the garage or the driveway to the garages, but that
shouldn't exceed 20 feet. Um, but I think it they could possibly make that work. >> Well, does and and because this is just a design review, you know, we just >> spitballing here stuff. >> Is is that
I I guess there hasn't been a a actual determination by staff specifically that landscaping is a problem. But I guess I'm asking we're assured that that if there is they have to bend on that situation that we don't
>> correct if they if they do not meet the requirements then the the permit does not get issued until we resolve it. >> Okay. >> But I would like some information on the the palms along the right of way if >> Yeah. You know I rode by there today and I know the house has been demolished but
I forgot to count trees. So yeah. >> Yeah. And I think that's the big Yeah. The the big question that we get a lot with our clients is are are responsible for the trees in the ride ofway. You know, is that our responsibility or and so as far as
anything on the property um you know I I haven't been out to the to the site but um if they are going to remove any trees or if they have removed any trees that that's been done with the demolition permit and whatever tree removal permits that they were needed to occur. Um but
uh and and make way for the new landscaping that we would need to be putting in. So as far as all the trees in the ride ofway, um they're they're I think that's what you're referring to, right? Yeah. I mean, >> see what's going to have to be removed to accommodate that new curb cut and driveway. >> Correct. Yeah. I don't believe that
there's any any trees. Um there may be one tree. Looks like there's a 14-in tree that I'm looking at for my landscape plan. But, you know, again, I don't know what the responsibilities are with the >> specifically either, but I would, you know, we talked about maybe next meeting
talking about that kind of stuff because >> just so you're aware too, you may be already, you know, when when they widened the street about five or six or seven years ago or not they they didn't really widen it, but they dug it all up and did a bunch of work and then stuff. You know, Pass Girl was noted for having
these Washingtonian palms that lined Passer Girl way, right? >> Which it's hard to line them if everyone's decided to put a, you know, curb cut there. And so >> there was a lot of money spent in replacing those trees. Of course, they could only replace them about half the height.
>> So, they're growing into that what it is. But, you know, obviously we're sensitive if people put in curb cuts and we take out the trees we just put in a little while ago. that probably if if they if it isn't required that the property owner probably should be
required to replace those trees somewhere else in the right way. But, you know, >> right, >> I just mentioned that that >> and I'd like to just add that there are two trees that look like they're kind of new that were planted and then there's actually a third that abuts uh this property and then the property just
south of it. >> Right. Yeah. There's, at least from what I can tell from our surveyor doing his tree mapping, that there's essentially two trees that are basically in line with the side property lines and then one in the middle that looks like it
could be in conflict with the driveway there. So again, you know, I'd be we we're certainly have that conversation to see who's responsible for that and I'm sure the donors would be more than happy to put trees there if that's required, you know, so or move it. You
know, those are not an arborist, but I know palms are relatively easy to move as opposed to shade trees. So, um >> I think it's more about the historic aesthetic and the way that the passway line has always looked versus, you know,
a shade tree, per se. No. Right. I mean I mean I don't think we can tell people they Well, I know we can't tell the people at least not yet that you can't have a driveway because you're going to take a tree out. Okay. So So that but we do want to try to maintain as much as we
can that kind of you know column of trees as you go down and and you know like I said if a if a 60oot tree gets put taken down a 10-ft tree gets put up there it's kind of doesn't do much you know. So, not that you could replace a 60oot tree probably, but um all right,
we I think we've had some discussion about anybody have any any more questions or any more comments on this? >> Okay, I thank you for your time. >> Thank you very much. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, now we're in discussion item
five B, which would be fees for demolition. So, I I obviously watched the commission meeting the other night and there were obviously some things that were brought up in regards to creating or generating
additional funds for the city. uh and and some of which you know is of concern just being in a historic community and then also being in an area that I see our businesses working really hard to maintain um you know the flow of traffic and foot
traffic and then to add in additional fees or cost to people to come into our community obviously is a concern. So it kind of got my wheels turning. So, I believe the fee for the demolition of historic and or contributing structures,
if I'm not mistaken, is $100, if that's >> so for for to come before this board is is a $50 fee. And that is one flat rate to get a certificate of appropriateness. For a demolition permit for the building side, for the B building permit itself
is approximately $100, maybe $104. um that does not include any fees for on the zoning and planning side for historical review. So, we make sure if they're coming in for a demo, we are checking to see if it's contributing if it has to come here, which is that $50
fee as well as our zoning fees as well. We don't have any. It's all encompassed in there. Um so, you're looking at if it was a contributing structure about $154 total to remove. So, as we're looking at
the cost obviously of people coming in, spending the money for demolition, spending the money to build these homes to the maximum height with density, I feel as though a better way perhaps to raise money, and I understand that we
would have to go in and see how can we, I guess, reassign funds once they've gone into a particular department or something like that. Um, but maybe to raise that fee. So if someone comes in and buys a historic or a contributing structure with the intention of
demolition, they're they're not coming in buying a million million plus $2 million property to demolish without having financial means to be able to do as such. So I feel like at $100 or $150,
it's honestly almost laughable. Not to mention all of the work that Kristen and Brandon and Lind and everybody does to make sure that everything kind of rolls out. So, I would say that it would need to be probably $1,000 to be honest. And
I don't think that's an absurd amount of money to ask someone that's building a 2 million to $3 million home coming in buying a piece of property that they're just demolishing. especially as we're looking at kind of the wave the way that things are going.
I mean, we see Pastor Girl, which thankfully is historic. You know, Lynn and everyone's been working super hard to get other communities within our city deemed historic. This is not going to stop. You know, this wave has started. And so, how can we maximize instead of penalizing people that want
to visit our city and and support our businesses and support who we are as a community, why don't we say, "Okay, if you want to join our community, you have to pay this price point because this is what is going to help us stay alive and stay afloat." So,
>> I think they're making it up on the construction side. When a new construction permit is being issued, those fees are considerably higher. I and I'm I'm no expert on the building side of it, but um I do think that new
homes could be a set rate and then renovations and I can you know might be better if I come back to you with these answers if I don't know. Yes. >> Because I don't want to put on the but I can look into some additional information. I know if it's renovations it's a different price than if it's a
new home. Um, so I can get some information. >> One thing I would be of interest is how long has this fee been where it is? It's been like this for the last 20 years or 25 or 30 years. I think we have >> and so yeah so you know because obviously after the storm there's a lot
of need for you know >> the city to be able to raise some monies and I >> member Dash has a good point about $100 is almost negligible nowadays especially with the price that they're paying for some of these homes good news is none of you guys have to worry about it that's
you're beyond that but uh um >> well some of the people who are pulling the demo permits aren't necessarily the people who may in the future buy the law and build the new home. >> They may be pulling a demo permit because their house is further deteriorating day by day and they're
paying taxes on an improved property and they can't decide what to do or an estate can't decide what to do. So, they take it down to minimize their their risk and their carrying costs. There there's a devil's advocate aspect to that that if you're a homeowner that's had your home for 50 years and it got
damaged by the storm and you want to knock it down to sell the lot. >> Then then is that within the spirit of what you're kind of talking about. Okay. Because I understand what you're talking about. People are coming in just saying I'm going to buy this house cuz it I'm going to call it a knockdown and then
I'm going to build whatever I want kind of thing. That that that's kind of a different scenario. But I I would let's bring it up for let's have add it to next month's uh agenda if you could find out some of the information about other fees and how long they've been around
and whether or not because the whole city I know Miss Canary wants to say something but citywide they may be re looking at fees on everything. I don't know. So that may kind of already be in the works. Miss Carrie >> hi thank you sir. Laura Canary community development director. Yes, we're in the
process of doing an operating fee study across the board as well as looking at the enterprise fees for those enterprises. Um, looking at everything from cost from a cost recovery standpoint because one thing that we do know even in looking at some of those initial numbers when we look at
ourselves in to in comparison to what we would consider comparable communities, um, some of our fee structure is just not aligned with what it should be. So, we're looking at that across the board. That's number one. Number two, to your point, yes, whe with regard to an
elevation or a new build, the fee structure looks much different. So, they do end up essentially paying more when it comes to the permit side versus if you were just doing a remodel or, you know, um if you were doing mitigation. Um, the other thing that I think is important to note that with the fee
structure, one of the things, again, this study was already underway before any of the Senate Bill 180 stuff came into play, but it's just something that we also have to be very mindful of because, as you can imagine, you know, SB 180 without, you know, being an attorney or putting on a legal hat, you
know, it it pretty much prohibits you from doing anything that would um make development more difficult. And as you can imagine, sometimes they look at, oh, increasing a fee structure as one way to kind of impede development or redevelopment in a different way. So, as
we've been doing the fee studies, we've been also working very closely with the city attorney just to make sure that we're aligned that even if we want to change some of these, we have to be dotting our eyes and crossing our tees to make sure that it's the appropriate time because if the SB80 does come into play, then we're going to need to wait
till 2027 to actually implement those fee changes. Okay, very good. Thank you. That's very uh informative and I think obviously you being present and you hearing what we're talking about, these are fees we'd like to have looked at obviously. So maybe you can just give us
some of that general information. Shouldn't be long, but uh that's a good point. All right. Anybody else have any comments on that at this stage? So otherwise, we'll bring it up for next month. And then we have uh 5C,
which was why I brought up about moving the historic house. That and no surprise, that's the house we just talked about. You've seen pictures of it if you aren't familiar with it already. Um I've given kind of some of the background on that. Uh, one of the things,
well, first off, I I haven't had an opportunity to talk to any of you about it because Sunshine Laws, I think I've mentioned, you know, this home and the people uh are willing to have it donated. Um, I would ask you all in the next for the
next meeting perhaps to go look at the house maybe and go look at the lot. I mean the the where the shuffleboard clubhouse is, like I said, there's been a change and that the city has passed the rest a resolution to demolish the
clubhouse. That's going to happen. Um I think the this house is essentially 40T by 40T with a 10-ft sunroof, not sunroof, sun room on the side, which I think was a slightly later addition to
the home. Uh, I know we approximated it as a 1940 build. Uh, I know it was built earlier than that. I think >> Yeah, that's and I'm not sure exactly where that comes from, but that could be accurate. But, but I have done a little
bit of research and I know a lot of it from my neighbor Bob Moore, who's your neighbor, uh, who used to own that house himself years ago. And a mayor of Passer Grill lived in there whose last name was his name was John Deacon. He was absolutely the mayor
in the mid mid30s and late 30s. So he was living in that house before 1940. So clearly it was there. And uh his wife was one of the first presidents of the women's club. There's a little bit pretty cool providence about that house.
So it has some besides being an old house that's in great shape and it really is. They've taken really good care of it. Um it if you go look down there at the shuffleboard clubhouse, the dimensions fit pretty well. You might
have to move a a tree or something and there's a walkway through the park that's actually not lined up with the alleys anyway, but you might have to move some of that a little bit. There's been people in the community that are very interested in in in having this done. I think it's a really a
win-win situation that not only could we have a replacement for the clubhouse, which really just needs storage, but we would have a historic home on city-owned property in the heart of the historic
district. Um, and I just think that has first off, you can probably move the house cheaper than built. Well, maybe that just so you know, the the lowest estimate to repair the clubhouse was $192,000,
which just is stunning. Okay. I know that one of the citizens that was contemplating moving the Peza's home uh a few months ago actually got an estimate to move it and it was about $162,000
and that included putting it up on 11 foot foundation which we wouldn't need to do at the park. uh it include it's a f it would have been a further move by a few blocks and it also uh had the removal of the the side room and I think
perhaps it being reattached to a different part of the house because the house as it sits right now was too wide for the the lot this citizen had. So, I'd hope to think that we could get it moved for under $162,000,
which I know is a still a lot of money, but it's certainly cheaper than than the than what the estimate was to repair $192,000. So, what we have at this moment, forget moving the house, we're going to have a
clubhouse that's torn down. And then the staff's presentation on the demolition of the clubhouse, the path forward was after it's torn down, there would be meetings with the shuffle board club. There'd be meetings with the
historic board. There'd be meetings on zoning trying to determine what it is that needed to be built. All right. And and having not been more born yesterday, I know that could take a long time. So we might not have a shuffleboard or
clubhouse for city's got a lot of priorities other than this I would say. So I'm concerned that we'd be sitting around waiting for a while on that. Um the good thing about moving something like that, not only for the obvious
historical aspects to it, but it's done. It's moved and it's put into place. You know, we don't have to spend a whole lot of time getting it in there. Uh still a lot of work to be done, a lot of work on the timing of it to be done. Uh
I I believe I I'm hope I'm not speaking out of class here, but I I believe I've also got a situation where if the site wasn't prepared in time, I the house could be parked on an empty
lot that's along the route basically for free for a short period of time. So there's some ability that we could extend some of the time perhaps if we needed it. Um I think the >> pay for moving it twice.
>> I don't know. >> Or would we only pay for moving it halfway? >> No, I think >> and then half now >> we're going to do a we're going to do a bucket brigade and move it brick by brick, right? No. Um no, I don't know. I'm just saying those are I'm trying to
look at the potential uh roadblocks and try to deal with them um >> before it happens. >> I haven't seen the minutes from the city council meeting. How was this presentation received by the council
members? And what was the audience response? >> Well, the audience really didn't have a response because I made my comment, my threeminut comment. Okay. It wasn't I it was on it was on that for an action item to just sign the resolution to have it
demolished. So I proposed to the city I said look there's this opportunity with this house that the timing is kind of dovetailed on you know like I said earlier months ago we had we had talked about it but the city didn't really have interest at that
point which is I'm not that's okay with that. And then some citizens did and of course we were going to repair the clubhouse so it wasn't an issue anymore. We didn't need to move anything there because it was going to get fixed. But now that we got the estimates in that takes months to do for that process to
occur and the city wants to go forward demolish it. Now we're it's bubbled up again. And so I mentioned it to the city commission and if you watch it I I believe they responded enthusiastically to the point that they certainly directed staff to look into that and I
got an email the next day from Camden Mills about some of the information that I had. So, I know that there's things going on which and they're going to have to resolve fairly quick and there's lots of options out there
whether you know well let me tell you this part too. According to the demolition presentation was put on by the staff on Monday, there was appear to be two sources of funding to rebuild the uh clubhouse. One
was the insurance the the actual insurance from from that building which I think was in the neighborhood of 110 or $120,000 or something like that. And then there appeared to be some some other I don't know what it was other group of funding that they listed there had a bunch of numbers in front of it. I
don't know if it's from the state or the feds or whatever but if you combine them together it was about $186,000 and then the demolition cost would be about 8,000 they speculated. So, doing my simple math, it was about $177,000
that's potentially available, but you just because it's earmarked doesn't mean it necessarily goes to that. And the city might have other priorities. I don't know. You know, money's scarce. So, you know, you naturally say, well, if the insurance was for this building,
then it should go to replace the building, but I don't know if it pretty much has to. But so there might be a significant amount of money if we say $177,000 that could perhaps cover or probably should cover the moving of the home. Now
there might be ancillary costs and then that includes I think putting on a foundation but you know there might be power and hookups and things of that nature uh things that would cost extra money and we don't know the answer to that yet. Um, but I also know there's
been folks in the community that are willing to get involved and perhaps it can be a joint kind of effort that we could move towards, you know. So, um, I'm really just bringing this up to put it in everyone's brain so they can think about it a little bit and know that that's out there that there might be
some, you know, uh, community talk about it so so you're aware of what's going on. Um, I don't really think there's a whole much more to that other than the fact that we have to be moving quickly on it
>> because uh, you know, as Mr. Pez says, and they they want to move forward and that's totally understandable. They've they've had it they've talked about donating it for, you know, eight months now and so there's been plenty of time to go through those things. But so I
don't know if youall have any questions about it or how it might work. It's I think my understanding would be that we'd have to get it historically designated. We have to get a we'd have to get um get a certificate of appropriate appropriateness to have it
moved. I don't think I've seen one of those yet. I don't they're pretty rare. So, uh it's my understanding that in reading this that it doesn't have to get upgrades for power. It's not FEMA that you know for power for plumbing.
According to what I've read in our ordinances, it just has to be not in a dangerous condition and no worse than it was in its original condition, which would have been, I guess, the codes from 100 years ago. So, um, there's some things we've got to get go through, but
I just think it would be a >> a win. >> Yeah. Then the city could use it. It'd be like a it'd be like a nicer Warren Webster, you know, and it could plaque out there talking about its history. Oh, by the way, I have to do this. is the uh Can we turn on the overhead projector?
Can I do something here? So, this is just so uh serendipitous. I think I'm talking to my neighbor, Mr. Moore. He gave me some information on
some of the information he had on on the house, which was known as the Deacon Cottage. That was the mayor's name. We have this up. >> Yes, it's on. >> Oh, it is on. And so this is a photograph from about 1937 when this young guy on the right, he was
the mayor. And here is a picture of him in front of the shuffleboard clubhouse being presented shuffle board uh the cues, whatever they call those, from the president of the shuffleboard
clubhouse. So that's pretty pretty full circle there. So that guy's house potentially replaced that structure in the back. So my understanding I don't know what I'll try to find this out is whether the shuffleboard club was created during that time and
the reason they're giving the mayor the cues are because in thanks of him doing that or whether that was just some other PR piece. So >> hey look at those black windows. the two-tone shoes. >> Yeah, the >> the suit and the shoes.
>> Yeah, >> we've come a long way. >> I think 19 formal, >> so we clearly was live living here and the shovel board club was was rolling. But, uh, if that's not just, you know, car >> that's cool. >> And of course, this could be a nice
picture on the wall in there, right? >> Yep. So, is there a way just to do a blanketed I I don't even know what you would call it, what the blanketed variance or a blanketed approval for this structure to
then be moved so that way it could maybe just to, you know, speed things up a little bit because I know obviously the homeowner's been so kind to extend x amount of months. Is there such a thing as that? >> I don't I mean, you could probably hear
>> multip Well, multiple things at once, but they would >> historic designation application to move, >> right? >> Maybe just list off. >> No. So, we we I I'm talked to Brandon about this a while ago. I I know we can do a historic designation, which is a requirement, but it can be done boom
boom one after the other. And then the moving permit. I think I think this is how I would read it that you have to have a plan a u I guess a foundation plan engineered before they
we can issue the certificate to to move. So there would have to be somebody that gets involved and puts together, you know, is the house going to be on three feet or four feet or whatever, you know, and I think some people are looking into trying to find somebody. I It's not like
drawing that up a house. It's just a it's a relatively simple thing and I don't know how costly that would be, but but that would have to be in place before it could be moved. But then I I think once the home is moved, that doesn't mean it's ready to be occupied. There's a lot of other things that would have to
happen at that point, but that would solve the problem of moving it before it got demolished. You know, >> I I want to note that the city commission will need to vote on whether they want this to happen. Um, and before anybody gets too far down the road on
making this happen, I think it should go before the city commission. >> That was more so my question for the commission, >> right? But that but I would say two things have happened on along those lines is I think the city commission is aware of the time frame. Uh I don't know
when they next meet but in a couple weeks I would hope I don't know at the end of the meeting where they whether they asked to get get information for the next meeting or not but I'm going to hope to think that they did. Uh yeah, there's no question the city commissioners would have to be behind
it. But um you know, I think at this point I would, you know, I'm thinking if if the city commission is going to vote on something like this, they're going to want some community input and that we should go ahead and get that rolling. Now, >> that was more my question was, is there
a way that we could put something together to present to the commission for them just to give a blanketed, you know, okay, we're good with this move kind of stamp of approval. I'm sure there's going to be ADA compli compliance or things such as that unless maybe there's not because it's a
historic structure going into another historic and again, we'd have to look into that. And I think that's part of what public services is looking into as well as probably our building department if there is a considered a change of use from residential to commercial what
requirements they would have to do costs for the movement. I I there is it has come down from the city manager to look at these things um to get cost estimates in order to provide that to the city commission. So we are working diligently on our end to to kind of give
an overall view of what we feel would be required from that standpoint. And part of that would be the local historic designation all the moving parts and components to have that overview that skeleton and if we can fill in how much something's going to be so they have as
much information they have they you know we can present to make their an informed decision. I know you guys have a lot on your plates and you're doing a lot of amazing work. I mean, would it be feasible to possibly have it in front of the commission in December?
>> I know we have at least some preliminary results that we can share. It might not be, you know, very extremely extensive. I will say our meetings in December are backtoback like the 3rd and the 9th because of the holidays. So it would
just be great to be able to have some sort of a definitive for commission. >> The third would be before our next meeting. >> I'm trying to think >> would be after. >> I mean all my dates because I've got board of adjustment TRC >> and then there's November they have two
meetings upcoming but the November 11th is moved I would think because that's Veterans Day. >> So we have We have already had our November 3rd. We
are not having a we do not have an additional commission meeting in November. We've already had our meeting in November for commission. And then going into December, we have
December 2nd. My apologies. And December 9th for commission. >> So the second would be before us. >> Yeah. But nothing between now and then. >> No. >> Well, I would just I I think we're going to get
>> I'm don't want to hold him up. >> Of course not. >> We want to try and make this happen without delaying your >> Absolutely. And that's >> And the 30-day stay. Does that start today? >> No. >> Yes. when we voted on it. So, it's >> correct.
>> So, I'm hopeful there will be communication. I think there will be I know Commissioner Maldonado is behind this as far as you know it it's his district. Okay. So, I'm hopeful there will be communications about
what's happening and if push came to shove and something happened where we needed to make a some sort of a decision, I mean, we could I think this is would be worthy of having a special meeting just for that purpose if that
helps down the line. But really the purpose is this is just to make everybody aware what's going on. Okay. And and and getting more information perhaps uh in the next couple weeks which could be disseminated to you folks not through me but through the staff or through emails and things
of that nature. So um >> is this information that you want? Is this uh to help guide a decision for a recommendation that you would make to the city commission or um >> Yes, >> absolutely. >> Um because
that was really that would really be what you could do is >> Yeah. >> You know, move to your support behind this. >> Yeah. I think I think ultimately but but so much of this information has to come from the staff for us to be able to put it as a presentation of some sorts to the city commission. the staff could
could do it themselves to the city commission, but you're right, as far as steps, I think there would have to be some sort of interim meeting with us where we would decide what we want to do and how we'd go about it. So, >> we could each individually email staff and say, you know, our support behind
moving, not in a group message. I know. >> No. Well, I mean, you know, um I mean it I suppose we could we could set it for an action item for next meeting, we might as well do that.
>> Yeah. Yes. If you're going to issue a recommendation as a body to the city commission, it would need to happen at a meeting. >> Yeah. Well, of course. So, I as I said, I just want people to think about it at this stage. So why don't we put it on the calendar as an action item and then we'll know more information by that time
whether we can actually you know do something with you know >> or would we be able to make that recommendation and request from today's meeting to say you know we're in support of trying to make this >> Absolutely. Um >> and that they have that information
>> if everybody is in agreement. >> Yes. >> So does it make a difference that we so we can make a motion now on a discussion item? That's fine for us to do that. Doesn't have to be an action item. I mean, I'd be happy to do that, but >> is it a motion or just a recommendation?
>> It's a recommendation and it doesn't in support of the um Yes, you can. You can because you can um demolition on the agenda already >> and
And part of the demolition package in the staff report included the possibility of movement, did it not? It >> did talk about it. >> Yeah. That we we have met with I personally have met with other residents, you know, for what would be
included in trying to move it and would it fit on their lot. I mean, there's certain things when you're looking at an individual parcel. Would it fit? Does it meet the coverage? Is there other things that they may want to look to do on the property further down the road?
Yes, we're saving a structure, but does it does it fit their view of what they're looking to do? So, there's multiple, you know, factors and any >> and and and I want to thank you for that too because I don't I didn't really say that or think about. I know that some of
the citizens have met with staff and you've put time and effort into some things and which did not come to fruition. Uh, so I really do appreciate that >> and that's why I think >> it's to me it's the be it's and it's like Mr. PZ has said, you know, originally that's really where they
wanted it to be part of the city as opposed but that didn't seem to be uh what was going to happen back then for reasons I've said. So now it's just we're at a different time where things timing seems better, but it's going to
have to be quick. So, are you s going back to your saying we could do a recommendation at from this right now? >> Yeah. And it could be by motion or consensus. Um, >> just as a body whether you support this. Um, >> all right. Well, let's talk about it as a motion, but how would we want to
phrase it? What what do you how do you think we should call it just that we uh because it's a matter of encouraging the city council to >> we're supporting the effort supporting the idea
but time is of the essence >> staff makes a recommendation to us for approval of something under these conditions. I know. I'm just talking about the language, right? >> You know, are we just saying that we we are recommend we we're making a motion
that uh the 103 24th Avenue be historically designated and be subject to and also uh a certificate of appropriates for uh for moving. >> I wouldn't make a recommendation on those because those could come before you afterwards and those should be on
the agenda. So, we're just making we're just basically making a motion in support of the moving the moving of the residence at 10324 to the shuffle board >> or you're you're in support or of
>> make a recommendation for a commission to consider the relocation of the property located at blah blah blah to >> of a historical property. Where'd you get that gimmission for Jenny's over there? >> Let's see if she comes up.
>> Back space. Back space. Back. >> Yeah. >> So, the board is recommending that the city commission consider the relocation of the historic building located at and the address.
>> Yeah. 103 24th Avenue to the to the location of the shuffleboard clubhouse in Pasador Park which actually has an address but I can't think of what it is something 9th you know what it is
>> no >> can we should we say something in there >> 901 >> that we have about the state of demolition so it gets the idea across that this time is of the essence.
>> Well, I think they I don't think we have to say that in this because I think they know that and staff certainly knows it and it was brought up before and I think everyone's had got their instructions on that. And if it could include that there's an application
submitted for local historic designation of the structure >> and at some point an application to for a certificate appropriateness to move the historic structure. But see the way this would work is the city essentially would be doing those moving would be
asking for those certificates >> and that designation >> and that in part is why I asked for future or information on the local historic designation because it wouldn't necessarily be the pezas that are requesting that it would be the city. So
that was be part of they are no longer the applicant. a new application would be filed. So, I'd want to close out the other one if it's no longer under consideration or on the table. >> But by the same not to get too crazy here, if the if they have to withdraw it and the city has to do a new one, >> then do we have to wait 30 days to get
it in front of the the the uh board? >> So, can that be part of the suggestion to the city commission >> well for them to approve it? I mean, I would just say that the peasant I mean, if if they had it historically designated, >> right, >> right now, the city wouldn't have to do it later,
>> right? >> So, I would just say leave it a as it is at the moment because >> what's going to happen is it's going to be and this is something I've talked to the city attorney about that he's looking into. It may be a situation where before a lot of this stuff can
happen, there has to be some sort of a quick claim deed from for the house. not pay to move something that they don't own. >> Yeah. So there there's a lot of things to do. I'm just making people aware of what's going on. So uh >> I think from what madame clerk has
written down that we can advise, you know, make a recommendation to the uh commission. That's kind of all we can do today. Maybe assuming is everybody is that unanimous belief that's what we want to do? >> Yes. >> Okay.
And the shuffleboard court location is 900 Pacway. >> Thank you. >> And who's who's moving and who's seconding? >> Okay. Can you make jump up to somebody? >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second it. >> Thank you. >> Roll call, please. >> Member Dashel,
>> yes. >> Member Hurley, >> yes. >> Member Young, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Hawkinsmith, >> yes. >> Chair Lowry, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Thank you all for putting up with all that. All right. Now we're at 5D,
which uh Miss Hawkinsmith, you had an update? >> Yes. Um Gulf Beach's Historic Museum in all of its splendor will be hosting the light up the museum ceremony at sunset on Sunday, December 7th.
Have refreshments in the courtyard there. So, please join. >> Did it rain last year? >> Was it rainy last year? >> No, it didn't rain last year. >> So, so great. Okay. 5E, a public service update.
>> I think it did rain the year before. >> Publicly owned property. >> What was the time on that again, please? >> Uh, sunset. So, I think like 4:30. >> Okay. Thank you. >> They are, aren't they? Feel free to stop by on any given Monday to pull some
weeds, too. >> Every Monday morning. >> Yeah, it's fun. >> Okay. Kristen, do you have some public service updates? >> Um, yes. Asformational item 6A. Um, included in the agenda package, there
was the early draft of the um front contact front content of the uh design guide book. So, just kindly take a look at that. If you have any comments, recommendations or suggestions, bring them forward to our December meeting. We
will have a discussion on that. Also, if you haven't done so already, please do submit some photos of your preferred um historic structures or newly constructed buildings for inclusion into the design guide book. And if you do happen to have street addresses, that would be great,
but it is a game staff plays of name that house. So, we could do a flash card and turn it over and see who wins. Um the other item I had uh for a standing item update on city- owned resources. I
know cher chair Lowry has commented on that the city commission on Monday's meeting did approve for the demolition of the shuffleboard court. Um 6C updates from public services and speaking with Camden the director of public services.
You may have noticed some bricks had come out of 8th Avenue. They are fully aware of that. They are working on um city staff replacing those bricks back in. So that's trying to get scheduled. >> Can I Thank you. And on the design guide book I So we I can understand we don't
really need to talk about that today especially or in any detail because it's on you've put it on for next month's calendar. But, you know, I I I look through that and and I just want to say, forget maybe some of the stuff I did in the beginning, but whoever put the rest
of together, it w was an excellent job. Can I say thank you to you or did I say somebody else? Uh, I thought it was really, really well done. But there's a couple things I just want to mention so we can maybe talk about
next month is can I do this on the developmental history? Um in that paragraph as you go this kind of near the bottom of page two talks about uh prevailing architectural styles of
the era including craftsman bungalow Medit revival and a handful of colonial well we don't have met train revival as a subset later on and I think we probably should okay you do mention at the very end that there's other things such as Mediterranean revival but
there's enough nice houses there that I think >> okay We probably should. And then so is that is the idea that we would have in those subsets where we're talking about the different styles, we go ahead and have photographs of those examples at
that point. I that would make sense. >> That is that is the idea that we have. Yes. >> So so as you said for the people who have want to contribute photographs whatever those are kind of the areas we're looking for examples of. Right. Okay. Now,
um, the other thing, and I talked to Brandon about this before at some of the meetings, we talked about this at the end of this again, which I'm going to say I think was really, really well done. At one point we had talked about having
some separate sections that have photographs or or some uh um written words because I never want to say some description of historic homes that have had additions
to them. Okay? because I think it's important that when someone looks at a guide a guide book and if they you know have are buying historic house they know they can also put additions on them and and here's a couple examples of some good homes that have that
also and we don't have to do this but you know there's been there has been some successful homes that have been moved on pass historic homes we might want to have a couple pictures of those so so people know that they can actually you know move these things. And then
even more importantly, maybe when we talked about this, having a a set of photographs of new structures that fit the architectural aesthetic that we that we like.
>> Okay, >> understood. And that that could all be part of when you guys are out there. >> Exactly. So that's >> Tell us tell us the story behind it. Um >> Okay. If you have dates, if you have >> addresses, >> addresses when it was done, especially
if it's additions, if you have even prior, I mean, we can look back on Google Streets if we have them or in our records, but any help that you can help us develop this would be fantastic. >> Okay. But again, I'm going to say that I I I have my red pen out. I didn't even do anything. So,
>> that's okay. Save it for next save that or you can email it to us prior to the to uh >> the red pen might be over there in that collection. >> Just knock that down. Just knock that down. Um okay. >> So I have a question. The photos that we're submitting is there, you know,
someone at some point going to send out a professional photographer to take photos of those things or are we expect to do our best? And they're >> I would try your best. Um, but if there's certain angles or certain, you know, other elements as we um go through
this process, maybe close-ups on things. I I don't know how. >> Do we need to have Brandon in there for scale? >> Please be in every picture, right? >> I have done that to him while we've been posting um some pictures and then added it into the city manager weekly report.
So, that has been part of the fun as well. So, yeah. >> Well, thank you so much. That was really good. Okay. Anything else on we need to discuss? Okay. Ajourn. >> Thank you all. >> Good talk. [Applause]