e e e e e e e e please stand for the pledge of allegiance to United States of America
the which stands one nation under God indivisible for liberty and justice for all okay folks welcome to the historic preservation board meeting for March 6 2025 uh Madam Court I mean Madam clerk
would you do do a roll call please member Hurley present member young present Vice chair Hawkins Smith pres member dashel here chair Lowry yes we have a quorum okay uh we'll do the approval of
the agenda um before we get what's already on the agenda does anybody have anything they'd like to add as a discussion item for today's uh meeting I would like to add a discussion item just sharing all the local businesses that have reopened in
pass of girl okay so we'll call that discussion item 5D anybody have anything else all right I would like to add a discussion item to talk about uh the Mary pier and the shuffle board
building we'll call that five E okay anybody had an opportunity to look at the agenda and have any kind of motions for that oh chair yes I'm sorry that had one item for a the owner has asked to withdraw so that will not be heard which one is that again that is 4
a okay that any discussion items you'd like Brandon uh none to have no all right well I've looked at the uh agenda and I would ask that we I'd move that we approve the agenda for today second
Madam clerk yes Vice chair Hawkin Smith yes member dashel yes member Hurley yes chair Lowry yes motion carries okay um this is a portion of the meeting
folks out there which which is for audience comments which you have 3 minutes to come up and talk on some subject um of your choice basically however if you're here to talk about a specific some action matter then you can wait and speak at that point so if
you're here just to speak about something in general now as your opportunity to do that otherwise you know wait if you filled out when that happens you have to come up give your name and your address so you identify yourself okay does anybody want to speak about any general
matters okay let's move on the next low I think we missed approval of the minutes I thought we just did wasn't I know this that's what I'm going to do now oh okay yeah you skip according to this audience comments becomes before approval of the minutes so so now let's
talk about the minutes has anybody had an opportunity to read the minutes from last month's meeting I have I go ahead and move to approve second that motion roll call please Vice chair hackin Smith yes member dashel yes member Hurley yes
member young yes Lowry yes motion carries okay so now we're on to action items uh as we just said 4A has been removed so we're now at 4B which is the local historic designation number 24108 for the property located or
properties located at 3215 and 3217 East deason Avenue Brandon do you have this uh this Gil Martinez but uh city city clerk can we swear in anybody speaking today please can indeed anybody who will be speaking to the board or presenting
please stand up raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the information or factual representation that you're about to give to the board is truthful thank
you okay Mr Martinez good afternoon board Mr board and chair and and board members where's the quicker guys coming sorry the item before you today is a request for local historic designation by Deborah Warner for Deborah Warner
revocable trust and Diane and Kevin O'Brien for the property located at 3215 and 3217 East of bosin the application is requested local historic designation for a multiple multif family duplex structure located
at said address here are a couple of images of the property dating back to 2014 and 2019 in its historic background it is located within the doncesar place Community it is an area that was ploted by Thomas Row the developer of the Don
CeSar Hotel it was originally housed for VA workers and nurses and it generally contributes to the Don CeSar Place neighborhood's character it was built in 1949 at a Mediterranean Revival Style with stucco walls and Spanish style roof
it's cement block construction ceramic tile floors and cement tile gable roof both um units feature sun rooms with views directly of the Don CeSar Hotel staff supports this application to
locally designate 3215 and 3217 East of bosin Avenue as historic property St finds that the building is significant in the following areas it embodies a distinctive visible characteristic of an architectural style in Period and it's also associated with the life of a
person who played a significant role in in our community we bring forward a motion to approve case number 24108 for local historic designation of the multif family duplex structure at 3215 3217
East of bosin Avenue the applicant is here to the applicants are here to answer any questions you may have as well as I am okay anybody have any questions for Mr Martinez you know would the applicants
like to come forward and speak no one wants to come forward you don't necessar have to but it's your opportunity I'm sorry let me get my mic better uh this is an opportunity for you to come up and speak to the board if you'd like to you don't necessarily have to but uh some people
like to brag about their houses so okay well I guess I have a question or two these are those duplexes that I don't know there was a woman in here that's you from before we talked about this right okay and so the only question I would have and I'm sure this has all
been done is both the duplex is owned by two different parties and that's each one of you correct so you're both in agreement on this all right that's the only questions I had um anybody else have any questions no well I would just say that
I think these are what it's worth I know there's a number of them there they were probably all built around 49 this the first time I've heard that I guess it was mainly for the the nurses and uh staff there when Don the Don was a hospital I guess which is pretty neat so uh I have no other comments on that
but I will make a motion that we go ahead and approve for local historic designation case number 24108 the residents of 3215 and 3217 East de Basin Avenue I'll second that motion all call please member Dashi yes
member Hurley yes member young yes Vice chair Hawkins Smith yes chair low yes motion carries okay next we have 4C Lo local historic designation number 25011 for the residents at 1031 17th Avenue hi
ly hello good good afternoon good morning I'm going morning God it's part of the day I've been up a long time today it's all the same it's all the same I'm Lyn Rosetti a contract historic
planner for the city and my case is case number 2511 Cheryl Callahan is the owner and as well as her she has a revocable trust she's not able to be here today after I finish my presentation I'm going to she
asked me to read a statement which I will do all right so this property is located at 1031 17th Avenue and it's considered to it is a single family one-story minimal
traditional residential structure it was constructed in 1947 it has uh some distinguishing architectural features including a hip roof one one over one double hung vinyl sash Corner windows with projecting
Sills overhanging Eaves arched louvers and Cuban tile it further features an exterior chimney and this is really a very well-preserved mid-century house there are more photographs in the application which did
not get into the staff the presentation but they are really it's really a nice house well taken care of well maintained the histor prop I keep forgetting this okay take
this is the house you can see it's uh looks very well maintained staff is supporting this application to locally designate 103 17th Avenue as a historic property staff finds that the building is significant in the following areas it reflects the
broad cultural economic and social history of the P Grill neighborhood and St Pete Beach it's also are reflective of Pastor grills and St Pete Beach's Community Planning and Development efforts staff is recommending a motion to approve case number
25011 for local historic designation of the single family structure located at 103 17th Avenue U let me [Applause] see at this point I'm done with my presentation unless you've got any
questions I will go ahead and read the letter from Miss Callahan that's yeah go ahead Glen okay Dear Miss Rosetti I cannot attend tomorrow's meeting of the St Pete Beach historic preservation board and ask this
email statement be included submitted in the public records I own 103 17th Avenue and strongly advocate for preservation for our community's historic structures I'm proud to say that how my 1947 home
stands today there is nothing short of a miracle an original footprint and most of her vintage features represents such a happy and simple time a period marked with Fresh Starts after World War II the house reflects the character and
Heritage of our P gril community and is meticulously maintained 103 is a tough old broad that stood strong during the devastating hurricanes we had in 2024 well 103 is resilient 103 is history
wrapped in Nostalgia for to me I hope I hope you find this structure as worthy for local historic designation as I do if there are any questions or concerns that cannot be addressed in my absence today I kindly ask that your decision be
deferred so that I can attend the next meeting and then she also attached the optional noticing waiver and I gave a copy of that to Brandon so that I could speak for her and she not appear here today if you
have any questions I'll be glad to answer them otherwise thank you thank you so I have a question Lyn so it's a single family is there a second unit on noer there is not no one unit I have intimate knowledge of that property no there's only one single family home two
bedrooms one bath I think you were the realtor yes I know Cheryl told me anybody else you may have that thank you it is it is a a home that does fit
the nature of our beach and she's kept it that way she's been very very good at taking care of it yeah I just saw a couple pictures and then my screen went blank that you know a little I just lost I just lost everything too and I wasn't sure if happened but I lost everything
on my tablet also yeah mine's still blank but he Str through that's all right I mean for the purposes what we have here uh yes I don't know if we need more too much disc discussion considering this is probably an ideal
example of you know post World War II at Bungalow I moved to go ahead and improve I'll second that motion roll call please member Hurley yes young yes Vice chair Hawkin Smith
yes member Dash yes chair Lowry yes motion carries and just for the record that's designation number 25011 1031 13th Avenue 17th Avenue 17th excuse me yeah 1031 17th yeah I think I
said 13th I apologize okay now we're going on to 4D local historic designation number 25012 of the home at 3215 West Marana Drive ask [Applause]
Martinez use this one if you need to okay thank you are you doing something with the quicker over there try to good afternoon board Gil Martinez senior planner before you is a request for local historic design designation
for the property located at 3215 maritana Drive case number 25012 the applicant Gregory cadell for Gregory cadell revocable trust is requesting a local historic designation for the single family structure located
at said address it's a beautiful home just to start off with this um this placard is on the structure how it got here what its history is we we really don't know but it's pretty interesting they were offered early on
where you could contact the company directly and go ahead and get your own Medallion when it was designated back in the early 2000s good to know thank you um couple of images of the home current image and a 2014
image an image of the home the home also has two features associated with the which is the dock uh to the front as well as a carriage house that was added um some years ago but was not part of the original construction it's very
complimentary in its design to the overall um architectural features of the single family home some interior shots that you know really frame the beauty the internal beauty of the home as well as how how it
interacts with the outside this is a very interesting image of the home back in well we really don't know the year but um as you can see the Don CeSar was under construction and um it's notable that this was actually the home
of Thomas R while the Don CeSar was being built it was built in 1927 by Thomas R the architect for the Don CeSar its Mediterranean Revival Style um it has direct views to the Don CeSar
Hotel during its construction comes with a soundtrack too I like that yeah right um it's red clay tile roof stucco exterior arched entryways spiral columns shape par parit circular vent
it's got 10 light casement windows with one light fixed window and Arch trans transoms original Arch top wood slab door and shredded shred roof porch supported by stucco
columns staff recommends approval of the for local historic designation of the residential structure located at 3215 West maritana drive because a embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of an architectural style and it's also
associated with the life of a person who played a significant role in our community we recommend motion to approve case number 25012 for local historic designation of the single family residents at 3215 West maritana Drive
I'm here to answer any questions that I may and is the applicant is here as well to answer any questions you may have anybody have any questions for Mr Martinez I do not Mr cadel do you wish to come up and speak to
us we' love to hear from you so come on up please state your name for the record please uh Gregory cadell so I just want to uh say a quick thanks to the board for the important work you're doing for uh historic uh
preservation um espe speci thanks to Tia who connected me with this house in 2019 and it's been a a pleasure to live there um it's important to me and I think it's important to um the community
to have this Des destination or this designation um just coming up here with my sister we drove by the Dawn and the the extensive amount of restoration that's going on there really shines a light on the importance of EV everybody
connected to that that's not going to go away even though it was threatened years ago to disappear it didn't and I think all the connecting um uh houses should be um get get an extra um bit of
importance in in their designation but anyway thank you so much and the spirit of Thomas row uh they say the Don's haunted so so I'm getting a little vibe that you guys have to pass this you know
just saying so um it's not a threat but yeah but anyway thank you so much thank you Mr canel appreciate it any questions you know you're the perfect fit for that house and I knew you would take good care of it and love it thank you so much
to I appreciate that so much I'm going to make a motion that we approve local historic designation to 25012 uh 3215 West maritana Drive second
we call please Vice chair huin Smith yes member dashel yes member Hurley yes member young yes Lowry yes motion carries all right okay moving on to 4E certificate
of appropriateness for the restoration of case number number 25017 which is the address of 3401 Casablanca Avenue Lynn good afternoon again Lyn
rosed um this okay the property owners of this local Historic Landmark are requesting a certificate of appropriateness to replace the outdoor rear patio that was severely damaged during
the H during Hurricane helina we may have a picture of it in this if not it's it's in your part of your packet so this prop the house was built in 1936 the property is was included in the
city's first historic survey undertaken in the mid1 1980s a Florida Master site file was submitted to the state in 1987 in addition 341 Casablanca was locally designated a Historic Landmark
in 1996 but that was before the city was a local certified local government and so consequently on July 9th was it on the 9th I think that that's what it was it was locally landmarked on July
9th 2020 I remember doing the case and furthermore the 2024 historic survey of Donar place and belista neighborhoods uh the historic Consultants that did that survey noted
that this particular house Thomas row house they felt was one of two properties that they had surveyed between B Vista and Don CeSar that was eligible for National register listing I I have inform the owner of
that 341 Casablanca Avenue is a very good example of the mission style of architecture back when we redid the historic designation there was a certificate of appropriateness that went with it that included for and also
included a FEMA variance so I don't know if all of those projects have been finished but if the property owner wants to continue and do any of those projects they don't have a date of expiration if you recall and so um they can get a list
from us in the building department we keep that record in our building permit information and we also record any FEMA variants and the list that has been approved we record that with the county
so that's part of the property appraiser records that they can find out I say that the current record the current uh work is to replace the outdoor screen patio and that was not part of what was reviewed in
2020 let's see some pictures of the house you can see the screen enclosure there and post hurricane you can see what it looked like it has that part has all been removed they've gotten the they've demoed
it and it looks like that now this is shows the proposed elevations staff supports the request for this certificate of appropriateness to replace the severely damaged outdoor patio in the same footprint as the former uh hurricane destroyed covered
patio and find it consistent with the city of St Pete Beach Land Development code staff is recommending approval of the proposed certificates of appropriateness I will be glad to answer any questions that you may have if not I
know that the applicant is here and probably is anxious to speak to you okay I have a couple questions okay um just so I'm clear I think you said stated it all but I want to make sure so this was designated historic before we the city
had its own certification but it's been redesignated that second designated in 2020 yes right okay good and and then they did a the FEMA variance was pursuant to this being in historic structure and as you said maybe some of that's been done maybe some of it hasn't
but they can continue on it because there's no expiration date for that that's correct okay that's correct they can they can check with with us and see what is on that list and you know they they would be free to get a permit and
do that other do that work and is that done and that's great but Brandon is that still what's going I thought we had a I thought the other day someone was talking about you have to do within a certain amount of time I mean I'm glad you don't but is you know what I'm talking about it seems like we talked
about if you have if you get the permit maybe it's just pulling a permit you have to do the permit within a certain amount of time we have time limits on permits but not on certificates gotcha okay good and the only thing Lynn that I was going to say is is obviously they're redoing this open porch but they're adding a roof
structure that's similar to the original House's roof yes not so it doesn't have a metal flat roof if it actually has a a it will hopefully look a little better yes exactly okay this I thought that was a nice touch as well okay um anyone have
any more questions for Lyn so that that new roof is not adding living area correct not outdoor okay it's still going to be a porch or patio covered patio and the outdoor fireplace that's replacing what was previously
there was not I don't believe there was an outdoor no uh fire fireplace but I don't think I thought about that a lot but it's I don't think it's anything that needs a certificate of appropriateness for because it's kind
of contained inside you're not really going to see it from outside looks great and it matches the other and it matches the house other feature on the uh chimney I guess on the on the main house it does all right anybody else thank you
thank you does the property owner want to be heard here first let me tell you thank you for I guess that's a recent purchase for you guys beautiful house thanks for coming in and doing this it's really a great addition for a long time so anything you
want to tell us or no my name's uh Brian Jordan my wife and I are here I'm an architect as well I just wanted to give a big thanks to the board and all the city staff I think this has been horrendous for everyone involved in these storms um our goal is to keep this house historic and spend as much money
as we need to to make sure it matches the neighborhood and just continues following the tradition of the neighborhood so um I really appreciate your your time today and hope you agree with what we're doing yeah well we appreciate what you've done very much it's
a beautiful house and it's a beautiful addition or you know fix up you want to do to it so thank you so for that keeping it historical is great y absolutely and that was our goal when we purchased it we fell in love with the home the neighborhood so it's important to us that everything matches and it's
period correct now do you have ghosts in your house too or do you know well I'm thinking that we do now after the storm but uh hopefully not okay good all right thank you sir appreciate that anybody else have any questions okay thank you sir thank you
anybody have a motion I would like to make a motion that we Grant a certificate of appropriateness for restoration number 250 17341 Casablanca Avenue I second it Madam clerk roll call please member
dashel yes member Hurley yes member young yes Vice chair hackin Smith yes chair Lowry yes motion carries okay okay uh 4f certificate of appropriateness for the demolition uh number
25014 of 1807 passor girl way who's handling that we can get the PowerPoint pulled up please thank you Brandon okay this is a certificate of
appropriateness for demolition of 1807 pass away case number 25014 applicant and owners are Victor tonis and Wendy Hopwood owners the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of the contributing single family
residents here's some photographs of the structure showing it in 2015 on the left when it was picked up in the city's local historic resources survey uh showing the structure on the right I met with the applicant very shortly after
the storm um had been considering a few different options and um I know he's present today could give some input on um the choice to demolish but here are some photos of the Interior the structure as well as the
exterior as as stated every other meeting um the board cannot deny demolition permits because this structure is a contributing resource a stay of up to 30 days could be placed on the demolition uh to discuss preservation incentives with the
owner and here are the criteria that we look at um when reviewing these requests staff recommends approval of the request without any stay uh the structure is scale appropriate they did a very good job with the recent addition to the rear of the structure um and helping to preserve its scale mass and
architecture however it's not one of the remaining uh examples of the masonry vernacular style in passer Grail we do have a large number of ranch style residences especially in the Don CeSar neighborhood um and so that style is well represented in other areas of the city um Additionally the structure has
clearly sustained significant damage from the storm is justified by the applicant as it is a single family residence um there's nothing peculiar about the structure that would prevent it from being rebuilt um in a FEMA comply and and possibly scale um appropriate manner um just as long as it
complies with the setbacks lot coverage and and height limitations that would be imposed in any other structure in passag grail staff does not find any limitations in place to prevent the applicant from building a new residents of a similar character on the subject property so if the board seeks any
testimony from the applicant um that would be appropriate however we do recommend approval of case number 25014 for demolition of the residents at 1807 pass gril way any have any questions for
Brandon I do not I'd like to make a motion to go ahead and approve the demolition of the property okay don't want to hear from anybody that's fine I well it's we can just jump right ahead that's fine by me because didn't mean to didn't mean to jump ahead it's just you know what you know at the end of the day
we should call for the opportunity for anybody to speak on it anybody would like to speak good afternoon board I'm Victor tonis and Wendy my fiance and I have owned the uh property uh since 2017 we love the house we love the
neighborhood um it's you know uh hard for me to ask to demolish it but uh it was devastated uh the location that we're at um at the bottom of the channel where the open
water comes in and just funnels right in it just is like a direct hit I mean we we had a huge surge that bombed our house so we had about 39 in of water inside totally flooded uh the out side
just to give you an idea the historic masonry wall that we had that was like 6 feet tall and 90 ft long just reduced to Rubble um we had two decks in the backyard with a hot tub filled with water just washed away so I think we
were one of the hardest hit like in passag gr because of our location um so it it's been a a big big struggle uh we did a lot of research um I have to thank brand bar uh very much for uh answering a lot of my questions
and spending time with me and explaining the different intricacies of the rules and rs and you know uh codes uh concerning St Pete Beach and passig and even rzone uh there's a line while line
that comes right through our property and that AE Zone in particular um requires Breakaway walls there's there's certain addition items that you need to do if you're going to build up so I I learned I came into this pretty knowledgeable we
weighed out building on the ground we wanted to do that we weighed out um elevating abandoning the first floor building on a second floor and then finally demolishing and we realize that at our age and our stage of Life uh we
want to move forward in a peaceful more you know uh um strategic IC way where we can just sort of relax not keep our fingers crossed every year uh as hard as it is um we have made a decision to
rebuild an elevated home uh we we've found a good Builder Joe Walsh of Walsh design and build uh they have proposed to us a very nice Coastal style home uh
we're deciding to uh stay small uh this home would be be elevated of course in compliance with St Pete Beach FMA and all the you know uh setbacks and everything it'll be less square footage than what we currently have now we have
a livable 23 I think 2350 square feet I think this home the living space will be about 1,900 or 2,000 square fet um the coastal um style of the house I think would blend very
nicely in St Pete Beach um you know we're trying to keep with that character we're trying to keep as much as we can with um not standing out but um keeping the character of the community and um this will be as
hurricane proof as possible uh we'll of course be using the club Breakaway walls but uh for the ground floor but we'll also have a a cement building with uh metal hurricane Clips you know everything you need to be as hurricane
proof as possible um you know basically uh that's that's our idea uh that's why I'm here today to uh propose that we um as hard as this is move move forward with it as
soon as we can thank you if there's any questions I'm happy to answer them I don't think I any questions but I would say that you this is very well thought through we appreciate when people do that um I like what you're saying I we totally understand and uh
let's hope your new home is as nice as it sounds like it's going to be I didn't mean to jump the gun but I took the pictures that he originally received After the Storm yeah there wasn't any question about this one really but yeah all right well um with that being
said Thank you Mr tonis I will do make a motion to Grant the certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of 1807 pass W which is demolition number 25014 four thank you so we had a motion
on the floor do you want to Second oh second okay yes the earlier one correct yes roll call please Madam clerk thank you member young yes Vice chair hackin Smith yes member dashel yes member Hurley yes chair Lowry yes motion
carries thank you Mr Thomas okay now we go to 4G of certificate of appropriateness for the demolition uh number 25010 or4 808 passor R way and chair for this one we do have a recusal um yes M
dasel yes so I Danielle and Desi hereby disclosed that on March 6 2025 um a measure came and is coming before the agency uh that will be of benefit or
special gain or loss of my relative Mary Joe Mish this is for certificate of appropriateness for demolition number 25010 808 pass R way and Mary J Mish request a certificate of appropriateness for
demolition okay thank you who's presenting this that'll be me you can pull the PowerPoint please so this is certificate of appropriateness 25010 for 808 pass away this is a commercial structure with a residence the applicants requesting his
certificate of appropriateness for demolition of the contributing twostory retail building and one-story outbuilding structure at the subject property here's some historic photographs you can see on the left from the one of the original property cards
uh Circa 1936 uh this was also one of the structures that was included on the 1989 National register historic district designation list of photographs you can see it on the right there and then unfortunately the state uh today these were some staff
photographs that were taken showing fairly extensive d damage to the structure from the outside there are some additional photographs supplied by the applicant in your packet same standards um this is not a locally designated historic race source so any stay imposed on the issuance of
the certificate of appropriateness would be limited to 30 days uh staff recommends approval without delay of the demolition of the contributing structure and contributing garage of the property uh it's evident through photos as well as the city's own assessment that the primary structur
sustain significant damage from recent hurricanes St finds an unreasonable to require remediation given the extent of damage uh the existing use of the property is commercial that is a permitted use in the zoning District the crde the applicant would not be prevented from establishing a similar
structure use on the property when and if they choose to redevelop um there is some additional development potential available to the uh to the site over and above what is currently on the the site uh the applicant also could also reestablish uper story residences if
they desire if adequate testimonies is provided to the findings of the board um we recommend a motion to approve this case for the demolition of the contributing structures at 808 pass gril way that's all from
staff okay um before we I just want to go back for a moment to make sure Madam clerk on the last one we did um which was 4f I I think uh Mr Hurley mentioned we would be waving the
30-day wait I just want to make sure we did lat to the motion say that I just want to make sure that that's in the record okay good all right so let's go back here to forg uh does anybody want to speak on behalf of
this not necessary but just wondering okay one question I have though Brandon is because this is I know it's been used lately as a commercial building but originally it was a single family residence now last
week we had an issue about the testimony of of the new per the owner realizing if he they demolish they can't rebuild as a single family residence have you gotten that information that that you need for that well I believe the applicant is here he may want to speak and he is
authorized to speak on behalf of this case but they did identify as residential over retail already ready in the in the Testament okay I mean it does say yeah I mean if it's they stated that already it's page page we don't need to go
through this again um it's not him it's the owner which I'm I'm sure it wants to do that as well I'm just asking from this from the city's point of view whether we've satisfied that requirement I know it would be and I'm willing to go forward with that I'm just wondering if
we're okay on that I believe so yeah I mean I know Mr could will go through that again since he's not the owner but I know Miss mlit is here and I assume she recognizes what I'm talking about and realizes yes so there you go you just said yes so that satisfies the the
the testimonial aspect of it okay anybody else have any questions about this for anybody all right um I'll make a motion to Grant the certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of
25010 808 pass a girl away it's a great old house but I know it got destroyed and you know what else we going to do so I'll second that motion Madam clerk roll call please Vice chair Hawkin Smith yes member
dashel oh I'm sorry member Hurley yes member young yes chair Lowry yes motion carries and oh also we didn't talk about this do we want to do the waiver 30 days on this as well I don't see any reason why not to consider 30 days I W 30 days
so let's add that to there thank you all right let's move on to four H certificate of appropriat for the demolition uh case number 25031 of 110 15th Avenue thank you chair
you pull with PowerPoint this is the last certificate of appropriateness for the day 110 15th Avenue case 2501 31 Samuel Irvin for Johnny Francisco of Tulia Homes Real Estate development and LLC applicant is
requesting a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of the contributing twostory Hurley Park Apartments at the subject property here's some photographs showing the photo from the property card on the left circuit 1936 and a photo on the right from the
2015 historic resources survey here's some post storm photos this is a contrib structure any delay would be limited to 30 days to discuss preservation incentives staff recommends approval of the demolition of the contributing
residential structure at 110 15th Avenue structure does possess both clear internal architectural integrity and a scale appropriate for the area uh however there has been significant damage sustained to the structure and it is apparent uh staff finds a struct structure to have sustained substantial
damage staff does not find it to be viable to preserve the structure uh we do request as with the other cases where the property or the structure itself were in these situations that the applicant acknowledge that the property cannot be redeveloped with a multif family structure unless the form mass
and developed square footage of the structure Remains the Same after development um we we've addressed this through the overlay amendments that may change slightly um based on the adoption of the new overlay but by and large the living square footage of the structure and the scale and mass would need to
stay the same under any kind of Redevelopment scenario if a multif family structure were to be um retained um if they were to rebuild with a single family they would not face those limitations so with that acknowledgement of that restriction um from the
applicant we would request a motion to approve case 25031 for demolition of the residence of the subject property okay so here we are again so we do we have the owner here yes oh you are here okay would you come for you
understand what the question is right or what being posed to you that you know it's a multi-use structure now multi-unit okay there you go that's Brandon's been amazing through the process well all we needed you was to
say not that he was amazing but say that you're you understand you can't rebuild a three a three unit building on that same plot that's any larger than what it currently exists if you switch to a single family you're fine yeah sing family okay good that's all we needed know thank you sir can we please have him State his name for the
record I apologize I'm sorry state your name for the record John Francisco all right thank you sir all right anybody else have any motion go ahead I move that we Grant a certificate of appropriat for demolition
number 25031 at 115th Avenue we 30 days I'll second that motion uh Madam clerk roll call member Hurley yes member young yes Vice chair hogin Smith yes
member dashel yes chair Lowry yes motion carries okay now we go on to 4i which is a recommendation well let me just do this do you want well I guess we'll just go forward this recommendation of ordinance 20
25-7 in 20258 to the city commission Brandon you want to talk about this so I just have a brief presentation on this if we could pull it up so this has been a long time coming um these are the corresponding ordinances for the pass gril historic
overlay district and the crd 8th Avenue District that's 20257 and 08 uh staff made minor changes following what we perceive to be consensus from the January workshop for the pass gril historic overlay amendments uh the first
is that all new developments that are accessible from a public alley must provide driveway access solely from that alley um through the design review process the historic preservation board will be empowered to provide a waiver rather than a variance of this
requirement and design review if the alley is under 15 ft in width if the applicant is seeking any kind of waiver from this standard and the alleyway is 15 F feet or greater they would need to get a variance that would then move on to the board of adjustment after recommendation from the historic
preservation board um there was another discussion point that was brought up and I seem there seemed to be consensus that pool must still meet the required setbacks but they are permitted to be placed in the front of the residents so that would be the one exemption to our accessory structure standard that
requires accessory structures behind the residents uh there were no changes based on that meeting made to the crd 8 Avenue district there appeared to be consensus that uh those that that ordinance was in in a good place um obviously one of the
major components of this ordinance is the design guide book we will be bringing that back to you likely prior to moving this on to the city commission but we did want to get this queued up for moving on to the planning board that'll be the next stop and then we'll have two discussions before City
commission um I believe at both of those meetings I sense that both the board and the commission and we're relatively happy with the Amendments as they were but if there are any significant changes we'll certainly bring those back to you anything minor I'll I'll address through a staff report unless the board finds
differently but if if anything comes out of the recommendation from the planning board I'll I'll I'll bring that back to this board to discuss before moving it forward and then we'll have the design guide book for you likely in the next two to three months is there anything else that the board would like to discuss on either of these ordinances
before I have one question with regard to the pool in the front does that change any of our guidelines as far as fencing in the front yards with respect to safety requirements for pool fencing and enclosures not directly or at least not
based on the floor of pool code um we do allow for fences up to four feet in the front yard and that would be met with a new development um and that would meet the Florida pool code the gate latch would need to be at 54 in so that would extend just a bit about Beyond bit above
that but um again that setback is based on where the front of the home is established so if they were to have the gate latch further back toward the side of the house that would be fine okay question I have I think you said up but I just want to clarify a little bit because I'm concerned to want
to get more clarification about the timing of this and so the next thing we're going to do without doing anything is go to the planning board is that right correct so we're not going to have a designed guide book for the planning board that is going to look at what we have done so far basically it would just
it would be based on the code amendments we will bring the guide book back to you before this moves no I understand that and so so but obviously we can't go in front of the city commission to get this improved until the guide book is in play or can we with the condition that the
guide book would be forthcoming given that there's requirements in the ordinance to comply with the guide book or to show how a structure is meeting the designed guide book requirements I would at least
like for it to go that would need to be in place and accepted by the board prior to Second raing so prior to adoption but it could be possible that we could have first reading prior to but it would have to be before second reading anyway correct okay so obviously what I'm getting at is you know the quicker we
could get this done the better especially with all the natural you know demolitions and changes that are going on down there uh and split your estimate it might be a couple months before we can get the guide book together I you know I think if we were
to have it in between first and second reading that might that might work well um I would sorry go ahead I was I was thinking probably about two to three months for the guide book okay is there any and and I know you're super busy so
I'm not you know I don't not at all challenging your you know work ethic by any means but is there is there anything people on the board can do to help facilitate the speeding up of that process because I mean with a workshop or something I do have for your Workshop
but you know we and again you're the expert on this you know we have a couple already previous kind of guide books that'll give us um a lot of guidance I guess why that's why they're guide books but um you know I just would hate to
wait two or three months before we can get some of this done with the rate of new homes being you know either built and old homes being knocked down and stuff so any suggestions or we can think to try to accelerate this does the city can they I don't say they can bring
somebody in I don't know I mean I'm you know I'm just asking so our consultant Tera salary is going to be handling the guide book she has provided these and and developed these guide books for other communities which is why she's able to get it done in the at the rate she is um what I
believe I can probably bring back next month is the basis that she'll be using for the guide book she already has some of that information available so I can share it with the board and maybe just get a preliminary go ahead on that um just to make sure that we're going the
right direction with the book so when we bring it back to you there may not need to be extensive changes that that there would be otherwise well I'm wondering and and I'm not I'm only speaking for myself okay so I don't know about the rest of the board but if they all agree that this is kind of a I guess one one
of the good things is Tara isn't a beach resident so she maybe don't have to deal with all the hurricane uh mess that the rest of you had you know or that you have on your plate but could or should it be a situation where we could meet in
two weeks or instead of a month or in six weeks or something just on that thing to try to move that along I mean I I'm I'm serious when I say I think every week can make a difference you know uh I'm just want do you all agree with me on that we want to push this as fast as
we can well we have momentum now and this has been what two two and a half years in the making and yeah I mean I think if we hadn't had the hurricane I think we would already have done this would you agree with that but you everything got pushed back because of that but because of the hurricane
there's a lot of new things happening that you know to preserve whatever degree we can preserve the historic nature down there you know we rather do it as quick as we can after this I can coordinate with the clerk's office on that um you know in terms of Staffing
we'll just need to make sure that it you know can it can work out for a special meeting but I I wouldn't have any issue with that I mean if we have to do that and you can certainly we can have a talk about that too but does everyone kind of agree that if we that you know if we can accelerate this that's a good thing I
think it's of utmost importance but I also think if tarot and I'm not sure legally if it would be permissible but if she could email each of us um the basis for the guide book just whenever as soon as she would have it maybe at her fingertips and then that way we would have a chance to start looking it
over perhaps Gathering our thoughts because I know you all have so much on your plates and then maybe obviously we can't talk amongst ourselves but perhaps we could then communicate either back with Tara for any feedback or or anyone out of out of the team for that matter
just as a thought be just I don't know if that's that can that can be done as long as we're bringing we're not communicating with each other we're bringing it all in with everybody we'll listen to Council on this one I I would suggest that the guide book is
distributed um not through Tara but probably through staff to each person individually and then um you can each submit your feedback um to staff to provide to her but if there's any sort of decision to be made any action the board really needs to be
together to vote on that um and so that's what I would be concerned about and so I yeah for sure I get that I think yes the as Danielle's point is we would be preloaded to talk about these things as opposed to I think it would be a better idea to just have the items that each of you want to discuss um
ready for a meeting where everybody can discuss that all at once um and if if you guys had a consensus on holding another meeting um now then we could organize that and then okay so let me
ask you this but I think it would be better to discuss it out in the open in the public sure so so the suggestion would be or we could do it potentially do it this fashion terara could provide whatever information information she has or will have in the short term to staff
staff provides that to us we then have a meeting where we talk about that for the first time but we already know what tera's already done is that what you're saying yes okay I think that makes sense so it's just going to be a matter though if you got in contact with teror to find
find out when she's comfortable maybe passing that stuff along and then if we can just go ahead and pass it along then at that point probably by the next meeting we'll know whether we need to set a quicker meeting does that make sense that makes sense all right good
thank you I have a question about the cdea um I may be misreading this but in section 40.8 Building height it states that should not exceed 35 ft above grade except for providing for elevation
structures and when you go down to H on page 370 it turns around and backs up on itself so and I think that's what we had discussed with the board previously the 35 height 35 ft height from so it has no
teeth in it so they can build 35 ft above minimum base FL elevation again site those those to me again Sean please so I can follow you here okay so the item that is where's the maximum height I just
lost it section 40.8 Building height has a whopping one sentence that refers to section 4.44 and when you go to 4014 item h it basically says that you can do whatever you want so I don't I don't believe that was
the intent I'll just I know it wasn't the intent what's what's an H is for those structures that are built allows anything that can get built above base flood elevation can go 35 ft in the air above base flood elevation which brings us back to the 40 some odd feet that we
were trying to get away from that is only if they don't make the first floor habitable so if they're not using it for commercial space or if they're If This Were a standalone lodging facility where it has to be elevated and the ground floor is only
used for example for parking or storage that would allow for that recessed Upper Floor the 10ft recessed Upper Floor um I'm I'm sorry I believe this was discussed but if that's just something that we just need we did discuss it it's just it didn't read this way the last
time I saw it yeah so I think yeah I recall kind of how has Brandon had it for example there's nothing like that right now that exists down there and so this would I think we were talking about what would be an example
of where H could kick in and uh that's basically what you just said if it was like a a a lodging where they had the first floor was open was it wasn't being commercially used was being used for parking or storage or whatever
that's correct we don't we don't allow Standalone multif family in this District so the only option would be for a lodging building where they chose to not have the ground floor as a flood proof ground floor so one that was developed at grade if they were to choose to only build a lodging
development and they were to elevate the lowest level of that lodging development to the required design flood elevation they would be permitted that additional height that's lost by not building it grade however the upper story would need to be ESS 10 ft I if if the board is
conceptually okay with that I can work on cleaning this up and and bring it back to you what's the difference what's the exuse me what's the differ I I I understand the 10ft setback so that puts the height back further which aesthetically is goodev but how
much how many feet higher is it than this this the 30 I know it's in general than the 35 ft over gr it's it would be five to six feet taller measuring to the top our better part of 10 which is what we were trying to get around what's that
for the better part of 10 ft which is where we were trying to get around there one building that's on 8th Avenue that was built after this was developed and we realized the loopholes in it now we're back to the same height but I would say for a development like the
Berkeley they they would not if if they if it were to be developed today under this standard because of the ground floor restaurant they would not benefit from that additional six feet because this is to avoid and it was discussed with the attorney at the time um to avoid a taking where someone has to
elevate their structure and because of that they're losing 5 to six feet off the top of their structure this was what we came up with as a ability to preserve that and not take that six feet away but also to not incentivize someone to have a ground floor and then get that additional 5 to
six feet at the upper level because they chose to flood proof instead of elevate and and so again in Practical matters you'd have to have somebody who wanted had a commercial space or
multi uh not multi family but uh a lodging mhm where they would take the first floor and say we're just going to keep either make it all parking now can they do a combination of Lobby and parking or they couldn't do that would
have to be entirely nonuse you know open in the bottom right it's it's the the first actual floor of the structure would need to be elevated above the at to or above the design flood in order to take advantage of the additional 5 to six feet in height and
by there would have to be by ADA compliance some sort of access at at grade no I understand that I'm I'm just trying to think of the the Practical I'm trying to think of the Practical appliances to it down the road when somebody finds the way to do it yes
we're going to be back at 40t yeah 45 ft well I don't know I mean I think I understood what Brandon when he's just talking about speaking to an attorney about the taking aspect of it so here I guess is where the the the rub
exists so even though what what did you call the base flood not elevation but what did you call the design flood designs because the design flood includes extra feet right one additional foot correct so
there I mean a person could do they have to build by the design flood I mean you know I guess the Practical matter you can't use a parking garage if it's only six feet high that's why it's poorly written right that's that's what I'm say you know and
so uh you know I don't know how we get around so we we're like I guess we're talking about that dis distinction between five or 6 feet and 10 ft you know which is the taking aspect you're talking about is if they decided to uh
flood prooof the first floor then they would be limited 35 ft over grade and again I thought that we were limiting it to Total 35 ft and they were allowed to have the base flood elevation be flood proofed however they only got two
stories of other space right but which is what the goal of a Avenue was originally yes I and I I agree with that the issue would be though it's zoned to allow other kind of structures that don't necessarily exist right
now and the argument I guess would be if you CH can we force someone to flood prooof their first floor when they don't want to use it for that purpose when they don't want it to be flood proofed when they want to use it as a you know a parking G for example
for a sake of argument um based on our current situation since September it's going to cause people to make different decisions and they have the ability to flood proof on their ground level to meet FEMA requirements and still have their regular construction or regular uh
building above so why all of the sudden are we giving away 10 ft on a place that we said we don't want to give away 10 ft to go ahead and do this no I agree with you I I I I don't want to do that right but the I guess the question could be
35t above Place 35 ft above base flood elevation or base you know whatever we want to call it today is not what we were our goal was our goal was 25 ft minus 10 no I agree my my question is to you Brandon is can we just make it part
of the ordinance that they have to flood prooof the first floor and then just eliminate this option well with the alone lodging we could not require that because that's it's not an option for lodging that's considered residential in terms of what
fee is looking at so if they were to develop what what is currently a permitted use Standalone lodging facility they would not have the option to ground uh sorry flood proof the ground floor but we have the ability to do Residential over retail all day long places stores all through the area are
being rebuilt After the flood because they were able to flood proof D according to FEMA rules and still we slab on grade and and they will they will still have that option for those who have retail or office at the ground level and almost any kind of commercial but we're opening the door for them to do whatever they want because we already
have that in place why are we giving them 10 ft do we need to spell out what I guess that's what we need to do so residents over retail and then a definitive as to what's applicable if they want to do something in Hospitality well again they do residents over retail
they have the ability to get it FEMA proofed on ground level because they're commercial so why are we giving them 10 more feet I would agree well I agree too except for the way this is written are we are we
giving this is this is goes back to the original conversation we had almost three years ago where they said we can't take away property rights I know but at the end of the day it was it was not conceived The Way It Was Written it was the way it was interpreted that was not
correct and now we're trying to figure out the interpretation trying to get it narrowed down to where we can go ahead and work within these constraints and again we just open the door again so how do we go about changing this well we went through this for two
years and it didn't get changed so obviously a workaround is not working out well again is there a requirement that there's pedestrian grade level access to commercial space in that District that it has to be at grade level
not necessarily based on what's written um it it would make sense for the vast majority of developments the you know residential or lodging over commercial which we obviously have along 8th Avenue this is the intent was just for this to you know plan for those scenarios where
that would not apply but we we could probably tighten down the language somewhat um I don't I don't want to hold up the division 20 changes because I think there is consensus on those from what I heard if this is something you'd like me to to work on and bring back
next next month I can maybe send out the language changes to the board early in advance of the meeting and get feedback and come back okay well that sounds that sounds like a good good idea but the the I appreciate that
um I I guess where I where I'm going with this it seems like this was a carve out for just a very special thing is but Sean is in disagreeing you're saying this carve act could maybe be used by
everybody that's my concern it needs to be tightened up okay yeah I understand what you're saying I mean that was the goal of furing crde EA okay but are are you are you saying that the carve out should be eliminated or the carve out should still
exist but it has to be tightened up I need to figure out what it really means because originally we said 35 ft minus BFE right which roughly was BF plus 25 now they're saying 35 Plus BF and we're back to the same place that
we were that the log the words never changed well except for it's I think and maybe it needs to be tightened up it it it it's under the offices that they're not flood proofing and doing what they normally would do to have point is you
can do that to any commercial or retail existence on base elevation so what is the taking away any property rights by having a hard stop on height exactly they just come in and this is what you can do and this is what you can't do and this the argument been for
over two years taking away your property rights these are your property rights yeah I think we all said that from the very beginning we thought it was simple just saying you know we wanted we want everything to be the same height as it always has been and then of course the problem we just gave away BFE plus 35
yeah and then but then FEMA came about and that made it impractical for people build FEMA was around when it first was adopted and it was no I'm talking about I'm talking about to be match the historic nature of 8th Avenue which is all pre
FEMA again residential over retail you're allowed to go ahead and and waterproof flood prooof the retail aspect on the ground floor so why are we giving away another 10 ft I can name restaurant after
restaurant store after store they got flooded during Helen that has rebuilt on slab meeting FEMA requirements why do we need to give them do we need to elevate all them and give them 10 ft also no and I don't think and I think this carve up doesn't include
that but I'm not saying that language can't be opens it opens a door for something like that to happen I mean you know me I'm all about not going so I agree if if you if I'm not quite on the same page as you are but I understand your concern and I think Brandon
understands as well that what our concerns are that we're we don't want to open the door with this it's a loophole that can get exploited and we need to figure out a way to make sure the loophole does not get exploited well I kind of circle back to Tia where it just says 35 ft period end story it's a hard
stop well again that was the whole point of our conversation over two years ago it was 25 ft above BF higher if you do a 10ft set back and use it for something else on the bottom I again it was eliminated 25 ft over BF and that's what
we were trying to do based on what was going on with residential and passive R also and it slipped it slipped in again and that's what I'm irritated by we fought against this and it's back in the thing okay I agree yeah let's let's push
on with TW section 20 and and Brandon if you will try to work your magic on section 40 for the next meeting that would be super great could I could I get a formal recommendation on division 20 please yes I guess I do we need have a motion on that or just say you could just make
motion I'll make a motion I move that we approve recommendation of ordinances 2025-the is 257 yes and then we will uh I am I amend my
motion um that we approve recommendation of ordinance 2025-the Lowry yes motion carries and then not that we need a motion for this but for 20 25-8 we'll bring that up next month
of meeting yes okay all right good thank you Sean uh okay now we have 4J recommendation of Hurley Park design to the city commission good afternoon board um Mandy Edmonds acting Recreation director hi
Andy how are you good thank you um I have a quick presentation for you that if we can bring that up okay so this is going to be a presentation on the um Hurley park playground proposal as everybody knows that we've been going on with this uh
proposal probably now for over 10 years so we're trying to move everything forward so a little bit of a project history here so it started back in 2015 when Hurley park playground was removed 2019 we had a Community input meeting uh
where basically commission approved um commission approval received to restore to the original conditions so Hurley Park when they were under construction we approved to go back to the original 2020 um the playground was uh the whole
park design I think was brought to Historic preservation board and they approved restoration back to the original condition including the playground commission meeting held announcing the dog park concept with approval 2021 Park restoration complete without a
playground 2022 meetings with staff to add a playground and funding options and then 2024 uh monor raises funds towards public purchasing uh towards purchasing a playground with resident support of the project this would be a public
private partnership funding so where we're at now we did have $140,000 budgeted this year to um install this PL ground the quoted playground and surfacing cost came in at
9,546 the monitory contribution with anou agreement is 37,500 can I stop you what does anou mean a memorandum of understanding okay okay um the amount needed from the capital Improvement budget will be
62,400 and6 which does leave um a balance in our CIP program of 77,000 959 which would go towards other priority projects in our CIP budget this is the playground design and
location so the features include a hammock slides mini climber Loop ladder Lemonade game counter and umbrella Roofing the fall height is listed uh the capacity is 37 children and the age group is for 18 months to 12
years the location is going to be in the southwest corner of the existing Pavilion between the Pavilion and the basketball pickle ball court behind the left field fence so you'll see that in the uh diagram below it's in that small area directly behind that fencing so it is not the way it looks in
our photos yeah ours is on the ours shows that you're removing the basketball court pickle ball courts and putting it there m mine didn't say that I thought you I thought you had it over to the West another bit but well her picture does show that
I don't know what page this is on I don't know I'm just looking at this I'm looking at her presentation I'm at page 405 of our presentation which shows it removing the basketball court and Etc it should be just adjacent to the basketball court we're not removing to
your your production on the screen it is yes I was just concerned that they're different and and and and well mean but since we're on that location issue right now and I had the same kind of question I thought it looked like was in a different place mhm and I walked down
there and paced it off earlier not that that means anything there's plenty there's there's enough room there there is so when we actually did the scope of work and we had the contractors come out and do the bids they all viewed the location and they're well aware of where we're going to be placing that
playground and I will just say this because to me I know you probably had the same conversation it seemed like if it was moved North there's a there's a just directly north there's really a much more of an open area and that there's no power poles and trees and
stuff like that and I guess I'm wondering it's also close to the monor although they have they do have a playground there as well but and I'm just thinking would it be better in that location further north so you're a little bit removed from the
adults that are playing pickle ball or basketball and the things that adults can say to Children you know in front of children's ears we did consider that um but our ultimate goal too was to keep a large amount of green space so that we can have other activities so that's why we chose the location closest to the
pickleball yeah I don't person don't any heartb when I you all went through all that right I figured you had okay so that concludes the presentation do you have I have another question before you sorry I mean only because I'm intrigued about and you'll find out if you stick
around later when we talk about another discussion but monor raised some money and then and the memo of understanding standing basically say is saying what is it saying so theou is going to outline um that that money raised will go
towards the installation the purchasing and the installation of this playground okay after that the city will be responsible for all maintenance costs okay and and so and the way that would work this is money that's monory has raised and that goes towards that which is great and there's no repayment aspect
or anything like that this is just a donation from the private sector correct so we would um what we would do is we would have that cash in hand before we went forward with the purchasing of this yeah okay all right I'm just like I said later I'm might be talking about something else I was kind of trying to get a feel for how that works all right
and I'm assuming that monor is on board with this playground and what it looks like and yes all it they are um we actually have Representatives here today from monor um as well as our playground representative so if you had any direct questions for either of them we can
address that no I I mean I don't know if anyone does I mean this is really just for informational purposes for us I believe right which we thank you very much that you're bringing in on us in on this uh does mon want to speak about it you don't have to you can if you
want okay all right all right thank you very good thank you Mandy all right thank you okay so now we are on to section five discussion items we do need a
motion on that one oh we do oh I'm sorry well I'll make a motion that we recommend the Hurley Park designed to the city commission I'll second that Madam clerk roll call member young yes Vice chair Hawkins Smith yes member dashel yes member Hurley yes chair Lowry
yes motion carries all right very good okay uh 5A design review number 25034 for 1061 18th Avenue thank you chair if we could pull up the staff PowerPoint this is a new residence built
to the house medium standards proposed for 106 18th Avenue the owner is J Jen Dennis Johnson Jr oh I think I clicked out of it I'm sorry go so here is the site plan showing the
development um you can see on the right side of the screen is a garage that's accessible from the alleyway the applicant is also proposing a Turf block parking space accessible from 18th Avenue that will be on the west side of
the structure there is an existing curb cut on the East that is being closed um and that is the location of where the porch will be uh they are showing some Landscaping at the front of the structure as well as on the sides that does meet the minimum Landscaping requirement that was one of the two
design review comments which I'll get to in the moment um otherwise the structure does meet the setbacks for the house medium style of development uh they are showing the garage closer than 15 ft to the alleyway for the structure itself
when it's located within 15 ft um it it typically needs to only be garage space and they you show that on floor plans is being met so you can see here the front elevation of the structure it is compliant with the
height requirement which is uh 32 ft to the highest point of the roof from the designed flood elevation and they are also measuring 28 ft to the midpoint of the slope roof there the midpoint of the sloped roof is a little bit below that that height maximum that would be
permitted here's some rendering showing the front and the alleyway elev elevation uh staff consultant has performed a design review they have the following comments um they wanted some additional Landscaping at the front to mass the elevated portion of the structure and both of these comments
have been sent to the applicant they also asked that the material or scoring surrounding the pool at the base of the structure should be better integrated with the elevated portion of the home uh staff had a few limited comments related to the zoning review nothing that's going to change the design of the development we just wanted to point them
out at this stage um what I mentioned before regarding the single level garage they are currently meeting the setbacks however there may be a future limitation on extension of any kind of living space above the garage if it's within that rear 15t setback uh the frontage parking
space shall provide for at least 20 ft of depth to allow for a vehicle to be fully located on private property under the current zoning code they are allowed access from that Frontage and the lot is depicted is very close to its minimum grain space requirements significant modifications May require removal of
existing impervious and semi-pervious material on the site so we don't ask for a board motion on these but we do ask for direction if there are things that you feel can be made to uh better ensure the design of the structure with the surrounding neighborhood uh we ask for your input if
you'd like us to bring this item back to you after modifications have been made if any uh we'd be happy to do so if not we can include the um redesign plans if any um as a information item moving forward so that is all from staff I
believe the applicants present hi uh Dennis Johnson 4021 West Barcelona Street Tampa if you have any questions just a quick comment on the Landscaping we purposely limited the the Landscaping on the rendering so you could see the house we have about a
$30,000 landscape Budget on a 50 by 100 foot lot so there's going to be 10 times amount of landscaping um so that that is not even an issue at all I don't see any future significant improvements at all uh there's nowhere really we would ever add on to the house uh we have a pool area
uh we have the alley access garage there's really nowhere to I don't see any additional you know for 50 60 70 years I don't see where you would ever add anything onto that house possibly so it is a tight site the house is not that large it's I think the main house is
2980 Square ft or something um it's you know twostory uh as far as the material we do we are required Breakaway walls we are going to have to put the vents in which we did not show on the because we don't have placement of venting yet we are within
300t of the con Coastal Construction line but we're in A10 so we're still going to have to do pilings and do breakway and flow through so I'm not sure exactly other than stucco I'm not sure what we would do I don't think it would be reasonable to do any kind of
sighing on that lower portion uh we were thinking of maybe some kind of coina potentially that gets a little challenging with events but um if you guys have any great suggestions we'll listen well I think you answered a lot of them by saying you're doing a lot
more Landscaping I mean that makes sense and obviously as much as that can be kind of covered the one thing first off let let me say this just so you understand I think your Design's nice I'm loving the fact that you're putting the garages in the back and you know that's kind of a pet peeve yeah for me
me too and so but I noticed you have a parking space in the front which under the current rules you can have that's what we're just talking about some of the Amendments we're trying to make is to make everyone all the parking being the back so we don't have cars in the
front yard there's more landscaping and there's not a curb cut uh I know and I'm just throwing that out there you know I know I know that on 18th you can only Park on one side of the street which is your side correct I know that the lot
already has a curb cut from sometime in the past it does Drive the Eastern side of the lot so you're you're proposing to move this to the western side but I'm just going to say I really wish you didn't have a part we're not really
losing one because we're switching and then if we lose our cut you get one more spot on the street so you're getting one spot either way except for you don't have a car in the front front yard and lack of hand and and no Landscaping there yeah but when you see how the
stuff we do that's why prefaced it with I think your design is nice and and this is just a minor thing but I think to be true to myself and what we've been talking about the last couple years I just have to mention it okay um the idea being that you know and and I don't I guess honestly
you're you're from the standpoint that house that you knocked down did not have access did not have a a driveway to the alley did it did not so it was always was all front it always had that curb cut was it did it was existing yeah we're just shifting it basically no I
understand that I'm I'm just I'm just thinking from the we're going to use a porest material so you know whether it be shell or whatever they want well I can't tell you what to do I mean you can do all these things this is just the SEC the port of this where we tried to persuade you okay I'm I'm not going to say I'm going to win the argument but
you know better than anybody parking is incredible banana if you can do a nice looking parking but just so you understand you the reason especially further south of was parking on both sides of the street people we've been having new homes that
don't use the alley and they put the garage facing the front they take away parking spaces so this new the way we're one of the things we're trying to mend in the new ordinance that's coming through is stopping that so the front of the houses are still the front of the
houses and they don't have garages which you don't have place in the front that's what I said I I appreciate that but they also don't have a curb cut because you know again it takes away some of the parking but that's my argument more power to you you know I'm just saying okay well so where the curb
cut is behind that would be is that the pool uh yes there's going to be fencing with landscaping and that is the pool so then it truly will be a parking space it's basically just if somebody comes like we don't even have anywhere to somebody to wants to deliver something
or somebody wants to come over for an hour or with there's no I mean we have two spots off the alley there's nowhere to park on the Alley once you go inside our garage there's no space on the Alley so and so and so just sorry to interrupt you so and this is obviously this isn't
something that you can commit to or someone bought the house after you you're not intending to use your private cars or necessarily no absolutely not okay yeah yeah exactly you're saying basically it should be empty most of the time correct yeah it's not our spot it's it's
and the side stairs is that to a second um I guess like Wing is a back entrance yeah um it's come you can come off the pool and go up to the main level Lai where the cook you know you can outdoor kitchen is and then you can go spiral stair up to the second floor and then
you can continue to the rooftop so it's basically it's a it's another entrance to the second floor instead of coming all the way to the front of the house and then going in just a quicker way to get upstairs stairs basically to the rooftop which is still below 34 ft thank you very much yes we kept it at
32 so it's not a big rooftop deck yeah yeah we worked a long time on this to try to I remember when you came in that for the demolition per minut a few years ago I guess I think this is definitely an improvement of what was there I love that old house but it was had black mold that was the Killer and
then the had Vines grow to the W it had settled and all the trusses had collapsed and sure so it was yeah it was unfortunately not salvageable but so this is just for informational purposes in a way but you we you said we could bring it we could bring it back if we wanted to does anybody see any reasons
based upon the discussions we've had that we need to look at this again I've got a silly question and I'm not able to find it and with a packet and that is the 20 foot setback and where it puts it in relation to the sidewalk because the city of St Pete Beach has been just
raging on people that are encroaching on the sidewalk do you have that in front of you I'm trying I got it in here somewhere with our set back I'm trying to find it and I'm not doing a very good job usually I can read plans but I don't seem to find out that we did whatever
we see I think we're are we TW 20 to the house and 12 to the porch is that what it is does that sound right you have the stairs at the front that are at 73 um and then you have the front of the
house a 10 where it's required to be so okay that that gives us enough room that he can clear the sidewalk so we's not getting complaints from the city because I've got three houses right now that were built years ago and now the city complains about the fact that are back bumpers cover the sidewalk oh well that
was one of the items that I mentioned that oh that's on the parking oh talkinging parking okay space it'll it it will need to be the 20 ft to fit a vehicle yes yeah so it's the 20 ft above the sidewalk we can adjust the fence back so it's it's I'm splitting hairs I have
okay it's just I've got so many complaints recently over it you have to buy a short car only your visitors have to have short cars don't bring don't bring the exhibition no parking no parking the they only get one visitor there's nowhere else to one very small visitor
exactly with a Coachman Car right okay well so that we don't see any reason to bring this back then is that fair to say okay thank you Mr Johnson so can we permit is what's next we can got to permit okay great thank you very much for your time all right thank you thank you okay 5B Des IR review number 2495 at
the home located at 1303 Gulfway pull the PowerPoint back up please this is 1303 Gulfway case 2495 um applicant ERS Daniel ca for Frederick and aan Ross the applicant is
requesting as with the prior structure a house medium built structure standards of the passor grill overlay District so here's a site plan um there happen some modifications but this was the one that was published with your uh staff report um it is very well
extensively landscaped in the front um it is also parking from the rear uh which is a which is a benefit they do have two Pathways out to the uh West Side on Gulfway and then they have some stepping stones on the North side um staff has some comments regarding the
encroachment into the southern side but otherwise um all of the parking is to the the East you can see here the renderings ismetric renderings and here is the side
elevations for this structure uh staff's design consultant who is not present um had sign uh significant number of requests for correction of plan submitted in early February they had marked up a previous plan set but I did speak with them earlier this week uh they did find these
comments to pertain to the existing revised development that was published with your packet uh their first comment was that there was no private frontages required by code which is a portra stoop I didn't want to clarify that is pending code language that a portra stoop needs to be provided for these type of
developments there is the private Frontage option for the common yard in place currently the applicant has it extensively landscaped and um I haven't gone through through through the details but I believe that they would probably meet that common yard Frontage standard
if if they need to do so uh she had asked for some recomend or she had asked that some identification be placed in the plan particularly for the voids on the Frontage of the structure uh she felt that it did not me the code intent for natural breakes in the mass she had asked for demonstration that the windows
U meet the similarity standard in the code uh the bottom of the structure does not appear to be supporting of the two upper floors architecturally I did send send the design um the architect a example of one that I felt would meet that but we are in discussion on that
item and uh she felt that there was a disparity between the style of the ground level as well as the upper two floors uh which do not meet the code requirement zoning staff had very limited um comments the only comments were that the height of the pared
appears to exceed the 28 ft per minute in passor Grill the parapet height is included in the overall height of the flat roof structure um however we did find the overall height the 32t mark to be uh compliant with the maximum height requirement uh or other comments were
that balconies are not permitted ins side yards and the pool catch Basin will need to be removed from the front set pack it does need to meet that 10-ft front set pack okay so that's all I had okay to try to clarify a little bit of that so I I miss I know there was a number of
things that you put down that need to be looked at what we have seen here though is this an updated version that addresses some of those issues or it doesn't address those issues those were still remaining comments and again I I wanted to point out that multiple of
those comments were just identification based our reviewer just wanted those to be identified in the plans the comments regarding the frontage let me sorry let me get back to those the secondary Frontage um the similarity between Windows unless demonstrated by the
applicant and the um the architectural support between the first floor and the upper two floors those were items that the design reviewer felt were not met uh the applicant can show those items on the plans and and we can continue to discuss those with her but those were remaining items based on
the current plans okay so uh you know we're getting this as a discussion item right and I guess I'm trying to find out are we in the middle of the river here or
are we getting to the shore I mean is this a little premature for us are we going to to bring this back again once the staff's questions have been answered I mean I hate to be looking at something and then and having us make some sort of
uh even for informational purposes and not know if these I mean I I I have to I think we all have to go by what staff says on these kind of things and so this appears to be
incomplete at this stage and maybe I'm wrong about that but you know seems like there's some significant stuff that I would say why are we getting this today if there's things that have to be do because I can ask some you know some questions and we can get some answers but you
know uh first let me say I appreciate the fact that this is brought in front of us for informational purposes so we get an idea of what's going on so don't get me wrong there but secondarily if if things are in
Midstream we're really not getting the information we really need so do we just need to reset this to another date where those where we don't have these questions so we know what we're actually looking at or perhaps if there's anything in addition
into these Corrections that we want to question or have addressed or consider well I yeah but you know when I read there's disparity between the style of the first and rer two floors which not appear to meet LDC section 20.2 I'm not you know I don't know what
that means really necessarily and you know so uh identify voids on the preliminary axonometric view I don't even know what that word means uh as it does not appear to meet the code intent for natural breaks in the that that you know I don't really know what that
means and so if that question was answered does it change what this house looks like significantly I don't know so you know to me this strikes me as just having a lot of is in I don't know who's reviewing it it doesn't make a
difference really but that the person who's reviewing it from the staff obviously has some significant questions chairman if you would look at page 435 it shows the Western elevation of the home and I think that's what most of the questions are
about um it does show differences in finishes it shows differences in Windows and Etc differences in Style Style Style shape and size
symmetry it it does throw things sideways a little bit but we're not Architects well I I I I agree with what you're saying but you're saying that's that seems to be a concern that staff has right yes and so right so I just want you to be able to see the elevation I think they're talking about well I
agree because like under the pool what is that it's going to be it's going to be where the pool is the six foot of pool is going down there yeah but is it behind a wall or is it behind a wall what kind of just a blank wall like a garage or is it to the sea monkey style
of the yes yes yeah versus having a big window in front of your steel do that my point is and and maybe I don't think I me L line here from the folks on this are you comfortable with seeing what we need to see I'm not sure I'm just trying
to get I'm trying to get to where we can all talk about what we're looking at and again you know window design versus sliding glass door design I think is what we're looking at from the see if staff recommendations are followed is
something that looks very different than what we're seeing today I don't know and and and and and and it strikes me too that it's not really a staff recommendation particularly if they say it doesn't fit in the LDC then it doesn't fit in the
LDC so it may just be a design that that won't work right there is some difference to The Architects in these type of reviews um if they demonstrate that something's adequately met our design reviewer you know will take that into consideration but the reason why I
brought this forward to you at this stage is because I have been working um with the applicants for some time now we've had the plans I think in house since last year and uh we wanted to get the board's input because these are things that you know on the zoning side I have very few comments but from the
design reviewer there may be extensive changes and we just wanted you to have your input at this stage if you would like us to bring this back either when it gets to permitting prior to that we'd be happy to do so we just wanted to get your input if there's anything else
other than what staff has already shared that you feel would be should be taken into account I would I would want to consider at least during the review process that the neighbors's visual impediment would be considered I
don't I don't know how far back this I see where it sits on the on the subject lot but I don't know how that is in reference to the neighbors on either side of it and how does that impede their visual atph when we when we changed to our new design thing we went ahead and gave them
20 ft setback instead of 25 I I assume this is built on that's why I just said consideration this is built on the it's just it hadn't worked hadn't worked in the past I know this is currently designed under the Pascal overlay as opposed to that's the ant instead of the right so the house to the north of it is
built on the overlay as well I I know that and the house the south of it is recessed in one story or one and a half stories St yeah yeah so it's a whole different thing uh and I think you know what we're getting at cuz the house to up from you was built back and the next house blocks
they in so right matching immediately next door to well you know uh I just I just feel that I'm kind of spinning my wheels if I start asking questions about stuff when
answer them well I know but see like do you know what when they said minute ago what was that you had that on the screen what the staff yeah the axon numerical it she she calls out the shet so it's yeah it's an axonometric view where
we're presenting the house from the 3D perspective and she's questioning the amount of openings on the elevations um we have been discussing potentially uh providing some fencing uh similar to you know landscape or some
sort of uh ministration not not penetration but fencing kind of like what you showed me on that other residence still up for discussion with the owner to see if that would be what you know agreeable and uh the fenestration we still have to work through that I ideally would love to
meet with the person who's making his comments absolutely we don't know where she's coming from have that opportunity to discuss where she's coming from and maybe we can meet that out uh and sorry I just for the record I don't think you've identified yourself so let's if you'll do thator I'm Daniel my name is
my name is Daniel architect of record for the design and we and audin Ross the owner of the prop you're the owner okay so okay all right well yeah I mean I I think what you're saying makes sense that you can make move that person and find that information and and and I'm I'm
not trying to delay anything or pointy blame or anything like that I just don't think that we have you know like like I I look at this just what I'm looking at and the area on the West Side that's under I guess the edge of the pool in this
picture was just like a blank what cement wall yes the pool is going to be raised so you access it from the Second Story and in front of it we're going to put Plants and okay see Landscaping cures a lot of problems you know when you look at these things but I guess I'd
like I believe you mentioned they they did you mention you eliminated the Landscaping from this view just because that was the other guy that was the other okay but he could have said that right we we we have a yeah they have a big budget on on Plants it's going to be nicely
know where everybody wants things or I did look up what types we have to have and they have to fall into certain categories and I'm quite happy to put as many plants as we need in there the intent was to put a like a raised planter in front of the the wall
and then have some pretty in front of it so it looks aesthetically pleasing yes and so that's that's obviously the concern we have is we don't get to see that stuff at least at this stage and now is there ultimately when there's a a plan that sett on there is actually
Landscaping correct yes can we maybe just see that when that happens I mean you know see when you finally met with these people and done that and maybe we don't have to have these folks be here that would be fun you follow what I'm saying I mean I hate to have you come back if it's going to all be rectified
in some fashion but I think you we always like to know what's going on in the neighborhood you know so if we can kind to get it not that we can do a bun about it but that was intent of the meeting is again initial thoughts we want be upfront about what we're doing obviously it's contemporary and this is a historic overlay District we want to
respect everything that has to do with Z yeah I mean you know I mean if you open the door there a little bit you know I think these contemporary houses are as nice as they are I don't know if they really fit in that historical district but they've been being they've been being built and that's we don't have any
teeth as far as that goes at this moment um you know I think when we have some changes perhap to the commission that this might might get tightened up a little bit and not be quite so contemporary but that's the way the world is right now so I'm just saying you know that
that's where we're at it's much less contemporary than 1207 oh I know but you know I I know but you know um you know and and this is this is not designed to be rude or anything like that but you no property values and
stuff you know every house we get is Max Max I mean I was surprised the last guy came in and said I'm not I'm only producing building a smaller house that's that's as rare as a bonal Snowman on the beach so you know
uh you know so and and and and in the block you're in frankly the two houses next to you that's already you know that's kind of what's going on anyway so okay well I think we appreciate you all coming in um Brandon if once there's
some things finalized maybe if you can just give that to us for informational purposes you all won't won't have to be back for that I mean unless you want to come sit through the afternoon with us again um so does that make sense to everyone okay then thank you very much appreciate
it thank you thank you brother okay now we're on 5c the historic plaque update's going to handle that just a brief update um we have been speaking with the vendor regarding producing those uh those plaques um
we're working on whether or not we can have them individually numbered or or not but we're estimating the cost to probably be somewhere in the range of1 to $125 per plaque we're hoping to have everything finalized by next month so I'll have an update for you then I just want to let you know we're working on it so okay and I happen to come across some
paperwork having to do with the original plaques MH and where they were ordered who they were ordered from Etc and the ability to have the design in place already I can forward it to the board or to you whoever is necessary I don't know if we're going out and finding somebody
new but they had everything all set in place back in 2013 I I don't believe so I believe Kristen's been working with the original vendor but if you could send it over just in case I'd appreciate it by all means thank you and when you say the 1005 that's I'm just to be obvious
that's going to be the cost to the owner correct the city's not for for the time being yes yes yes good thank you about that because I do think a lot with a lot of these people that are getting the homes designated let's hope that they ultimately want to do a PL so I do have a question about numbering so
specifically Mr cadell was here earlier when he was designated in the past he had a marker number 35 will he be able to stay marker number 35 or does he have to move to marker number 170 or something um that's a good question I have the same issue member number one at
the Yacht Club is a big deal um so maybe member number 35 of the historic preservation is also important could be a selling point yeah yeah again I that's one of the questions I would have brought forward also is that
you know I have a plaque on my building my uncle was you know head of the historic board and historic preservation for many many years I am now having to recertify not realizing it till just recently uh and I don't want to lose my number one
status no one ever does don't we don't take your number away you're you're still on we do have a recertification number just for tracking purposes but just like 3401 casablanc I believe it's number four um it was it was real early but it's still number four that hasn't changed they've just been recertified
for variance purposes so all right good okay so then I guess we're going on to 5D that was you as I believe yes so I just wanted to highlight unfortunately
as we've all heard there's so many businesses throughout our that aren't reopening like Woodies and so many other places that have just been Main Stays and I think being at the hotel at the Keystone which thankfully is historically designated we've had all of our guests come back thankfully and
we've also picked up new guests that previously would go to other areas the one thing that I've heard unanimously has been how impressed everyone has been with all of the businesses that have been open and how kind everybody has been and they didn't anticipate traveling here and having people be nice
because of everything everyone has been through and so just hearing that really made me stop and think and um so I just wanted to highlight in pass of Grill all of the locally owned and operated businesses that are open so I did them in alphabetical order so that way I
didn't show any favorites but um so bamboozle and Etc on 8th Avenue Brass Monkey Coconut Inn dod's also on 8th Avenue Evander Preston's Eva's Emporium Havana Inn in
on the beach Frank T Hurley real estate Associates Island life pass a grill La Tortuga little room of art which just opened this past weekend Paradise Grill Paradise sweets Paradise to go which I
do have to just say that they are such a wonderful French family and they've worked so hard and they're raising their kids and it really is an honor to have them as our neighbors I agree they're super super nice and I guess Paradise sweets just opened this last week right yes and they're just exceptional um so
now you have to get your coffee at Paradise sweets instead of paradise to go by the way yes and your ice cream yes uh Paradiso of course on 8th Avenue red Whit and booze sable palms shadra shers The Dewy the Keystone the hurricane and
the warf everyone is so grateful to be there and so I just want to make sure everyone knew that these places were open and appreciative of any business and all the employees too very nice okay well that is a lovely segue into 5e which is I want to talk
about a little bit about the Mary pier and the shuffle board court which are two local kind of businesses that aren't open because they've both been pretty much uh condemned by the storm so here's one thing and this is I'm just doing this again for obviously discussion
purposes and I want the board to obviously know what I'm proposing and kind of doing and put your thinking caps on and talk to people and stuff it's and again there's no this is my accumulation of information in the last couple
weeks the Mary Pier by the time the city and this is nothing the city's told me specifically except for I I feel that I can easily say that if the city rebuilds Mary Pier it could be two or three years from now because they have other
priorities budgetary reasons I've talked to public works I mean I've got a pretty good feel for that um and it just struck me that Mary Pier really is the iconic symbol of historic pass of grill and you
know it has such a connection to the whole history there so I'm proposing to try to look at in getting the private sector involved in the redoing of the Mary Pier um it's
very early stages um I'm going to meet I think with the pass girl Association next week there's been some individuals that have reached out that said that they could provide financial support to get the Mary Pier done uh we have some
ideas not the city has given me some information I guess about the estimates what what it's going to cost um because I'm on this this task force thing too that we met twice so far and they've talked about some of the uh you know Dam
to the city owned property and one of the things like for this is just very very rough figures but they had estimated that demolition to the Mary Pier would be $45,000 now and I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this I don't know if
that included the shuffle board court or not because 45,000 sounds very high for just the pier so we're going to we're going to probably dig that out okay so it might be the demolition for all to the shuffle board court and as you know we already have a demolition permit for
the shuffle board court which you know I don't know where the budget the money comes from the city to do that but obviously it's an eyesore and that probably should happen as soon as it could but again the city's got a lot of things going on I'm not clearly
not telling them what to do the Mary Pier I've been told and you can go down there and look that the pilings the dock itself is fine it's just the building that's that that's the problem which is good because they don't really have to
do underwater work on that at all now if you go and look in the windows if you step over the evidence tape and look in the windows uh you can see it's like a ice fishing house now because you could fish right through the floor because the floor is pretty much removed there and
so they've condemned that it's going to my I believe there's people local contractors that would probably take the job on um so I'm approaching it from the standpoint of trying to like I said get private sector donations involved I'm
talking to the city maybe whether that could be a situation I know there insurance money for the for the structure which doesn't pay for the whole rebuild it doesn't mean that the city would allow that money to go towards that in particular they might want to use it for something else so
it's obviously a situation where we're going have to get in front of the commission at sometime uh there's a street party in passag Grill in the m and I Avenue I think May 3rd which could be a good time to try to raise donations or do something like that I'm just looking for input and ideas and you may
know people that have interest in it and uh I'd like to maybe follow up next month with that in the meantime I guess I I guess for the for the attorney's from point of view I'm not looking at this as a historic
preservation board Le event this is just throwing it out there to the community okay so I don't I'm going to ask you if you think that that we would be involved in some sort of Sunshine Law violation if I talk to
any of these people about any ideas or thoughts they might have have to that or whether we should just handle that in here and if so maybe I should have kept my mouth shut but I I do think that that should be handled here um if it's any sort of
decision that even appears like it would be um an act of the historic preservation board um you run the risk of it appearing to be a sunshine violation well yeah okay I understand you're saying but I'm not I'm I'm saying this more as not as a historic
preservation board just as a member of the community as a member of the community and I'm just putting the the sign that just like someone can talk about what's happening out in the community this I'm putting the fielders out anybody that's listening uh you know and the people here that I know are concerned about that but I I would have
to have some discussion with the city obviously at some point and so it would be I think I can recognize my um responsibilities as far as that goes yeah if there's anybody you know who's ordinarily on the historic
preservation board who you know you were meeting with and talking with outside of this uh even if you began talking about the Mary Pier if the conversation drifted towards something that would be an official duty of the historic preservation board there's always a risk there okay all right so with all that
caveat there you know I'm just telling you all to put your thing caps on and and we can meet again talk about if we can put it on the meeting for next month to see so we have the permission to be bringing that up again for the friends of the Mary Pier you come with a better
name than that I would think the library again I have I and one thing if I can if I can ask staff for this could we since we're going to have that discussion item next month could we get
a copy of the current lease for the Mary Pier because obviously nothing's going on there and probably would not be going on there for two or three years unless some private people uh step in and I've been told you know from from talking people the city that they it's a
they love the idea you know they're more power to us if we can get something like that done so all right I have one more request to make sure okay um so I noticed we've started doing this swearing in process as a group now can
we add that as an agenda item so that people know what what to expect and we don't overlook that at some point so it becomes something that happens right after theion minutes I I would highly recommend that yeah it makes sense sure just gets it over with um and maybe at
the same time when you swear them in make sure they understand that even though they've been sworn in they need to state their name for the record when they approach the podium that be good time to remind that yes um and then also if we could add as a regular agenda item at the end with discussion items an
update on any any city-owned historic resources so that would kind of Encompass what's happening at Mary Pier what's happening at happening at the baseball stadium if there's a worn Webster issue something like that it would automatically be part of our
discussion that's all very good yes and um if we were going to consider adding swearing into the beginning of the agenda I would also suggest also um having an opportunity for everybody to disclose their expar Communications concerning any of the action items um
prior to those at that time yes um things like you know visiting the properties uh would also be under expart Communications um and so if anything like that goes into your consideration on those action items that should be dis closed and we could have an opportunity
to disclose those things prior to the hearings if we're going to do the swearing in ahead of time too so just clear like you said on the expar so I I mentioned earlier that I drove by that guy's house and noticed that the driveway is on the other side is that something that is considered expar that
I would have to comment on even though yes and you have been commenting on it um you and so that's okay um that is something though to be disclosed uh if it does factor into anybody's decision um if if they have looked at the
property ahead of time um that's something that should be disclosed I always drive by these we get our agenda that's part of my I feel like I know what I'm talking about as long as and I don't want to get an argument about Sunshine Law violation but exp parte you know to me is you have a
discussion with somebody not that you receive information that's different than what's on the agenda it's any outside information different from the evidence that's presented to you um in this room at the time of the hearing okay I mean I think that that's
like arguing what hearsay is you know it's like you know so I took a degree I have a degree in architecture am I supposed to I don't but you know oh no it's specific to that individual property um I was supposed to disclose that I mean I I I that that house that
the 808 house I had a lot of fun in that house I I might be try to disclose some that you know in the old days shouldn't [Laughter] disclose no okay all right that sounds good and it's with regard to that particular I understand I understand what you're saying in the house at some
point in time you know before the application was submitted um that's you were you know visiting to specifically gather information on for that particular agenda item that's where you would draw the line does that make sense yes yes but it's almost like you
know I'm just being AR matter of here it's almost like we're saying you know if you don't just want to sit in your home and read it but actually want to go out and do something then you've got to tell everybody you're actually going out and do something which to me should just be you know I think everyone should be
go out to look at the property one if they don't one if they don't include photographs that you need to look at you know or they add old photographs I love my morning walks I never see you walking I see youon honking from your car but okay all right really good thank thank you d i I understand understand
okay everybody all right good all right with that Jour all right thank you all