For a lot of years, I never looked to see who else I could make up my own mind. You know what I mean? Because they said that. It's hard to say. But yeah, I'm still finding out.
Townhomes and those homes. Not an issue for me. I'm okay. I want to get water and not be
here. I appreciate your next. It's all. I guess that makes sense. Okay, I'd like to call
the meeting to order the planning and zoning. Today is November 17th. I'd like to roll
call, please. Chairperson Curtis here. Vice chair Vessey here. Mr. Rocklin here, miss early here. Miss Swenson here.
Miss Weaver here. Mr. Collins here. Okay. At this time, I'd like for us to stand. Anybody in the audience, please? Silence your cell phones. Those
on the dais as well stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. The flag will behind. I pretend it's there. Oh, I pledge
allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Thank you. And now, Mr. Vasquez allowed me to give the the reflection for
today. What I would say is this. We just celebrated last week, Veterans Day. And, you know, if you know, veterans, thank them for their service. Don't wait for Veterans Day to do that.
You should do that every time you see a veteran. Number one. Number two, Thanksgiving is approaching. If you know a family that's in need, please reach out to them. And as we are fortunate in our lives, we
should be provide that fortune to them as well. I want to thank everybody for coming. You know, we live in a great country that allows us to have difference of opinion, to sit
at a dais to discuss things, to have people present a case. Regardless, we are fortunate enough to have the country that allows us to do that. And for that, I thank you and I and I'd
like to go ahead and please be seated. Perfect. Okay. All right. On the consent agenda,
next item, you'll see minutes from August 21st of 23. September of 23, November of 23, January of 24 and September of
25. Some of those had got gotten lost along the way. So we are actually going back to to approve those minutes. Do we need counsel? Do we? We don't
have to go through each one. We can just do it as a consent item. We do it as one. Okay. So I'd like to have a motion. Does anybody does anybody want to pull any of the minutes from
the consent agenda and have a discussion on them. No, no. Then I'd like to see a motion as to consent for all of those minutes. I would make that motion. I'll second. Is there a
second? Okay. Roll call please. Mr. Collins. Yes, yes, yes, Miss Swenson. Yes, miss early. Yes, Mr. Rocklin? Yes. Vice
chair. Vessey. Yes, chairperson. Koskotas. Yes. This is a quasi judicial board as well. And with that, we have counsel. Go ahead and make the announcement
as to the the role of the quasi judicial board and the swearing in of any speakers. This is a quasi judicial proceeding with a planning and Zoning board acts in a quasi judicial rather
than a legislative capacity at a quasi judicial hearing. It is not the board's function to make law, but rather to apply law that has already been established in a quasi judicial
hearing. The board is required by law to make findings of fact based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, and apply those findings of fact to previously established criteria
contained in the Code of Ordinances, in order to make a legal decision regarding the application before it. The board may only consider evidence at this hearing that
the law considers competent, substantial, and relevant to the issues. If the competent, substantial, and relevant evidence at the hearing demonstrates that the applicant has met the criteria
established in the Code of Ordinances, then the board is required by law to find in favor of the applicant. By the same token, if the competent, substantial and relevant evidence at the hearing
demonstrates that the applicant has failed to meet the criteria established in the Code of Ordinances, then the board is required by law to find against the applicant. If you're going
to speak tonight, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm your testimony before the Planning and Zoning Board shall be the
truth, so help you? Thank you. Okay. Moving on. Ordinances and resolutions. Our first item on the agenda is resolution 2025, Dash 62, which is quasi
judicial. Regarding the conditional use to allow a restaurant slash tavern in the T4B transect of the special area plan on property located
at 325 East Lemon Street. That's application 25 Dash 69 and I will turn turn it over to staff for presentation. Okay. Ali Keene, principal planner
with the planning and Zoning Department. Again, this is a conditional use request to allow a restaurant tavern at the property located at 325 East Lemon Street. The property
is just under a half an acre in size. It is located within the city's Sponge docks and downtown CRA Special Area Plan, specifically within the Downtown Gateway Character
District and the C4B Residential Industrial Office transect zone. The site is outlined in red here on the screen. It's located at the
northwest corner of East Lemon Street and South Gross Avenue. The Special Area Plans boundary is just south of East Lemon Street. This site, as well as the properties in the immediate
area, are within the T4B transect zone. But it's important to note that this property is just one block south of the T5B district,
which is the smart codes. Main downtown commercial transect zone. This property is the former site of the Silver King
Brewing Brewing Company, and that operated up until 2022. The proposed restaurant is going to occupy approximately 2500ft■!S of the existing buildg
in the area, outlined in red. Here on the screen, they're looking to provide indoor and outdoor seating. The property is located in the historic district, and the structure
itself is considered a contributing altered structure. The original brick portion, which is in the restaurant area, which is this section right here, was the city's original
jail house, and the remaining portion was a firehouse firehouse. They are not proposing any sort of exterior modifications at this time. So Heritage Preservation Board approval is not required at
this time. The remaining portion of the building is going to be occupied by custom printing and fulfillment business, which is infinite print, and that is operated by the property owner. They have
and they have indicated that the hours of operation will not interfere with the proposed restaurant. But regardless, the printing processes do not produce any sort of noise or odors that would provide any
sort of nuisance to restaurant patrons. The Smart code does provide some limitations for retail establishments within the T4B transect zone. Those
limitations can be adjustable by warrant. One of the limitations is with regard to seating. This district is limited to a maximum number of seats, which is 49 seats. The
applicant is requesting warrant approval to allow them to have up to 124 seats, and that's split between indoors and outdoors, with the outdoor seating in the rear of the building. They're looking to
have approximately 92 seats inside and 32 outdoors. The application did go before the city's technical review committee. That does include our fire marshal. He did a preliminary review of their
seating plan, found that they could have indoor occupancy of about 95 people, which is consistent with what they're proposing. There are a few considerations with seating one at the state level. There are
various requirements when you're looking to get an alcohol license for a special restaurant, alcohol license, which is a license for establishments that have 51% of their sales, is in food. It
requires you to have a minimum of 120 seats. The next is. This is a historic building we know was previously used as a brewery not too long ago. 2022 is when they closed their
establishment. And then again, as I mentioned previously, this property is located at the edge of downtown. It's only one block south of Tarpon Avenue, and it's in a mixed use area that has retail, office,
industrial and some residential. The Smartcode strongly encourages pedestrian access at the street level and street access for your primary
entrances. The applicants are looking to utilize the west side entrance as the main entrance for the restaurant, which is from the parking lot here in red, as opposed to the
Lemon Street entrance, which is circled in yellow. The primary reason is due to the location of the kitchen, which is situated right by the Lemon Street entrance. They're looking to utilize this more for loading and unloading.
There is an existing narrow walkway that connects the Lemon Street sidewalk back to this entrance way, but according to the survey, it's only about 2.5ft wide. It is recommended
if that is to be the main entrance that that be widened to really be usable for pedestrians. Zooming out a little bit, the adjacent
property to the north is the city owned parking lot. There is an existing four foot wide walkway that extends into the subject property, and it terminates right at the edge of
the parking area. A connection between this sidewalk to the main entry of the restaurant. The proposed entry would be beneficial not only for On-Site circulation, but also
circulation throughout downtown. It also would, you know, meet the overall intent of the special area plan and enhance pedestrian circulation. Looking
at your conditional use criteria, the proposed use does conform with the Land Development Code as well as the smart Code requirements. With regard to compatibility to
existing and planned uses in the area. Again, this is in the Downtown Gateway character district. There are a mixture of uses within the area, including retail, office, industrial and residential. The
property is only one block south of Tarpon Avenue, which is the edge of downtown where you can find several restaurants, breweries, cafes and bars that are similar to what the proposed uses and further, the property was
previously a brewery up until 2022, and staff does feel that the proposed use is consistent with the existing and planned uses established in the Special Area Plan. Skipping to the
impacts to historical environmental resources. Again, the property is in the historic district and the structure is a contributing altered structure. They're not proposing any sort of exterior modifications that
would require heritage preservation approval. The proposed use will not negatively impact the historic significance of the structure, rather, make use of the existing historic building within the heart of downtown.
And it's not any environmentally sensitive area. With respect to property values. The site again is in a mixed use area with industrial,
office, retail and residential. The proposed restaurant and tavern will occupy an existing structure within the city's downtown, recently used as a brewery, and is not expected to adversely impact the
surrounding property values. The city is able to provide public facilities to the property and the proposed use and the proposed use does provide or does represent efficient and orderly
development. By utilizing existing historic structure, it also enhances and carry out the intent of the Special Area Plan and supports existing downtown uses. And then lastly, the
proposed use is nonexistent or not expected to adversely impact general health, safety, and welfare. As with any application, they are required to meet all applicable building Fire and Health Department
codes and they will be required to obtain a local business tax receipt to operate the establishment. With that, staff does recommend approval of
resolution 2025 Dash 62, including the warrant request for increased seating. We do have four recommended conditions that are shown here on the screen. Those include
one. That the maximum number of seats is limited to 124 to the walkway connecting the Lemon Street public sidewalk and the proposed main entrance, which is the west side. Entry shall
be widened to a minimum of four feet and extended to connect to the pedestrian walkway leading to the city parking lot to the north. These improvements should be included with the building permit application for
interior modifications. Number three. The Lemon Street door must remain operational and have the appearance of an entryway, and the last, the business tax receipt, must be obtained within 12 months. The
application was properly noticed and we have not received any sort of written notifications. With that, I'm happy to answer questions, I guess I'll start on this end of
the dais. If anybody has any questions. We'll start from the end and work our way this way. And good evening. One thing that you said there was going
to be no modifications to the exterior on the proposed entrance. It looks just like a side door. Is that going to be there? I know there wasn't no recommendation to make look
like the main entrance. It's probably something I'd like to see, but I guess I'll ask you the question if that was
brought up. So not not this time. Switching out the door was not brought up. But I will say if they do switch out a door, that may be something that is required to get reviewed by the historic board.
Maybe not switched out, but just like a, like a covered with the sign that that way it's not. I mean, it just looks like a side door, that's all.
Yeah, yeah. No, nothing to that extent was discussed at this time. Thank you. We're not going to skip. You have any questions? I have a question,
but I didn't know. Go ahead. I'm going to. Withhold mine until later. Okay. I just have a question about the the 124.
Are are they counting the outside seating as the 124. Are they allowed to count the outside seating as the 124? I guess my question. Yes, that's the total number that's between
indoors and outdoors. Okay. Thank you. Mr. I. It can be a
slow question. Okay. So because I'm, I'm reasonably familiar with the term warrant, but we have several new members here. Could you delve into and explain exactly what the
warrant is, what the warrant request is and the implications of that for this application. So warrant is probably another term for maybe a variance.
Maybe. But it doesn't necessarily have the criteria attached to it like a typical variance. So a warrant is deviation from what is in the
in the code. So right now the code is strictly written is in the T4B district. You cannot have more than 49 seats in your retail establishment. But the
smart code has an allowance that you can ask special approval to deviate. So what they're requesting is to allow
increased seating to go up to 124. So looking we did an analysis looking at the surrounding area, the impacts of having increased seating in
our determination to recommend approval of the warrant. Okay. That's a great answer. Thank you. So as I understand this
application has a warrant request for two issues, not just the you use the word deviation. I think that's polite. The vast increase in
seating nearly two times, three times, three times the seating that would be allowed under this district, and the fact that the front door is not
going to be used, we're going to hope it's going to stay there and they're going to use a side door. Now would that be correct? So the required so in this particular district in this situation the code does
not require the main entry at the street. Or the street. The street frontage it encourages. So that's why we looked at it and has recommendations to
widen the walkway, have potentially the connection to the to the parking lot to kind of meet that overall intent and to get that encouragement, but it's not a requirement. So
there's only one warrant request, which is the seating. Okay. And then last but not least, I think your thoughts are correct in the fact that
the access sidewalk is insufficient. Going to four feet would be right. But I would suggest this isn't the question necessarily, is that
obviously we have the Ada implications of that. And then therefore it appears when that there's some comment that's going to take a minute, is that there aren't going to be any
exterior modifications. Well, that's not necessarily completely true. Maybe, just maybe to the structure. But not only does the sidewalk need to be widened, but the proper curb cut and Ada access, which isn't
reflected here, there's not a site plan they're probably trying to get through without a building permit, but I think one leads right to the other is that if they are going to move the front door to the side door,
it needs to be complete clarity and it needs to be an Ada access front door, curb cut, sidewalk parking X, y, z. Maybe that's already included. If
it's not, it should be that. Come back to this again. I don't think so. This is not a site plan change. We're not going to see this again. Yeah it's not this wouldn't at this level was proposed. It's not
would require a site plan even with the addition of a sidewalk or widening the the walkway. That's all building permit level. But we can add clarifying language to the
condition regarding those walkway. The walkway widening and everything. We can add clarifying information and
language for Ada compliance. Just to reinforce that. Thank you for that answer. And not necessarily. And she has a
question. Thank you. Sorry. Yeah. We'll go back. But Lori yeah before I go to this side I'll start. Thank you. Don't go backwards. Yeah. So the only
you know I like this idea but the only I'm trying to understand this is pre permit phase. They will be seeking
permits for certain things. At that point they'll be reviewed. It's a very small kitchen to crank out 124 meals. So I'm
just wondering at what you know how much further they're planning to go with the with the site. That's really all. Okay. I will just clarify that
this is not necessarily a two scale plan, but but yes, they'll have to go through a permitting, you know, upon approval, they will have to go to permitting to make sure that
they're compliant with all building codes. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Any I had a question that's not been yet addressed only because I'm a morning
person, not a night person. And maybe they'll address it with the hours, with their hours of operation. So will I have that question? Because I don't know if 12 a.m. is a normal hour or
I mean, yeah, I'll, I'll defer to the to the applicant property owner. And the other thing about the kitchen, I mean, that was a well, I was at the TRC and they'll address that later because they have a
limited menu. They're not doing a full scale kitchen from what I remember. So but anyway, that's all. I don't want to read it, but I don't think it's our purview to make that determination what size kitchen
they should or should not have. I agree that falls under the purview of explain it. So okay. All right. Thank you Ali for a great presentation. As usual I
just have two quick questions. There were no mention at all. Even the lack of the requirement of any additional parking for the increased occupancy there is that due to
the zoning as the transect district not requiring anything right to change. Okay. Correct. Yes. And because it's technically kind of adaptive reuse, there's some allowances within it. Correct. Yeah. And I
know the adjacent lot just to the south would be an eight. I think there's a private property lot on the other side of the street that maybe the owner could discuss with that owner if they, if they have
some need at some point, the the Lemon Street door that's going to remain operational. Would that be for emergency egress in case someone
questions not in but out. Yeah. Yeah, it still will be an accessible door. And that was one. Another thing that we wanted to reiterate in our condition is we wanted to be operational. And I think it would have to be that way
regardless for fire access. Right. True. Yeah. Operational and unobstructed. So thank you. Yep. Okay. Before I go back around, for a person who's seen the inside of that jail a few
times when I was young. I have no questions, I do. Okay. So we're going to go back. To I date myself and and where I was
when I was young. So we're going to go back. This way. So anybody have any follow up questions? I guess the only
thing is on a future on another project, we added safety parking rails that separated the parking lot from the outdoor seating, not to mention
the sidewalk that was coming. If you look at that photo, that white truck right below the orange line, will that be allowed to be a parking spot? If so, just maybe a barricade
that I don't know if it is a bar, some type of barricade that separates parking lot from the outdoor seating. I'd kind of like to see that. Okay. Just so for orientation purposes to
this is kind of the area where they have the proposed seating is back in this realm, but just
so you have orientation. Yes. Okay. Skip. All right. Your turn. My original question has
been answered however. I just wanted to follow up. Pardon me on what you were saying. It
seems to be. Sadly, I'm trying to orient myself to the photograph, but it seems that his comment or question that
that seating area be protected is a good one, but I you are you are the best judge. I mean, you've been there and you've discussed and seen where it's
going to be placed, but that would be my only concern is that the outdoor seating was protected somehow, even if it's just a berm or a I think it's
on the grassy area or whatever that. Oh, I didn't know that's what they were. I think how we did that in the past was an
outdoor seating area that was adjacent to parking spaces, had a bollard or some sort of protective measure. I think we just need instead of just outdoor seating being protected, I think we have to give some
sort of context. So if there if there are parking spaces adjacent to where the seating is, then there has to be a protective measure so we can add that condition. If that's something that the board chooses to add to the
recommendation, then we can put that in there. But just so there's a little bit more direction. Thank you. No questions. Any other questions
on this okay. There's no questions I don't think anybody has any questions. The applicant here does the applicant want to make a presentation or have any
comment with regard to any of the concerns that have been addressed by the PNC? So good evening. My name is Benjamin Spiegel. I am the owner of 325
East Lemon Street. I just want to clarify one point. For the record, the original applicant who submitted the narrative and business plan is no longer moving forward with his individual concept. However,
the intended use for the space remains exactly the same as the staff has reviewed a bar tavern restaurant style operation using the same general square
footage and a similar layout, intensity and activity level. I personally fell in love with the historical charm of the building when it was former Silver King, and I intend to
keep the historical character alive and to keep with the Bar Tavern kind of concept. At this stage, my goal is to simply secure the appropriate conditional use approval for
the property so the space can be activated with the use that aligns with the city's plan for the downtown gateway area. And I appreciate the staff's work on this application and the
recommendation for approval. I'm happy to answer any questions from the board. Okay. We're going to start on this side next. Any questions of the applicant. Yes. Okay. So I
looked at the hours and it said typically 12 a.m. I think that was every night. Is that a normal time frame down. So I think that area in that area, I think 12 a.m. is probably
usually when places start to close. Okay. Yeah, yeah. And the second one, if you want to clarify the kitchen use. Correct. So with with his
proposed plan, the kitchen use was mostly for kind of more convection ovens like pizza ovens, sandwiches, stuff like that to kind of feed a bar
tavern style atmosphere. Thank you. All right. No questions. I just thank you for revitalizing what is a vacant building and
keeping its character and keeping pretty much a similar use in an area. I used to also partake in the the drinking establishment there. That's where I used to start my first
Fridays all the time and then work my way in. So it was missed. And actually after it closed, I used to park there because the spots were all open and little by little the word
got out. So I wish you luck. Thank you. Thank you very much. I no question, Mr. Benjamin.
I'm excited for your idea. I'm going to definitely come check it out. Okay. I just want to make sure that the concerns addressed that you haven't kind
of covered them the. But I guess we could make that continuation. But I'm just making sure that you've heard the concerns and that you see
what you say about that is all. Yep. So I've heard the concerns regarding obviously the parking and the front door entry use.
Honestly with it was the original applicant's plan was to not make the the front door entry the main entry. Again. He's no longer part of this
this project. I particularly love that front entry and I would personally like to keep it there. So that kind of solves some of the issues with that. Granted, I'm still in
talks currently with prospective tenants, so to figure out the full plan. Okay. Yeah, good luck with with this
project. I live nearby, so I would certainly enjoy seeing something there. Is it your intent to have live music at
this location? I believe there is a possibility of some kind of live music. Mostly, I would assume indoors something on the small acoustic level. Nothing.
No. Large outside. Okay. That's it. No, Mr. Vessey. I have a question for staff. Not so much,
Mr. Spiegel. I've got to admit, I'm thrown for a loop here because we just had the owner not. And he is on the application, say, hey, kind of
deal's off. It's changed. What we were doing, is not it? I'm a little bit of a loss now. I'm supportive. It's it's a neat thing. Right? But something doesn't add up here where we're
being asked to approve a warrant for something. He just says he doesn't really maybe want or need. I'm not going to use your word not to put you on the spot, but I'm kind of at a
loss why we're actually doing what we're doing. Because the applicant just said, hey, I'm really not going to do that. May if I may. So could you answer that just for. So a
conditional use is tied to a property, not a specific business necessarily. So say the original applicant came through and got approval for
this request. And then a month later says, hey Benjamin, I'm not going to do this. He still has a conditional use in place as long as they operate within the confines of the approved
conditional use, they can do that. So you're really looking at the concept of a restaurant tavern at this location that
has up to 124 seats, and does that make sense at this location? Not necessarily. Will say the Rusty Key Tavern that was specifically proposed by this one specific person.
Agreed. And if I may continue, since you answered and you're listening, except that we just told him he's got to put a four foot sidewalk and a curb cut Ada. That could cost him ten
grand. He might not even use that. But as I understand it, as part of the warrant, he would be required to install that for the conditional use. So that so the installation, the improvements for that is
tied to interior modifications for the restaurant. With the building permit. I how it is written as a condition. It talks about the proposed main
entrance as the west side entry. So I would say that the widening of the sidewalk and that connection really is tied to the side entry being the
main entrance. So if that's not being used as the main entry, I guess there could be argued that they wouldn't have to do that. I may have, but we can't be wishy washy. We got to say
either it is or either it isn't, or I'm just trying to be helpful here because it's kind of a serious topic. It's not a casual we can we will, maybe we won't. Right. You can attach it
as a condition. If the wherever the entrance is, that's what's important. You can attach it to that, that location. Fair
enough. Trying to save you a whole bunch of cash and a bunch of work that you don't need to do because it warrants a warrant. It says it shall be appreciated. Yeah. So I have a
question if if I could if I could jump into. I will say, though, from staff's perspective, the connection to the city parking lot is fairly important. We think that that is that really plays out what
the special area plan is, you know, intending to accomplish, potentially the widening of the 2.5ft sidewalk is maybe more tied to that main entry, but
providing some sort of connection to the sidewalk to the city parking lot, we feel is very important. But up to the board, whether you want to have that condition tied to regardless of where the main
entrance is located, you can we can amend the condition to be, you know, to just be that has to be done regardless. I
understand everything that you just said, and I think that I would support that and the emphasis on that. The owner, as earnest as he is, might just be
passing through just like the previous partner was. But adherence to the district and trying to be true to the intent long term, arguably is more important. So however, you
might choose to structure the end result so that we follow that. I would be supportive of that. Okay. Yes. Okay. My turn as when you hear what I hear
the word warrant and I think of the jail, I just get chills now. Poor choice of words. No, only to make you uncomfortable. I know it used to be a jail,
right? Yeah. Trust me, I know. So. So the fact is, what I think the applicant is. What you're doing here is you're trying to get permission to do it, and you may find a tenant
or to fill in that space for a restaurant, whether you. I've, I'm not thinking you're going to run the restaurant, but probably getting an investor to buy or put in a restaurant.
That being said, any person coming in may design the interior the way they feel they need to design the interior. So leaving those requirements in
as a conditional use regardless gives the flexibility or the requirement that whoever's coming in will be have to do
that. So I think that's the amendment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's kind of what your your business plan is correct. Yeah. My goal at this point is to get the okay, find
somebody to fill it, get it, find a tenant, and at least make it easy for them and makes them much more sure to come to the space. Yes okay. All right. So that being said, I, I have a
simple question then. So it isn't necessarily going to be a Celtic restaurant. So that's how it was first. That's how it was originally. That's how it was originally framed. It may
or may not be. Yeah, yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Is there anybody else have any questions before I go to any public comment? I don't see any
public comment. Is there anybody responded to the applicant either mail or email or. No. Okay. So that being
said, I'm going to go ahead and close the the presentation. And did you have something else you wanted to add? Yes. I just wanted to give a suggestion to
the board if you wanted to revise that second condition, to just be applicable, no matter, regardless of the entry, I think that's what's going to I think that's what the motion
is going to be. Okay. And I and I think what the motion may include, whoever's going to make it is that there be some type of barrier. You know,
whether it's a plant or one of those cement planters or some type of barrier to the outdoor seating, to the outdoor seating as a requirement or as a condition, what we would
recommend is just removing and proposed main entrance, west side entry. So just say the walkway connecting the Lemon Street sidewalk shall be widened to the minimum four feet extended to connect to the
existing pedestrian walkway leading to the city parking lot. On and on. So we would just remove that specific reference to the entryway and that would
achieve just getting those connections that are required for a second exit. Is there a second door there? It just it
just takes away that tying that condition to the specific main entrance and the, you know, lack of clarity, if you're going to adopt the conditions
and you would it sounds like the board would add a fifth one, which is the one that you discussed. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I need a little bit more clarification from Miss Keen.
Okay. Having read it more carefully and tried to listen more carefully, do I understand? That the sidewalk shall be
continuous from the existing city parking lot and the sidewalk extensions there, and then it shall be continuous to the new four foot that runs in
front of the building, and then exit out on Lemon Street. Is that what I hear? Essentially, it will be continuous. It may not be a complete straight line. How it lays out to connect to the existing pedestrian parkway.
So in other words, someone could walk on that sidewalk. And I didn't see this before because there's not a site plan, there's just a floor plan, there's not enough. There really is that they can take a
left on Lemon Walk by the west entrance that may or may not be being used, and continue to the sidewalk. Correct? Yeah. So essentially kind of follow
these lines from Lemon Street. Someone could walk all the way through here. So that's why we said, you know, beneficial not only through the site, but for people going from downtown to get to the property and vice
versa. I missed the whole dotted line thing before. I'm real slow. It takes me longer to get there. You're doing great sticking to that, because that is that is really nice. Yeah. And like I said, it may
not be you know, exactly this layout, but we can work with the applicant and the future tenant when necessary. And are you cool with that? I mean, if the entrance, the existing
entrance remains the same as the one that's on Lemon Street, I would prefer not to have a connecting sidewalk through that direction if the side entrance is not in use, so I'm
glad that I asked, because that's not what's being proposed here, because staff in the city wants you to put that in as part of getting the more seats. Okay. I just want to help because I think that
there's a miss there. So you're kind of tied to this. No matter what happens, you can just start planning for it now. I tried to save you the money, but, dude, she just spent. It may be better for your business.
Okay. Yeah, the the ancillary parking is equally important, so we want people to be able to come and patronize the establishment, to have availability, even even the
sidewalk kind of goes through, essentially called a parking lot. Not all of it's used that that walkway that's considered
the parking lot would not be. Applicable for the for to connect it. So, so for for example, like parts that are
say the paved parking lot area, ways that you can delineate it for pedestrians by paint striping that so delineates a pedestrian walkway, areas that are in the grass area that would have, you know, an actual walkway. There's a good portion
that's already in right here on the property, but we can when the time comes, we can work with you on how to do that. And like I said, maybe your future. Let me let me suggest this. And one of the reasons I think that
four foot is is important, regardless of where you put the entrance, if somebody is going to access your property from the city parking lot and they are they are handicapped, you're going to want the four foot sidewalk anyways. So
that's just my my thought. And that's why I think it's important, regardless of where the entrance may be. So I want to go ahead and, and I think this more of this board
discussion and so question okay. Okay. I, I'm not able to picture it totally. But if he installs the sidewalk, if he takes which apparently he needs
to do does that it's no longer a city sidewalk. If he's putting that sidewalk down, do we need to work. No. Okay. All
right. The chief knows what I was going to ask, and he was shaking his head. I was just worried about this man's liability. Okay, okay. All
right. I'm going to go ahead and close the comment and turn the matter over to this board before we start a discussion. We opened it up to the public.
Yet I think we did. I asked if there was any. Did we. Okay. Sorry. Did I miss that? Okay. I first, for discussion purposes, like to hear a motion. And if
whoever's going to make the motion, if they would think about including the additional requirement. I'm not telling you what to do, but but that's
chair could for everyone's understanding. What is the suggested additional condition that there be a there be some some type of structure
prohibitive between the eating out the exterior outdoor dining area, some protective, whether it's a planter or something to designate or separate the
outdoor seating from, from parking or from. The cars. Vehicle traffic. Vehicle traffic. Did we establish that
there's parking next adjacent to the. Well, there's there's a little bit of parking. If you looked at the out the the aerial, there's some a little bit of parking along the side.
And that's just a barrier. We're thinking of a barrier, some structural barrier between the outdoor seating. That was, that was is that the is that the case or was there just in that in that photo, just a
vehicle parked there randomly. Is that actually going to be utilized for parking? So as far as associated with the proposed restaurant, they're proposing to put seating at this time
potentially in the rear of the building. I would say they formalize seating in the rear of the building. And that formalized area is adjacent to
parking. A barrier of some sort needs to be in place. Once we have more information at the building permit stage, we can implement that condition. We always look back to the conditions when we're looking at the permit, so we can put
that in place. Because the reason I ask is there's there's a difference between vehicles that may be traveling, you know, laterally with a seating area, as opposed to pulling up
perpendicular to a seating area. Perpendicular is obviously more dangerous. So it how is the traffic pattern being utilized there? Is it is it that
vehicles are going alongside the parking lot does not go all the way through. It kind of ends. Basically the parking they park on either side. If you see my arrow kind of it
parks along the side. This vehicle I think is I think there's a home right here, and this might be that personal vehicle for that home. That's my assumption. But the parking
spaces for these establishments are on either side of this drive aisle, perpendicular to the building. Yeah, right. Okay. All right. So there was a so I
didn't hear a motion yet. Okay. I would make that motion, Mr. chairman, to approve resolution 2025 dash 62 for conditional use. 25 Dash 69, including the
warrant for additional seating and including the original for staff recommendation points to be determined by the final
placement of the main entrance, and also include the parking barrier for any protective barrier. Yeah, any area that's
used particularly, and any area that's used for outdoor seating. Okay, there's a motion and a second. Now, any discussion on
the motion before roll call? Okay. I don't see any hands. So roll call please, Mr. Collins. Yes, Miss Weaver? Yes, Miss
Johnson? Yes, miss. Early. Yes, Mr. Rockland? Yes. Vice chair. Vessey. Yes, chairperson. Yes. Okay. Moving on. Thank you,
thank you. Okay. If you look on your agenda, item B is going to be deferred. So to item C which is again another quasi judicial
ordinance. 2025 Dash 18 amending the official zoning atlas for property located at 475 North Highland, from
agricultural to residential planned development. Good evening, Pat McNeese. Supervisor. So what you have
before you is a proposed rezoning. For property located at 475 North Highland Avenue.
This is about 500ft north of Keystone Road on the east side of the road of Highland Avenue. The future land use is residential, very low, and
preservation the current zoning. It's currently under two Zonings agricultural and residential planned development and proposed is to make it all
agricultural. The property is 7.72 acres in size, more than half of which is wetlands. It was originally part of that McAlpin property off of
Keystone Road, and it's been subject to agricultural activities over the years. The applicant is also processing a minor site plan to divide the
parcel into with the working with the TRC on. So this is the site location of the parcel. As
you can see, it's got two zonings on it. The future land use is residential, very low and preservation because there are wetlands on the property.
So that's what the preservation covers. The Zonings are PG and agricultural. You processed a rezoning for adjacent property.
The same thing. They to basically remove that RPD designation. This area was an approved RPD from I guess
several years ago. It was never built. Pinellas County bought a large portion of it to use for storm water handling for the
Keystone Road upgrade, so this is left over from that. This just gives you an idea using the county wide map, what the
Zonings and future land use in the area looks like. Basically, east to 19, mostly up off of Keystone Road. You're looking
at rural and estate type zoning and future land use. This is our 2045 comprehensive place based area map. Same idea. This
property is in an agricultural residential estate, place based area. Both the county and the city comprehensive plans, both of which have a planning
horizon of 2045. At least through that horizon, see this area as staying low density
estate type. Parcels limited agricultural, which you can do in Pinellas County anyway. You've got veterinary veterinarian, some dog breeding,
limited horses, you know, activities like that up in this area. This is a survey. The parcel I didn't really mark it,
but a large portion right along here. East of that is wetlands. The the uplands. Fortunately for them bordered the road. So
they will be able to that will make it easier for them to split this into two parcels and build a single family. There
are eight units allocated density wise because they have almost eight acres, but the change to agricultural will limit them to single family
detached dwelling product and the lot sizes and dimensions are are very conservative. So they're really limited. Really
the two lots that they're proposing is probably the best practical use. So the agricultural zoning is
consistent with the plan and place based area map. And the the uses are compatible with the surrounding area. As I mentioned, we're looking at
single family detached dwelling for the residential. This is consistent with both the city and the county. Long term growth patterns for this area.
We serve the property. Property right now the fire, emergency and law enforcement services. We can serve it with solid waste. The utilities and
roadway are provided of by Pinellas County. So staff is recommending approval of this rezoning from two districts
agricultural, agricultural and RPD to all one district agriculture. And there were no responses to the public notices.
Do you have any questions on this one? We'll start on this end this time. Great. I my
question is I think it's great, but why why would they want to do this? Because they want more agricultural. I mean, what's
the objective? The objective is to remove the RPD zoning. Yes, so that they can go forward with the low level, a state
level residential under agricultural. So they cannot go forward with the low density. It with the way it is zoned right now. No, there's two
zonings on it. And if they left the RPD on they're higher density okay. It well it wouldn't necessarily do higher density but you'd have to you'd have to come in with a plan
development which is not not what's appropriate for this property basically because there's significant wetlands too. So how would they. And under the as you all know,
under the new comprehensive plan, we really have prohibited pretty much prohibited wetland impacts. Okay. Thank you.
That's it. Okay. No questions here. No questions. Thank you. No no questions. If we approve
this, will this be the last time that we look at this parcel? Because we have spent more time staring at Highland Avenue, trying to put some levity in there. I actually
understand exactly what's going on there. But maybe this is the end of this project here. There's a few of those. That's.
Yeah. I mean, is this you the I would say that the rezoning. Pretty much done after this. I
don't see any move by the county trees on their bond. And my guess is they don't care to do it. They already built the
pond. You know, it's. Any other questions? No. Okay. It's not too often we see somebody who kind of call down zone. Yeah.
Okay. And and and it's it's actually refreshing to to not see everybody try to pack a lot of homes in a small area. So I have no questions of the
applicant is here. If the applicant has anything to add. I'll keep I'll keep it brief.
For the record, I'm Pete Pensa. I'm an ACP certified planner with avid McAdams for the land planners, surveyors, engineers for the project. We concur with
staff's findings and recommendation for the rezoning. Quite simply put, it's a cleanup. It's got split zoning on it. The RPD is, staff had
pointed out, was never developed. The property owner, Patrick Fantasia. Sole purpose for this is to do a lot split and build two single family homes. And we met with the city
about doing that. And zoning came up as a item that we needed. We needed to clean up in order to do that. We have an application for minor site plan, which is the preliminary
planning process for that lot. Split is already in review. DRC reviewed that concurrently with the with the rezoning, and we're updating the couple items
that they had on the survey and the minor site plan to address the comments that they had and will be submitting. And then he just wants to go forward with a building permit and build two houses. Thank you. Okay. And I
would also question came up about the wetlands. There's no intention of impacting wetlands. We I know you don't have the minor site plan as part of your application, but essentially
where the two words lot one and lot two in the acreages, those two areas where those labels are is where the developable areas are two and a half and three quarters of an acre of
developable area. There's significant utility easements all over this property as well as wetlands. And then of course, you got the wetland buffer from there as well. So the minor
site plan, it shows where the developable area is that's in the property. It's actually pulled back off the road because Duke Energy and others have easements along the road
frontage. And so that's it. Unless you have any additional questions for me. Any questions of the applicant? Okay. Any
public comment, any phone calls, emails. No. Okay. All right then I'm gonna close the the presentation at this point and
turn it over to the board. Is there first before we have a discussion, I'd like to hear a motion. To somebody. Want to
make a motion? Sure. I motion that we pass as submitted. Submitted ordinance 25 2025 Dash 18. Okay. Is there a second? Second. All right. We
got a couple seconds. Okay. Any discussion? No. Okay. Roll. Roll call, Mr. Collins. Yes, miss Weaver? Yes, miss Swenson?
Yes, Mr. Lee? Yes. Mr. Rockland? Yes. Vice chair. Vessey. Yes, chairperson. Yes. All right. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Good luck. Okay, on to our next. Item on the agenda, resolution 2025, Dash 65, which is also quasi judicial site plan
approval for the construction of a 13,000 square foot medical and general office building at 1098 South Pinellas Avenue. Is the applicant here? Okay.
Presentation, please. This is for The Shoppes at Mears site. Plan approval again, this is at 1098 South Pinellas Avenue. The
property consists of 1.83 acres in size. 1.2 of that is wetlands and submerged land.
This is in the T5, a South Pinellas Avenue transect district and the South Gateway Character District of the Special Area Plan. What's
proposed is a little over 13,000ft■!S of gross floor area for a medical and general office building. There were any
applicant. Mr. Is here to talk about this application. There were two previous approvals on this site. Your staff report outlines that the project was
never constructed either time. Those were in 2010 and 2020. So this is the location of the site. I did add the transit stop up here, which I will talk
about later. We can go back to that if needed. It's again at the north west northwest corner of Mears Boulevard. And 19
really kind of at the dead end of that South Canal. This is just an oblique aerial of the
site and the context around. Again, this is in the T5 South Pinellas Ave transect. The blue
dashed line outlines the South Gateway character district. So this is in your form based code. This would be really the first building in that character
district that would be built to the standards called for in the form form based code. This just
shows the survey. The property yellow is the property line and the green just shows the wetland jurisdiction line. The area west of the line is the
wetland area and this shows the. Demolition plan to impact point 98 acres of the wetland. To
prepare the site. And then there will be a walled drainage pond facility on the west along the west side and outside of
that would be the remaining submerged land. This is a depiction of the site plan. So you've got the office building right up almost well ten feet
from the property line. So right up along the roadway, parking behind, we have an access in front as required by
code, as well as access from the rear for the patrons. The applicant's proposing parking
to the north and west, with a total of 70 spaces. And 16 of those will be. Pervious pavement. In the back we have
the wall drainage facility, which will also be bordered by riprap because the the bottom of the wall there will be
submerged basically, and riprap is to provide some habitat along that really that basically dredged canal that's
there. Couple other features I'll talk about this as far as the review criteria, we did ask the applicant to reduce the
parking, the required parking per smart code is 39 spaces. As you know, parking requirements and smart code are reduced from
what you're Euclidean zone requires because of the use. Being a medical office building, the applicant really felt like they needed more parking. They
proposed 75, then they reduced it to 70, added the pervious pavement and added additional landscaping. So. That is
something that that just wanted to let you know. We kind of went through another feature of the access is from Apricot
Court, and the applicant did request an access to Mirrors Boulevard, that is a county road. The county did deny that
access at this point. And he can talk about that if you have any questions about that. So we just have the access off Apricot Court. This is just a
depiction of where the landscaping is proposed. The applicant is proposing a street wall to achieve the 80% build
out on South Pinellas. But there's no street wall proposed on Boulevard, and a warrant is requested to allow a hedgerow to act as the street wall.
Staff feels that this this could be supported. We feel like really the main. Vehicular
travel is is there is a lot of mirrors, but for this building is really going to be on all 19. So we felt like that warrant
was supportable. This is just a depiction of the building elevation. It's obviously going to have a corner feature in
this gateway area. The wetland mitigation. I'll talk about that for a minute. So the wetland impacts were permitted by state and federal agencies.
The state permit with the Southwest Florida Water Management District is still in effect. I've got it's in your staff report when it expires,
but it's a couple years. I think I can look that up if needed. The Corps permit already did expire, and the the Pinellas County Water
Navigation Authority has asked that the applicant apply for a dredge and fill permit. Meanwhile, the mitigation for the wetland impacts was
completed in 2014, 2015. It's it's been monitored ever since it was done up at the North Anclote River Nature Park.
That's the city park. And again finished in 2015. This is just a construction depiction of the construction document for that
wetland mitigation and the full documents in your packet. These are pictures I took the other day. I put the latest monitoring report in your packet from August of this year.
That is the seventh and final report reporting successful recovery and meeting the goals and actually exceeding the
goals of the mitigation for this wetland. Restoration that was done. So really, all he all
the applicant needs to do is renew that core permit and, you know, document the mitigation that was done that was originally approved by the
Corps and then with the county. The county required city approval or city status before they would process their permits. So it's kind of a
chicken and egg thing. So they are awaiting city approval of the project before they process the applicant's request. This
application came in in 2023, prior to the adoption of your 2045 Comprehensive plan. So it's being reviewed under the
previous plan. In that case, if you all remember, you were allowed to impact wetlands, then you had to show by three
choices and show either prove why you couldn't pick the choices in order, or you know what you were going to do. The
first choice was to mitigate on site. That wasn't possible for the site. The second choice was to mitigate inside the city limits and planning area. That was actually done for this
project. The third choice is to mitigate offsite or pay into mitigation bank, but the applicant was able to mitigate inside the city. So we asked
for the reduction in parking because of the heat island effect or the heat severity effect, which is really more of a policy direction, or it is a
policy direction in your new comprehensive plan. It's not in the old plan. The applicant did do a reduction. So that was
just something that we. Kind of went back and forth and talked through with the applicant already gave you the spaces and the warrant. This project would
technically require a transportation management plan because it proposes 51 peak hours of vehicular trips. When you hit 51 or above, you're
supposed to do a transportation management plan. Usually that's bicycle racks, which this project has, and other ways of
non vehicular transportation. Sometimes people can do a bus stop or other means. As you can
see, we do have a transit stop less than 300ft from the site. We felt like this site has already been mitigated for
especially for that low level 51 new trips. So we did not ask for a separate TMP. This is
just a picture of the heat severity map in your new comprehensive plan. And as you can expect, you know your mild to moderate heat is is along
some of the commercial corridors. And we're just looking to, you know, minimize how much more is added. The
property can the project can meet the concurrency management requirements and meet the levels of service. It's expected to meet. City building codes. The applicant has
proposed multi-tenant flood proofing. And this isn't really preferred by staff because of the documents, agreements and and action plans that have to
be implemented ahead of the storm. But it is allowable. FEMA allows this, so the city has to allow it. So we were just we have just recommended a
condition that this paperwork be submitted with the building permit application. And all that documentation is, is completed. This went through
five rounds of review at TRC, and the last review was on May 1st. Some there's a couple of conditions that help resolve
TRC comments. And so staff is recommending approval conditions. I can read those if you want, but they are in your staff report. This is just a
summary. So there would be one warrant to allow the planted hedgerow along boulevard frontage and then staff feels that the the applicant should
pull the site construction and vertical building permits within six months of the approval. As you know, the code,
we had a code change there a couple years ago. There used to be one year for an applicant to apply for a building permit. The code was changed to six
months to obtain a building permit. So we wanted to reiterate that. And that's what that condition is about dry flood proofing. We're asking
for the documentation up front with the building permit to the satisfaction of the floodplain administrator. Before the
permits are issued. All other jurisdictional permits. So we did supply. So so he does have a receipt from the county and the Corps for his applications.
Knowing the Corps and not really knowing the county there, there will be a time lapse for for pulling that permit, some processing time. But we are we
would like to require those with the application for building permit. Looking for vertical clearance on the landscape material for D.O.T.
standards on maintain and county standards on more years. Boulevard. The driveway access point is restricted to 24ft near Smartcode, so that needs
to be reduced a little bit. And there's a number of things for utilities, just that it's master metered and some other conditions that need to be on
this approval so that the the applicant gets notice. So this application appeared on the agenda. That is the public
notice for this application. We have not received any any contact or anything from citizens or the public and
staff is recommending approval of this resolution. Are there any questions? Just for clarification, you said six months to secure. You mean to
apply for a permit because the permit could take many months to secure. You're talking about Applicating application for within six months. We're
talking about. Pulling both the site construction, which is the site preparation permit, and the vertical permit. Within six
months. The code allows the applicant to ask the board for phasing plan or more time. I didn't receive a written
request by today from the applicant, but he can he can address them. So I thought we said that they had to apply within the window, not because
applying and securing could take revisions back and forth could take a long time, and it may not be the fault of the applicant. I thought that's what we did, that they had to apply. Yeah, I can that that
first line of that code is section 210 05A approval of a site plan shall expire in six months from the date of original approval, unless a
construction permit or building permit is obtained and kept active, except that the Board of Commissioners may approve an alternate phasing plan at the time of site plan approval.
Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the clarification. Yeah. Okay. We'll start on. We're going to start with. Yeah I have a couple of questions here. First
of all, who did the letters go to to find out if people were concerned at all. There were no letters. This is a site plan for use by Was. It was on the
Planning and Zoning board agenda, which was posted last Monday, because I would only really like to know what the people in the mirror in the condos over there would think, because I have a couple of
questions. One, we know that they need that dry flooding proofing because they're not going to adhere to the elevation that they were really recommended to hold there.
That's correct, that's correct. And that's a concern to me. But. They've done and I can ask him some more questions after. I really don't agree that we
don't need a traffic study. There are so many accidents on Pinellas Avenue South by Mears. And I know that we're exiting
at at apricot, but that's not too far. And to say that the transit stop and bike rack and even maybe the bus stop, I mean, people downtown Tarpon don't
even want to walk two blocks, provide sufficient means to obviate the need for TMP. That
is, that is yeah, troubling. The other. I really would probably want to ask him more questions, because I'm really concerned with water drainage
and the impact on those canals, because the people that live on MLK and in those Mears condos, if you have just a high tide, the water is flowing over their
seawall. And we know for people that live around there, that bridge is so low to begin with that if you're going to impact that water and that water level gets higher, you know that
that's a much concern. And I did read about your soil studies. And in fact, you only, I believe, had two, two spots that you tested at the time. And you have to do additional
soil studies. And I could talk to you about that later, but I definitely, as an engineer, have a little bit of concerns with this, but thank you. Okay.
I'm not asking questions. No questions, Mr. Chair. Just to clarify, this is only approval to move forward with the
building plan. Nothing. Or is this. I'm sorry, I guess I just don't know. Is this. If we approve this, are they good to start the building? Well,
you're obviously recommending to the Board of Commissioners. Once the Board of Commissioners approves it, they can come in and apply for building permits.
Yes. Okay. And with the building permits, if they get to that stage, like, I just know there's the electrical lines on that corner. There's
those. What would the building permits state the, the move removal of all those or like how I guess just how would that work? Because I just I drive
that corner every day and there's, there's electrical lines like on that. I'm assuming you wouldn't have electrical lines right by the
building. I, I, I'm just trying to learn here if we're approving like what this building looks like or like the process of it, if you can. I
mean, we, you know, there's there's signage there, there's electric poles. I don't know that we got and those would all be in the right of way. So and
he's ten feet back from the right of way. Not saying nothing would need to be modified, but those kinds of details are usually done at the building permit. We we
generally review the site layout here and the details of of site circulation and features and that. But to get
into all that extra, you know, building frankly building code details is is just too much to ask the applicant without knowing if a site plan, if they
even have a site plan approval. So those details are usually worked out later. And again, that's all right of way. Infrastructure and an estimate.
And the applicant may be able to answer about the electric lines. Okay. And how high would they have to build up. Do you.
Six feet the you mean the flood? I mean, we're building elevation. The parking lot is on top of wetland like so. Yeah. So the parking lot said about an applicant again can address
this. If you look at your the plan said about seven foot above sea level. The site right now is, you know, anywhere from
anywhere from zero at the west end which is submerged to maybe two or so. So as we outlined in the staff report, we're looking
at 4 to 6ft of, of fill. And then the finish floor and parking lots probably six something finish floor is going to be seven feet above sea level. Would I anticipate a
sidewalk followed by a retaining wall followed by the building. Would you would that be the sidewalk on the the all
19 like the street? I'm assuming I would see. Yeah. There's a retaining wall of some sort, a sidewalk and then the wall of the building. And
as you can see, the applicant's proposing stairs here to walk into the building onto the seven foot finish floor and the
height of the building. Height, I can look three foot above. It looks like it's about 28ft according to the elevation.
Correct. All right. Thank you. So the the main entrance to the building is going to be off apricot. Is that or is it going
to be off Pinellas. The patrons can enter from the parking lot. The code requires the the
entrance on South Pinellas. I don't think we get to the point of of enforcing that. Everybody go in that side. You can go in obviously pedestrians and and
people with bicycles and things can would go into that side. But it depends also on who the tenants are. The architectural drawings would would reflect
some kind of main entrance appearance from the. Yes. That's what this east elevation
is. Okay. That's all I have. Forgive me, but I, I, I'm looking at the photograph on location and context from your
staff presentation. The actual photograph. And I'm very familiar with this intersection as well. It's a it's an extremely busy intersection, although you don't see that
right now on the photograph. And I cannot wrap my head around. I guess my question is this. And I heard you say earlier that the parking was
resolved somehow, but I look at that parking lot and it's location, and I'm concerned not only with the heat factor, but
runoff from that facility's parking lot could be horrible. And that's a that's a what do
you call the. The water? Well, I would thank you. The canal. There's not a lot of movement. So any runoff is not going to
be, you know, diluted and washed away. What I see is just a big problem with that corner. And I guess what I want to ask is, have they addressed
anything on the along those lines? Certainly they have. Proposed to hold a stormwater handling plan. They have a wall
pond that's proposed, and our stormwater engineers have reviewed that have reviewed that plan, and it is in compliance. And I can't
remember you had another there was runoff. And something else you may be better qualified as saying retention. Yeah. Yeah, yeah it's retention. The
storage where she's talking about is retention. Yeah. So the pond will treat that is there. Yeah. Okay. And then if you pull up if you just address
the question, if you address the, this is the, the the blue. That's the retention pond. The pond that will accept the drainage. And it's a retention
pond that works. Well. That fixes everything. Right. Well I don't I'm just very concerned
about the location okay. Mr. McNeish, are you done? I'm done. Thank you. Are you sure? I'm sure. Okay. I was hoping that
you could repeat for everyone, because there is obviously some concern. And maybe just a touch of misunderstanding is that it
appears that they're about to pave over a wetland. Which is partially true, except that there was part of your presentation that I don't think was completely understood in regards to the mitigation that was done by the previous
applicant that has moved forward with this application. And that's how I understand that. Is that previous application and a previous development site plan did a
wetland mitigation project within the city of Tarpon Springs. Could you cover that again? So we understand how, yes, that wetland is being transferred somewhere else. And
I appreciate that. I want for those of us who which I understand, but there's some people may not understand how mitigation works. I think that's what you're so well, I understand how it works. I know
some people may not understand how understand? Okay. This is actually for hey, when you look at the picture, it looks like a tidal wetland when it's just really the end of a canal. And
in a previous time and I want to speak for staff, a previous applicant and perhaps owner made a huge effort to bank and
to mitigate the covering of that. She covered that in that. But it was kind of hard to tell what was going on. She showed some pretty pictures. Maybe if you could do that again for everyone, just to make sure
that we understand what's been done in regards to this particular piece of project. Thank you. Sure. First of all, the applicant can correct me if I'm wrong when when we hear
from him, but I believe the applicant and owner have not changed. So this is the same applicant requesting basically
for third time the approval of this project. So the applicant did perform mitigation. So. So this is the site as you can see
there's you know I should have probably guesstimated where the property line is here. But you've got up front. And here's
the uplands where you see the little tree dots. That's the uplands that's disturbed. I'll backtrack a little bit and say, when you look at historic
aerials of this, this area, this was all dredged. Yeah. The seawall stopped here. This was not stabilized up here in this
area. And it began, I'm conjecturing now. It began to erode back in and fill back in. It filled to a certain level and grew mangroves. So all this
greenery you see here is mangrove wetlands and salt marsh grasses. It's a marine wetland, basically, and and
real shallow submerged land. So the applicant proposed there's 1.2 acres of that on his
property of wetlands. And some of that or most of that is going to be filled in to bring the site up to an acceptable
grade to, to build on. Okay. So when that happens, as we all know, you need permits to mitigate the loss of the
wetland benefits both in area and function. That's how the agencies look at it. They have a score sheet. They look at the
score of the area you're going to impact. And they say, okay, you need to score that or higher on your mitigation site. And it needs to be basically
like for like marine, brackish, marine wetlands for the same type. So. That's what they did.
They proposed a mitigation plan to create wetlands. Basically it was almost kind of a wetland restoration. If any of you know,
the little bit of history about Northern Nature Park, it used to be a landfill, a big one, pretty big one that was closed in like the 70s, maybe. Anyway,
a lot of this stuff was, was dredge spoils. So they scraped down a lot of that dirt, planted the area. And the mangroves are fairly getting
fairly large. This was, you know, ten years ago now. So this mitigation is is about ten years old and. The success
criteria. So the coverage of plants, the diversity of plants, those types of things. The agency says you need to achieve this. They they you have to go
out and do a report every year. So the applicant has been doing that. And they they measure from beginning to end whether those standards have been
achieved. This last report from August states that the standards have been achieved. And in some selected areas
exceeded. So. The agencies have to approve where the mitigation is done. And like I say, the level, the the quality and the area of the mitigation, if you
can't do mitigation, as you all have heard, there are regional what they call banks, mitigation, banks of large wetland restoration that you
can pay into and that that restoration is done outside Pinellas County. There are no banks in Pinellas County. In this case. They didn't have to
do that. We had the site available and they did mitigation here. So the as far as the agencies are concerned,
the services of the wetland impacts have already been replaced. Does that help? Well, it helps me a lot. I hope it helps somebody else. So in
other words, I'll just summarize it because he's talk. There was a dump on the Anclote River, and they cleaned up a big portion of the dump and made it look pretty like those pictures that they can build on
this part. That was, according to Mike, never actually wetland to begin with. It was dredged a long time ago. It's it used to be all upland. They dug it out. Yeah. That's just according to Mike right there, who's been
here longer than everybody. You can tell what is upland? Upland is dry land. Okay, okay. Fancy word for dry. Wet is wet. Dry upland is dry. Wet is okay. You did great, Pat. Thank you very
much. I was trying to give credit where it's due. Right. There's been a lot of work done in order to be able to do the work that's there. Okay. All right. Okay. So just so I understand, everybody
understands historically when you have wetland, some of it's bad wetland. It's not all good wetland. They swap a developer will swap us out provide you
better opportunity for more pristine or precious land that you want to preserve. Okay. In exchange, allow me to fill in
some of this bad wetland. And so that was done years ago. Okay. They purchased or acquired more pristine or more
needed land in exchange for the opportunity to fill in wetland. Okay. Does that make sense? Okay. If you try to do it on site, if you can't do it on
site, just to clarify, you can go within the city limits if it's available. If it's not available, let's say you're building a big project and there's not enough within the
city. You can bank go anywhere in the state where we've had developers buy land up in, in the in up in Pasco or, or Central Florida to preserve
that wetland. So the developer will exchange buying that wetland in exchange for led me to develop this one. Okay. Interesting. I didn't know that.
So so and and a question for Pat historically historically because I know sometimes wetlands become wetlands that were never wetlands before. Over the course of time. I know
that for a fact. Okay. And and so this property may have never been always wetland. It may have been upland that was, like you said, dredged. Okay. All right. If you look at that
development where they were that's never been developed behind Ace Hardware. That wasn't always canals okay. That was dredged to make to make
those waterfront condos or water access condos okay. Because you never would have. Perfect. Yeah. Okay. If that makes if that makes sense. Okay. So that was dredged for that
purpose. Okay. I'll just give you a little bit of historical data on that okay. Thank you. All right. With regard to questions, and I understand that the the runoff or the
drainage will be because drainage has to remain on site. Okay. There there's going to be an overflow. But typically when you have a parking lot, you or
you have to all your non pervious drainage has to remain on site. So that's what you saw that that would have called it a a retention pond. But it's
not a pond. It's a retention bank or vault okay. So I hope that answers some of the questions that everybody has.
As far as questions, Pat. I just have comments and I'll reserve my comments for later because now's not the time for comments. I just want to make sure that if anybody's got a
question, you have another question. Let's address the questions and when we open it up for the applicant, we can ask him questions. But as far as opinions or comments, I
would request that we wait till we are in session and then we can have our opinion address our opinions. But at this point the board should only be asking
questions. Okay, I'll delete my question for a comment okay, okay. Follow your rules okay. All right. Any other questions for this for staff at this
point the applicant please introduce yourself. Definitely. Thank you so much. JD Al-sabbah engineering, 8370 West Hillsborough Avenue, suite 200,
Tampa, Florida 33615. And I already sworn so thank you so much for clarification. And I have I thought I'm going to start discussing the project completely. But Pat covered
almost everything. So I'm going to go to mainly mostly to the major point as discussed. For instance, the drainage, the drainage. As you mentioned, we have a drainage system which
can treat and attenuate runoff on site and later overflow anything, what they call it over and beyond, can be overflow. This site in
particular require only treatment, not require attenuation. However, we provide treatment and attenuation and it is on that site that one. So this site,
it's also in tidal influence which the tidal influence is it's you know, it's not required mitigation even in the flood area there. So so that's
what make it, you know different. You know case and the other the this the flood elevation is ten. However the finish floor is seven as we did
based on the request of the staff. And we're going to go do prove protection to the foundation, which cost highly. We try to make it pedestrian friendly. The building so can
be accessible as in the downtown. And that's what the target was the same way with the landscaping as requested by the staff. And based on the smart code, we did all what
they asking for to to place it. So that's that's I think as far as the height we trying to make it also 20 foot or 25 foot as mentioned by Pat and the same
you see the style, the architectural style. Try as as close to the area as, as we can with this here. So the as, as you mentioned exactly this is
started about probably 15 years ago. And the quality of the wetland is very low. Not by my opinion, by environmental scientists and by the agency
who came and reviewed the wetland as far as the swift mud or Army Corps of Engineers. So based on that, when you an impact wetland area, you do
what you call it. You ma'am. So we went with you, ma'am. Method to determine, as mentioned by Pat the what's the existing quality of that. Create score.
Multiply by the area you're going to impact. And. Created. You require 0.7 unit to mitigate 0.7. Unit can be bank and can be somewhere else. We
what we did is is like we went and created and then North Park River because something also useful to the city at that time when we started it. So we held
also the city they trying to do they have some retrofit project and we did it and we did paid for that and created it and create that wetland. As mentioned exactly. The wetland
has been in operation for over ten years. And periodically our environmental scientists create what they call it operation and maintenance, report where they go and observe it and create
his report and submit it to the agency. As with Mud and Army Corps. And the same way, no objection. And of course, the city aware of it, the public work. Tom, before he retired,
he was working with us closely on this. So I mean, we did everything what it take and I encourage you to walk that site you're going to see and I walk
it this afternoon before I came here. It's it's really dry. It's really dry. I know, you see, it's like wetland and wet and other you'll be, you'll be, you'll be surprised what it is. But regardless, this is not a
question. It's defined 15 years ago as wetland. We still we three times get approval by Swift three times. The last one was last year. So which is
effective every five years. And as mentioned exactly Army Corps is expired. We submitted we work into extension which is no issue. They told us we
submitted in May. Until now we didn't hear from them. What we hear to I was out of the office. This is like two and a half months ago. We are out of the office. So sorry about that on
the delay, but we will get back to you as soon as possible. The second reply about two weeks ago to indicate to me that, as you know, the, the, the, the, the federal government is close.
So, you know, we are delay. So that's the reason we delay. And when we come back as, as soon as we can, we can get you back. The response. So before I continue and make some comment
also and what ask from Pat. I would love to any other question or clarification. I would love to help and answer. Okay. And we'll start. Does
anybody have any questions of the applicant? We discussed a bit the traffic not requiring a traffic study realistically. I
mean, have you looked at Apricot and Pinellas Avenue? And that intersection right close to it? It mirrors there. There was a major accident just
a week or so ago. Yes, definitely. Concerned about that. Yeah. I'm I tell you the truth, the the issue we face we don't have access to to
Pinellas Avenue. So which is D.O.T. which is D.O.T. and we don't have access to Mears Boulevard. Fantastic. We have access to the side street. The
side street, which is might be I'm not going to say zero trip, but we are our trip, the one generated, and we have what we call it a thought, as you see longer thought, which is can
back up with 4 or 5 car before coming to. They're going to stop the traffic and the stop bar. Yeah. Before taking the right or the left on this year, which is the best of my ability.
This is an excellent one. Tell you the truth, we did traffic study as far when we try to work on the access here, the the generated trip is this and
the threshold with the with the less than the threshold is less than. A number required is de minimis. And that's what Pinellas County when they say do not give you another access because a small amount of trip
generated and they said when access is more than enough, I mean, how do you even determine that 51 number or anything? But that probably goes into a lot of detail from the other question I have, and we
mentioned it before, I know that there have been studies, and you said one study last year, have you gone around last year after the hurricanes,
those condos over in there, right, like a war zone, you know, most of those condos on that first floor were all devastated. I mean, what is going to happen to your spot
there and what is going to happen to, you know, how tall is your seawall, when is it going to go over and when is it going to impact those canals. So so kindly you referring to
the townhome. Which townhome? I'm there right off of Mears. Right as you come. And which one? Pinellas Avenue there. Right behind you. Yeah. Yeah. I
mean if if, if you kindly I can I can. They're actually on the same side of the street as he's on. Yeah. Right. Okay, here's the site. This is vacant. There
are condos here okay. And I believe here. Right. All of those. Okay. They're on the canal. Right. And they were all floating, right? Flooded
terribly. So I'm going to tell you. So as an engineer, I have 28 years of experience. So whenever it happens storm in Tampa Bay area. And I'm residence 28 in Tampa Bay area,
which love it. I go after storm and visit my project not only last year, but year before and after. So let me give you I can start, I can speak what I know. I could not speak on something
I don't know, which is the example you're talking about. I mean, I can study it and report back to you because also if you go on MLK, which is right on that canal, those houses were
all destroyed and they are on that canal that comes right out of there also. Right? So I'm just concerned because at a high tide, the water is flowing
over into their swimming pools over there and you know, I, I cannot I'm sorry. I was just asking. I don't know what the question was. I missed the question. What what is he going
to do to make sure that there isn't a significant increase in water? Okay, I am, I'm one of the we do I am not one of the issue. We do flood modeling. Okay. So I can tell you
something. I have the honor to be the designer, the engineer for that sweetbay in 2008. I'm the engineer. You see the record? I am also the engineer for that apartment complex
south of it, which is done five years ago. So one of the things I visit them, of course, after the hurricane, they are not on the canals either. Right? I'm sorry, they are not on the canals. They are not close to
the wetland area and they are only connected, by the way, the Sweetbay. We connected it through pipe to through Metropolis property to, to, to Sweetbay. So it's you can say
tidal influence also on this here. So if you don't mind, I don't mind telling you the truth. What's his case? I can study it and let you know on this here. Yeah, but but it's
okay. I just personally I think your building looks great, but from my own personal standpoint, I think it's a terrible location. That's all I can say.
Yeah. That's okay, because I wanted to get I want to focus on questions and comments. So I just want to that's okay. No questions. Actually I'm good.
I'm going to apologize on behalf of the board that it's not our place at this point. We're here to ask questions and get informed and pass in. Our personal judgment is not appropriate at that point.
There's a different time frame, and I'm sorry. No problem. Can I mention back on the electrical brought up? So if you can let's let's let them ask the questions and then you
can answer. We'll start on that end. Yes. Thank you. As I mentioned earlier, the the power lines, what it looks like
in your plan for the, I guess, the appearance of the corner of your project. Okay. So what we do, we going to do so an
entitlement and concept plan which will be solid. We're going to follow with the construction plan. When we started the construction plan we go and communicate with the electrical company. As far as
the service as far. And they look into all that area there, as far above the ground, below the ground, and they give us the option as far how are they
going to serve our project? And we discuss it back and forth. This is the best option, the most economical one, the most efficient one, and how we can work with the pole and the
place to change it. So this is as mentioned also by Pat, is really a detail we work it through whenever we started in the, in the, in the construction phase. I
appreciate thank you. The only thing that comes to mind about this project is, I would hope that you have a way to make it
clear to your clients where they're going to be turning, where they're parking, simply because I fear that people might park across the street and try to negotiate South
Pinellas Avenue. So I would hope that your signage, whatever you're allowed to put signage would be, would be ample enough to to deter anyone
from thinking maybe if they're coming from outside the area, from thinking that it's a good idea to park across the street and negotiate south south Pinellas. Absolutely. We can do that. And just kindly, if you
allow me, we have discussion with the team and they said, hey, we have too much parking and we need to reduce it. Smart code and other and that we work
with them closely. We believe that might be better. More parking is good idea, but at the same time we work with them on how we mitigate it. So
pervious pavement and reduction and also adding some island there. So I mean we we would love to add the sign as requested, but at the same time we are trying to get get the
smart code and apply it fully as, as requested was was whatever parking number and reduction in the heat, you know,
rate or other at the same time. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Vessey. Pardon me, I forgot your name.
So your name. So my apologies. I'm sorry. I'm. I'm have a flu. So it might be. My hearing is not supposed to be. I'll just say, Mr. Engineer, then. Yeah.
JD, your name is your name JD. Right. JD would be fantastic. Thank you. So honest question. Honest answer. One of the
conditions. So staff is set. What I think is pretty tough bar for you in regards to working conditions. And I'm concerned about condition number three. Pat can you can
you put the conditions up please. Condition of the trees okay. No I'm going to try and help here. I number three the
condition is provide all other jurisdictional permits with the site construction permit application. The US Corps of Engineers, Pinellas County Navigation Authority and I is
the engineer, one that has been out. So I'm concerned that that bar is unnecessarily high. And
you made comment unintentionally that even though you would prefer to be able to and I can believe you
that you would provide all that documentation that your hands might be tied by a US government agency that simply won't provide that to you. And
I just want to ask, do you think it's reasonable and highly likely that all of those bodies that you have no control
over are going to supply you the documents that you need in six months? That's it's one of my item list. I want to ask for extension of state of six
months. When to I mean, if there is any way in case it show the intention. If it's not approved, like Army Corps, especially Army Corps equipment.
You know, our local people, I mean, we knew we interact issue which we permitted already. They tell you the truth. The
Phil and dredge the Pinellas County. We we have a meeting with them and it's approved by Army Corps. It's approved by
Swfwmd, however, for them, they wanted full review. And I'm not sure I tell you the truth what the review for, but we submitted it and they said we are backlog when we speak in
May. They said something in October. Somebody for his dock. I think fall or broken during Milton until now not get
approved. Okay. So I'm glad that I asked and I'm glad that you answered. Thank you. And and and this isn't the question, but it's obvious that you've
acted in good faith for 15 years, 10 or 15 years in regards to the mitigation. So we can trust you to act in good faith. And would you be willing to accept, if we were able to
get staff to maybe revise that condition number three, to have a built in extension, would that be acceptable? Please, please and kindly, the second
item I'm asking for, I tell you the truth, we have discussion, me and Pat on this one, which is the 24 foot wide driveway.
And I am I have 31 and I have it for safety. The 31ft and pat show me that the the code said no wider than 24. And I don't
want to you know, I'm doing for safety and I show her I do autoturn which show the truck how it move which is based on that I put 31 however I don't want. I mean, if there is no
way to widen it, I'm going to give it 24 on this here. So this is one of the item I have discussion with Pat and she show me the code that the code is a code we follow. So this is
one point. So the clarification for me in regards to that point, this is the actual driveway cut that is going to be on that north facing accessory road that right now is only a parking lot for our local
police department is a completely unused road. Well, it goes to a dead end game, right? We all cut through there to get to ace, right? Traffic's a little bit heavy, so you would prefer to have 31 instead
of 24. But this staff says, hey, the rule says 24. Correct. And that guy Justin on the board is a real stickler for the rules.
I only want to ask him for that. I mean, I'm. I was listening, okay, so you would if it was possible. Yes. 31 would make
you happier. And you'd also be willing to accept a voluntary extension on those government documents that control and and I just I show here earlier how
we show the truck how move and based on that the width we define which is you know you know what I'm saying here. So if there is a way I would love
to on this one. Changes to the condition that you agree. That's all my questions. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. My third point, if you
don't mind kindly, this is approved in 2020. The same 13,000. Everything Covid came. We have an issue as you know,
everybody with offices, the offices you know in low demand and other. We delay it no demand. So we pick up the
permit last we expired. So now what will they approve us before two phases in in in the site plan. The first phase is
clearing the site which why we need it clear the site and we trying to get clear the site and fill and compact. Take the
clay. Any things compacted, have it ready and do geotechnical boring for the building because we cannot access it which they approved the staff. The second phase in
this is construction plan approval or so. So we asking respectfully if they allow us to do that the same as I did before and we ready to follow
all the condition as when we start to do the silt fence inspection, all of this ready to do which they agree before and agree about that, but would
love to have it now also. If I need to clarify, I would love to. I don't, I don't think so. I can't speak for anybody else, but we would have to discuss staff with that at at the right
time. Okay. For that request. All right. Thank you. I'm I'm going to ask Pat some questions based on our comments. And I familiar with the requirements
of having a get the Army Corps of Engineers permits, which can be pulling teeth. And that's why I asked you about. But you know, I look at the requirements. Pinellas water
that's not that's not navigable waters anyways because it's not navigable. Correct. They they should not I don't think I think that's a no brainer as far as getting past the county.
But with regard to the Army Corps of Engineers, that is a brainer. And that's based on and they could care less about your time requirements or the city's. Correct. And and so I,
I guess I'm gonna throw this back at Pat or staff or council is let's say, and whether we vote to approve this or not, if let's say we vote to approve it,
that is a monument could be a monumental obstacle to get this thing approved. Okay, then we're back here again. You know, because he couldn't get the permit going in front of us on
another time. And I just want to try to see correct me if I'm wrong, is we can work on it. We can work with that issue. If he can't get that. I mean, I'm very familiar as you are, chair,
that it takes forever to get them, especially now. So we can work with that condition and work with them to delay. If so long as it's gone through and
we're waiting on them, it's not an issue. Okay, so so somebody made a permit. That's why I go to permit application. In other words, I'm submitting a permit application subject to be
getting this. I don't want the six months to run out. He's still waiting for the Corps of Engineers. As long as the application is made timely and it's over there with them. But
but that's what Pat said. After six months, it's done. So yeah. So the so the there are two two things here. First of all he there is no code requirement to
obtain agency permits prior up prior to pulling a city building permit. Okay. He could pull the city building permit. He wouldn't be able to fill the
site. Obviously without the permit or some kind of corps approval. But he could he could pull the site construction permit, you know, apply for it
and pull it while he's working on, on the corps. Then he's got, what, 180 days till first inspection. He's got, you know, he's got some more time he
could ask you all for. Then there's the second part of the code that I just read you. That's pretty clear that at least the planning director and I are operating under that
being clear, the six months to obtain, you can again ask for a phase plan. He can ask for longer time. He can ask for those things. And the board,
according to that code, has the ability to give him that, that different plan that he would like to to do. So this board can can phase it. If, if we put
that as part of our yes condition that it be phased, please. Okay. So so whoever's so there's phasing. What what Mr. Osborne was talking about
was the site work, the site construction and the vertical, the building permit. Those were the phases before. You still need the Corps permit to actually do the site
construction because it involves film. But you you wouldn't. Your second thing would be then to perhaps modify the condition that they don't
need the other agency permits before they pull the permit. And just a clarification, just for me. What? And you may have already said it, but it takes
me twice what was staff's purpose and reasoning for the combo permit? That it must be site and vertical at the same time? Is that the code that
you're referring to that that's written into our code of ordinances? That was just your preference. The planning and zoning director is concerned.
Is concerned with with with the phasing. She's concerned that we may end up with a site that's been altered, filled,
and then and then nothing happens. That is a great concern. I'm glad I asked. That is not to disparage Mr. Osborne at all. Maybe he can't go forward. Or maybe there's
something that happens. She's concerned about that possibility. And, you know, so so at her direction that that
condition was added, if I can say something not quite yet. Okay. But but thank you. Just so we don't get into a back and forth, I think we were done with with applicant comment.
Now we're at ask staff comment. Okay, I'm really glad I asked that question. So just to repeat the purpose of that condition, which is a tough one, is because the director, Miss
Vincent, was concerned about that and wanted it was done, wanted to make sure that the full building plans were submitted for all the vertical construction, in addition to
the full site plan. And then I want to move forward since I've got your attention, what was the concern about 24 foot curb cut versus 31ft, other than
that's what was written in the rule book. That's a smart code requirement not to exceed. It's not. It might be something we look at when we revise the
smart code, but unfortunately, the smart code restricts a two way driveway to 24ft and specifies the only way to to change that is through a
variance. Now the applicant can ask for a variance to that, but so that that's a no no deal for us is that we that is not a warrant in your smart code.
It's a variance. So that's off the board of adjustment. Yeah okay. Thank you so much for answering that question. So just just so I'm clear with regard to site plan and
building. So those are going to be bifurcated applications. Those will be two separate permit numbers. The site construction and the vertical
building permit construction okay. So he could submit them even though I'm just thinking out loud here that absent the the Army Corps of Engineers, he could submit for the permit. He
just cannot do the fill until he gets the approval. That's correct. Okay, so. I we we've not we have we haven't closed
the his portion of it yet. So you can respond. So do you want to respond to what I just asked. I want to just just make clear
the facing which agree 2020. I think Miss Vincent was part of it. The same as but both of them agree. And look what we ended up here after five years.
We could not even any of them do. So what the? I'm not sure what the concern is, but the concern is issue is we were not
clear until we have the required permitting fully from everybody, and we have the mitigation and everything there. The second is look to the condition we have right now. I
mean, the condition there is the homeless and two side, which repeatedly we have an issue with clearing it's safety.
It's and look to the city to the corner and we are going to do the construction soon. I understand that, but I think with regard to the widening is
a different board, not us. Right. I understood, okay, but we would love to have the condition. Right. So you know that's not a condition that that we have. Correct. Okay.
That's what I'm asking. Respectfully, if we can add it, we can't. That's not part of our purview here. This is planning and zoning. This is not the board of adjustment.
Okay? Okay. You have to ask the Board of Adjustment if you want to widen the driveway. Okay. The entrance. Okay. That has nothing to do with us, but I guess I'm trying to solve the
problem is with the Army Corps. Is that even though you want to start construction right away, you obviously can't do any construction until you fill in
the wetlands, right? Correct. Okay. Which requires you to get the Army Corps of Engineers correct approval, but does not preclude you from making
application for the permits for both the site and the vertical. Okay. It's just that you can't do the site work until the Army Corps gives you the okay. But
at least if you make application for the permits and you'll hear me out if I'm wrong, is that you can make application for the permits,
get them granted, and then may have to extend because the city attorney's here understanding that the the onus of dealing with the Army Corps of
Engineers, the the the delays that that will may require your permit before you can do anything. And I think what the city attorney is saying, that
the city will look at giving you latitude, okay. With regard to any delay, as if it if the delay is the result of the Army Corps. Right. Okay. And I don't
know, can we make a pronouncement as for a a recommendation for an extension, we can't grant you an extension, but we can if there's going to
be a motion, a recommendation for extension, okay. Because of any delays caused by an Army corps, does that make sense? Okay. Thank you. Sir. Does that
kind of make sense to the the board if there's a motion to that regard. Right. Okay. Anybody have any more questions before I close it or we go to
public comment. Can I say so this is the application referred to which we need to do before six months before the end. It's full construction
plan, full building plan. And the issue with the full building plan you need to have foundation and other design. And we don't have geotechnical. We don't have that until we
clear and get some response. We face this one before, and I understand you said the facing is not two part, but my understanding that's might be it's good idea if you
recommended it. And I know the approval for the board. But if that suggestion not more because the application not filling application more than set of architectural I understand that and the
building plan. So and these are could not achieve it without clearing and and getting some. Nobody can design that without without geotechnical and other
material there. Oh I got you. What you're saying is you can't do a design until you know what the geotechnical is. What we did for he can't the engineer won't stamp the footing and foundation until they get the
geotech report. He can't get the Geotech report. The army. Corps. Yeah, yeah. Unfortunately, we really would like to defer to Renee Vincent. Meaning that. And she kind of
wants it a certain way. But this is a pretty legitimate reason not to fall into discussion. Forgive me, but the we don't have to approve that condition. I mean, how can he.
It's he can recommend removing that condition or delaying it for for I mean you're you're making the right it's only a condition. And I'll say, please,
baby Jesus, don't be mad at me. If a motion was made without that condition, the motion's made without that condition, right? I mean, exactly, it's a recommendation. It's a direction that you're making to
the city to be aware of the problems that the applicant could have. And we want to do is bring the applicant back to you for the same request. That
has nothing to do with something that he did. Right? Right. Exactly. Okay. If if that condition is removed
completely, it would go back to the the code would go back to what the code says, which is, you know, six months unless a
construction permit or building permit is obtained. So go back to that. So at that point you're you would he would be
able to get the site work permit first to his geotech do the building permit. Now the six months would be in effect. So that was the second thing I think you wanted to address
about the agency permits. So the the length you would address with whatever condition. So you wanted to provide for extensions based on. Army Corps
processing. If I understand your comment, by removing condition number one, we've solved two elements the timing and the fact that he physically can't do them both. Is that how
I understood that you removed the fact that he can't physically do both? The timing is still six months unless you
approve because the or create a loophole in number three that it's really about the US Army engineers just create a loophole within number three about intent. That's where you
would address without it being hard. Right? I think your intention is, is that one of the things, I guess, is the city's concern would be, obviously, is that the
application is made timely, right? That that is one we want to make sure occurs. We just don't want to delay about six months and then make the
application and then have another 6 to 9 months down the road. Condition it upon. Or can you condition the clock to start within so many months of
getting approval from the Army Corps? I would more be inclined to recommend that you give a
time period for the application to be made for the permit with for approval by the Army Corps, and then with a recommendation
that the city acknowledged the difficulty with that particular obtaining that and not hold that back against him. But but we still got to get a timely
done, right? Yes. That's the big concern. Right? I believe, chair said. Like used to be a time period to apply. Yeah. Versus obtain obtain. Right.
Yeah. You applied it. You had all these criteria you had to meet before you get your permit. Okay. Application. Now, you know I have to get these satisfactions from governmental authorities. That could take time. But that doesn't that
doesn't stop my clock. From that abates the clock until such time as those things are secured. And I mean, I think the legitimate concern is also with timing that we all are
acknowledged that it's taking longer. Yeah. To get any response from them. I'm trying to find us. We're trying to find a solution to your issue that we recognize as a problem
that's outside of everybody's purview here. And I'm going to rely on this board. Yeah, I'll rely on this board to to come up with a solution. Well, the
other thing I would say to the board is that instead of maybe coming up with a direct solution, is that it's a solid recommendation of the board that this issue be dealt with
so that it's the applicant is not being punished so that we can, you know, we can talk to Renee and, and figure out a way to deal with that. If that's your recommendation. That would
commission adopts that okay. All right. Okay. At this point I'm going to go ahead and close.
Is there any public comment to this chair. Julie weighed 1095
Mainsail Drive. This is the third time I've seen proposals from this applicant. And he's been before code board. And he's there were homeless issues
on this property. I'm sorry. You bought swamp land in Florida. I understand that you spent money mitigating on a different property, and I
appreciate that you did that and you did a nice job on that. Maybe you can sell those credits because the credits are available to another developer.
But I don't feel that this property is appropriate for what you're planning for the site. Some of these are going to be out of order. As I look through the backup materials.
The survey couldn't find the date on that. And the last time you came before the board, the survey was not correct. The water had changed the outline
of the property and you came to the full board of commissioners with an incorrect survey. Your geotechnical report that was in
this packet was dated from 2010, and there was water covering that property at that time, the report states. I could not check everything because I was
waiting on this property. Recommendation was for pilings or soil removal down six feet
and then building back up to that level plus six feet. Because the soil is so bad, it's full of debris. It's full
of material that can't be built upon. It's full of organic material. And your own guy said it was. His report was based. I'm quoting based on limited
subsurface investigation. Then they talked about putting in a dry foundation. I would not want to put my medical office in a place that had a, quote,
dry foundation. And it is six feet above sea level on land that we know floods. Your own drainage analysis says excludes
preserved wetland area. I was surprised Swfwmd gave the okay, but I understand it was because of the credits that you had in
the wildlife survey. It just breaks your heart to think of destroying that much wetlands and tidal flats. There was no mention of the retention of the
mangroves that are there. The city tonight said the new comp plan prohibits wetland impacts. Now, maybe he can get away with
that because he's already mitigated those. But at tonight's meeting you said that I don't know why we would permit this in a flood zone.
The apricot entrance is better than your previous entrance at. When you presented this plan earlier, you might consider a smaller building, maybe on
stilts, a lot less parking, and. But I'm not sure you can make your money back on that because of how much this has to be mitigated to build anything
there. The improvements are just so costly. Medical offices are logical in that area, but it feels like you're trying to put 20 pounds of stuff on a 10
pound in a 10 pound sack on an unstable surface. So from I live right nearby there, I don't object to a medical office building, but I just
don't think that this is the appropriate site for this. And I think everybody is fighting so hard to try to make it work for you. But I think the land is just not going to be
developable for anything of that kind of size. That's just from a person that lives near there. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Any other comment?
Okay. There being none, I'm gonna go ahead and close the public comment on this and then put it back to this board. You
know, and I think before we get into discussion, I know everybody's got an opinion. I probably would like to to hear a motion. And then we can have
a thorough discussion before we vote. So is there a motion? I'll make a motion. This is a motion just to to discuss this
I think. Well, I think you make a motion to either approve or if there's no motion, it fails. If there's a motion to approve, does it mean you have to approve it? It just means it
opens it up for discussion. And if there's and and absent a motion, the applicant fails on its face. So you. So if you want to make a motion to
include all the conditions that we feel are appropriate, and then that allows us to have a discussion, we can't should not
have a discussion without some type of motion. Okay. And so I would look to this board for a motion, a motion to include
whatever conditions the, the the board think are appropriate. And then we can have a discussion and determine whether or not that particular applicant should either move
forward or not move forward. So that's why I'm putting it back to this board to make a motion. I think the lady wanted to make a motion. Okay. I'm sorry. Well, I just wanted to clarify what
we were making a motion on. Okay. Well, you you can make a motion to deny. And if it passes, then it's dead. If you
can make, then it then would be a motion somebody else could make a motion to approve with conditions. And then that will open up for discussion. So if
somebody wants to make a motion. I'd like to entertain one. Okay. Well I would make that motion. Mr. chairman, I believe the current application is 2025
Dash 65 to approve the proposal here with the numerous conditions and adaptations we've discussed, and with the
city providing some allowances for timelines based on the required documentation, which may be arduous to obtain. Is there a second? I'll second.
Okay. Now we can have a discussion as to that motion. Okay. Clarification on the. I
can't repeat your words exactly because there was so much discussion. Maybe you, as the motion maker, could clarify your expectation for the
conditions as written or as discussed, or how would you like them? As discussed. And I believe we talked about omitting condition number three
and amending possibly one of the other ones, and then possibly imposing a condition for the city to give serious consideration to allowances in
the required timelines, and also offer the applicant the opportunity to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the
driveway variance if he feels it's warranted. Doing a motion in a second. I just want to
make sure I understand. I just want to make sure I understand the motion, okay. So you're saying about removal of of
condition number three as far as securing jurisdictional permits and approvals submitted with the site construction permit application to include
not only the Army Corps of Engineers, but Pinellas County Water Navigation Authority to remove that as a condition. But the condition to to have both
the site construction and vertical permits done simultaneously is. But but you also want to include in your motion that is strongly
recommended that the city provide latitude in the application process as a result of the requirements by outside
governmental authority. Would that be? Pretty much yes. What you're saying? Yeah, the condition number one. And also I think we omitted the the
request for the warrant for the landscaping change as recommended by city staff. Okay. And that's consistent with your second. Correct. Because you
seconded the motion. Yes. Okay. All right. Now we can have a discussion. Okay. I will tell you since. First of all, with
regard to concerns of construction, you can't build something without a solid base and whether the ground is bad or not, it's irrelevant because
you have to have the boring studies and everything in place. Even if you've got bad soil, you have to remove it or build something that that a structure
that size will have to tolerate. So that to me is a non-issue. If you know anything about construction, you can't just say whatever it is, you have to
meet those engineering requirements. One, two. On my other boards that I serve on, I'm actually vice chair of of Advent Health. And I will tell
you, and this is very critical for me, okay. There's a reason we we need primary care physicians. We need primary care physicians in this community. Too many times, our
residents have to leave the city of Tarpon Springs, go see a doctor because their primary care is located somewhere else. And there's a desperate need in
this community for for class A medical office space, desperate need. Okay. And that has to do with the wellness of this community. There have been
other attempts for medical office buildings. Obviously, you know, this is not the panacea, but but I looked at this when I saw the the application come through and I
said, well, that that really solves a problem within the community as far as the wellness of this community. Okay. You got you're going to
say something. I am okay. I disagree with you in a sense. If I can. That's what I'm here. What I'm discovering is that
our medical professionals, our doctors are primary care physicians. What they're doing is they're not just leaving tarpon because they don't have
anywhere to have an office. No, no. You know where they're going, Trinity. No, no, I know you're the first. You're telling me something I know 100% accurate of. Okay, I'm
just saying it out loud. Okay, you can say it, but we have when you look at not only primary care, but you look at also specialty care. Okay, that the there's a significant lack
of class A, class a medical office building in this community. Significant. What's a class A medical office building. Really nice. Okay
okay okay. All right. Not a storefront. Yeah. Okay. Okay. And and that's when you look at a business model of a hospital, they build the hospital. And if
you look at every hospital in this area, next to that hospital is a medical office building. Why? Because it it's an attractor. Look at our hospital. We have a great hospital, but there's no
medical office building next to it. It's because all the area to the right of it to the south. Well, first of all, it's funding. It's funding. And I'm not going to get into the
technical financial details of the hospital. But I can tell you AdventHealth has invested tens and tens of millions of dollars in our facility. Okay,
tens of millions of dollars. Okay. And so that's projected in the future, but that's not needed five years from now. It's needed now. Okay. I'm just
saying that that I'm not saying that to sway your vote. I'm just saying that because I know that the need and I know the vacuum with regard to that need.
Okay. Now, is this the right location? The upside is it's you. You look at Green Dolphin and others community. You have doctors that would be walking
distance okay to where you live if because if you look at like green golf for example. Not that it's an over 55 community, but most of the people that live, you know, yeah, most of
the people that live in that area are in the green dolphin or or or or or seniors. Okay. And here you have a doctor you can walk to instead of having
to get in your car and drive down 19 or alternate 19 to Palm Harbor or Pasco or whatever the case may be. So it serves that need. And so that's what I look
at when I sit on this board is is the applicant improving? Obviously there's there's a business aspect to it. But but when you have a business aspect
that also I think addresses a community need, it makes me look at that a little bit more favorably than just, you know. Sure. And that's the way I look
at it. And so I was happy to see this. I know I don't want to I don't want to hog the microphone. I'm sure everybody else has their own comments or
other thoughts. So I said my piece. Thank you. So so if that's the case, there is a if
unless anybody has a comment I will call for the motion. Chairman, I would like to say if this was a residential build at this area, at this location,
at the elevation, would that not be required to be on stilts? That's when you're dealing with commercial. It's a different animal. Okay. Understand. And
and I know with FEMA, with FEMA and Council, first of all, you would you would lose your FEMA accreditation if it did not meet FEMA requirements. Correct me if I'm wrong. Council. You
are correct. Okay. So and for it to make for it to be a buildable location and get a CEO, it has to satisfy FEMA requirements. And and and if if
the requirements or the city has requirements with regard to flood proofing, then that's the requirements. But understand this. Okay. What we had a year
ago was 100 year event okay. It was a 100 year event. Not that it won't happen for another 100 years. It could happen tomorrow. But those type of catastrophic events are 100 year storms.
They call it 100 year storm. You can't you cannot build or the city should not look or anybody should look to build to prevent 100. You would hope
that you have a enough to satisfy 100 year event, but you can't move forward if you're going to just plan for 100 year event. Otherwise, you would have to wipe out half of downtown Tarpon Springs because
it was flooded. I think we have to have smart development, smart development, not not just say, well, it probably won't happen again. Go ahead. I understand that, but but as long as it's within the
governmental requirements or guidelines, okay. It's not for us to you know what I'm saying? I see what you're saying. Okay. So if the government agency say, look, you could build there,
obviously you could have 100 year event, but you could build there. That means it satisfy the government requirements, FEMA requirements. I think what
I'm having a hard time with is Tarpon was so consumed with doing better at the sponge docks, doing better. I mean, in terms of flooding now. I could
half those buildings out at the sponge docks only have foundations, but that's a different story. But, you know, I thought we were on the road to trying to be better, you know, in terms of planning and
developing that. That's where I'm having a hard time. Okay. So what would be better, if I may interject? I'll, I'll suggest what might be better. And I'm going to answer your
question at the same time, because it's a complex topic. So number four on the review criteria, the site plan, city building codes, this is addresses this topic kind of
directly. The project will be required to comment and is expected to be able to meet the standard of the city building codes. This is going to include. Floodplain. The applicant
wishes to implement multi tenant flood proofing. What that means is that's a style of construction. It is not normally chosen. In fact I've
never seen it done really. So what they're going to do is they're going to build the building so that the layer that is within the flood zone in this case, is going to be at least three feet, probably four
seven inch slab. The base flood elevation is ten. We have one foot of freeboard. So the first four feet of that building has to be flood proof. It is a very difficult process to do. That
means there are no electrical receptacles in this building below four feet period. No, there's nothing that can be flooded and can't be replaced. So that's what they're
proposing. Proposing when they go to building permit application. So that's their solution is there. It's not that it shouldn't be higher such as you suggested, it's that they've chosen that
they're just not going to do that because their clientele has got to be able to walk up. So they're not going to have stairs. This is their pathway. It is legal. But that doesn't
mean that it's actually going to be approved. We have a floodplain manager. She's a nice young lady. She takes her job very seriously. This site plan application and the building plan will have to go
through our floodplain department. They have the opportunity to reject it at that point, because it puts the city at risk. Because we, as the city, would be penalized
for allowing that construction to occur, even though they're flood proofing it, because we don't want to build those buildings that low they can, but we want to discourage it.
Now, I don't have a dog in the race. I'm saying that's my understanding because that's what I do for a living. And it's a pathway, not an advantageous pathway. And then
I'll just repeat, the applicant wishes to implement a multi-tenant flood proofing, although this is not preferred by the city staff, it is allowable. So I hope that kind
of answers your question is why they're doing it. It might do that. You know, you're kind of going back and forth as the hey, we flooded, flooded bad. And
here we're going to approve a building to be built lower than everybody else. And you got to go. Why? And at the same time, they're getting rid of what some might say is valuable
extra flood space. The math sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. It's complicated. It's tough. On the flip side, property owner follows the rules, has a right to develop
their land, even though it's kind of, you know, okay, so I hope that answered that question. We'll go to the flood park. All right. So at this point, absent any comments,
please roll call please motion to. What are the conditions, the the conditions. You're killing me I, I wrote I wrote
condition number three is eliminated. Yep. Okay. We have an allowance in the timeline. We have a we we recommend us. We strongly recommend an allowance on the timeline. And
how are we addressing the driveway variance. Just that has to be we're not addressing it. That has to be done by a it's not included. In any motion that we've made. Correct.
Okay okay. Roll call please. Mr. Collins. Yes, miss Weaver.
Yes. Miss Swenson? No, no. Yes. Vice chair Vessey. Yes.
Chairperson. Yes. Okay. Thank you, thank you. Okay. On to. First of all, I want to say
very, very good discussion, a very good analysis on this application. So thank everyone for that. Okay. Board, board
and staff comments. Any comments. No no no comments. Thank you. All right okay okay.
Any board comments. Okay. The only comment I would say is I, I just want to reiterate what I just said is I, I really
appreciate you know, this is this is the type of discussion and analysis that this board is. I think that's very well. And
and there was no one calling anybody names. We all appreciate that. Yeah. We don't want that. I do have a staff. All right. Just please indulge
me. What I have is it is it comment period. Yeah. Okay. So this is a positive. It's two step I noticed when I came in
that we have a new clerk. Recording clerk? Yes. And maybe all met the pretty young lady before, but I didn't, so. No. Do you want to stand up and say your name? Hello? Yeah. Most of
you actually know me. I was part of the Citizens Academy, and about a year and a half ago, I was hired on and brought in to public works. And about a month ago, I moved over to Planning and Zoning and took
over for Kim after she left. So my name is Chloe and thanks for welcoming on. All right, so that's cool, but that's not the end, okay. The end is that when I saw Chloe I was like, where
is Miss Kim Crichton? Because I've been around long enough that it was Crichton and then it became Miss Yothers. She happens to be my neighbor, and she recently was married. And and his and his advanced
because staff doesn't talk about it. The whole time she was working here as clerk, she put herself through planning and zoning school and has got a type of certification that you
can speak to that well, she's almost, almost finished with her. I think it's public public administration degree. As a college. She's got two classes.
Taking a position down in Sarasota. Is that correct? She I don't know that she has a position at this point, but okay. She's looking well, I
miss you and Kim and the others. We miss you. I miss you. And she she served us so good for so long. She did. I just hope the best. Yes. Thank you. We
miss her. Anything else? All right. Adjourned. Thank you. All right. You married? You're
married? Yes. The wife. Where do you.