Okay. Welcome to the City of Treasure Island Planning and Zoning Board meeting for January 15, 2026. If you wish to speak on a topic which is on today's agenda, a speaker's card is available at the table over to the left
there. at the entrance and must be completed and given to the chairperson. Please do not address the board from your seat, but rather from the podium where your comments can be heard by all and recorded as required by Florida statutes. Unscheduled topics may be
presented under the public comments section of the agenda. If you are an applicant today and you receive a invoice from the city of Treasure Island, do not pay it. It is a scam. Uh
we had several of our applicants receive bills. They were all ready to go pay them. Found out that it uh who knows where it came from, but it came from not in the state of Florida. So, if you get one, throw it in the garbage, delete it,
don't pay it. Thank you very much. Could we uh please silence your cell phone and let's stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance >> to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. T if we could have a roll call. Valeria >> here. >> Ross Sanchez >> here. >> Chris Downing >> here.
>> Grant Smith >> here. >> Marvin Shavelin here. >> Richard Harris >> here. >> Thank you. >> All right. Getting into the minutes from the last meeting. I didn't see any. Uh so we don't need to approve any meetings
because we didn't get any. Uh status update on prior planning and zoning cases. Braden, you uh emailed us all that. Did anybody have any questions on it? Doesn't look like a whole lot is changing, >> but thanks for sending that in advance
so we can review each time. Appreciate that. >> Absolutely. >> What's this on the >> 12 20 12200 Gulf Boulevard requested an extension to 92825. Who's that?
>> That is that little boutique hotel right on the corner of Gulf and 122nd, >> right? But did they did they get an extension or >> um I think that might have been a note left over from Jesse's. Um any extensions would just first of all be applicable to executive orders that are
in place anyways, right? >> Um so that would >> you know precede any other extensions that they have. >> Okay. any um any hearing procedures you'd like to tell us about Nancy? >> Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so today
on your agenda, you have two variances and you have one site plan and these land use approvals. They are quasi judicial in nature. And this requires that your hearing today comply with some procedural requirements that have been established in Florida law and in your
land development code. So these quasi judicial proceedings, they're going to be less formal than proceedings before a circuit court, but they will be a little bit more formal than the rest of your meeting. And we will be following some basic standards of due process that
requires noticing that requires the application of the correct standards and that your decisions today be made on competent substantial evidence that could be presented either in written documents or through oral testimony. So your responsibility today is to evaluate
the testimony and the information that is provided to you on each of these three items and then draw a conclusion regarding whether the criteria that's in your code or in state law has been satisfied. So speculation or opinion
that's not based on competent facts legally should not be considered by you in evaluating your agenda item. So testimony by individuals who have been qualified as experts in a particular area such as uh planning and zoning and
land use matters in the town in the city of uh Treasure Island. They they would be considered um to to be providing you with uh competent substantial evidence as well as others in the audience who can state their qualifications and you
can accept them as experts as well. Um residents also can be uh their testimony can also be considered to be competent substantial evidence if their testimony is based on factual information or their personal knowledge
um that they share with you. So your decision uh if you choose to deny it, I do ask that you state on the record the basis for the denial uh which would be the absence of competent substantial evidence regarding one of the criteria
that staff will um advise you of. So with that said, I think we should be ready to to move forward. >> Very good. All right. uh administration of oath. Uh for everybody who's going to speak
today, uh please uh rise, raise your right hand, and be sworn in. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony and evidence you're about to give before the planning and zoning board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Expart communication disclosure. Anybody have anything they need to disclose today? I will disclose the fact that I had a conversation with Barb Adams and she just said, "What do I do next?" And I said, "You apply for a variance." And
that's what reason why she's here today. So we will start out uh with item 10 AV- 0000586-25 two variances inclusives of one variance to section 68483
to allow an ingground swimming pool in the required front yard at a setback of 10 ft and one variance to section 68-541 one to reduce the minimum sideyard setback to allow the construction of a
new single family residence. The applicant is being represented by Mark Bentley. So, approach the podium and make your presentation. Tell us what you want to do. >> Good afternoon. Um, board members, my name is Mark
Bentley, 400 North Ashley Drive, >> Tampa 3602. I represent the petitioner Um what I what I'd like to do is um [clears throat] I'll introduce Ryan Manassie and Ryan's going to give a presentation and go over
the criteria and then after Ryan I want to address some of the legal points in terms of substantial competent evidence and things like that. So, a little bit about Ryan in terms of his qualifications because I think this might be the first presentation he's made is uh he's former development
coordinator for the city of Tampa for I think five years and then he made the uh decision to go into the private sector. So, with Johnson Pope's firm, which we have about 120 lawyers now, he's a director of development. So, that being
said, Ryan is my presentation. It's not up yet. >> Is there a a motion to accept him as a Is there a motion to accept him as an expert based on the qualifications that you've heard? >> Uh could we have a motion to that effect? [clears throat]
>> We've never done that before. >> Oh, I'll make a motion um to accept him as an >> expert. >> Expert. I'll second. >> All in favor? I I >> he's been here like a hundred times in the last two years. So [laughter] >> I did speak
>> he has been here many times before >> and it was seven years with the city of Tampa. >> It's okay. I'll let him go on that. So >> on a different case. Go [laughter] ahead. >> Um my presentation's loading but I'll get started. Ryan Manassi with Johnson Pope, director of planning and development. Um good afternoon chair,
board members. This request again is for two variances uh located at 12409 Gulf Boulevard. Um like chair mentioned, one is to reduce the southern side yard setback and the second is the permission to locate the swimming pool in the front yard. Just a little history on the lot. It was platted in 1924 which was long
before zoning uh setbacks parking and fot access regulations existed. Additionally, uh with the widening of Gulf Boulevard, this platted lot becomes more difficult to uh develop. Um, while the parcel was functional at the time it
was created, the evolution of land development code over the last h 100red years has significantly constrained its ability to function as a reasonable single family residence today. We believe the evidence demonstrates that all variance criteria are satisfied. And I'll walk you through those criteria as
applied to this unique property as soon as my slides come up. I can give paper versions too if they can't get it. I don't know why it frozen. >> Yeah, he had it up earlier. Let me try this. >> Yeah, it changes it on my screen here,
but for some reason this computer is not communicating with the projector. >> No, got it up here. It's just not communicating. Oh, there's another Yes.
>> Great. Thank you. Um, so project overview. This application involves dimensional relief necessary to allow a functional single family home on a legally platted lot of record. The project is designed to comply with all other applicable development standards, including parking, access, landscaping,
fencing, and any other safety requirements. I'll begin with the site context and then address each criteria under section uh 70-221. Now, this is a photo um of just a Google image of the front of the property. Our subject site is over there to the right.
It's that little bungalow. The reason I'm showing this is it shows our proposed single family home that you see in our site plan is comparable and compatible in scale, location, and massing with the existing single family structures to our immediate north, which would be that yellow house and then the newer white and blue house that you see
there. The subject property is small constrained lot of record along Gulf Boulevard measuring approximately 40.6 ft wide, 88t deep, and 3,890 ft in area. [snorts] While the width technically
complies, the lot is substandard in both depth and total area. When the lot was created in 1924, there were no zoning requirements. Today, access to FDOC controlled Gulf Boulevard is prohibited, requiring all vehicular access and parking to occur from the rear alley.
Compounding this constraint, Gulf Boulevard has been expanded over time from approximately 60 feet uh according to the plat to the now 80 feet of rightway that's there which further reduce the effective buildable area of the lot. [snorts] Surrounding developments
consist of older non-conforming structures that reflect similar setbacks and lot conditions and the proposed redevelopment will be consistent with that established pattern. So this is the variance criteria from your code section 70-221.
Um these criteria must be evaluated holistically in this case due to the multiple regulatory constraints intersecting on this unique parcel. [snorts] And I think this slide's important. Um it's important to note that the criterion addressing special conditions
or circumstances is particularly compelling in this case as the lot was directly affected by a government taking to widening Gulf Boulevard. The property was originally platted with a 100 foot lot depth which would have made the design of a single family home far more
feasible on this narrow and irregularly shaped lot. [snorts] Now to get into the criteria criteria one the true variance. The request relief involves dimensional and locationational standards only. There is no request to alter the use density or
zoning intensity. Uh this precisely this is precisely the type of circumstance for which a variance process exists. Criteria two, special conditions to the property. The parcel is subject to special conditions not generally applicable to other properties in this
district. [snorts] While it meets minimum width, it is substandard in depth and area and is uniquely constrained by mandatory rear alley parking due to FOT access restrictions. These conditions did not exist when the lot was platted and are external regulatory constraints, not
discretionary design choices. Criteria three, reasonable use. Strict application of the code could um would limit the buildable uh width to approximately 30.6 ft and elimin eliminate any feasible location for a swimming pool. A residence of that width
combined with the required parking and setbacks does not represent a reasonable or functional single family use. In today's context, [snorts] parking, excuse me, parking must be accommodated along the alley, not the front. And the number of spaces proposed
reflects a realistic uh single family use of a vacation home including visits from grandparents, children. Also provide uh uh providing on-site parking uh in addition to what code requires reduces overflow into unauthorized areas
of the street and allows delivery vehicles such as FedEx, Uber, um UPS to load without obstructing the alley circulation. Criteria four, hardship not self-created. [snorts] Hardship results from the lot's historic dimension, the
expansion of Gulf Boulevard, the city's zoning code, modern parking requirements, uh, and FDA access controls, conditions entirely outside the applicant's control. Any reasonable redevelopment of this parcel would encounter the same, uh, types of constraints. Now, I know
staff is going to get in their their report and I know they object to the pool in the rear as well as a setback, but I wanted to highlight the proposed location for the pool a bit. Under your code, I would have to have a setback for the pool from the rear of 10 ft as well as a side uh 10 ft. This would eliminate
any realistic needed parking. Like I said, we have a couple spaces above what code requires, and it' roughly give me a pool the size of a Toyota Corolla, which is not feasible. Criteria five, the requested relief is the minimum necessary to allow reasonable use. The reduced side setback
permits a modest 36 foot wide structure which is sufficient for a functional layout. Any lesser relief would render this uh redevelopment impractical. [snorts] Also, the front yard pool location is not a preference. The 25- ft front setback combined with the rear alley
parking and other required setbacks makes it impossible to locate a pool elsewhere on the site unless we utilize the existing non-conforming structure setbacks which would require variances. [snorts] Criteria six, a necessary hardship. The
code recognizes redevelopment of substandard lots of record as a hardship consideration. here. Strict enforcement would prevent reasonable redevelopment with customary residential amenities due to the lot size, configuration, and regulatory access limitations. That
hardship is unnecessary and sight specific. This is primarily a government imposed hardship which reduced the lot depth by 12% and lot area by 12 a.5%. It eliminates access to Gulf Boulevard, forces parking in the rear lot area, the
alley side, and now the rear of the property basically became the front. [snorts] Criteria seven, harmony with the code. The RFM30 uh district anticipates compact resort style residential development. The proposed
structure is compatible in scale and character with the surrounding development uh much of much of which is non-conforming. Allowing a modest residence and a pool on this unique lot advances the district's intent without compromising access management or safety.
And slide 14 and this is from property appraiser. I don't have survey surveys of off-site properties obviously but they do have a GIS measuring tool. And what it does is our subject sites uh outlined with that red and then the star and then the other highlighted in yellow
uh parcels and it's not all inclusive but I just pointed out that you could see those are abuing the property boundary. So the setbacks are obviously reduced from the five five yard five foot setback that's required for this area. So just showing you the
non-conforming characteristics of that area. There's numerous structures that don't wouldn't meet the current code and they'd be in a similar circumstance if they were to rebuild in that current uh capacity. Not to mention our our side a lot I believe the other side too, but
it's not a perfect square or rectangle. It's a trapezoid. And I know everybody up there knows things about building and such and it's hard to put a rectangle or square in a trapezoid and meet perfect setbacks, you know. So, we're dealing with this uniquely shaped lot.
>> [clears throat] >> Um, criteria eight. Yes, sorry. Um, the variance will not be injurous to the neighborhood or public welfare. The pool will have code uh compliant fencing and landscaping, preventing public access and making it largely unnoticeable to pedestrians along Gulf Boulevard. All
storm water and safety requirements will be met through permitting. Importantly, uh, maintaining alley only access avoids traffic conflicts from visitors and deliveries on Gulf Boulevard and is fully consistent with FOT access management objectives.
[snorts] In conclusion, uh, we've we feel we've demonstrated a unique hardship arising from the lot's historic dimensions, expanded right of way that government taking, mandatory rear alley parking, and lack of permitted access to Gulf Boulevard. The requested variances
represent the minimum relief necessary to allow reasonable use, are consistent with the intent of the land development regulations, and will not adversely impact public welfare. [snorts] Also, the code provides that the board must find the criteria to be substantially satisfied rather than requiring strict
compliance. We believe we've demonstrated that standard has been met. Finally, to ensure additional compatibility, staff has proposed three conditions that we find acceptable. And with those conditions in place, we'd respectfully request your approval of our two
variances. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Any uh board members have any questions for the applicant? >> Seeing none, >> go ahead, Mark. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Any questions at all? Now, I was just
going to raise a couple points and I didn't have the pleasure of meeting the city attorney. My name is Mark Bentley and >> welcome. >> I'm Nancy Stupich. I'm with the Vos Law Firm. >> Oh, hey Nancy. Um, first thing I notice in getting prepared
today is that the um 2026 and the standard state zoning enabling act promulgated by the department of commerce in 1926 is the basis for the city's um variance criteria. So it's a hundred
years old. Yeah, it's something we might want to take a look at. But, uh, I think most jurisdictions adopted that. So, um, in any event, I thought that was interesting. Um, and just for the record,
I've been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners for 30, I think, 39 years. And I was a former planning director for the city of Oldsmar. So, even though I'm a lawyer, I kind of wear both hats. And the only reason I bring that up is I'm going to talk a little bit about some of
the land use issues. But the first thing I wanted to address was um you know in in Florida when uh the appellet courts or Florida Supreme Court when there's not precedent or maybe there's a trend going through the United
States in the law they'll oftentimes look to other jurisdictions for some guidance okay as to uh what the law should be or shouldn't be. So, for example, the landmark 1993 Snyder Bvard County versus Snyder case.
Um, in that case, the issue was whether or not a reasonzoning should be considered legislative versus quasi judicial. And the court found since these regulations relate to individual parcels or persons that it should be
quasi judicial versus legislative. But what was really unique about that case is they relied on a case out of Oregon called Fisano. So that was the Florida Supreme Court. And [clears throat]
that being said, there are two cases I'd like to discuss that relate to this case today. One's Dade County versus Pepper. And the significance of Nancy, I'll give you these cases, you know, is um
what that court found was that eminent domain impacts, okay, could fulfill the hardship requirement to to deal with that. And that's an appella case out of the third DCA.
And finally, there's a case out of Wisconsin. It's called Lynn and since there's no case law in Florida on directly on point in that case what's kind of interesting is that uh an applicant was pursuing a variance to
locate the pool in the sideyard and the pools under the code had to be located just like in our situation today in the rear yard and the court found that um because of certain constraints and topography the variance got denied and
went up on appeal and the court reversed that and said that um [clears throat] area and setback variances are relatively minor and do not have significant impact on the character of a neighborhood. they are held to a lesser
standard and they went on and on about that and that's kind of similar to what's going on in this situation is um I read the staff report and they there was some objection because we had proposed four spaces for parking in the
rear like Ryan said first of all Golf Boulevard was out of the picture dot that's a hard no right there so we had to use the alley and if it's a kind of a vacation home. Uh obviously additional parking is not a bad thing
and and trying to meet the setbacks for the pool in the rear yard, we'd be in the same position asking for a variance as well. So the only logical place to locate it is in the front. And then with landscaping, you know, even a pedestrian probably
won't even notice that a pool is there. And those conditions proposed by staff and your backup. Uh, one of them was was that the the applicant, our client could never apply for a cage, I guess, for the pool. And um,
I think aesthetically that might not be a good look on Golf Boulevard, but the client's immunable to that. He's that's not in the in the card. So, he would agree to that as a condition. Um so back to that case is like uh that
situation where the pool on the side is similar to the criterion number four uh in your code which deals with conditions and circumstances are not the result of actions of the applicant but in this case primarily
u since this lot was platted 1924 or 44 I think it's 80 years ago it was platted or 80 years or So um so the conditions and circumstances are not the result of are are actions of the applicant but
mainly a result of the government enactment of regulations the comp plan zoning code also do taking about 12 or 13 feet off the frontage. When you see that picture that Ryan showed you can see that when you open the door the existing bungalow you're literally in
the rightway. And uh so that made um the lot substandard relative to your code today. Yeah, it was it was 1946. And finally,
um you know, I've been doing this for a while and not too many cases like really hit every criteria just dead on point. You know, some are real, you hit them stronger, some are a little weaker, but your code
does, I think, contemplate more of a balancing test with these criteria. Actually, you know, I mentioned about 100 years old the the criteria. Some some jurisdictions have gone to almost using the same criteria, but that you
have to meet 205 or, you know, something like that to allow some flexibility. But your code says it doesn't require strict compliance. And I'm looking under 70.221
sub subsection 4. Um, so strict compliance isn't required, but says that the criteria should be substantially satisfied. So here again, it contemplates this board considering all the facts and issues in the case and balancing those against the public
interest. And clearly um even though there are a couple variances like Ryan said on one side it's a little over a foot on the south side but because of the shape of the lot when it gets to the alley it's roughly 3.5 ft and the code
requires 5T on that side. And then we respect the setback on the north side. We respect the setback on G Boulevard as well. So um that being said really appreciate your time and consideration. And if you have any questions, certainly
I'll attempt to answer them. Thanks. >> Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Chris, go ahead. >> Yeah, Mark, just one question. your case that you mentioned from day county where it the um eminent domain played a role
and I'm wonder if you could just give us some discussion from your view viewpoint that that that imminent domain that impacted the current owner and therefore impacted that property and redevelopment on that property. Did that case in any way
carry that forward that future owners of that property then would be that hardship would be considered from the from the standpoint of that that imminent domain that occurred prior to that if it occurred prior to that owner being the owner of that property. They
didn't get into and here again the factual discussion in that case didn't get that deep as to whether he was a you know the original owner that got impacted or or not. Okay. The point is is that um
I don't think it's really that relevant. I I guess if you're kind of headed like, hey, did my guy get compensated for the taking? Then all things, you know, there there was a hardship, they paid you, you know, were square. But that's not the
situation here is um I couldn't find the final judgment on the acquisition or or stipulated final judgment, you know, in the records. I guess in a more general sense is whether or not the the the imminent domain that caused this hardship. Now that essentially is
effectively living with the property and it's a question for us whether it uh it it applies in terms of the hardship. Um well I guess since in 19
24 when there were no regulations okay then the city comes along and imposes these setbacks on this small lot actually smaller than what's even allowed. When you all reszone this lot you made it non-conforming right right
from the get-go because it didn't meet dimensional requirements. Okay. because you didn't have another zoning district that would accommodate it. So, um I just feel that if it's a governmental
action and whether you were the affected or the owner at that point in time or in the future, that limitation should to a certain degree fulfill the hardship requirement because the
government imposed that whether you know you're owner number one or owner owner number five. So um >> from a practical basis obviously it it carried forward. So >> yeah and you know based on my experience okay is and because this comes up you
know here and there and um is in a general sense that's something the board's considered relative to a hardship you know. So >> okay thank you. I I know I probably didn't answer your question, but maybe
in a roundabout way. I tried. >> That's all right. Thank you. >> Go ahead, Marva. >> Um, is there a fence back here? I I see a part of a fence, but is there a a fence that completely surrounds the pool or
>> Well, the pool would require a fence. Oh, >> so you're not showing it on the site plan? No, because it wouldn't it wouldn't we're not requesting any variances or anything like that from the site plan. Just shows the requested uh I'm sorry it's not up on screen. I don't know why I looked I can see I can see >> those are I think those are existing
fence lines that you're seeing and and the property adjacent that's their fence on both sides. >> Okay. >> But our fence will comply with code. We're not requesting any and just like the condition stated by staff, you know, there's a condition saying that we won't request a variance from the fence. I
mean, I believe in the front it's three foot opaque and four foot I'm sorry, three foot solid, four foot opaque. >> That's correct. >> Yeah. So, in the front, set back you can go that high and then your shrubs can't go over four four feet in the front, I believe, according to the code and then
obviously six foot on the sides. >> Okay. >> But the pool has to I mean, by building code, the pool has to be uh secured. You can't just have an open pool for someone to walk in. So, that fencing would have to meet any kind of safety requirement.
And one thing I wanted to add, I guess, um, if you don't mind, is when we kind of surveyed the surrounding area and not just because of the taking, the taking had significant impact like the the property directly south and it's like an
old school kind of motor in with a common driveway and you have like four or five units. It's that's what it appeared to be like. Okay. The taking made that non-conforming with respect to Golf Boulevard. it doesn't meet the setback. And then
um because of the imposition of the city zoning code, the property to the south doesn't even meet the five foot setback relative to our client's property. So it would be on their north side. So the long and the short of it is
these nonconformities are a very common you know situation in this general area. So the grain of the variance would not change like the character or integrity of of what's going on there because you're going to see a lot of these properties come in. Some won't come in
for just flatout redevelopment to meet code. I think some will come in and maybe try and vest the setbacks because that property to the south for example, you could never rep replicate that under your city's code now. you know, but I noticed that they're doing a lot to kind
of preserve it in terms of repairs and renovations and things like that. So, the point is is that, you know, the granny, the variance, you know, it wouldn't right now it's non-conforming on multiple fronts and actually what
we're doing is probably making the property more conforming with respect to your code. Thanks. >> Okay, any other questions? Okay, Braden, if you could proceed with your presentation. One thing that I would like to point out is there's two
variances here and I would like to have each of them considered separately. It's not a situation where you get all or none. There is a potential one or none or both, [clears throat] but
uh I just wanted to point that out. Uh before I get started on this, I just wanted to uh point out one quick correction on my staff report that Mr. Manass just pointed out, and that's in regards to attachment three on the original neighborhood plat. Um I seem to have outlined the neighboring property.
Um so it's not lot four as it's highlighted on attachment three, it's actually lot three. All the other attachments in the staff report are correct. So just wanted to put that out there. Okay. All right. This is staff presentation
for uh application number v00586 2025. Um so the application consists of two variance requests. A variance of section 68483 to allow a swimming pool in the required front yard at a setback of 10 ft and a variance section 68541 to
reduce the minimum side yard setback to allow the construction of new single family residents. In regards to that um dimensional request, the standard required is 5T for this property and it is being proposed at a setback of 10.2
in which is a 4.5 ft variance which is an 83% magnitude. Here is an aerial image of the property as well as some other photography. This property is zoned within the RFM30 zoning district.
Um, as discussed, parking off of the property is required to be um off the rear alley which has uh three exits as shown here. The property is also adjacent to a midblock pedestrian crosswalk that's equipped with flashing beacons directly
adjacent to the front of the parcel on Gulf Boulevard. The subject property has a lot width which is consistent with the minimum requirements of the land development regulations. Um however this is substandard in lot area. The parcel
contains 3,890 ft where a minimum of 4500 is required. Uh within the adjacent blocks alone 22 substandard parcels have consistent or smaller property dimensions uh which indicates uh the development pattern within the surrounding block faces. Out
of these 22 properties, eight of which are in the same zoning district as this property, including um the two properties immediately abudding the subject property to the north and the south. The subject property contains currently a one slab ongrade single family
residence. It was originally constructed in 1946 and has approximately 1,000 ft of living space. The applicant seeking to demolish the structure and construct a new two-story over garage single family residence. Uh this here is the site plan the
applicant submitted with their application. We can see here the 0.85 ft setback which is proposed uh as mentioned earlier that comes out to 10.2 in uh where 5t is required. The ingground swimming pool as proposed
is in the front yard at a 10ft setback from the property line shown here. And the site plan also includes two additional parking spaces beyond the required minimum uh which further reduces the available width in the backyard. Uh the variance request is applicable to
two sections of the land development regulations section 68482 which states that swimming pools may be constructed within yard areas except for the front yard outside of pool walls shall be at least 10 ft from all other property lines. and the building setback
um portion of the code section 68541 which establishes the setbacks for this property as uh 5t from the rear, 5t from both sides and 25 ft from the street for the building. Staff reviewed section 70-221 of the uh
code for uh consistency for this variance. Um let's see. So staff determined that the variance is in fact a variance that can be requested. Um in regards to special conditions of the property, uh staff's determination is
that there are no special conditions that exist which are unique from the surrounding parcels within the same or differing zoning districts. Uh in the abuing blocks alone, eight parcels within the same district contain consistent or smaller lot areas as the subject property uh as mentioned
including the property immediately abuing to the north and to the south. uh strict application of the code would not restrict reasonable use of the property which could be achieved through alterations of the proposed site plan uh changing the dimensions of the structure
etc. Um and it was staff's determination that the conditions resulting in this request are in fact the result of the applicant uh based on the site plan layout selected by the property owner. uh reasonable use of the subject property could be made without
variances. Uh beyond this, alternative variances could have been applied for at a lesser magnitude than what's being requested of 83%. Uh the subject property as mentioned has a compliant lot width but is substandard in lot depth uh and lot area. Uh the
surrounding neighborhood consists of other single family homes, neighborhood scale hotel and motel uses, multifamily uses including duplex, triplex and quadplex developments. Um but there's no precedent in the surrounding neighborhood for a reduced residential
setback of this scale um 10.2 in or the placement of a private residential pool along Gulf Boulevard. Uh the existing pools that can be seen along Gulf Boulevard are for commercial uses, hotels, motel, etc. there's no precedent for a single family private pool in the
front yard along Gulf Boulevard. Um, as far as if this variance would be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter, um, for us to remember, the intent of the land development regulations are to quote promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, order,
appearance, convenience, moral, and general welfare of the people end quote. Uh so staff has determined this request to be in conflict with this intent by impacting the spatial relationship between the proposed and neighboring structures in addition to contradicting
uh a general expectation for street level private residential uses to be screened from the public realm. Um furthermore a reduced side setback of this degree is very likely to increase in um harm to the abuing neighbor. Uh
this could be caused from increased runoff water from roof eaves and gutters or otherwise. Um in addition to um the potential for blocking natural light from reaching that northern uh facade of the structure either the current or a
future uh potential structure on that lot. Um, and then lastly, uh, it's important to note that the relationship of this site to that, uh, midblock pedestrian crosswalk, which is equipped with, uh, flashing beacons. Um, the
proximity of this pool to that crosswalk, presents potential hazards and distractions, not only to drivers, but to pedestrians. Um, it's a reminder that the the highest allowable fence within the front yard is a 4ft open
fence or a 3-ft closed fence. Um, unless you as the board were to dismiss the staff's recommend recommended condition of not allowing a variance further to the uh fence setbacks. Um so uh it's important to note that
relationship between the crosswalk and and potential injurious habits that could happen uh from that relationship. Uh so based on these criteria, staff recommends denial of both variances. Um, as mentioned uh previously, if the board
decides to approve this variance, the conditions considered are that the site plan be uh consistent with what was submitted and that no future variances be granted to um the front yard fence regulations, which would allow a higher
fence than what is permitted by code or the ability to grant a variance for a screen enclosure within the front yard. >> I'm available if you have any questions. Thank you. Can you put your last slide up there and just keep that one up there if you would mind? >> Sure.
>> Thanks. >> Okay. Any questions from the board to the uh city staff? >> U one quick question for me in regard to the pool. You know, it's an ingground pool. What was the main objection to
that variance? Is it mostly the fencing and and the relationship to the crosswalk? I'm just asking you to repeat what you already said for my own clarification. >> Uh yeah, it's our interpretation that it's an incompatible use with the existing streetscape, the public realm
of what um a pedestrian or a motorist would expect upon a four-lane arterial highway such as G Boulevard. Um it's it's just inconsistent with the existing land uses and and the public realm you'd expect on the front yard streetscape of a of a road that heavily trafficked.
>> Thank you. Any >> any questions? >> I have a question. >> I am a little bit torn on this one in regards to the pool. I mean obviously being in the front. So if you said okay well if it's we need to put it in the back but then we're also not allowed to
enter the site from Golf Boulevard. So they would also have to put their driveway in the back. Is that that's correct? Through through the alley. >> That's correct. I mean, if they wanted four parking spaces, I I assume they could do four stacked parking spaces under the house. Uh, which would be half as much width of the parking lot of the
parking space they have now. So, I did the math on this. The minimum required parking for a single family residence is two spaces, which is equivalent to 324 square ft. Uh the proposed parking that they have on their site plan is a total of 540 square feet which is a surplus of
216 square feet above what's required by code. Their pool is only 156 square feet. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'd love to see the investment like on the east side of Gulf Boulevard, but at the same time it's that's this is a tough one.
>> And go ahead. >> My question is regard to the the fence in the front. So you you mentioned that currently allowing a fence up to the property line could in the front can only be three foot high or 4 foot I forget which. >> Uh 3T for a closed fence, 4 foot for an
open fence. >> For an open fence, that's a differentiation. Um, so if this board were to allow the pool in the front and we wanted them to have a higher fence for safety and privacy, we'd have to also give a variance to
that fence area if that's what if that's what this board's desire was. >> I believe so. That I Nancy could correct me. I think that would have to be renoticed if that was the case. Yes, because that is an additional um variance that was not part of the the
initial application. I would agree. >> So that couldn't be established just as a condition of these two variances or one or the other. >> As a condition, you could require that they come back for offense variance if that's the an additional variance that's
needed, which it sounds like it is. >> Thanks. But there's already regulations in regard like you they had mentioned from a hedge perspective like they can have the fence but then they can have a hedge that goes on top of that. >> The maximum height for a f a hedge in the front yard would also be 4 feet. So it's consistent with the so so yeah
actually maximum fence or open is 4t. They can do a hedge which would be more solid than that at 4t but that's the maximum. >> I just don't know if I want to get in the business of putting eight foot fences down G. >> Right. I was just bringing it I just wanted to get the whole picture here. Yeah,
>> I know the D the Duke meter, just for clarification, the Duke meter, it wasn't called out on the plans, but I think it's up in the stairwell. >> Um >> I believe so. That was actually something that I had in my notes. I unfortunately wasn't present at the DRC meeting for this application, so I
wasn't sure. >> I think it's in the entry stairs in the back. There's a little um there's not a note for it, but I think I see it there. >> I know what you mean. I I agree. And I did want to note before I forget you putting up those dots on the other non-conforming that's the first time we've seen that in a while and I really appreciate it for that zoning district
to help really paint a picture. So thank you that worked out. >> So with regard to the side setback variance request >> um if going down to less than a foot on that side I haven't looked at the building plans themselves but someone
mentioned about issues of overhangs. I guess the effectively you could almost have an overhang going over the neighbor's property at that point. Is that concern still have to bring that back? >> That was a concern of mine as well and I I spoke to Ryan Manass about this. Uh so
the code allows an overhang to extend up to half of the required yard setback. So in this case it would be 2 and 1/2 ft. The building would already be encroached past that. So it would not be permitted to have any additional overhang. Uh the conceptual plans for the building uh
included a two-foot overhang which was alarming to me because if that were to be built it would not be compliant. It would be over the property line. Um so that's when I spoke to Ryan Manass and he explained that those were just conceptual plans which then prompted the condition to say specifically that the condition of approval is that the site
plan is to be substantially consistent. So the property owner would then have to revise their conceptual plans to reduce that overhang either or to to remove the overhang essentially because the furthest extension would be 10.2 in from the property line. >> Yes.
>> So we if we were to approve that variance on the setback they would have to alter that back so that nothing p went past the property line itself. >> Uh yeah that was the intent of the way that I wrote the wrote the condition. So that's that is correct. >> Okay.
And and I guess you know that the whole issue of bringing it that close is really the impact when the neighbor to the south when they rebuild that property, how far how close can they come and from a practical point of view
if we take it down to less than a foot. What can they do in terms of utilization of their width of their property becomes into play? >> Yeah, that was a concern of mine. I spoke to Pat Wenszel, the building official, about this as well to make sure there weren't any potential life safety concerns. Um, fortunately, there
was nothing that he was able to come up with that would conflict this specific request. Um, uh, the existing structure that's on that southern abuing property in, you know, was built in, I could only presume sometime in the 30s. I don't have the date off hand. Very close to
the property line though. Um, >> offhand I couldn't tell you, but the width between the structures will be very minimal. Mhm. >> matter of a few feet. Um I I don't know if I necessarily caught your exact >> question. I guess this gets to longterm
if it if then if if this variance was approved then the next property comes and how close they can come. What is the minimum width we allow in Treasure Island between buildings for life safety across the board? >> There's actually a example in Sunset
Beach where it is zero. Well, it may be non-conforming zero today, but I'm >> It's brand new. >> It's brand new. >> This is a new house down there, and it was >> interesting that it was actually in the zoning code is a zero sideyard setback. I was amazed. But anyway,
>> so regardless of that, >> that answers that then. Okay. >> It would I guess I suppose it would have an impact on the development like the internal development of whatever structure is next to that. If you know if two residential structures have less than a less than a foot setback from each other, you couldn't put a bedroom
abuing that property line because there could be no window for egress for life safety. Things like that of that nature is the only potential concern that I could come up with off the top of my >> Yeah. I'm just trying to figure out all the unintended consequences here. Okay. >> Yeah. So, because I want to I want to walk a little bit further into that. So,
if for this property, let's say it gets granted, it's 0.85 85 close to the the the uh property line goes up in the air then the property to the south of it wants to do the same thing let's say 085 goes up in the air I mean their overhangs are going to be kissing each
other's property line that could be a scenario correct but they'd have to come in for a variance and >> absolutely >> because it falls into it and >> it's a possibility >> it's a possibility okay I I mean I did by any chance do the do you know I mean we can ask them if they come back up Do
you know if the applicant looked at stepping back that side property? You know, how we've always talked about in regards to stepping back to keep it inside the setback. >> Um, from my understanding, the the goal the intent of the property owner was to to maintain like a an existing
>> building plan that was already that's already in place. So, they wanted that 36 foot building because they were uh looking for that specific building plan to use on property. But Ryan, if >> yeah, [clears throat] >> you can answer that if you haven't better. >> Can I comment on some other points too? Now,
>> what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna see if there's anybody in the audience who wants to speak. Anybody in the audience which wishes to speak to this? I do not have any cards, so I'm assuming not. So, go ahead and uh >> Thank you, Chair. >> Comment away.
>> Ryan Manassi again. Um, just to hit on some points, I was trying to jot down some notes. I appreciate what um staff did with doing the calculations for the parking and what pool can go there, but what I don't know if you you took in account it was a 10-ft setback. So, if you apply the 10 foot set back to the
rear and the side when he was talking about the actual losing two parking spaces and the the square footage of the pool and that's what I what I initially presented. If you actually apply the pool setbacks per your code, it's going to further limit that rear area. So, again, that's the
reason You know, I get it. We're We have two more spaces than what's required by code, but we justified that by if we only put two spaces there, guaranteed visitors, deliveries are going to be stuck in that alley. >> Right. And it may be that then you have to request the variance for the pool in
the back. >> Exactly. >> Up against that alleyway. >> Exactly what would probably happen. If we wanted to try to get more pool in the back, we'd be here for a variance. >> Um, something to mention. I know there was some discussion about the fence height in the front. I mean, we think the way the building is proposed, it's
in it's in conformity with the northern two residential structures. To the south is that cottage type uh what it used to be like a motel kind of triplex duplex thing going on. So really to the single family homes that are adjacent to it to the north they're meeting that 25 foot
or there they're thereabout setback. So, you know, to put a larger fence in the front along G Boulevard really takes away that front facade that this block is pretty much created on by that new structure all the way to the north as well as the adjacent um uh single family home. As far as the spatial distance and
the lighting, we're not requesting any height above what's required. I mean, I don't think there was an analysis done to see what 10 in does compared to five feet on the side. So, I'm not sure what light is being impaired from us being
code compliant with height on the neighboring properties. Um, let's see. Um, when we talk about the southern variance, and I understand it's that 10 in 10.2 in, and everybody's up here. Why are we doing that? Again, the property
shape is a trapezoid, right? It doesn't it's not a perfect rectangle. We're trying to fit a rectangle in a trapezoid. we have a larger setback as you go back towards the rear, right? But really the the reason by pushing this to the south is to give the northern part a better access point. So now you have
five foot separation on the north. You can get your lawn mower, you can get your pool equipment, you can get whatever you need because it actually makes one side of the property functional to access the rear of the property or the front of the property. So again, it's like let's just say we could take it and split the difference
and put it on both sides that now you have two narrow passageways instead of one that's actually functional, can possibly grow hedges or you can have a pathway to one that's or to two that wouldn't be functional. Um >> I I'd argue that point. It's under the garage. It's wide open. You'd go
straight through it. >> It's enclosed. >> Not on our conceptual designs that we have. There's nothing enclosed. my my mistake then. >> Okay. No, I'm not trying to be difficult. I mean, trust me, I'm I'm trying, but >> I can show those here. >> But again, I mean, it
>> and but if you're parking, then you're not, you know, the dedicated pathway is still a dedicated pathway because if we have vehicles there, then you still want to be able to walk to the the front of the property to where the pool's located.
>> The lawn mower was a stretch. I think I I try to address some of the points. Anybody else have any questions? >> Just one quick question on the southeast corner of the house. >> What's your setback there?
>> Southeast at the corner of the building. >> Yes. >> Uh it was about 3.14. I It's not labeled on the plan. It's a little over 3T when I measured it out on the on sale. >> So nowhere along the length of the building do you meet the minimum setback of 5T? No sir. >> Okay. Thanks.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Do you have any other comments? >> Mark was just I we were talking about earlier, you know, again, something to take in consideration as the neighboring properties. The one to the south is not meeting the setback requirements. The property to the north is not meeting the setback requirement to their north
property line. You know, so these these homes that's that that goes back to the initial presentation of the non-conforming characteristics of that whole block that block area. Um, you know, you're going to see homes that are ab budding the property line, eaves touching the property line. I you could
possibly have homes that are over a property line. Who knows what happened since 1924. Um, but there's no consistency. It's not like you'd go on, you know, some of the homes on Paradise Island, per se, and say you have that exact setback that builder stood to. This is when I was looking at the area. You could see that on the on that aerial
map I showed that the structures are not all consistent with 5-ft setbacks on both sides. >> One question then um just for my own identification, the house to the north, does it have a 5ft set back on the
south? There's no survey that shows it. And that's and then so when in my initial presentation it's not serve I I don't have a survey either but on property appraiser if you pull it up the lines are pretty close and you can measure it looks like it's hugging the property line to the north and that was built in 2000 I believe when I looked it
up. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? >> Seeing none we'll close the public hearing. Uh like I said earlier we've got two variances. When we make a motion, I would like each variance to have its own motion so we can consider
these separately. Um, you know, I'll start it out with initial comments. >> You already did public comment on this. >> Okay. >> I do. >> Chairman, if we if we separate it just when it comes to the case number, do we leave for the city attorney? Do we leave the case number the same? And >> yes, you can leave the the case number
the same. And and also just I apologize, but just for the record, for purposes of the record, I believe you have qualified Braden as an expert as well. Is that correct? >> I would hope we hired him. >> Yeah. I just need to get it in the record for this case. That's all. Thank you.
>> He is an expert. He's a city employee. [laughter] >> Anyway, my comment is, you know, I've never really had a whole lot of concerns with front yard setbacks for a pool. Uh it's like uh city staff said, it's very
odd to have a swimming pool that close to Gulf Boulevard. Uh not exactly the best situation in the world, but of the two variances, I really don't object to the pool being in the front too much. The other one, on the other hand, it
boils down to safety. I mean, it's safety aspect. You can't have a house less than a foot from a property line. Especially, you know, we had an example prior situation where a guy on Sunset Beach asked for zero sideyard setback. I
happen to know the guy who owned the lot next door. He said, "Well, what happens when I come in and ask for zero set back?" I said, "You're going to have two houses up against each other and it's impossible for the fire department to get through there." I went out and looked at this situation and provided
back in 1924 they did things a heck of a lot different and it's not a good situation but I don't think we can per personally uh perpetuate the scenario out there. So while I don't mind the
pool the uh sideyard setback is just unsafe. We've had multiple fires in Sunset Beach where the houses are very close together and it burns up the houses on both sides and uh it's happened twice since I've lived in
Sunset Beach. Actually, it's happened three times. >> That's where I was trying to get in terms of what it going forward. you know, this is a non-conforming lot trying to make some, you know, allowance for, you know, adjustment and and setback as a result of that. So, you can
build a reasonable structure. What is the reasonable amount of opening that we, you know, will allow? >> I mean, I >> 5 foot is there for a reason. I mean, 5 foot setback. >> I don't want to speak for everyone, but I like Richard said, I mean, these houses have setbacks. I mean, we've I
know that they had mentioned consistency. if someone's build like the consistency that I would like to see is that if someone comes in and builds a brand new residential home that we are consistent in regards to following the setbacks that apply to that parcel. >> Well, the thing is there's a lot of houses, my own personal house is 30 ft
wide. This house is 36 ft wide. While I appreciate the fact that they're not going to be able to build a house as big as they would like, that is not for this board to uh take into account. appreciate the fact that your house is about 2600 square feet. Uh it can be
less. And so once again, I don't care about the pool in the front. Really don't. That's just an odd situation. It's up to the builder to make it safe. I don't want any little kids getting in that pool and drowning. But that's up to them. As far as sideyard setback, that
impacts the neighbors. And it's a it's a safety situation. It is strictly safety. So, >> that's my comment. >> How high fence do we need around a pool to be what's required? >> 6 foot. >> I mean, do we want a 6ft fence on G
Boulevard? >> Life safety codes, I believe, require 40 42 feet. It's 4T. And then the gate has to be like an additional there isn't a requirement there. I did speak to um Emily Ellis, the planning manager who who oversees the zoning code um
alongside me and then Pat Wenszel for life safety and we made sure that the uh life safety requirements could be met without contradicting the code requirements for the front yard fence and they can be met. >> Is there any h any homes in this area that have a pool? Because I don't see
>> no I I'm sorry. Are you saying a pool in general >> in the front period? A pool period? I don't. >> There's absolutely no single family homes that I could find in Treasure Island that have a pool in the front yard. >> No, no, I meant just a pool in general and not I'm talking about this area. I'm
looking at the surveys and whatever. I can't find a pool. >> Yeah, I I did not look for that. I can take a look on the aerial map uh now though and see if I come up with anything. >> Have a pool. But other thing is right down the street
there's uh Crystal Palms and it's not the best scenario ever. Their pool is in front of the building. It's right on Gulf Boulevard and uh it's just uh you know not the ultimate situation. I agree. But Six Island Drive has a pool
in the front yard, >> but it's like a kitty pool. It's like two feet deep. But they also have a pool in the backyard. >> It's a koi pond. >> Call it that. So imminent domain took part of the front of this lot many years ago. So I'm
trying to understand with >> the current proposal for this property is to live with that the front setback as is. There's no variance being asked for for the front.
I wouldn't mind this board having some discussion of had this applicant come in and put the pool in the back, push the parking to the side or put some parking underneath the structure and brought the structure forward and in order to do
that and the variance that he was asking for was in the front. How would this board view that request? I wouldn't be ablethetically >> I wouldn't be able to answer that question without seeing like a packet seeing the details and stuff like that >> and I'm really saying because that's
where eminent do domain caused you know the the front to be taken long ago and that is where the hardship part of the hardship exists here >> but the owner bought it after the domain >> well he he knew what he was buying for sure I'm just saying that in terms of
why this low this lot though is one of the reasons it's a nonconforming lot is because of that imminent domain that occurred a while ago. >> And I realize I'm just asking the theoretical if if the board is not going to be amanable to the request that's
coming forward. It may be that in the future doing it another way might be a more acceptable way of getting there. >> But what we do not want to encourage is any buildings closer to Gulf Boulevard than 25 ft, which is the current setback. I mean, I object
>> that answers the question then. I object immensely to any building being in in in a front yard setback. Uh especially a arterial road such as uh Gulf Boulevard. That's just not a [snorts] trend we want to encourage.
>> Well, that that fair enough. I mean, that's really that that was in part why I was asking. >> You know, the thing is I was wrong. It is not a 6 foot GPT says it's 48 in. That's up to the builder, you know, it's
up to them to make make it safe. I don't have any problem with the actual being out there, >> but >> once again, I'm repeating myself. 085 on a sideyard setback is too small. >> Yep. >> Very much. And um with that, any other
comments or can we have some motions? >> I'd like to have two of them. >> [clears throat] >> All right, guys. I'll do it for you. All right. I'll make a motion in regards to case number V- 0002,
I'm sorry, 0000586-2 025. Uh, at the location 12409 G Boulevard, Treasure, Florida. Uh, as a planning and zone member, uh, I will make the motion that this does not meet all of the criteria. So hold on one
second. >> Or which varian? >> I'm going to do the first one listed in our packet which is inclusive of one variance section 68-483 to allow an ingground. All right. I'd like to restart. >> Okay. >> Because you made me separate them.
>> So the in just a little bit more uh regarding your prior question. So the application would be approved in part and denied in part and then we would um show the requisite uh denial basis for the denial if it if that's where you
go with it. >> You could do both parts is what she's saying. >> If you No. Well, no. I think the chair had asked for two separate motions, which is fine, but then we would combine it into that application saying it's approved in part or denied in part if
that's the way it ends up. question. >> I'm just looking at the conditions to make sure I know which ones are applicable. >> Well, number two obviously is. >> Mhm. And then >> and number three as well. >> Number three. So, just leave out one.
Okay. >> Ready? >> Go for it. >> We're going to give this a shot. All right. I'm going to make a motion in regards to the case number V-0000586-2025 at the location 12409 Golf Boulevard, Treasure Island, Florida 3376. Um, I
will make the motion to approve the first variance listed in our packet for the allowance of an ingground swimming pool uh, in the required front yard setback of 10 ft. with the conditions
two and three listed in our packet and included in that motion. I will not allow or deny the variance for um the second variance in our packet listed
to section 68-541 to reduce the minimum sideyard setback to allow the construction of that new single family home. Now, do we want to >> due to the absence of >> should we separate due to the absence of
>> which criteria? >> The hardship does not exist. >> Okay, that works. >> Gross, just for clarification sake, you made a great first motion on the pool. Let's vote on that one and uh that way it's absolutely
>> always happens. I mean, the city attorney tell Okay, sure. >> That that's you can do that. you'll do. We're gonna end up with three three votes. >> It's going to be the same vote, but yes, let's do it. >> So, we'll do the pool first, then we can do the side, and then we'll have one
vote that says uh approved in part or denied in part if that's the way it ends up. I don't know. >> So, these are preliminary votes. >> Oh, sorry. Yeah. >> Anyway, could we have >> This is frustrating >> a second on the second to the way he
said it. I'll second that for the pool. >> Okay. Motion by Ross Sanchez, second by Chris Downing. And >> wait a minute. I need to know what the motion I thought was a combination, wasn't it? >> Well, it was and that's what I was going to clarify next.
>> Well, wait a minute. He made the motion. >> Okay. Ross, what I'd like you >> I was making the motion. I know that you wanted us to split them in half, but then she had told me that I can do them together and we can vote on it all together if people are in if there is a second to it. And then there is a vote to it.
>> We do have a motion and a second. So >> that is correct. And then the denial of the side setback was due to the lack of evidence showing a hardship. Yes, that's what I >> You're doing both at the same time. >> I'm doing both at the same time. That's fine. I just want to make sure it was totally clear and it's
>> before I give my clear then before I give my second on this I just just a clarification on the parking is parking included at all the having the ability to do the four spaces at all in this >> no because the site plan is not being approved provided in our judge wanted
that clarification in that case I I will second as you've read >> this is a yes for the pool and a no for the building >> correct >> can we get some clarification before we vote I'm a simple man. And I don't really understand. Are we voting a vote of yes? >> A vote for yes on the pool. A vote for
no on the uh setback. >> Two separate votes. >> If you vote >> voting no, >> you can't. You got to break them up. You got to do one at a time. >> That I thought would be the most clear way to do it. It's going to be It's so confusing motion. >> Telling you.
>> Ross, if you don't mind, >> Marvin can make the motion if if if he wants them broken up. He can make the motion. >> Good. Go ahead, Marvin. But we have a pending motion on the floor. >> We have a first. >> Okay, withdraw that one. Ross, I withdraw my motion. >> Thank you. >> If you would, Marvin,
>> my motion is going to be different. You're not going to like my motion [laughter] >> cuz I don't want to approve the pool. >> Guys, I tried doing it the most simplest way. >> Like I have said before, >> I I literally tried doing it the most simplest way. If you want the pool, you say yes. >> And you want the building out, it's the
still the same. Yes. >> Yeah. It's a combined one is one I'm approving and one I'm denying. >> That simple. >> I agree with you, Ross, but >> we're at the point now where we're going to do them separately. >> Okay. >> And and Marvin, if you would make a
motion to approve and you can vote no against the pool if you want to. It just makes it >> okay. I guess >> when you're I've said this in the past, when you're voting yes to say no, it gets confusing. and uh you know if you would make your motion and say yes for
the first one and no for the second one. That's what we're aiming at. >> Okay. Regarding case number V-00586-2052 I move to approve the variance for the pool
as requested. I'll second. >> Okay. Motion by Marvin Chavelin, second by Chris Downing. Can we have a roll call vote, please? >> Valier Cree, >> yes. >> Ross Sanchez, >> yes. >> Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Grant Smith,
>> no. >> Marvin Shavelin, >> no. >> Richard Harris, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay, number one is approved. You can uh build a pool with 4ft fences, making sure it's totally safe. Okay, Marvin, if you would make a motion for the second
>> regarding case number V-00586-2025, I move to deny the variance for the um to reduce the minimum sideyard setback to allow for the construction of a new
single family residence. And the basis for the denial, >> lack of substantial evidence or >> lack of criteria, >> lack of criteria, >> lack of what? >> Hardship. >> Lack of hardship. >> Second. >> Okay. Uh motion by Marvin Chevlin,
second by Valerie Ay. Could we have a roll call vote, please? >> Valerie, >> yes. >> Ross Sanchez, >> yes. >> Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Grant Smith, >> yes. >> Robin Shadlin, >> yes. >> Richard Harris, >> yes. and your client, your architect's just going to have to go sharpen his
pencil, Mark, that uh he's going to build a smaller house. >> So, for purposes of recordkeeping for this particular application, then it it is the the will of the planning uh and zoning board that the application is approved in part and denied in part. Is
that a correct representation? >> Yes, it is. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you all for your time and consideration. Really appreciate it. Take care. >> Okay, we'll move on to our next case. [clears throat] Number 10, BV-0000588-20 52 variances to section 68-
541 granting a 2.4 foot variance to the required front yard setback for the construction of an external staircase and a 2.4 4 foot variance to the required sideyard setback for the
construction of an elevator shaft both in conjunction with the structural elevation ele structural elevation improvements to adhere with current minimum flood elevation requirements. This house is being jacked up. So just
remember that if you the applicant uh could approach the podium and make your presentation please. I >> think elevated is the right word. >> I may briefly introduce >> um [laughter] I am Jim Adams. Barb and I
bought this uh home in October, November of 2017. And I am present simply to help a answer questions that you all may have. Um, Barbara is deeper in the weeds in this
that I am and I will defer to her. >> Um, thanks for hearing us. Um, what our goal is, we want to elevate our property so that um, we become FEMA
compliant. Um, all of us have been through the nightmare of Helen and Milton and we don't want our property in the future if there are any other storms like this to have the mountain of debris in front of
our house, you know, with all the interior, the appliances, all of that. We want to avoid that, not only for ourselves and our neighborhood, but for the city. Um [sighs] the issue with our property, as you can
see from the um site plan, is we have truly a trapezoidal shaped property. We're a corner we're a corner lot on a finger. Um some of the people call it an armpit lot. Um
but we have a lot more property in the front of the house than we do in the rear. So, there's not as much on the water, but in the front there's quite a bit. Um, because of the strange angles of the trapezoid, the way it Well, you
can you can see how very odd shape >> um when when you raise the house. And we're we're not looking to change the shape of the house. We don't want any more square footage. We don't want any kind of dramatic entrance. We're not trying to
do anything to change the character of the house of the neighborhood. We just want to raise it. Um but because of the way the angles come across the front um the stairs even even um
going sideways doing a switch back um there's a triangular section that encroaches into the setback at the maximum point 2.4 ft. So into we still have um you know over 17 ft of setback
in the front and it's not the entire front of the staircase. It's just the way the angle and I marked this in yellow. This is the part that encroaches um here and there's no way um you know
from a code stand st point of view that you can change the design of the stairs. I mean they have to be a certain width, they have to be a certain height. Um and we did the switch back so that it would be close to the house and not coming
forward. Um, I mean, if we didn't ha if we didn't get a variance, the only way to get into our house would be with a ladder. I mean, there's no physical way to get to the door of the house um
without having this triangle of of of a um encroachment. Um, so there's one more there's one more variance that we're requesting and that involves an exterior elevator. Um,
our property was built in the 1950s. It's a small house, you know, built in a strange way to fit that trapezoid shape. Um, it was originally built as a two-bedroom, two bath with a onecar
garage. a previous owner made the garage um into a third bedroom. Um so the interior the interior of the house is just completely opened up. It's just like you know kitchen, living room, dining room. It's all open and then
there are three bedrooms. So the issue with the elevator is there's nowhere to put it inside the house. Um, so the engineers and the architects that we've been dealing with with modern
movers said really the only thing you can do is is put it on the side of the house and there is a side entrance um to the house with a door and that is where that's where they recommend putting
putting the elevator. Um, and again, it's only it's a triangle that encroaches, not the entire structure. And it's the exact same amount of footage. Uh, 2.4 at its widest point of
the triangle. And there there's a 10-ft set back there. Um, and there there is still 7.6 six feet um between that one corner that corner of the
elevator and and the setback. Um the neighbor that is to the side of our property has no has no issue with that at all. None of the neighbors do. Um but you know, you may say, "Well, why do we
need an elevator? We're well, we're both 72 years old. I've had two knee surgeries, COPD, my husband has heart disease. Um, we we have to have an elevator and there's, you know, you can't put it in the middle of the kitchen. There's there's nowhere to put
it. So, um, that's why we're asking, you know, for your consideration in granting these two easements. Um, we just want to make the property more compliant and um, be able to have access to our
house. >> Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant? >> Yep. Thank you, Barb. Good presentation. >> Okay, if you could have a seat and we'll have uh, Braden uh, go ahead and um, [clears throat] give us your presentation. >> All right. I am presenting for
application VR 00005822025. This is an application uh that consists of two variances to section 68-541 granting a 2.4 ft variance to the required front yard setback for the construction of an external staircase and a 2.4 foot variance to the required
sideyard setback for the construction of an elevator shaft. Both in conjunction with structural elevation improvements to adhere with the current flood minimum elevation requirements. Front setback proposed is 17.6 feet where 20 feet is required and the side setback proposed
is 7.6 where 10 feet is required. Both variances are 2.4 ft. Uh we can see the subject property here and some aerial imagery. The subject property is within the residential urban um RU75 zoning
district. Um, as discussed, this is an irregularly irregularly shaped lot with 88 feet of street frontage and 28 feet of frontage along the waterfront. The applicable setbacks for this property are 20 ft from the street side,
10 ft from each interior side, and then 25 ft from that waterfront property. The subject property contains a one-story slab on grade single family residence which was constructed in 1958 with approximately 1,900 square feet of living space and is located within the
AE flood zone with a base flood elevation of 10 ft and um experienced damage during the hurricanes last year. So as discussed the applicant is speaking seeking to elevate the existing structure to comply with the current requirements uh which has prompted the
need for this application. Here we have the site plan and currently the land development regulations allow one set of stairs to encroach into the setbacks when elevating a structure. That allowable crochment has already been used here for the Duke meter. And that first variance
is shown there in yellow uh for the 2.4 foot reduced front yard setback um utilizing a a swing back for the stair to uh minimize the total encroachment. And then that secondary uh variance request is there on the left side of the
house. Uh 2.4 foot reduced sideyard setback for a an elevator to meet an existing uh configuration of an external uh egress to the house. Uh if for review criteria uh staff has uh determined this is an applicable
variance for request and the structure which was built to code at the time of construction faces unique challenges in relation to the orientation of the existing structure and the developments as a result of coming into compliance with the flood elevation requirements. Um strict application of these
regulations would not allow for exterior aggress to be maintained um in the same configuration or potentially at all which in the locations where it's currently developed um and would impact the overall ability to improve the property to the current requirements for
flood elevation. Uh these conditions are not at the fault of the property owner as the property was in full compliance when they purchased the home and when it was constructed. um and staff to determine this the variances proposed were um reasonable
and the least minimum impact uh possible. Uh the surrounding neighborhood of of the subject property consists of single family structures which have undergone similar improvements to comply uh with the flood elevation requirements and and
staff has determined that this request is in harmony with the general intent of the code and will not create any adverse impacts to neighboring properties. Uh so with that staff recommends uh approval of both variances included in the application uh with conditions and I'm
available if you have questions. Okay. Any questions of the um city staff? Seeing none, we will seeing none, we will close the public hearing. Um this lot is the epitome of hardship due to
its configuration. 88 ft on the front, 28 ft in the back, and they're trying to jack up an existing house. Uh initially when I became involved in this uh when the applicant asked me what she should do I said well apply for vance if you
have to but try to see if we can do this one administratively. I mean it's clipping the corner of an elevator and clipping the corner of a of a stairway. This is pretty minor uh situation. So I fully support this one. And um you know,
you got to be able to get to your house. Like Miss Adams said, we all at their age and my age want to have an elevator. Um so I support this one. Uh any further comments or could we have a motion for approval, please?
>> I just always find it interesting. >> Public comment. >> Oh, >> I'm sorry. I always forget to do that. Anybody in the audience who wishes to speak to this one? Seeing none, we covered that. Go ahead. I just find it, you know, and I get it. I like that we're doing this
for people that are trying to make their homes resilient. Um, and then obviously like it's like they're making it resilient. Okay, that that's good. But then it's not falling within our current rules. So then we're kind of here at that board having that discussion and
trying to help that applicant. It sounds a lot like something that we should also apply theory to our commercial areas as well. So sounds great. Thank you. >> Couldn't agree more. >> Yep. And the uh the main thing is Ross, for jacking up a house, I don't have any problem with it. If you're doing this
and with new construction, I'd say sharpen your pencil. >> Y >> we made exceptions to that in the past, but >> yeah, >> so since this is a I I would like to make the motion um you know to approve this variance um or both the variances here. Um, but before I do, I I did want
to ask, does this board have the authority to um wave the fees for the variance being applied for in this case? >> No, you don't. >> Okay. >> They would have to go to the um city commission because it's basically involving public money and you don't
have authority. >> Great. In this case, Chris, and the cost of of raising your house as grant, can you wave my permit fee for my house? the fees are minor. >> I definitely couldn't do that. But I I was what I was really getting at was,
you know, there are these variances that we're allowing for people that are elevating their homes to stay to to meet the FEMA FEMA code. It was to no no will on their part, you know, they were put in this position. So that we'll take that up with the commission.
>> What about the people that have houses that it is a >> I would agree. It's a broader question, but I figured I'd put it out there to see how fast I would get knocked down. >> Um, but I would like to make the motion to >> Please do um to approve >> uh case variance 0000588-2025.
Um uh the planning and zoding board has determined that the variance application um does meet all the criteria set forth in section 7221 uh to approve this variance as as requested. Second in and add this and including
condition number one. >> Yeah, it's got to be approved with conditions. >> Okay. I didn't see the condition number one. Sorry. And condition number one. What is condition number one? I I'm looking for that >> proposed structure shall be substantially cons. >> Oh, thank you. And yes, I'm Yeah. So,
I'll amend what I said all the way up to u approving the variance as requested. uh with the condition of the proposed structure being uh substantially consistent with plans prepared by RBA Engineering dated July 14th, 2025.
>> Good. Thank you. Second, please. >> Second. >> All right. Motion by Chris Downing, second by Marvin Shavelin. Uh could we have a roll call vote, please? >> Talia, >> yes. >> Ross Sanchez, >> yes. >> Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Grant Smith, >> yes. >> Marvin Shavelin, yes. >> Richard Harris, >> yes. >> Thank you.
>> Okay, go tell Martin Movers to get to work. Anyway, okay, let's move on to the next one. And this one is a site plan review to allow construction of a single family home. Um, it's right there there at the
end of 85th and I don't have the address right off hand, but it's in the packet. If the applicant can uh approach the podium and make their presentation. >> Hello. Good afternoon. Uh my name is Jason Ma. Um and we bought our property
at 8576 West Gulf Boulevard uh about a year before Hurricane Helena Milton. So some bad timing by us, but that's all right. Um, we're really excited to be full-time Treasure Island residents as soon as we can. Um, as you can see from
our request, we are proposing to build a single family home. Um, we understand that there is an erosion control line that needs to be set and we understand that part of the conditions suggested by staff would be to allow this contingent on that line being set,
which we agree with. Um, but we are eager and excited to build here in Treasure Island. We intend to use Treasure Island based builders. We intend to use Treasure Island based um, construction companies for this. Um, so we've submitted the request. Um, I'm
happy to answer any questions, but but I think the request is pretty straightforward. >> Any questions of the applicant? >> Seeing none, go ahead Braden with your presentation. >> All right. Thank you. This is a presentation for application site-0000589-2025.
Uh the applicant is currently seeking a site plan approval for a single family residence located along the west side of West Gulf Boulevard. Uh the subject property is located at 8576 West Gulf Boulevard. I have an aerial map here for you of the property.
Uh subject property is within the uh RM15 zoning district uh with the portion of the property abuing the Gulf zoned preservation. Uh we have an aerial uh image of the parcel here. The structure that is currently there is uh since been
removed. Uh so it's that middle singlestory structure there. That's the parcel in question. Uh some background on the application and the property. Uh the previously existing structures were demolished in 2025 and the property is currently vacant. An application was previously
brought to commission on November 18th of 2025 requesting a 10-ft variance to the waterfront setback resulting in a zero foot setback for the construction of a new family residence. Um and the application was continued by commission in anticipation of an updated erosion
control line. Uh since that time, an updated application was submitted um consisting of a site plan without variances uh but dependent on the assumed location of an proposed erosion control line. That previous application uh continued by the commission has since
been withdrawn by the applicant and we're here today reviewing his updated application. Uh the most recent updates uh from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection are that this erosion control line will hopefully be adopted by the end of actually this has
been updated since I even wrote this um Febru January to February hopefully. Um here is the site plan. Uh just for context, this is the line of the current TI um mean high water line
and the location of the proposed uh erosion control line. We have uh the east and west elevations of the property here uh which is the equivalent to the front and rear of the property and then the two north and south interior sides of the property.
Uh site plan review criteria are outlined in section 70-92 of the city code of ordinances. Um the subject property has a future land use designation of residential medium and is located within the RM15 zoning district. Uh single family residence is a
permitted use within the zoning district and is consistent with the purpose uh and intent of the zoning code and the comprehensive plan. Um and the proposed site plan is in conformance with all applicable regulations of the RM15 zoning district. Uh [snorts] we can
start to see these regulations here. It meets the minimum width of 45 ft where 65 ft is provided. Um it has a uh conforming overall lot depth to the uh true rear property line. um despite only having an 81 ft depth from or to the
currently existing Treasure Island meanh high water line uh is has a surplus lot area uh it's compliant in impervious surface ratio uh although floor air ratio is not regulated for single family structures the F here is 0.63 63. Uh the height is
compliant at 28T 8 in. The design flood elevation is consistent with what is required. The setbacks proposed are uh an additional 10 in beyond the 20 foot uh street side setback that's required. The side setbacks are 10 1/2 and 11 ft 2
in where 7 and 1/2 ft is required. Um and likewise the uh rear waterfront setback is compliant with that proposed uh erosion control line location. uh both for the pool and the structure. The open space requirement is met uh
with a surplus of close to one foot and where two parking spaces are required for provided. Uh the site plan does not include the subdivision of property um and the uh proposed developments are compatible with the planned character of
the RM15 zoning districts and um the surrounding single family and multifamily uh residential developments in the area. Uh the proposed site plan is in conformance with all landscaping requirements set forth in chapter 72. Um and the proposed development meets um or
exceeds all setback and open space requirements. As uh discussed prior, there'll be no change to the abuing beach access to the direct um I'm south of the property um as that will remain in place. Uh the public works department
uh will determine if any uh proposed development require new or upgraded utility improvements at the time of permit review. And this application did not re uh require review from FDOT uh Southwest Florida Water Management District or the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council.
Uh staff recommends approval of the site plan brought to you today uh with the approve or uh conditions of approval as listed in the staff report. I'm available if you have questions. Thank you. >> Okay. Any questions of the U city staff? >> Yeah, I just have a question. Um, two
questions. One, uh, the applicant was good with the six conditions that were listed in the packet. >> Uh, I provided them the staff report and I I assume that they were able to review this. >> And number six in our packet, it states if within 12 months of the date of approval of an application for the site
plan review, a building permit has not been applied for, the approved site plan becomes null and void. Is that standard for us? Uh, so as far as I know, this is of course my first time writing this staff report for this. I, you know, kind of repair compared this to the last most
previous single family res. >> I think it's in the code because it's a because it's G Boulevard, >> right? I assume >> it's West G Boulevard. >> West Golf Boulevard. Yeah. >> I never seen someone be so excited to be your neighbor, Richard. This is amazing. >> You know, the thing is I walked by this houseund
150,000 times in case Richard lives in Pisa. Okay. All right. So, I'm good. >> You know, it's going to be a good This one really took a hit. Uh, let me ask before I forget. Anybody in the audience wants to speak to this? >> Okay, I remembered to do it this time.
>> That's a great Duke Energy platform, too, by the way. I don't know if anyone saw that. >> Yeah, I the whole design against the a lot that's shifted that way. It's very good. >> Anyway, they took a big big hit. Um, and it was sad to see it get torn down, but
it had to be. It was actually a kayak wrapped around a piling underneath this one. And uh so with that, I support this site plan completely. Uh any other comments or go ahead, Marvin. >> Can you show this with the proposed uh erosion line than the existing?
>> It's about 10 ft further west. >> So if we're pretty sure that's going to happen, but if it doesn't, he's got to come back. Is that how that works? He's already been here once. >> It's in the >> You want me to handle it?
>> Yeah, go for it. >> It's in the conditions, Marvin. Under um number one, >> right? It's dependent. So, he's going to have to come back. >> Yeah. Okay. >> That will occur. I mean, I attended the uh hearing on the new erosion control
line, and it's just a bureaucratic process. It takes a while, but it'll get there. And that's the reason why they went for the uh variance to get things going. Uh their answer was what I predicted that it would be continued and
it was. So they're good to go. Could we have a motion to approve, please? >> Go ahead. I was going to sit myself out for motions for the rest of the day, but okay. Uh in [clears throat] regards to case numbers, site plan review 0000589-2025
at the location 8576 West Gulf Boulevard, Treasure Island, Florida. Um planning zoning boards uh by motion um make a motion to approve the site plan as follows with the conditions one through six listed in our packet.
>> Second, please. Okay. Motion by Ross Sanchez, second by Chris Downing. Could we have a roll call? >> Valerie. Yes. >> Ross Sanchez. >> Yes. >> Chris Downing. >> Yes. >> Grant Smith. >> Yes. >> Marvin Shavelin. >> Yes. >> Richard Harris. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Public comment for non-aggenda
items. Don't see any. >> Please approach the podium. We don't get these very often. I just want to see what they're talking about. >> The big sign here. Good afternoon. I'm Jackie Toledo and this is Tim Pets and
we're here um to speak about the Club of Treasure Island. We're the owner's representative and I know that this is we're not on the agenda, but we wanted to just get you familiar with what we had planned. We're very excited to provide a concept plan and tell you um
what we have um proposed. what we are proposing. Um, so you are all very familiar with the Club of Treasure Island. I've heard many stories about people having weddings there, celebrations, birthdays, and it's been sitting empty for many years. Um, so the
owner u purchased this property about two years ago and did market analysis and research and talked to many residents about what the needs were in the area. And what they come up with was a high-end dry to support the area. As you know, about a year ago, we all
suffered um the her the damage from hurricanes. We saw boats flying everywhere in people's properties. So, this would definitely help the community and I think it will be a great investment for the community and provide a lot of funding for the area. We did
bring some um handouts if you wanted to take a look. Um again, this is just the concept plan. Um but can I hand this out? Um and we know that there's a process but um we just wanted to present this to
you. Um this will be about a 300 foot um by 100 foot um 160T 162 foot property. It will be the height will be similar to the existing club. We will keep the existing club there and um
this will just serve um as an ancillarious to the marina that's currently there. you're saying. >> Um, but I will open it up for any questions that you have. >> I'm sure you have many. >> And Tim, if you want to come on as I get
done looking. [laughter] >> Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead. >> No, if you have any questions Oh, >> about the property. >> I was just looking at your elevation. We want to make sure everybody uh gets to see it. Um, >> yeah. I mean, I'm sure this thing is
going to generate a gajillion questions. >> Yeah. Um, but thanks for coming to us and asking, you know, for opportunity within Treasure Island because that's what this town needs right now. Um, regardless of what it is. Uh, yeah, I mean, it's I I I think there
will be a lot more questions if a future site plan is provided to us. Like, yeah, high and dry sounds great, but is there any plan from uh sports or rec uh recreation, you know, when it comes to either pickle ball or tennis or something? because you know there is that was there that would be technically
I wouldn't say it was there it's been there for a long time but then obviously over the years it's kind of diminished um there was also previous uh sailing camps you know things like that even tennis camps for kids um my grandparents were members of the previous club my family was members of
the previous club so very familiar with that that property um so it just this is going to generate a lot of uh good noise, I think. But, uh, we'll see what happens. >> So, the the orientation of what we're looking at here, uh, the that large
entrance faces what direction? >> That would be the north. >> Facing north. Okay. >> You're looking at it from uh, Treasure Island Causeway down to it. Okay. >> The rear would be where they would put boats into. >> I see. So, it be open on both ends.
>> Yeah, it needs to be. >> It needs to be for pass through. The rest of it though, you're the rest of it though, you're proposing that it would have u a an outer shell that is kind of in harmony with the existing club building. I guess this the intent of this elevation correct concept.
>> Correct. It is. At at first when we started discussing this with builders and so forth, they were like just do open air and we said no, I this would never make it through these people over here. So that's why we tried to dress it up. >> Yep. Okay. Yeah. Thanks for sharing that today. What about what what about the
existing building? I mean, I know that this this looks great, don't get me wrong. I mean, it's just on paper, but us residents still have been looking at that old building for a long long time. >> I I I agree with you. Uh I've been working with this ownership for over
three years, and that's one of the considerations I threw out to them. >> That are driving all of you. You're tired of seeing that building look like that. Oh, I mean the f I mean you call it the fence, the the the uh the the lots, the tumble weeds, the roof, the tarp. You made the comment about boats
flying around like yeah, boats did fly around, but a majority of the boats that ended up in people's yards came from the club's property because of the boat club >> 100%. >> So, yeah, agree with you on that. >> Did do you know if there's any idea I mean like again this is Okay, thanks for
sharing with us. Do you know if there's any plans in regards to opening that back up? >> Oh, yes. There there are plans. Um we want to keep the existing structure there obviously improve it and open it up to the community. >> I need to jump in here and give address
your question. That's good. Uh we first came to the property I think December of 2003 and it took us just about seven months to be able to present that building to anybody because it was so damaged inside and everything else. We got it to the
point where we hired a commercial, a firm to make a commercial that actually went out national. Okay. Three weeks later, the hurricanes came. We had vendors or restaurant operators that wanted to come and start negotiating
with us. They said, "We'll call you back in about two years." The one comment I had uh in regard to the architecture, you know, this is one thing that I've been encouraging over the years, you know, making a high and
dry um building look architecturally nice uh aesthetically pleasing. Something we would strive for. you made a great effort in this initial uh concept plan. I realize it's just a concept plan, but please focus on oh
some of the newer Pine Dries in the Tampa Bay area. Uh some of them like the Loggerhead down at um oh down at O'Neal's down at the Skyway, you know, they >> that is our I'll thank the city as well
because they just recently approved us to put floating docks to repair the docks that cost. We're putting the exact same floating box as loggerhead. >> Okay. >> Our architect went to loggerhead to do this rendering. So we we are we could
say we're copycat and loggerhead only on a small scale. >> Just uh take it as a point to say we encourage you. We're very creative architecture. Let's put it that way. You are on the focal point as you come into Treasure Island. Needless to say, over
the last couple years, uh, and of course it's mainly because of the hurricane, but the idea of a yach club situation where you pay a monthly, uh, membership fee just has had its day and is no longer viable. So, we just encourage you
to >> go through the process and uh, this is a start. >> So, we do appreciate it. So, what about like and and as you guys are preparing for your next steps? I mean, I'm going to want to know questions like what's going to happen with the seaw wall for the property, what the current docks
that are there. You talked about putting in floating docks, but obviously there's some older docks that are there. Um, I mean, things like that. I mean, but but again, I'd focus on the the main building as well. Um, because it's going to be very difficult for everyone to be like, "Yeah, let's do something. let's potentially do something new that's new
and exciting when we still have this >> empty building that's sitting there. And then just for for the last point, um the traffic that comes down off the bridge into that area turning left, you know, I think about someone with a truck and a 35 ft center console that's, you know,
or or if they're going to put a boat dealership in. You know, I'm going to want to know things like that um when it comes to your your all the next steps. But I do applaud you because you're the second group that's come in for a commercial parcel. Um, our friends at the Thunderbird had beat you for the first one to actually show us a piece of
paper that you know is what is potentially the future of of Treasure Island, which is what we're all here focused on. >> So, do do you all represent then the the owners of the club and the property around the club today? And so this
property would as a high and dry would be still part of that same property >> just to so to Ross's point any you know anything that >> just the club >> you can I'm sorry >> it's just the club >> just the club well and the prop and the
the adjacent prop property >> you're talking about like the condos >> no not the condos just the parking area around that >> yeah that's all part I thought I'm sorry Chris I thought you were talking about the >> Oh no not the condos right just that parcel um So it I think we would all on
this board be looking at this from a holistic point of view, not just the high and dry as to all the changes that would be put forward. Um it is a it's you know exciting to think what could happen there. >> And um just to clarify, it is 7.6 acres
and right now only less than 10% of it is being utilized. With the high and dry it's up to 23%. So there is still a lot of opportunity for development to see some of the things that you had mentioned.
>> I'll probably Okay. Yep. Thank you. >> We do appreciate you coming in and informing uh the constituency of your plans. So we look forward to uh seeing some finalization. Okay. With that uh any other public comments for
non-aggenda items? Seeing none, uh, reports and comments of city attorney, staff, or board members? >> No comments. >> Nope. >> Okay. Uh, our next meeting for the planning and zoning board is, uh, February 19th, 2026, hopefully followed
by an LPA LPA meeting uh, the same date. And with that, could we have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjourn. >> Okay, it is about 10:04. We will reconvene right at 4 with the
OPA. Thank you. to the city of Treasure Island local planning agency board meeting for January 15, 2015, 2026. Damn. If you wish to uh speak on a topic which is uh on today's agenda, a
speaker card is available on the table by the entrance and must be completed and given to the chair ple person. Please do not address the board from your seat, but rather from the podium where your comments can be heard by all and recorded as required by Florida
statute. We're going to change around this uh schedule a little bit uh because Gary agreed to let these folks uh have the public comment first. So, what we're going to do is start out with the uh
public comment and talking about and we're going to do things a little bit out of order for even you Ross. uh public comment if you everybody
remembers we had three proposals last month. The three proposals in a nutshell were to reestablish the RFH50 district with the city as an applicant. The only change that would be made would
be on the density 100 units per acre for everything above an acre, 75 units per acre for everything less than an acre. The second one was to um address the central business district go to 60 units per acre
um and also go to an 80 foot maximum height there as well. The third proposal is a plan development zoning category which we encouraged Kimley Horn to like I said
last month copy and paste another um city's plan development ordinance and let's get this ball rolling because quite frankly I think plan development a lot of plan projects will end up being
plan developments. Um, so that's where we stand. What I did for this meeting was to invite uh the representatives of the Thunderbird property, all four of those guys back there. And what I'd like to do
is just have them kind of come up like Jackie Toledo did, and uh give a presentation of what they would like to do and what they would like to build and how much it cost. That seems to be the main thing is
uh this is a high-risk highreward business land development and of course the thing is if you can't make money at the current code you're just not going to do anything. If uh people remember the Treasure Island Resort site sat
empty for 10 years. Uh they finally, even though they asked for a variance to go to seven stories over one story of parking, which was denied, they eventually said, "Well, we'll bite the bullet and only build 77 rooms." Uh the cost of construction back then was a lot
lower. Um I don't know who wants to approach the podium, but uh thank you for your comments in advance. >> So we do the housekeeping, Mr. Chair. Um, so we'll just do the housekeeping
matters after the presentations. Okay. >> Hi, good afternoon. Gilead Vaknin. I'm a part owner and the managing member for the Thunderbird Beach Resort. Um, so thank you for inviting us today to give you guys some brief about where we are.
I think I mean we've been uh uh pursuing the redevelopment of the property since the storm uh late 2003 and um we uh basically ran two different scenarios.
One of them was to uh rebuild it based on the existing count of rooms. Uh we at the time that we met right after the storm we met with the city it was recommended for us to uh because we already knew it's not going
to be uh uh feasible to build it financially feasible but we were recommended to go ahead and move forward with the two plans at the same time. One of them is to preserve basically the grandfather rights of the existing amount of rooms because with the current code it was even reducing that I think
by about 10 rooms or so. uh from the 106 rooms that we have and the the other one is to uh come with a what we thought was going to be a feasible plan to move forward for the development and we did both of them. We came in front of you guys with the AS is redevelopment as
amount of existing rooms redevelopment and we were working together with the city with the planning department and with the city officials about doing something that's going to be above the current by right use of the property
which we took a course with the uh through the legal side to go with a private application that will moved all the way to the up but then unfortunately was denied. Um so basically where we at right now still with the same plan that
we had from before it requires basically an increase. I think we uh when we turn back to the request was to uh go to the 100 unit per acres that is allowed by the county which would allow us to go from the 106 rooms that are there today
to 184 rooms. uh additional food and beverage and parking that's going to suffice uh the amount of rooms the food and beverage establishment that we had and you know part of the give and take that the city requested us to bring back so
one of the consideration was to bring some of that excess parking I think we have and initially again this is not entitled and hasn't been reviewed by the city until the point that we can get the zoning approved but it was what we
fought thought there would be a safe amount of excess parking that we'd have above our requirement that we can allocate for public use. So it was about 30 units. So the concept that we brought back is 184 rooms uh with stacked
parking with surface parking as well creating a corridor between us and the Bilmar that's going to be a main entry right current as you coming from central that you can see the beach. It's about 80 foot space between the uh buildings
that's going to create with a walkway and a public beach access. Uh we recommended also doing ADA walkways to the beach um from our property, maintaining the food and beverage and all the happening along the boardwalk and creating a
U-shaped uh building similar somewhat to what the Ocean Properties did on the Thunderbird Beach Resort north of us. uh with the top deck over the parking um maximizing
the beach view for the uh um for the u for the hotel rooms and uh that's it. Food and beverage in the front, food and beverage in the back giving parking to the city. Uh I think it's uh we presented the enclosed doors that
designed to uh the commissioners. Um I think we got good response from them about the design but the main consideration was again getting the uh density approved and getting the height uh approved. uh our project I think
again this is before review from the city but it was basically penetrating maybe about 10 to 15 foot above the existing code um which allows to go I think to 65 foot and or 60 foot over the
base flood elevation and we through our application requested to go to 80 foot uh generally speaking based on the existing landscape that is there right now other properties it really wasn't any impact to the existing landscape.
It's actually working pretty nice with everything that is out there. I just in terms of like changing the code, I think there's some adoption that needs to happen in the city. So, I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. >> I will start that out. the um you know
[clears throat] the I did get a a look at your plans and they you know from an engineering standpoint they look good to me but your total height I mean you're only looking at a building that is six stories over parking uh rather than seven over parking which is what you
could build with with 80 ft. So you're you're going to be a little bit lower. You're you said about 75 ft in height max >> 75 to give you between 75 and 80. Yeah. >> Okay. And uh what you were talking about
was some parking spaces for the benefit of the uh Treasure Island public some parking spaces for the use of the Treasure Island uh public. You do have a few extra spaces and like you said earlier, I'm just repeating things. uh
about 30 spaces dedicated that the city could use it to generate some revenue. One of the best things that I have seen about the site plan was as you're sitting at the corner of Central Avenue or 107th and you and Gulf Boulevard,
you're looking at the uh as you go straight ahead, you're looking at a huge view corridor to uh actually look at the Gulf and it really looks good. Did you say 60 or 80 ft that I >> think about 80 ft >> 80 feet >> which right now it's what
>> it's it's including the setbacks that you know both of the buildings are from the property line but basically >> cuz today it's maybe 15 feet or 20 feet >> well it has a lot of >> right >> obstructions there's a lot of other obstructions in the way so I mean it really would look a lot better having
that much open area across >> the intent is to open up a big corridor also for the view open up the beach and we created the 10ft sidewalk that's going to be an opening basically that's going to be for the public use to go from there to the beach. >> Yeah. >> How many how many restaurants and bars
are you talking about in this building? So we intend to maintain the same type of use that we had before for the iku which is basically you have a beach front bar that's going to be serving also to the uh to the public from the
boardwalk and creating that same vibe and activity that we had uh you know entertaining not only the hotel but also having it open uh to uh to the pedestrian and to the public. It was beneficial for everyone. I think it's created a very positive vibe. We have a
very good Donna is the leading person on that to basically to really create happening over there. It's it's a focal point. It's a great location for a gathering. So, we definitely maintain that. And then we have on the deck
level, I think it's on the open deck, I think it's fourth or fifth level that we have over there. It's going to be we want to do some kind of like an a rooftop type of a serving. That's going to be we also created the capsule elevator in the front for basically for people's when they come in that they can
go right with an open elevator that is a glass elevator basically that's going to take you from the boardwalk to that deck level. So, >> and I think that is one thing that is truly lacking in uh Treasure Allen right now. To my knowledge, we only have one
truly full serve hotel. I mean, the Bill Mahar has Slappy Joe's restaurant, and I was trying to think of any other hotel that we had that had full service and the Thunderbird did have it before the storm, >> the resort.
>> It's something as a resident and I know all the rest of us are residents, I just think it would be great to encourage these people to go forward. And you know there was a lot of rumors out said, "Oh, they'll get the entitlement and sell the property." But it is actually your
intent to go ahead and build that set of plans that I did get to see. Is that correct? >> We're we're not flippers in our nature. We operators. That's what we do in everything that we do. So we Yeah, we build and operate. >> Thank you. Well, I know this board was
um you know supportive of that plan that you brought to us several months ago and I think the you know it was turned back at the city level not so much because of your specific property but because the ordinance was going to apply in a
broader sense across that zoning district um the way it was brought forward and um that's one of the reasons this board is you know trying to do something that's more of a compromise that's in line actually with what your
original plan was at 100 units per acre. Um, and we're hopeful that uh, you know, that can go forward. >> Thank you. >> So, just a point of clarification, you started the presentation by saying you initially came to the board to seek
approval to rebuild as you were prior to the storm. Is that did I understand that correct? We started with two the two lanes in parallel. >> So um with with a a request to rebuild at 104 rooms or
>> 106 rooms as to maintain our grandfather rights. >> So were you aware at that time that the project for 106 rooms was economically not feasible? >> Yes. >> So why did you come before the board seeking approval for that? >> Because the main thing is to be able to
have at least the minimum. if you if you get something or nothing, it's better to get something. So, we wanted to maintain those rights, not losing them. I think we presented it at the time that we were in the board that we're saying that we're working on another one. Again, listen, if you if you if you develop
something without financing and everything, everything is feasible, right? We can come and just pay cash of everything and but you lose entitlement if you didn't do it. So, everything is feasible. But in terms of like the ability to finance a project and
maintain the revenue out of it, it's really requires more than the 186 rooms today. >> Grant, I can actually answer that question. >> So [clears throat] like it's in it's stated in our non non-conforming use section of code like you have something that's non-conforming. If it was damaged
by a storm or something like that and you don't repair it or anything within I believe it was like 6 or 12 months, you lose that then. >> Yes. I remember. >> So that's why they came back just to maintain the 106 rooms. >> Okay. >> I remember that discrepancy with Katherine here, Katherine Yoken, when we
flat out asked about like why are we here? And he was like, I don't want to lose what I have today. >> And then Katherine, I think kind of I'm not saying she fumbled it, but she was talking about, well, you really don't have to do that. Well, and then was like, well, you were under the impression that we had to do it. >> And then >> that's how that went down.
>> That Okay. All right. Just want to make sure we're clear there. So that's >> that was exactly how it went. Yes. >> Marvin, did you have a question? >> You you were approved for a parking garage across the street, right? >> Yes. >> So, were you intending are you still
intending to build that and were you intending to tie it into the hotel somehow? >> We do intend at some point. Today, it's really not feasible because there's really unfortunately that there's no there's any any uses that generate traffic right now at the downtown Treasure Island. So right
>> that's at the time that I guess our development and other development are going to come in. It's going to generate more user more traffic into the area. It's definitely makes sense. We have the entitlement for that or at least we had and we may need to revamp them. But this is a paid parking structure with retail
on ground level. That's going to be we definitely want to make use out of that but it's not it's not the right time. >> I just wonder if it might help you with the hotel parking if that makes any sense. I mean not by itself obviously but you know
>> yeah again it's building it's another expensive structure if we if if this treasure island the the Thunderbird is one property and this is another property if this doesn't you know it's already if this doesn't facilitate where it's up putting another structure over there and making another investment to
support the other structure it just it's building up your cost again. >> Gotcha. >> I mean I also think that flows with like everybody's kind of looking around at each other like what's going to happen? What's going to happen? who goes first. >> Um, I mean, from a Yeah. I mean, downtown is the heartbeat of the city.
>> I mean, it's it's clear as day. I mean, it's I mean, it says it in our current master plan. So, I think a lot of people are looking around to try to find that out on on what's going to be the next steps. So if you saw downtown start to really
develop well in the future next several years, would you look at your property that where that not for the Thunderbird property but the parking lot that Marvin was just speaking about. Look at that property maybe a little different as to highest
value use and not just be parking. >> Yeah. If there's other things, other opportunity that's out there to do mixed structure. Right now it's mixed retail. was the again the code what's allowed us at the time to do and what we thought it's going to be the highest and best use to do a mixeduse parking and retail
on the ground level. Now if there's going to be different opportunities and a different type of vision to that side of the downtown we're definitely going to consider that. >> Thanks. >> Okay. If we're able to go forward with what we want to go forward with, one of
the items is a developers agreement. I looked at your architecture. It looks pretty good. Part of that agreement would be uh public use of parking spaces to the uh amount of 30 spaces. So you would be
agreeable to that 30 spaces at this point. >> Yeah. If we have those as excess parking for sure. >> Um you know, we're not going to change the city code as far as parking is concerned in the next few years. So you
you know the plans I saw you have plenty of spaces. So it it looks really good. And you know this board I mean we're all longtime residents. I for one and we had a vote last month to uh
you know push the resort facilities high reapplication forward and it was passed seven to zero. Um has anybody else got any other questions? I would just like to uh say I encourage you to go forward every step you can.
>> I just think like from a f like from a foundation standpoint. So I we had that meeting last last month. We had that type of feedback. I I think people need to understand whether it's in the public, you know, even within this board or from like my positioning or maybe it's other people's position. They can come on it if they want. From a
perspective of this board is trying to bring solutions to the commission. the first time that this was shut down with the commission, it had some other things attached to it. So, I want to make it very clear that it's not the same thing that is going forward. It is it is on
itself for that zoning district. I don't want this to correct apply to the Thunderbird, but as as we all need to remember that there are three different components, maybe four that we today would like to send forward to show up differently for the commission to rule on or for for them for their feedback
on. And that's what had Richard had called out on last time. The developers agreement, Richard, would be the plan development opportunity. Correct. >> Well, it actually would be part of uh the resort facilities high district as well. I mean the district goes from about the I hotel all the way up to
119th and it would include all the other hotels that are currently in a state of disappear including the Sands, the Arilla, the Tahesian and um but it it would be a process and part of that can be architectural review.
>> Yeah. So because I know one of the things that we want to send forward is plan development as an opportunity >> but and that always is a tool within each of those districts. >> We're the only city that doesn't have it and I just I just want to kind of because I've done a lot of research on
this and I'll talk about it later. Um you're going to have sorry you'll just have to listen to it. So plan developments I want to make it very clear is for both siders. It can be a pain for developers. However, it is a tool that developers can come in front of the PNZ board with
an idea and have flexibility to when once we vet it, we can correct or we can have conversations about it and then they can move forward with revisions to the com to the commission for then the commission to review it and vet it and send back notes and figure
out what is best um in front of a town hall for residents and then the developers go back and review it again and then we can move forward with the project. In my positioning, the only So, so I know one of the commissioners made a comment that he's 1 million% for
development as long as it's smart. I don't know how that's not smart when the PNZ board reviews it, the commission reviews it, the developer signs on board for it. It feels like it checks a lot of boxes to kind of get this town headed in the right direction. And like I had said
out of the beginning, from a perspective of we are trying to bring solutions to the commission to get this town headed in the right direction. And I think the only cav caveat is that you have to still place a envelope of density and height around that. >> There's one thing
>> and that's what most towns do. >> That's one thing. You know, the thing about bringing back the RFH50 district is to get something going. I mean, these guys are ready to go. They could break ground in two months once [snorts] they get a building permit. I mean, they could apply for a building permit and
get going. Plan development takes a little bit longer. I've worked on them before and what it really would be is a very loose guideline basically height, density, and where it's going to be. That's it. And then you let the developer come back and say, "This is
what I want to do. This is where the open space is going to be. This is where the parking's going to be. This is what it's going to look like." And yes, it's a give and take. But uh this first proposal from last month was in order to
get something happening on these dead hotels on the west side of Gulf Boulevard. And I just named them all. Tahesian totally abandoned. Uh Sands vacant lot. Thunderbird totally closed. Arilla just barely hanging on. There's probably others that I haven't even
mentioned. The Norvin, you know, he's trying up there hard. just came before us for a new um restaurant use. So, it's those total of three things. And we'll we'll finish this segment up by saying thanks. Thank you for coming today. I
hope that was helpful. We're going to move on to proposal number two, which is where you're going to come in, Ross, with your research, and that's where Sean Burn is here at my invitation today to talk about the downtown area. So, Gilly, thank you very much for coming
and your staff for coming today and uh we encourage you every bit of the way. Anyway, Ross, why don't you uh talk about uh you know, our proposal number two, which is the central business district. And in
a nutshell, bringing the u density up to 60 units per acre and bringing the height up to a maximum of 80. Just because you say it could be 80 doesn't mean it has to be, but go ahead with what you wanted to say. >> Thank you, chairman. So I I want to tell
everyone from a perspective of my my residency, I mean, this is going to take a little bit of time, so I hope everybody is going to be listening, but I think it's extremely important from a perspective of where this town wants to go in the future. Um, you know, my residency currently is I own a lot on Treasure Island. Prior to that, I had a
house that got flooded. I sold it and then I bought a lot within 30 days. So, um, I notified the city in regards to my positioning. Um, was perfectly fine in regards to remaining on this board. But at the end of the day, like I've always said that my heart resides in this town. My grandfather lived on this island. My
parents still live on this island. My five-year-old child was born on this island. And so I think that I've got a pretty good uh resume when it comes to knowing this city. Uh on top of I think we did four year two or three years of code enforcement and then I think I've been on this board for probably six
maybe. >> You're coming up on six. >> Coming up on six. So I think I've got a pretty darn good resume. Um, more recently, I've had a lot of people, a lot of people, 70 year olds, 50 year olds, 30 year olds, male, female, liberals, conservatives, come up to me,
call me and say, "You got to get this town pointed in the right direction. We got to figure out something. What's what's it going to take?" Um, so really over the last couple of three or four weeks since we had the previous meeting was doing a lot of different research, came across our um current master plan
that we have today. There is a master plan within the city of Treasure Island. Does the Does the board know that? Did you know from a we have a master plan that exists today? We paid $127,000 for it in 2006. That'd be about 200k in
today's money. Uh this business is still this consultant is still in in play today. Um have I'm hoping that the commission is reaching out to him about revamping it. Seems like that would be a very cost-effective thing if a master plan um needs to exist. we have one. Um
doesn't seem like it really worked out that well when it comes to our current state of affairs, but just a couple of notes. Um I gave uh Tia uh our amazing clerk um a copy uh of it. I think I sent it to Jesse and his team in regards um
for today. Um you know, I I know that the the opportunity exists and I'm just going to hit on a couple of high notes that I thought were important from a current master plan. Again on the screen you're seeing our current master plan that we have today. Page uh page two on
the right hand side. Um again uh second column down first paragraph given its location and economic da d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d dam treasure island is a number of waterfront towns within the county that can play a significant role in furthering the overall redevelopment strategy. This is
great. We're we're going to find a lot of good call it nuggets and facts with inside this current master plan that we've already paid for. Um down at the bottom second paragraph um before the ending the rehabilitation and redevelopment of properties in the county have potentially been hampered by
inappropriate or misapplied land development regulations and processes. Land development regulations must provide adequate flexibility to allow redevelopment of difficult parcels and to be sensitive to the characteristics of the existing development patterns. It's pretty good. This is back from
2006. So fast forward in present day, we have to put we got to ramp this up a little bit in regards to if this is going to work because this is again um showing that we we we've got to do something. one of the examples and and again this master plan
or the revel redevelopment plan um it does focus on the the downtown core um but you know one of the things that I find that's interesting like in present day is that our current uh our current density that's allowed uh in the downtown area uh for for the uh for the
lodging is 23. our our um our LDRs stop it at 23, but our comprehensive plan goes up to goes up to 60. So, one of the things that we're going to do, like Richard said, from last week or
even today or from last month, even today, is that we're going to send something up just to try to get things going in the downtown area. It's already allowed within our comprehensive plan from the city. It's this is not a county thing. That's a that's that's a city
thing. Focusing on that on page three on the bottom lefthand corner. This is the one that really hits home the most is that the downtown core includes many of the primary redevelopment opportunities within the study area and is considered by most residents, business owners and officials as the heart of downtown and
by extension the city as a whole. How's our heartbeat doing today? So I mean it's this downtown should be a focus just like the other zones that we're talking about should be a focus. Do they go hand inand? I would think so. I would think if someone's going to want to do
something cool on the golf side that they're going to want to see something happening in downtown. So again, following with what Richard had mentioned in regards to taking forward. Um page four, second to last paragraph, right in the middle of it, it says in Treasure Island is more likely that
redevelopment will involve the demolition of existing buildings and reconstruction of structures more physically and functionally suited to contemporary markets. Wow. did it. >> That's crazy, right? This is from 2006.
So, I mean, again, the current master plan, uh, couple of just and and I hope I'm not boring anyone. I find this stuff extremely fascinating because it's about the future of our town. Uh, the the downtown on page six in the f first paragraph, downtown is inherently a
mixeduse environment with appeal and attraction to many audiences within the community. Out of our master plan, current status. So, we've got to focus on doing something. Um, it does focus a lot about mixed use. I thought that on this page with strategies I thought was
extremely important. Um, you know, there's a lot of different things inside this master plan that really call out where we should be going in the future. Page seven was just the history of it. Page eight, this is a this is a good one. So at the very bottom paragraph,
halfway through it, it says, "The physical condition of the existing retail core along 107th exhibit exhibit this exhibits an aging outdated strip commercial layout that in that inhibits effective recruitment of higher quality
destination type of establishments. Wow, another wow, huh? So at the bottom of that, why difficult the redevelopment of approximately 52 parcels can be achieved with well-conceived strategy and true public private partnership. So
I want that to focus from a pro from a PE plan development perspective where it's the city and the owners are talking to each other on trying to figure out something that works. Again, I'm not making this up. This is not something that I'm trying to just sell everybody. I'm pulling this directly from the
current master plan that we have today. On this same note, the second the second bullet, a higher density mixeduse program must be the community's goal to not only enhance the downtown's visual and physical presence, but create a
destination that will broaden the market appeal, increasing the quality of tenants. Pretty pretty good stuff right there. Um the uh and then the other one second bullet down to the right uh second to last. The city must also be proactive in
changing the zoning and land use regulations to encourage mixeduse developments. Again from the mixed use I'm sorry from the um current master plan that we have in place. So just real quick just a couple other things. I'll fast forward again. Page 11 kind of
shows uh the stakeholders um of what they have uh viewed from from uh from residents. Um I thought that that was important. Again, we I know we talked a little bit about plan development. It's important to have resident feedback that's included. Um it's interesting to
see some of the the feedback. It it's it's from 2006. A lot of things have changed. Um page 12. Uh something that is that I think going into just talking about how the economics can has has changed. It
says the future of land use designations for the downtown area this time do not reflect the mixeduse vision of the community that has emerged in recent years. Achieving this vision will entail some substantial changes to the current zoning and development regulations. Back in 2006 when we talked to our residents,
they didn't like the two strip malls. So again, I I find this um I mean this again is available. Um it's the city um one of the pages, pages 15. Sorry T if I'm or Jesse or T if I'm going too fast. Um you know there it talks about the
green space um that's available. You know when you do go higher you do have more green space below. Um the the uh page 16 of the current master plan kind of calls out what buildings are uh susceptible to
change. Uh the down in the this chart below where it shows the green you can see over on the um left hand side the bottom bullet the green buildings that are highly susceptible to change the strip commercial along 107th Avenue. So I mean it's again master plan
calling it out. There was a lot of focus on pedestrians u on page 17 extremely important. Um it it it the uh 18 really foc page 18 um and I'll kind of leave it in closing on this one. I'm going to
read this whole thing because I think that this is important then I'll I'll can it because I think I've gotten my point across. So retail and mixeduse. The redevelopment plan for downtown Treasure Island should focus on creating a district that is unique within the city as well as the general region for the range of diversity of uses that
includes. The plan should help foster integrated neighborhood facilities, shopping, living, working, playing or residents of the downtown for citizens and the city and for its visitors. The redevelopment plan is an opportunity for the city to capitalize on significant demographic and economic changes that
characterize these years of the 21st century. The mixing of layering the uses will help animate the streets in downtown and attract permanent residents as well as regular visitors. The opportunity to find everything one needs from one's day-to-day existence within
comfortable walking distance is at once unique and highly desired. In today's market, downtown Treasuron has to be potentially blend a wide variety of uses into a compact effective economic district that envinces a sense of place of unique for the greater Tampa Bay
region. So, I say that all because it talks about parking and you think about pedestrian walkways. There was a lot of parking in this master plan. It requires a lot. This was from 2006. So, a lot has changed and so I just want to make it very clear that like as we are trying to move forward when it comes to increasing
density or increasing height or putting a PD in or trying to help people that want to develop in Treasure Island, we have a roadmap that has been there. Clearly, it's was not executed appropriately. We can still execute it because we have it here right in front
of us and it would work and we have people that are wanting to invest in Treasure Island. So, thank you for letting me uh go into our current master plan that is active. Thank you. >> I did want to make one quick comment uh Ross. You know, this was a interesting
plan. A lot of was incorporated into the LDRs and it has a lot of requirements in the redevelopment our of our downtown area. I'm going to invite Sean Burn to come up and speak when I get done here.
Um, you know, the the canyon effect is part of is in here. They want the buildings out tight. The only thing that I think should be in a master plan, what we need to do is water this down when we redo the LDRs is height, density, and
where it's going to be, the limits of the area. And with those three items, it is then then put in the plan of a plan redevelopment. I mean that's the zoning uh for that piece of property right now.
Plan redevelopment mixeduse core. Well, we have those three major items. Then we leave the uh book open to the developer and say what do you want to build? And then it becomes a point and that's what's brilliant about redevel plan
redevelopment. it comes to, well, you want to do this, we'll agree with it, but you got to make these few changes. And um >> that just needs to happen. >> I I I appreciate you saying that because on page 22 of our current master plan
that the city has for downtown, it says redevelopment strategy planning issues. The first one, the hole at the center of the donut basically, but it says that the thus the downtown is effectively turned inside out. The tallest structures are set at the edges of the district and the smallest are at the
core. You guys have heard me make comments about that. Every downtown is the highest part or the tallest part of the metropolitan area. That that is something that an issue that we that we currently have here today. Again, this is something coming from the current master plan. It's not something that I'm just making it up, but it seems like
these are the the this is what is going to take for it to to work moving forward. And if you look at those pictures on page 22, which is in front of us right here, our downtown hasn't changed much other than a lot of storm damage. It
needs a lot of help. And we're at the point I would like to invite Mr. Burn to the podium just to uh give us a idea of what you would like to do. >> I mean, we're not going to hold anything, but what do you need before he
starts? Before he starts, can we just say a couple things? Go ahead. >> Yeah. Um, Ross, did I understand you to say that a current our current comprehensive plan allows for height and density? >> A comprehensive plan has nothing to do with with height. Okay. >> That's in the LDRs.
>> So, there's no limitation with height and density on a comprehensive plan. >> The LDRs are what protect our height. >> Was it with the plan developments? Do you need to effectively change the LDRs or plan is a plan development ordinance allow uh a group like the Thunderbird to
come forward and request a site plan approval without any change to the LDRs. >> It would the way it's done the way it's done >> we would have to have and this is what we attempted to do back in 2017. You have to establish an entire zoning
category called planned development. It is commercial planned development and it gives a real loose guideline the three things height density and where it's going to be and then the rest of it the
design is up to the developer. You put the design into their hands and say do this and then we'll review it. >> It it sits parallel to the uh >> but you could do it per parcel though. You could do it per part parcel though as well. >> Oh yeah. I mean let's go this way. Any parcel in the city,
>> any it goes any parcel >> can come in and request a plan development. >> A reszoning to plan development. >> A reszoning to plan development. >> It becomes applicable to any parcel in the city. >> Yep. So the Thunderbird, for instance, could come forward, make that request,
and their site plan could be evaluated independent of any other >> right >> motel on the beach. they so the way that I look at this is that we're trying to give four different solutions out of the out of those four two of them are we're trying to update the R
so resort so it's RF RFH50 that's one solution the other solution would be plan development to where they could go either route either the commission could say yeah we'll do it for the whole the whole thing or we could accept the plan
development route by parcel and It's still an option for them, but they yes, they would still have we would still have control over the heightened density per that per that parcel. >> But the one thing point I want to make here uh uh Ross is the plan development zoning category doesn't exist whereas
the RFH 50 does and we're trying to get a comprehensive land use plan amendment to allow the height and density that we need for these projects to go forward. Our downtown area exists as a plan
redevelopment mixeduse both Gulf Boulevard and the core area. So there's less work to do with the RFH 50 comprehensive land use plan amendment and then to amend the LDRs a little bit
to allow Sean Burn and whoever and Schlommo Melo I believe is his name to develop what they want to do in the two major parcels that they own. The uh problem with plan development is we do have to write the ordinance. it has to
go uh and and be approved uh by the state by the commission. So, while I want all three of these proposals that we've been pushing to go forward equally, some of them will go faster than others. And uh obviously to my
point of view, the RFH50 will go the quickest. the the redevelopment of downtown will go second, you know, just because it's got some more baggage with it with these very restrictive requirements and the LD
LDRs. And third, you know, we're pushing Kimley Horn to get done with this uh plan to redevelopment ordinance because quite frankly, there's only one piece of property that's going to majorly majorly benefit from planned redevelopment and that's the Krabby's property. It's the
biggest piece of property in the whole city that's privately owned. And uh you know, we heard earlier about another piece that is in bad need of something and we appreciate the fact they came here. But uh >> Grant, did that answer your question? >> Yeah. Thanks.
>> Okay. >> Do you uh Sean, why don't you tell us what you'd like to do? Well, well, and as a part of that, as it as it speaks to the plan that's been around for downtown, a master plan only for downtown, not for the entire city since
2006, why the anything in this plan really didn't come about. You've owned that land in the downtown area for a long time. So, very interested to hear. >> Great question. >> Why it hasn't happened? You know, what's the challenges that you're up against? because at the end of the day it's we're
trying to make changes so that we can knock some of the barriers down. >> I'd start with history on the property. >> So that's the context >> because part of the history is inside of this comprehensive plan. >> Well, let me run down. So it's a great question, Chris, but the first thing that I would say is building a mixeduse
project is completely different than building a hotel. I think any developer would agree with that. It's very difficult. There's a lot of challenges to it. It's the way of the future. We got to do it. It's just it needs flexibility. It's not rigid. It has to be flexible because things change, codes
change, health department changes. You obviously, we know bars and restaurants, they're on the bottom. You're trying to do grease traps. You're trying to do ventilation. You've got residential, you've got noise to deal with. You've got vertical parking to deal with. It's very complicated. And so flexibility is
by all means is probably the number one thing that I would say. And I think having discussion about this is just there's not one set it and forget it, right? The market changes, right? Like prehurricane, it was a different strategy than post hurricane. Um what you guys decide here
or what people decide on the commission level um is, you know, and what the what the residents believe, right? And what they are interested in and what they feel is necessary all kind of plays into action, but at the end of the day, it has to be feasible in order to build it. And so I guess that would be how I'd
start. The the second thing is is I know there's been a lot of comments about Fusion. Yes, my family owns the Fusion. We built it from the ground up. We still own and operate it. It's a 42 room condo hotel. Normally would have been sold out individually. We've decided to maint
retain it for right now. We put our blood, sweat, and tears in it. Some people love it. Some people maybe don't like the architecture. um we feel very proud of it and uh obviously that's what makes communities is difference of opinion so I can respect that. Um as far as fusion we
just let me give you a little timeline. And I'm just I kind of wrote this down just because this is just the reality is as a developer that you have to deal with in real life and it's easy to say if a project works or a project doesn't what but with fusion and
I want to go to the to answer your question Chris I want to get to the timeline of downtown but I just want to give an example because there's been a lot of rumors and I'm here so I'd like to just clear them all and if you have questions feel free to ask. >> You've got the floor. >> Perfect. So in for fusion we bought the land in 2017
we immediately were like okay we're building condos or or hotel um as you guys are aware I'm not sure but basically if you build condos it's half the density of what you can build under resident under tourism so we decided with the location of the property also
everybody's aware you you there's only in and right turn out um we didn't feel that that was a great location for high-end condos we felt that was more of a resort style facility with the the docks out back um with the amenities, you know, you're really trying to overcome essentially the beach, right?
People come to our area for the beach. So, you're trying to create something that somebody is still interested in. There's a niche market and I think we hit that on the spot. Um in 2018, we started construction. Um we built that building as fast as humanly possible
probably in my opinion. I think we're pretty proud of that. By October 18th, 2019, we opened um by the skin of our teeth because we set an opening date that was aggressive and it got aggressively tight. Um but not six months later. And and just
if you don't know a lot about hotels, and I'm sure the Thunderberg can assess this, um there's a ramp up period with hotels. So, you start off, you know, you try, you know, you kind of try coming out with a bang, but there's it's a ramp up period. So because you're kind of entering the market, you're creating
more supply. Essentially, it it takes a minute. So six months later, COVID set in and we shut down, right? And so from an investment standpoint as a developer, time is money, right? So every day that goes by once you break ground,
bankruptcy is getting closer, right? Time is money. And so COVID hit. So immediately, you know, what do you do? Um, we locked down. Everybody did the same thing. No future in sight. Um, 60 days later, all of a sudden the government's coming out. Hey, keep your
jobs. You guys are emergency. You need to open. Well, it's a small hotel. We don't have any assist other hotels. It's challenging, right? Because you lay off your staff as a private family-owned hotel. To reopen is not exactly just turn the switch back on. Um, luckily we
were able to retain some of the staff. Some of the staff had gotten new jobs. Some of the staff had moved away to live with family. Long story short, financially that's a huge hit, right? Um, and again, not looking for sympathy. I'm just trying to make an example that development isn't all good like everybody thinks it is.
Um, 2021, everybody's aware of the labor crisis and the hospitality industry. You couldn't get anybody to show up to work. And if you did, you were paying them and you were dealing with every excuse in the book. And it's just a fact. It is what it is. you know, service. People would go to restaurants and they would
get bad service. It it turnover is bad. There's never a good thing. It It costs money. It costs service. It costs reviews. It's it's it's it hurts. So, we get through the labor crisis and then here comes red tide. If everybody remembers in 2021, it was probably the worst red tide. I've lived here my
entire life. I've lived in Treasure Island. I'm almost 40 years old. Um my kids are growing up in my bedroom. My parents still live on the island. It's our home. Um, as far as red tide, it's terrible for
the hospitality industry, right? It's all over the international news. People aren't coming. So, there goes red tide comes by. Then we run into the supply chain crisis, right? So, it's like, oh, hey, how do we get soap? How do we Everything is just constantly been challenging since Fusion opened. And it's not a sympathy talk. I just want to
clear the air that things aren't always as good as they perceive. And um, and then here comes hurricanes, right? I mean, we've all been we probably packed the place up six times, 10 times. My house, I can't even count. Um, you hope you don't get them, but you always
prepare. And we got one. And fortunately, Fusion was built for that, but it still took damage to the amenities, the pool, the pavers, the landscaping, and really it's a labor thing, right? So, you're now taking and adding more money, and essentially,
who's your clientele, right? There's they're gone. They're there's nobody coming back. So, um it's been a roller coaster. Um we're proud of it. It's a great property. Um we're committed to the area despite up and down. Um we've
we got the property back up and running. We've had some challenges. I think people know we used to have um a restaurant and we did events and we had the back one of the challenges we had because of some of the codes is we tried to do you
know like a bigger hotel and we realized that with 42 rooms it's just not sustainable and unfortunately there's multiple reasons why but we had a vision and it was probably the saying I always say is you're putting 10 gallons of stuff in a five gallon bucket right it it just didn't work and so we thought,
hey, during co we'll buy the round building and we can do the the backup facility there. Well, one thing that I learned really quick and this kind of ties into the downtown is as much as it was a beautiful building and it was kind of unique and it had plenty of parking and it was exact same occupancy really
as the rooftop that we have, nobody wanted to be across the street, right? You go to the fifth floor on the roof and you're like, I don't want to go across the street. Like it's like when you come here and you go to the fifth floor or you go to that community center, they want to go to the fifth floor. It's it's a gorgeous view, right?
So view sells and it's it creates value. And so we decided, hey, let's let's restructure. So now really currently at Fusion, if anybody wants to know, we do still do events. There's not a lot of hotels that do events. We do basically it's a we rent you the space. We have
from preferred vendors. You can bring some of your own vendors. Um it's a beautiful view. If you haven't been to the top of Fusion, it's a mile of waterfront. Um, I think some people haven't been there, I'd encourage you. A lot of people say though, is it a hotel? Is it a condo? If you don't really know, people don't really know, right? And and
that's kind of the nature of condo hotels. Um, it comes with it like ocean club, you know, it's kind of like, well, is it a condo or is it a hotel? Like, you know, people don't really know and that's kind of the nature of condo hotels. So coming back just that was just a summary of
that development and keep in mind we built that everything's doubled. I think everybody's hit their own checkbook in reality with inflation. Um so is construction cost. So is labor and so if you were to try and build Fusion today it would never work. And that's
unfortunate but it's the facts. Um they're big thousand square foot units to be clear. They're two-bedroom, two baths. You You have a challenge of which you don't yield this. So, essentially what I'm getting at is if you had single
units, let's say they were all onebedrooms and the ADR, which is the average daily rate is $100, just because you have two bedrooms doesn't mean you get $200. So, you get a diminished return. And so, it's a challenge, right? And it's
creative. And luckily, we are creative and we're we know the market. So, let's go to the property downtown that everybody's talking about, Pirate Square. It's 3 acres. So, some of the history on Pirate Square, it goes back to the Dalling family, which the Dalling
family was here in the 50s and Richard Dalling, the son who I've worked with um is still lives in Treasure Island to my knowledge. Um he used to own basically we owned four quadrants. So we owned
next to Foxy's we owned a parcel all the way down uh towards the surf style [snorts] building and then we used to own at in 2006 2007 we bought where CJ's used to be and we bought the twotory section which used to be Captain Bills
to the Pearl. The Pearl was one story but that section we bought and it was all mixed. I mean, ever if you ever looked on Penelis County Records, I mean, it's all individual slices and carved out pieces and and so my I had nothing to do with it. I mean, I was a
young man at college at the time, but my parents purchased it. And so, it it was it was always like, well, we we purchased it not knowing what else. We always had a vision that one day we could make downtown really something to be proud of. And if anybody knows, we've built a lot of buildings up and down the
the beaches and they've all been successful. We always try to take it to another level. I mean, the minimum landscaping versus the maximum landscaping is a huge difference. Um, so in 2006, we bought the main two-story
parcel. In 2007, we bought CJ's parcel. In the meantime, D Richard Dalling owned the piece that was between the two of us. Now, we're not excl we're excluding the Bank of America building for a moment. So, the piece that was between the two of us, obviously, in order to build something, you kind of got to put
all the pieces together. And so across the street, Richard had a piece and we had the two pieces on each side of them. And for 10 years, we went back and forth and it just it wasn't it never really worked out on his end. Just tax reasons, motivation, is it really worth the
efforts. It just we could never really seem to make it work. Everybody was complacent. And finally, you just kind of keep saying, keep coming back to that table. Every year we used to meet and it kind of became a tradition. We'd say, "Hey, it's a year. Let's just get together." And we get together and most time nothing come of it. But we kept
trying and eventually we got to a point where we were able to get sell that side and acquire the piece in ours. This is 2021. So now we had roughly 2 acres still an alley in between. Um a little chopped up
but we're getting better. Um and in our in my mind I had tried even selling the property prior to that and it was really didn't really cash flow and people were like you know we just you know we don't really want it. So our mind is well we'll just redevelop it. So then we started that's when we acquired that
extra piece. So this is in November 2021. So December 2021 I reached out to the Keller Williams building which is the old Bank of America I think most of the locals refer to it as. Um it's a sing it was a single tenant use 11,000
foot building. If you know anything about commercial real estate there's no tenant use for 11,000 single tenant in Treasure Island. It's just there's nobody unless you have the surf shop. Sorry, maybe there is. Um, but really in that building, there's not a lot of
uses. It was an atrium style building. It was a bank. He used to have a drive-thru. So, I reached out to them. I said, "Hey guys, let's do something together." And to my knowledge, before I could hang up the phone, they said, "Well, we're not interested, but we'd sell it." And I kind of got shell shocked because that wasn't the reason
for my call. And so this is weeks after we just purchased the other piece, but we knew this was a must in order to really try to get something to happen. So we scrambled. We went to every friend and buddy we knew. We borrowed money from
everywhere we could with our reputation. And so we were able to acquire it. We leased it. Um we occupied it. We kept it. Um and then basically what happened with the down with the tear down. So come, you know, we started discussion, just for the record, we started
discussion with Amy Davis November 2021. That was our first meeting in the old city hall. And so we tried working through some of the challenges. And there's all kinds of challenges. We had homeless people in the rightaways. We had harassment in the morning of women
going to work. We had bar fights. I mean, we just we worked through as much as we could. We had plumbing under the building that was clay, you We pumped popped out walls and down and around and I mean you did what you had to do to try and keep it going for tenants. So long
story short, we ran into a point where we started having some very serious mechanical problems with the building from the elevator during the time of supply chain crisis. We couldn't get parts for it. Um there was rumors going out there and all this other stuff, but the reality is is the facts that were out there is that we we couldn't get
parts to fix the elevator. the only option was to order a new elevator that was going to be a year out because they couldn't get parts for new elevators. And so then when we started having more and more problems essentially when we purchased this last piece which is the Bank of America,
few of the tenants kind of seen the writing on the wall and got spooked. I mean our family's developers, right? They knew that we knew how to knock them down and rebuild them, right? And that spooks businesses and it is what it is. We knew there was a risk for that and
so we lost a few tenants. We knocked down the parcel. Um again, still having meetings with the city. Um fast forward, the hurricane hits, floods out the Bank of America. Tenant says, "Hey, we were already struggling. We're out of here. This is the perfect excuse. We're out of
here." And here we lie. So there's the history. 20 years we've been on that some of that property. Um it's been we've bent backwards to try and buy the remaining pieces. Um we did everything we could. We stabilized. We conquered.
We survived. And so I just wanted to set that so everybody knows it's all public records. You can reverify it on your own. But that's really the history of that parcel. Now when it comes to what do we want and what do we build, you know, I think some people probably have beat me to death on that question. So,
have you had any discussions with the owners across the tower >> all the time? >> And and I know that's multiple owners, right? >> Uh, so he the gentleman Schlommo, I don't even know how to pronounce his last name. Um, very nice guy. Um, so he
bought basically all the way down to the surf shop all the way up to next to Foxy's. The parcel that was next to Foxy's, if you recall, I said I owned it at one point, right? He purchased that from me 2023 or 2024. So, and the reason I saw
that is because I needed to focus on one part and for him in my opinion it was best for him to focus on his part. You got to I mean I mean even that redevelopment plan it identifies that consolidation is kind of a necessity to get real development. And so I do agree
with that. I think Richard said many times is like, you know, the south side and the north side, it took me 20 years to get all the pieces and there was five acquisitions. There's still one, two, three, there's still four owners on the north side if you count all the way to
the bank, >> right? >> So, you know, >> still a challenge then. >> It's challenging than it looks, right? And because everybody thinks theirs is worth more and and maybe it is to them, right? And that's not a if you have a business and it it may be worth that but
if you buy it for that it doesn't work. So you kind of get into this stallmate >> 10 years of like Richard D where we got into this stallmate where and so we've >> and has any developer ever come to kind of lay over the top of all of that and buy out you and buy out the the folks on
the north side >> and that kind of boils down >> has anybody ever come to look come knocking? I've had a lot of discussions. Um, full transparency in 20 21 we put it on the market just to see
like if we could jag just to see if we could get some interest, right? Sometimes that's how you do development is look for p joint ventures, try to attract some bigger players and a lot of the um >> the appetite is it's just
>> it's not typical development. You got to be creative in Treasure Island. >> [snorts] >> It's not a it's not a brown field or a green field. It's it's more much more complex >> and it's not typical development. It's more um you got to have local knowledge. And a lot of them kept telling me like
we're interested, we want to work with you, but you would have to stay involved because you have all the local knowledge. And and again, I'm okay staying involved. That's always been my plan. My plan, our plan was at one point I had reached out actually my the team that was here, the Johnson and Pope guys, and I had designed because I know
I've lived here my whole life. There's a lot of money in Treasure Island. And my plan was to use local investors because I use this example all the time. There's nothing worse than if I build that property and it fails. It would destroy
the city. And so what better than have investors show them a business plan and have investors from local money invest in the property. It would instantly build in a support for the business. And that was my original plan. It became kind of far distance and to the point it
disappeared um just because of the the challenges within the city. And I have respect for everybody's entitled to their opinion. And I've kind of just had the door open the whole time. I tell everybody if you want to have a meeting, you want to talk to me about it, I'm
interested in discussing, but it can't just be to get to know. It needs and then it's on you. It's got to be something to to get to a solution. And so I think I started off the discussion is flexibility in that project is the biggest key. I
mean, I could go through a few code changes and a good example for you would be if you remember when the city hall got packed and I think a guy got escorted out when they were trying to shut down 107th Avenue to one lane. Um the the government does you were
there Jesse? The government does strategic planning five years out. And so that part of that was a strategic planning and then that also rolls into all these other development plans that how government works. And so one of the codes that they had designed is they
don't want any access to any of the [clears throat] properties from 107th Avenue. Well, that kind of changes when you're originally going to shut down the road. That makes sense. But all of a sudden, you're not shutting down the road. Do we really want all the cars accessing from 106th Avenue where Ricky Te's is shutting down the road half the time?
>> Yeah. >> Kind of changes the game a little bit, right? But the code still says it. And Jesse, unfortunately, he can't magic magic wand. He has to live by it. To him, that's his Bible. So, and we have to try to work around that. But it's when there's no flexibility,
you're stuck. You're you're you're just, you know, it's just you you become stallmate. And and so one of the challenges was the alley. Um obviously everybody knows that's behind us thanks to you guys. Um it's uh that was a piece that was challenging because it kind of
quadranted the property. I don't need to go down that one. Um, and we're, you know, we're closer, but now we're in a situation where post hurricane there's a supply of land. I mean, despite what we want to say, the market's changed,
right? We have a supply of land. We have Thunderbird, um, the Tahesian, the Sands. There's a lot of land on the beach and the downtown is kind of at a disadvantage despite what everybody might think. The downtown isn't on the water, it's not on
the sand. I mean, I live on the water. I'm sure everybody loves living on the water that lives on the water. Uh, and there's people that live on the sand. And obviously this I sold real estate. Valerie, I know you sold real estate. I mean, I always tell people water's not the sand. Despite you might like water more, the sand sells for more. All
right. It is what it is. I love the water. I wouldn't live on the sand, but the reality is it sells for more. That's a fact. And so, it's a challenge. And the retail um, you know, I always say, you know, retail is done price per square foot. And
it's essentially the guy across the street is remodeling the property. I think you guys know he's got 20,000 square feet. Um he's looking to get $30 a square foot triple net, which works out to about $40. So to put that in
perspective, a 2,000 square foot space is $80,000 a year. I I don't know what businesses that you guys can see that goes in there, right? >> Yeah. Now, when you evaluate that and you flip that onto a new construction, the cost of the construction, you got to
get $40 a square foot to break even. >> I don't know anybody that goes to work to break even or takes risk to break even. After I gave you the timeline on Fusion, it can go down. I always say in development, whatever the first number you get, it only gets worse from there. Doesn't ever get better. There's no
like, oh, there's a hidden 100 grand over here. It only gets worse. It's like, you know, hey, you got to go back to the drawing board and you gota, oh man, we didn't think about the water softener or oh, the Duke Energy needs it. It just gets worse, right? And you can be really due diligent. You can get there, but there's always, that's why
they build contingencies into development plans because it gets worse, not better. So, I I'm here to answer questions. Um, as far as what do we want? We need flexibility. It's changing, right? Like depending on what you guys do with the
Thunderbird, there's always a business plan. We live in a beautiful area, but the market is always changing. And as fast as this mark, as I hate to say it, as slow as the government does things, I think we all know government's not the it's a process that's not the most speedy and as fast things change. And so
that's what exactly what happened with the 2006. By the time we were able to accumulate the property, it's outdated. And so I think the big thing for me is flexibility. >> So if if under the current zoning that
you have to live with on that parcel, would it be fair to say that you really can't do anything that's economically viable? I don't want to speak for you. I'm just really trying to get to that part of the question. And second to that, if if we're able to move forward with
changes that increase height and density in a reasonable way in the downtown sector, could you foresee that some mixed use? >> Let me answer one before I lose my train of thought that you would be able to do something that would be economically viable.
>> So on the first question, you say is it not economic viable? One of the big challenges and I think everybody in this room, Joan, everybody understands is is parking is a problem, right? And until we admit that parking is a problem and figure out a solution
that works together, it's a multi-step process, but it has to work together, if that makes sense. Like the downtown is an ecosystem. One without the other, it dies, right? Like the downtown doesn't do very well when the Thunderbird's not open, but the Thunderbird doesn't do very well without the downtown. Does
that make sense? like they work together and so working through all the processes is important and and there's been a lot of change in minds I guess you could say and so when it comes to one of the biggest challenges when you say does it work or doesn't does it
work is parking vertical parking is $40,000 a space right you build 184 rooms you need 185 parking spaces I mean do the math right it gets expensive And that's I think the
gentleman stood up here and and you guys asked about the parking garage. You know, the problem is is just you you add more structures and no revenue. It just kills the business plan. >> And so um and you don't build buildings like this on cash, right? That's just not how they're built because investors
expect a higher return than what the banks will lend to you. So that's how you get to the return of what the investors want. So you don't build them on cash. But they do require safety nets that the bank wants to see a business plan that makes sense. And if you can't provide a business plan to a bank, they
don't lend you any money. Then you're dead. You just stop. Nothing happens, right? And so when you go to investors and you say, "Hey, listen. This is what I think I can get them to." And then they go and they look at the code and they say, "Hey, there's no way to get there." You kind of die because you don't have a path. There's no forged
path to be able to get to success, right? So you say, "Hey, hopefully we can get them to change their mind." >> Then they go on the news and unfortunately they go on the news and they're like, "Risk." That's what they say, risk. And then that then then it dies, right? So
it's challenging. So the answer to your question is is I don't really want to say 100%. I think there's things that we need to do like, you know, our park, not beating up on Jesse or the staff, but you know, the park, you know, just think for a second Grand Central Park in New York City, right? Everybody wants to
look at it. You look at our park, it's really a grass field. It's not really a park, right? There's things that the city needs to do to create value. That also helps with the heightened density because if ADR goes up more or if the condo value goes up more, well, then it starts to make more sense, right? You
got to create value. It's not just one. It's so it's a multi to answer your question, it's a multi-prong step. I hope that answers. I'm not trying to dodge a question. Just >> the first part and that's fair. And I guess really to that point now that the city has uh some waterfront land at 108
is it? >> Yep. >> A great start to a great piece of property that >> doing something in a positive way with that would be one of those additional building blocks that might >> allow you to do something economically viable or investable um with with or
without any changes. >> Right. So that's an unknown. That's one more unknown. >> Right. >> What does that >> right now? That's an unknown >> which unknowns aren't good. Like nobody likes getting into the stock market unknown where it's going like ideas, right? If they >> So right now the at the status quo, you're stuck.
>> Until we can get a forged path of how to get there, right? We don't have a way of getting there. Um I think one of the things that Richard brought up is um is the setbacks. I think the word you refer to as canon effect, right? And so it's
like, okay, well, I think, and I don't know this for sure, but it seems to be there's a right now the setbacks on our property are zero zero and zero to put it in perspective. I can build all the way to the property line >> and really there's nothing the city can do about it. If I was economically able
to do it, I could. Not that I want to do that. The crazy part is the ground floor is just so you understand it is it's set 12 feet back, but the second floor can can lever all the way to zero. Yeah. >> And they want that because they want that walkable area to have covered from
the elements, which that part makes sense, but I don't know that I like the building at zero. But the facts are is it's not even flexible. It's not like, hey, I want it to be actually I want it to be 18 ft for a row of parking or something in the front and then we'll do that. It's it must be that. And so it's
just the code is very very rigid. And despite you guys might say, "Hey, that I I agree with him on this." Unfortunately, there's not a path for you, me, or Jesse to get there. >> So, if it were planned development and you could come to us with what you want to do, that's what you would want, right?
>> Bingo. And it actually it is plan redevelopment, but it's got all these restrictions in it from this. >> And really, we just need two restrictions. >> And we need to heighten density. >> Let them figure out the open space, the setbacks, everything else. I mean, we could go through and we could start
redlinining the LDRs one by one and by one, but I mean, golly, guys, you're going to be here for a long time. >> Plan develop. I mean, look at material >> and then if the market changes, what was it for, right? That's the problem for ours is, you know, do I does it help? Does it help um if we can do some of
these pieces? Yeah, some of them are big items like one of the big problems is is the tourism density is at 22 units an acre. So, on that property, it's 2.93 acres. Let's just say 65 units. Well, you can't run a hotel with 65 units. You're going to say people are going to
go, "Oh, well, look at Fusion." Well, Fusion's really a condo hotel. >> Yeah. >> It also has 18 boat slips out back, right? You can't build a Whenever you go to a Hilton or Hyatt, it's 120 rooms. >> So, what do you need? >> Tell us what you need.
>> Well, what what do you need for heighten density or do you know >> again? Exactly. I know I'm not trying to dodge a question, Marvin, but it's it's flexibility. What are we doing with parking? >> Where's the parking going? >> Well, if we do a plan development,
>> anyway, you can come in to us and say, "This is what I want. This is the height I need. This is the density I need." And then we could look at it and say, "We can do this. We can't do that." >> Change it. Y. >> So, let's >> That's really what we need is that. But like they when people ask me, "What do I need?" I go back to them and say, "Well,
where's the parking going?" Because if I shut if I would have let me give you an example. If Sandy Ovations was here and I don't have a way of putting it on the thing, but if I I don't know if anybody drove by. I mean, if you would have if if I would have fenced that property off, the whole city would have crumbled. There was 275 cars parked on that property. Where do they go? The whole
park was full. >> So then what? Now Sanvation gets shut down because they don't have any parking. Where are they going to park in your neighborhood? >> Where are people gonna park? >> Let me ask. >> It's a problem that you have to answer one in order to be able to answer the next one. So, I'm not trying to dodge a question, but it's a flexibility is the
biggest word. And >> let me ask you this real quick, uh, Sean. Okay. What we're aiming for on this board is 60 units per acre and 80 ft high. Parking's up to you. I mean, you and I had a meeting with Joe Lackey. I thought his solution was pretty good for the parking parking deck in the
middle. And but if we got were able to achieve those two items and basically said, "Okay, this is a real plan development, not a fake plan development, which is what this is." You know, you got those two limitations,
the ball's in your court. >> They help. I'm not sure, Richard, to be very transparent, honest, I'm not sure it's 100% there, but it brings it from 10% to 90%. >> Well, >> and then I can go play. >> Yeah. >> Back to PDS, right? I can go try and >> but if you say it's going to
>> maybe get some interest from the folks on the north side and maybe do something with the city >> and then we have a little clarity for these gentle behind us >> um and and just do your answer too Richard is um our application my team's not here as you guys know but um
>> my situation my application was just a comprehensive plan amendment it was not the LDRs and the idea behind that to be full transparent was to get you guys talking. >> I want the city. There's a lot of animosity. There's no oneizefits-all on
this project. And it I I'm all ears for the public. But to be clear that projects need banks. Banks don't lend without business plans. Business plans don't work. You don't get any money. So that's really the high level looking down is just, you know, we got to get
there. We got to keep working towards it. I think flexibility. I started the conversation. I think I'll end it on that flexibility. Um, one thing when you talk about height, 80 ft, um, 80 feet is a massive improvement. Um, one thing to
think about for a mixeduse compared to a hotel is the design behind 60 ft like Fusion is is it's parking with an 8 foot clear underground underneath and you end up with
76 in some parts of the room. 7 foot6 ceilings like like that in part of the rooms where the utilities are running down. I know you're an engineer so you'd understand. And so retail this doesn't work. This is not [snorts] good. Right.
People want 12 foot clear in retail. And um that's one thing to just take into consideration is all I ask when you are thinking mixed use versus a hotel. >> Even on the resident side, people want more height now. >> Yeah. It Yeah. And what that's a little
different with retail. It's it's again the retail I kind of ran the numbers through briefly high level but the retail is challenging and but it's a it's a must. I mean we all know everybody would love more restaurants around here. Everybody but but then the the rest the businesses that survive
next to the restaurants thrive off the restaurant. So they all it's it's an ecosystem. They all got to work together. And I'm sorry I don't have as direct answers for you, but I think I gave some broad spectrum of some of the challenges that I'm dealing with and
trying to work through. Um, you got to the answer to your question is you got to get over 125 rooms on the hotel or you're absolutely dead immediately. All ends stop. Um, you know, does that get me 100% of the way there? You know, I don't know if if all these beaches start
building brand new hotels, maybe this turns into more of a permanent residence. You know, it changes. That's why the market's changing and and a little bit of flexibility. Uh that is controlled, meaning it still has to come through you guys, the commission.
Flexibility, right? It gives me a path there to go spend money to try to bring something forward and get your input and then let me explain what's not working and why it is. And that's a good dialogue, right? It starts to build that correlation to to make progress.
>> That's great perspective. >> Sean, I don't want to pin you down, but I just kind of a numbers guy. You said 125 rooms. What's necessary to be feasible? >> That's the minimum. >> Okay. And what's your average daily rate on that or your projected revenue >> on downtown? >> Yeah, it's your 125 rooms.
>> It depends on the model. I mean, you're probably >> well, when you say 125 rooms, you have something in mind, right? >> Yeah. I I would say that you you're to be competitive. I mean, I like to take I can't nobody builds for future, right?
You build with facts today >> and we're down 25%. I mean, so I mean, I'm going to hit you with a number, but the market's hurt. I mean, I'm not going to lie, the market's hurt. So, $200 a night, >> thanks.
You're probably high 60s in occupancy right now. >> When you say the market hurts, is it all of >> It's going to come back, Marvin. But it got hurt. The hurricane I mean, you go on the new >> all the beaches or just this area? >> A little bit of both. >> I don't think they're all hurting. >> Little bit of both. >> But anyway, I think
>> congratulations for keeping the fusion going as well as you have. I mean that and all the things you took through. I heard everything but the BP oil spill in that. >> I forgot that one. >> That was just before. >> I think that was before. >> It was before. I just that's [laughter] all I could think of as I was going through. That would have been it.
>> The whole point I was trying to make is it's not always as roses and sunshine as it looks. Right. It and trying to do it right and doing the best you can. It takes a little flexibility. >> And I think with that we got the watch word. This is not flexible enough.
That's the downtown redevelopment plan. It didn't work. >> I mean it's been in place for 20 years now. Did not work. >> It's great. It's great info. It actually calls out a lot of the different parcel owners. It calls out an amphitheater down here or a future city hall building. Good start. >> I'm just The point of it is is that we
have one. We paid for one. It didn't work. There's some good >> one of the one of the things that I thought about to your question too, just so you're aware. Um >> remember I said it's an ecosystem, >> right? So I know this is a sensitive subject
especially in your district. Um the businesses have to have density, right? Because if not, the businesses don't work. People don't go. People don't they I'm not walking from my house. I live on Capri. I don't know where everybody else lives. I mean, I'll go walk for exercise to there, but I'm
not going to dinner for there, right? My wife in high heels isn't walking there. And in the middle of the summer, we're sure is not walking there. So, um that's the reason that the county recognized this as an activity center. and they they it doesn't mean hey we want density across this island but
there's some areas that need a central focused so that the businesses can thrive and one of the good great examples that I like to use is if you're a restaurant person and all you do is want to open restaurants and you don't own the real estate would you be going to St. Pete Beach or Treasure Island?
It's it just it kind of answers its answer, right? You don't see Mario's open out here like they're going to beach. I mean, they got more hotel rooms in a mile and a half than we got in all of Treasure Island. And I'm not saying that's what we want to be. >> Take that for the right word. All I'm saying is this is a very fair example.
It's factual. >> Well, I appreciate your analogy of looking at development as an ecosystem because it brings into the idea the multivariables that have to be considered beyond just a single building and what they can and cannot do. It's contingent upon the development around
which is why Ross I appreciate you bringing that plan forward >> and I think I don't know though that just um the developers pull the city out of this. It's it's a it's a it's a the city's got to be in this too, right? They need to create value. Like if we had every weekend with St. Innovations,
first off, we probably wouldn't none as the residents wouldn't love that. But to some aspect, if there was a hybrid of some events like that, it creates value and it helps the business plans become more tolerable to some, right? But if we
deal with facts today, it it these are the challenges we're working with. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you, Sean. I think we got our marching orders. Flexibility is the word. And also the other definition of smart development happens to be higher
density so people can walk to where they go. Look at the dome district in downtown St. Pete. When the dome first opened, there was nothing there. And here it is 25 years later and look at what's happening. Seven, eight story apartment buildings. >> Anyway,
>> so how do we get how do we get plan development moving? Because >> well what we're doing is >> that's what we we're doing it right now. We're going to try it again. We're >> is Kimberly Horn. >> We don't need them to do that part of it. We're we're already moving forward
with getting some of this to the >> We need the commission to be on board with some of the solutions that we have that we're going to repitch to them. >> How do we how are we pitching them? Well, I think what we ought to do is, you know, we had
our public speakers need to, you know, Nancy told me need to go through the minutia here at the front like >> the housekeeping. >> The housekeeping. So, let's have a roll call to see who uh showed up and stayed. [laughter]
We all stayed. >> By agree, >> we're doing roll call. >> Just say here. [laughter] >> Here. >> I'm barely here. Okay. Chris Donnie >> way here. >> Grant Smith >> here. [laughter] >> Robert Javelin >> here. >> Richard Harris
>> I'm here. Okay. Approval of the minutes. We don't have any. Uh presentations of items. Let's get through these two items real quick and then I'd like to talk about those three proposals again and let's have a vote to see where we're at. We already had one last meeting and it
was approved seven to zero. But anyway, I appreciate it to Gary Vanac for hanging in there and uh he's talking to somebody else, but uh letting our public speaker speak. Um 6A, request to approve resolution 2025-14
recommending adoption of ordinance 2025-37. What this is is the basically stairways for Duke Energy platforms across the board by administration
um for new construction. Jesse's that one. >> Yeah. I mean, pretty much you just hit it. I mean, that's pretty much all this is. Uh yeah, I believe this is a couple I believe Chris Downing brought this one up. It's like new construction. Okay. Um >> yeah, so pretty much Yeah, that sums it
up. uh just for relief for setback requirements for the installation of elevated meters for new construction. Uh we did Chris, I believe based off your advice, we did limit that to people that had setbacks of 7.5 or greater. >> Correct. >> Okay. And yeah, that's just an amendment to
chapter 68. I'm sorry, I'm not Mary Ellen. I'm just filling in for right now. But >> well, the one comment that I made was be great to have for the and Daniel Billings, he's not here, but for the air conditioning repairman is to go up to a Duke Energy platform and then you can go
up a few more steps to an AC platform because AC platforms have to be about 13 14 feet off the ground now. And there's nothing worse than working on a condensing unit off a ladder because I've done it. It's pain in the rear. But anyway, was there any I mean, did that
get incorporated or not? I know it it makes it a little more difficult. >> It it definitely does. Um I believe I'm [snorts] not sure who it was, but I think this was also brought up to uh Patner, building official, too. And I think it just came down to like the spacing around the condenser and stuff
like that and trying to cram the Duke meter, energy, and the condenser all on the same platform and still having the 3x5 platform layout. >> Yeah. might have been what the issue was. >> It could not be done because you got to go to a certain elevation for the meter. Then you got to go higher for the AC
unit. So it makes it challenging. >> Yeah. >> There's some people that put the meter there's some people that put the meter even as higher up as the HVAC systems >> and it could be done. >> So I mean >> I'm not sure Duke >> just cuz I wanted to close one of the loops with with Chris in the last meeting. I had mentioned that I would
supply this staff with about 12 different residences, right? They have those addresses. I'm sure that they can forward them to if you want. Um, but I did give them in my district 12 addresses that had Duke meters that were u not on the standard platform. So,
architects can do it. >> They can work around it. Um, and then I drove your district and then I drove a couple other the other two districts and I saw other options. If you want me to send you those addresses or send the staff those addresses, I will. But that they definitely exist out there with not
having the platform bolted to the side of the house >> and I appreciate that. I I haven't had a obviously >> no the staff has it. I just want to make sure it can be done. >> Would you like to look at them? >> Where are the staff? I mean I guess
where is the board on all of this? I guess that's what it comes down to. Well, the situation is is when these Duke Energy platforms were coming in for variances about four or five years ago. >> It was an afterthought and at that time we denied them all and
said go sharpen your pencils. >> Right. And that's the reason I threw in the idea of, yeah, you're gonna just have it as an afterthought. You got to be a little more creative and do a twolevel situation where you can help out the
poor old AC uh repair guy. Uh quite frankly, I don't want it to go back to that where everybody just says, "Oh, hell, we'll just stick it on the side of the building and let the uh you know, then we got to have a set of steps." So >> I'm actually fine with if if if it makes
sense because it helps out in terms of the safety for the HVAC maintenance in the future >> allowing it if if we in incorporate the HVAC in those cases or do using the alternative options. >> I mean just just to answer your your
initial question Chris I have zero interest in approving um Duke Energy platforms outside of I just just the amount of new business the amount of new construction. I mean, like I said previously, I think Jesse would have people come back and throwing stuff at them. I mean, there's been a lot of new
construction homes that have recently come in for review, and I'm sure that they were told, "You got to have that platform back in the setback." So, >> and they found ways to do it. >> Yep, they did. >> Well, there are ways to do it. Some of them weren't as nice. Seen people put uh
>> the platform in the front. >> No, no, I hate saying no up here. I really do. But I just and >> I think it's it's good that we've we've given the allowance for the homes that are being elevated and for those homes that are even I guess it's the it's really just those >> because that's the hardship that
>> that's the hardship one. >> But the thing is people don't read meters anymore. So you got to take that into account. It's only for the guy who's trying to yank an old crusty corroded meter off and he falls over off a ladder. So that's what it's for. >> I mean and so and not to I know Richard
likes talking about his own house. I can I can talk about mine. I mean, if this were to change, it would benefit me. And I'm up here saying that no, we shouldn't change it. >> No. And I think you in your case, you found kind of an innovate innovative way of adjusting the land area around it to to get up to that height because that
height doesn't have to be quite as high as um as some of the air conditioning units. So, I you know, is it it's not actually a motion that's out there right now anyway. It's a there >> uh actually this would be for a resolution to take just before the commission, >> right? And I think
>> and as >> I think we're I think absent of uh unless there was some I'd really I guess I would hear from the rest of the rest of the board on this because I it was brought up to me by a couple of constituents. We had one other member on the board who's not here today that said yes, this would help out a lot of the
builders and keep maximum square footage on the on the lots um as they're building new u new elevated homes. Um, but we've also now seen that there's plenty of ways to work around it. So, it's it's it's kind of a flip of the coin.
>> Well, as it currently exists, as it's currently written, I don't support it. And what I think we ought to do is just send it back to the staff and say figure out a way to make the two-step situation doable because it is doable. You know, I know it's a little bit convoluted. I
know it's a little more difficult, but the idea is not to make it so easy that the architects go, "Oh, this is just an afterthought. We'll stick it in the setback." >> This way they got to think about a little bit. So, as it is right now, I recommend that we send it back to the
staff and say, "See if you can figure that one out because I do like the idea. You come up on one set of steps, you got the Duke Energy meter sitting there. If you go take off on the other side, you go up a few more steps, you got your AC units there. For new constructions, that
is doable. And uh you know, it's not that hard. >> My vote would be just to put it down and let the staff work on some other pressing items that we need to address. That's just my opinion. >> Anyway, then make a motion, Ross. >> Well, it's it's Chris's or or Cliff.
Chris, you make a motion. I'm I'm thinking and I'm really thinking that you know that there's that we should just table it for the time being because I really think >> okay I think I'd like to hear from our other board member that had something
you know the in terms of the way builders look at this and you know the idea of whether we're going to do it and incorporate the HVAC as a part of it maybe then it makes sense to do it um or if we're not going to do that and not allow it at all and let them just do the
innovative things just to get access to the meter itself and leave it as is. >> Well, I'm kind that's kind of where I I don't think spending staff time to come up with different you know solutions around that. I my preference would be to at this point just table this and um
let's have a motion to date it then what date would you like to do I need to put a date on the continuence city attorney? No, because I don't think that I mean you haven't you're not doing you're tableing it. So no date I would move that we table it.
>> I I make a motion to table resolution 2025-14 recommending approval of ordinance 2025-37 to the city commission uh until a future date >> and I'll second that. >> Okay. Motion by um Ross Sanchez, second by Chris Downing. Uh let's have a roll
call. >> Valeria Creek. >> Yes. >> Ross Sanchez. >> Yes. Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Grant Smith, >> yes. >> Marvin Shavelin, >> yes. >> Richard Harris, >> y >> All right, we'll get into 6B. Request to approve resolution 2025-15 to replace
the terrain modification manual with the city of Treasure Island drainage manual and update corresponding land development regulations. This is something that uh uh sprung up from the terrain modification manual which has a
lot of good resource material in there but it was too lengthy, too hard to understand and quite frankly not very well written. So between the amalgamation of various other cities uh manuals and the federal housing
authority lot grading plan uh Gary Val was able to come up with something that uh was a little easier to understand. Gary have at it. >> Actually I was going to cover the first ones and then did youary mostly involved in chapter 76 and then of course the
actual drainage manual. >> Okay. Um so before Gary comes up I just want to mention so this affected chapter 66, chapter 68 and chapter 69 and chapter 76. Um all these have been minor revisions that we had to do. A lot of this just mostly involved just removing
the terrain modification manual verbiage and replacing with the drainage manual. Um the biggest one was chapter 76 where there was a lot of striketh through because the manual is basically replacing what was in 76. And then there was some additional slopes and more
detailed information about Phil that was added into chapter 66 which is our flood plate management. >> And would this do this in its entirety or just for residential properties? >> Should be just entire. It's the entirety because what
you what you do is, you know, instead of trying to write our own manual for commercial properties, the Southwest Florida Water Management District has the Environmental Resource Permit Manual. That's a document about that thick and address every
>> and we would let that cover the commercial side and and the information that you have in this simplified manual drainage manual is what covers then the specifics for residential. Correct. >> Yep. Residential and yeah residential
and commercial. By do by doing this we will finally uh move forward with putting to bed the terrain modification. [laughter] >> Well to clarify that it's still there. It has a lot of nice resource material in it but it was just so difficult for
the average person to understand and this really does simplify it. It really does. I mean you looked at it. I I looked at it. Uh I I like it. So, >> so I >> You got any comments you need to add? >> They should have put Richard's house on
the uh front cover of it because he talks about it so much. >> Well, in that in that picture that uh that's about 100 yards from my house. >> I figured it was. [laughter] >> Good evening. My name is Gary Volinac. I'm the director of public works. Um
[clears throat] I uh by a little bit of part of an introduction I've worked in the I've been a professional engineer for uh 45 years and I've worked both for uh public and private sector. I've owned my own
consulting firm for 27 years. Um I've worked on projects from the panhandle to the keys and [clears throat] uh this is my eighth month on the job here. But one of the uh introductions was as I I came on board was the the
fear or p you know the complaints the problems the the angst about the terrain model and the fill and all this and I totally new subject for me because um I've I've worked in the the uh permitting process or the labyrinth of
Swift Mud South Florida Water Management District St. John's water management district. So this was sort of the the the the complications that I saw. I I was it was a little confusing and but but I did sit down and go through the
terrain modification manual and I kind of saw where a lot of the angst and and anxiety came both in terms of the the uh development community, commercial and residential and the and the homeowners and it's just a very complicated uh document. Um I always like to to step
back and say what are we trying to achieve? I mean, if we're trying to just achieve some opportunity to provide fill and address uh climate change, do we really need such a cumbersome document? And so, after going to lunch with Richard a few times, we kicked it around
and and he's got extensive background in the same uh environment, the permitting, the the drainage. We've we've both done hundreds of projects in the Tampa Bay area and uh or Central Florida area. and and um it's really not that difficult if
you you know we need to provide a document that could be a tool and help to smooth the the process, streamline it and uh focus on the big picture and the big picture was getting people back into their homes, helping houses to
redevelop, yet still addressing uh the needs to uh to to to allow for fill and and elevation and things like that. So, um, I think the intent of the TMM was was good. I think that maybe some of the, you know, carrying it out was a little more cumbersome than it should
have been. And so, uh, sitting down with, again, with with Richard, I I put something together. We've looked at different communities in Florida as far as how they handle it. We tried to just glean the best of of those uh uh communities and and rely on the the the
the the ERP basis of design handbook because it has everything. I was afraid that when I looked through a lot of our ordinances there was there were design standards and things that conflicted or could conflict with what swift mud requires. And the last thing
as a designer, an arch, architect, engineer wants to deal with is multiple sets of regulations. They're trying to keep everybody happy. It it's more costly and timeconuming. So I'd like to think that it's it it maybe some people think it's too simple, but I really
think that it addresses the problems. I've worked with the CDD staff, Jesse and Mary Allen, and you know, try to recraft the ordinances to to uh integrate everything and yet, you know, back the TMM out and and hopefully get to where we need to go as far as helping
our our businesses and our citizens get moving and and going forward. Be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> I I looked through the I was able to see the latest copy of it and I I think you covered all the bases and did it much simpler. I we should drive this forward with a big green light.
>> I have a uh selfish question, but I think that it'll help the my fellow neighbors. Um if somebody is going through with an architect today in regards to following the previous terrain modification manual, would they need to be making changes if they would be submitting for a residential home
build when it comes to the updates? I mean, if if if an architect is already good to go with the terrain modification manual rules, could they're not going to have any problems with this new update, are they? >> No. Um, do you know if they've already submitted for permit? >> They have not. That's where my question was. I think that there's a lot of
people that are probably in >> they shouldn't conflict. I mean, >> I just want to make sure for those that are watching at home. >> Okay. >> They should get you to to the same place. >> Okay. Thank you. >> This is probably less restrictive. Yours is probably less restrictive, right? >> It It's not so much less restrictive.
Again, it it's it it simplifies if you just you if you're going to fill your property, there's certain height restrictions. You know, that's a flood plane manager, Jesse, have to look at how much fill you can bring in. But we just don't want you to flood your neighbor. And you got to make sure, you know, water is you can't cause adverse
impacts to Jason property owners. And it doesn't take a thick manual to get that across, especially when 98% of the 95% of the development out here, redevelopment will be homeowners. Mhm. >> Um the the large the large [clears throat] developers,
they've got an a large, you know, a team of of of of engineers working on the modeling, they know the regulations and stuff, they can navigate through Swift Mud. Um but but the homeowners, if they want to fill or they want to do something to the property, alter see the seaw wall elevation, things like that,
we just want to verify that they they drain their property adequately, but they don't cause any problems. And quite frankly, Ross, that grading plan I did for you, yours is there's only three types of lot grading, it's A, B, and C. And you know, it was in it's in the
manual. It makes it very easy. The other manual didn't even have anything in regard to federal housing authority grading standards. And it makes it very easy. And u I think it's what this city needed.
the average person can actually take it and go, "Yeah, water warrant runs downhill >> in three different directions." >> It still requires a, you know, a site drainage plan when work is being done, whether it's on a new new construction
or on uh just a seaw wall being done. Um, it's still on the the onus of the building department here to do the proper review of of that drainage plan. Um, it doesn't take away that part of it. Um, no it doesn't. But then again,
it's almost like drainage for dummies. What uh we came up with is a a typical drainage plan. And we actually put little slashes where we want the grades. And uh you know, the average person could say, "Hey, yeah, we'll have the
front drain to the front, the back drain to the back." >> Right. I've got I've got another question. If someone scrapes a new home or sorry, scrapes or demol demos a home, they want to put a new seaw wall in and a new home and they come for their seaw
wall permit. Is this going to apply where they have to submit their homesite plans or build to where you're not going to generate a seaw wall permit if it's lifted if you don't have the house plans that go with it? >> You know, you know where I'm going with this.
>> I do. And actually I' I've reviewed a couple of the seaw wall permits that there was an issue like this where then these were houses that were not scraped but houses that were just not being
lifted and but the seaw walls were being raised and it wasn't being corrected and I've spoken to Pat they're get the city is getting those getting those corrected but I but you bring up a really good point that we are going to see a lot of homes that have and scrapes and then to
raise value of the lot, they're going to >> do something to the seaw wall raise that seaw wall. I think you it has to be taken in its hold. You can't just say, "Yep, raise the seaw wall 2 feet and >> and it they're still going to have to submit a drainage plan that works, which
might mean bringing fill in even if it's a scrape lot. >> That's then we'll go through that lot. Okay, so that makes sense to me. I just want people to know that you most likely if you're going to raise your seaw wall and bring in filter, you're going to have to supply a drainage plan, bring in filter if you're going to leave the lot by itself or build a house first and
then keep the water on your property. >> That's how I understand it. But >> you're going to talk about the seaw wall is you know seaw walls [clears throat] are at least currently they're not going to stop flooding because you can put a seaw wall 10 feet in your backyard and the water's going to come around the front. So when you know when I hear
people putting in seaw walls and raising their seaw walls it's like seaw walls mainly to protect erosion of your back property but it's not going to it's not going to actually stop the flooding into your property because unless we raise a whole island there's going to be a front
door to our back door. >> But it is happening. I mean you there are permits in that and Jesse I'm sure can >> but I'd like to see one higher than 5t. No, they're they're bringing it up. They're bringing it up one and a half to two feet from existing. So that and I
think you're going to see that happen across the island. >> And that's that's fine. It's >> and I agree with you. It doesn't do anything to flooding. You know, it's it's in most cases it probably shouldn't be done. >> It'll help mitigate some of your you know, if you have a pool in the back, you have an elevated deck or something. But, you know, I think, you know, I've
built numerous numerous three properties on barrier islands and they've been elevated and I've never worried about flooding one minute. I don't know, but they're on pilings. People here want to raise their lots up, but but I've always, you know, we park underneath. We we get creative in some of the use
underneath it. But, uh, >> um, but anyway, we elevate elevate the house, but you know, the yard can flood. >> All right. Well, you and Richard are going to get an argument with that because he's going to tell you >> [laughter] >> I don't need to hear that story again. I'll make a Are we good? Do you want me to make a motion? >> Yep.
>> Well, let me make one comment. >> It depends on how much you want your yard to flood. When it gets into >> I knew [laughter] happen. >> I knew it was going to happen. Bay Plaza. If I could have built two more feet higher, I would have. >> Obviously, I've said that before. Bottom
line is [laughter] >> if you are building a new house, raise up [snorts] your garage so you don't get as much water in it. >> Yeah. Yeah. See, I mean, you know, thing is appreciate all you do for the city, by the way. I've heard incredible things of all the work that you put together,
so we need all the help we can get. We're going to bring it back. >> Um, go ahead. >> Thank you, Gary. >> I'll make a motion, um, if that's okay, chairman, please. Good. Go for it. >> Um, I'll I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2025-15,
which recommends approval ordinances 2025-38, uh, 2025-39 and 2025-40, 2025-41 and 2025-42 to the city commission. >> Second.
>> Okay, that was uh motion by Ross Sanchez. Who got the second in first? >> I think you got it. >> Marvin Sh got the second. Okay. Roll call vote, please. >> Alia Creek, >> yes. >> Ross Sanchez, >> yes. >> Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Smith, >> yes. >> Shavelin, yes.
>> Richard Harris, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Local planning issues, comments or discussion. >> So, this will go to >> Once again, I do want to bring up those three proposals and we've had a lot of discussion on them already today. Um,
it's something I mean, let's face it. You look out there, our city's in a state of disrepair and some incentive has to occur for these folks to come in and invest money in this city. And they're not going to
do it in a situation where they're not going to make money. Situation was back in November, the city commission turned down the comprehensive land use plan amendment. Well, they didn't come running in here with six-story buildings, did they? Because they
basically sat back and said, "Hey, we're going to see what's next cuz we're not going to invest a nickel until we can make some money." And uh the indication I got from uh the representatives of the downtown area and the Thunderbird is,
you know, you do the right flexibility, you give us the right incentives incentives, we will make the investment. But they're not going to do it at six stories. It's just a prime prime example. My comment has been since day
one and it has never changed. 20 feet is from me to that wall over there. It's not that much. And uh you can hate it, you can love it, but the situation is it will not occur in any of the residential districts. It will only incur in the
main island area. And that's what we need to have happen. So with that, I would like to have a vote, if we can do it, Ross, to move these three proposals forward to the city commission.
>> Yeah, I think that you would have to clarif and I don't want to speak for everyone. I would think that we need to clarify the three or maybe the four just because I I my concern is that if it goes to the commission all as like one package I
feel like it gets I I don't know. I just I'm very curious about the the opposition. I think if it's full >> Do we have this written out? >> No. Well, we would have the um our city attorney would write I would assume you would write out how long does that take? How long does the for like P like an
example for PD zoning like how long does that take for you if to bring back to us >> to draft to draft what help me understand exactly what you're asking >> for us to allow PDs in this in this city. >> Okay. So there there would have to be an ordinance but I my understanding was
that Kimley Horn was working on that. >> That's what I thought. I thought we were already moving ahead with having those things drafted. >> You're supposed to be moving on phase two. I've heard some uh a comment made because of the master plan phase two was >> Can I jump in?
>> Certainly. >> So, I had a call with Kimley Horn. Um and it just seems to be that everybody's doing this. >> Yeah. >> Um I'm just being honest with you guys because I I've seen your guys' frustration. You're all volunteers. Um
they're focused on LDRs phase 2. the focus needs to be on PDS >> like the flexibility I mean it it even helps properties I mean you know they're on their own but it helps because it gives so much flexibility let's just say
hey we want to move the building this way we move that it can move setbacks it can do all kinds of things right the focus needs to be on PDS I don't know if Kimley Horn's the right thing but if I recall I think Voss law firm >> kind of draft ordinances and I work with PDs all over the state >> I thought Vos law firm was hired with
the idea though they have some land use expertise in the firm, right? So, can they not draft it? >> We could draft it very easily. Yes. But, um, I love that. Just asking. Okay. So, you're giving direction. >> Thank you, sir. >> You're directing that we bring back
>> a PD ordinance. >> Well, one does not exist. the last at one of the previous meetings. Sorry to interrupt, but um Bobby Sheay was here for the meeting and Bobby I thought Bobby Sheay took the
ball on this to say that she would pull together what we were trying to present. >> Becky Vos in our firm is also working with Kimley Horn on this. I think there's been conversations there. >> Okay. >> Um my suggestion would be because I know
the direction you guys are going. Okay, I get it. >> No, I appreciate Um, let's put it on your next agenda and then we'll bring you back a document that you could look at >> the next agenda >> for your next meeting to discuss. >> Okay. >> Um,
>> and vote on if that can go forward to the commission. >> I have I don't know where this issue is in the process. My understanding was that Kimley Horn was working on it and that it was coming to you in phase two. I know that Becky in our firm has had
some conversations with Kimley Horn. I don't want to all of a sudden go drafting my own ordinance if somebody else has already >> spent time and you guys have paid money for them to do it. >> So, I don't know what the status is of it. I'm happy to draft it. I can draft
it. We can draft ordinances very easily. >> I think you should definitely talk to them. Just my impression is that Kimberly Horn is very slow and they're very busy. >> Yeah. >> So, if you can get something >> what I'm saying is that perhaps as a compromise and to keep this issue at
forefront because that's where you guys are, >> we'll put it on the agenda and then if we can if there's a draft ordinance floating around already, we'll bring that. If there isn't >> I was going to say Nancy, I'm I'm talking to Mary Ellen here. So in phase
two is going to have the PDS. They will be looking at PDS in phase two and over the next probably like two or 3 months I believe we're going to be finishing up the phase one of the LDRs. >> Then I guess there might be on hold. Um Braden I don't know you might have to
back me up too. Um they might be putting phase two on hold possibly. Do you see what is the outcome of the whole master plan discussion and all that stuff? So this is also something that the commission I believe already has on their agenda for this coming Tuesday
>> and that's the thing which let me read that all of what they want to do >> for the commission agenda. We are adding an item to discuss LPA's recommendations. I just want you to confirm the language before this is added. This is what was sent to me by
staff. Number one, draft a resolution and ordinance for the RFH50 zoning district. Allow alternative temporary lodging units at 100 units per acre for properties over 1 acre and 75 units per acre for properties below an acre and
increase height to 80 ft. Number two, downtown MR, excuse me, PR- MU core, increase tourist accommodations density to 60 units per acre and 80 ft in height. Number three, recommend the
establishment of planned development zoning districts. And that's what needs to happen. I mean, I don't care who build who does it. I think you guys at Boss Law Firm could probably do it quicker than Kimley Horn. Yeah, >> I really don't care who does it as long
as it gets done. >> If the city commission provides that direction to us, we will have it done. I I guarantee that. I mean, we we work with these all the time. >> I just don't want it to be He's talking two or three months. I mean, >> so he's talking LDR phase 2.
>> Yeah, that's LDR phase one adoptions, >> right? Okay. You said something. It's going to be in phase two and they were putting that on hold. >> PDS was going to be in phase phase two, right? To me, the PD is the most important. And you're talking about the the second one. >> I don't even think it is that
interesting to you, right? >> PDS. >> The PD is the way to go. >> PDS, Marvin, >> for everything really, >> right? It's the quickest. It's just the quickest, >> right? >> And it gives us the most control, right? >> And it gives the city the most control. >> Even the even the Thunderbird could use it. It's it's kind of the same thing
really. >> So, is at this point? Well, the biggest problem right now is it doesn't exist. Whereas the >> RFH50 amendment does exist. >> But does that have to go to the state if we do a PD?
>> Yes. >> Your PD is in your ordinance. >> There's no PD, >> right? >> You're going to create at some point there's going to be an ordinance in your zoning. So, it has to go through that process for a PD district. Yeah, >> I don't know unless it has to be
consistent with your comp plan. I don't know what your comp plan provides, >> Lauren. If if your comp plan >> Rubenstein is an expert on it, >> it does not right now, I don't believe. >> I'm glad you hung out and I waited so we could get a professional. Uh Lauren
Rubenstein is a attorney who has worked on this stuff a lot. >> Yes. So, Lauren Rubenstein, I'm with Hillward Henderson. I was here um with the Thunderbird and I did want to hang out because I wanted to make a couple points and this is exactly one of them. I think it's great that you all are
looking at these different proposals and moving them all forward because I think they check a lot of different boxes and as you heard from Mr. Burns, you heard from Thunderbird, flexibility is key, right? So for PD that is our main concern while the PD district we think
would work great. We don't have any objection to it, but you still have to have the overlaying comprehensive plan layer that gives your overall density, right? >> And so that's still going to require the comp plan amendment and it's still going
to require some type of increased density. Now, in the countywide rules, in order to increase that density to that 100 units per acre that you all have discussed for over one acre properties, you're still going to need the development agreement to go with it.
So, in essence, and I just want to clarify this, you know, your PD is that discussion back and forth. That's where you have some flexibility. You can move things around. The development agreement would go along with it. It would go same time. it wouldn't necessarily slow down
the process. Your first um proposal that is the RFH50 that we've outlaid already and you've made some changes that you would like to see. You know, I see that as a faster vehicle to allow a catalyst project to come in here, but you still have the
productions because it still requires that development agreement. So, I think there is a lot of misinformation out there and I'm sure you all understand, but I want to make it clear that if you approve that RFH50 with the comp plan and the LDRs to allow these density
increases, you're not allowing every single property in RFH50 to just come in and apply for a permit to build that. They still have to apply for a development agreement. The development agreement and process is exactly the same as a reszoning process for all
intents of purposes, which you would do with the PD. You come in with a site plan. You come to the LPA. You negotiate. You say, "Here's what we'd like to build. Here's what we think we'd like it to look like. Here's the 80 ft we want to add." So that you have a view
of the water when you drive in to Treasure Island. And then you get feedback. Those things can be revised. then it goes to city commission in that same town hall forum you've discussed in the PD. So I think that you know it's a
great tool. It's a great place to, you know, see a catalyst project come and if the PD is the future vision to include that, it fits in well and you can certainly then incorporate those same parameters into PD and you may have
other properties that want to develop and want to use PD because they want a little, you know, more variety for setbacks or open space. So you have that flexibility then, but it's definitely not a one-sizefits-all and it's definitely not an entitlement off the
block. So that's why I think it's great that you're looking to move all three forward because I think, you know, we've all heard it a million times, but Treasure Island needs a catalyst project. You need something to come in and start this redevelopment and and the sooner the better, right? So you have
that >> already basically prepared with the change if you've suggested and I think that's a good thing to do and then incorporate that PD which then can come in behind it. >> So you're really recommending that we just go with the the one the one item. >> No, I think you should move
>> for the time for I mean for the time being just for this next meeting with the commission. >> When you're referring to development agreements, are you referring to the statutory development agreements or the home rule development agreements? because I've been involved in both. >> Yes. So, it's a statutory development
agreement that's required under the countywide rules. >> Okay. >> Um so it it incorporates that so that >> if you want to build any of that increased density of that alternative transient lodging density, then you're
going to have to enter into a development agreement. You can't build it otherwise. So, >> you know, I just want to make that really clear. It's essentially the same thing as a PD. A little less flexible, but the city has just as much control.
>> You're saying for Thunderbird's purpose, the R RFH50 would be the best for you. >> Well, it's the it's going to be the fastest because if you've got to draft the PDS and you've got to draft a comprehensive um plan amendment and it's
got to go through all of that process first, that's just going to take more time. We already have this part already in the in the works. >> Yeah. The idea is to get something going so we can actually see see some progress in this town. >> That is on the commission's agenda next.
>> Well, that's what uh the verbiage that I just read out is supposed to be on the agenda for the 20th. >> Any commission should give direction and then we would be involved in whatever drafting is necessary. And yes, we can do that. I will say that as you guys
know I do a lot of work in Fort Myers Beach which was devastated by Hurricane Ian followed by Helen and Milton as you all have experienced and flexibility was very important for them. Um and that's why I'm I asked about the home rule
development agreement which even provides more flexibility um than what is statutoily required for development agreement. And I believe that most of our projects that we have that have been redevelopment projects
after the storm have been in the form of a PD. I'm not really advocating. I'm not taking a P position. I'm just giving you information. Um the ones that some however have chosen to continue to rebuild as of right based on what their
existing zoning was and just kind of rebuild without any additions. >> Yeah. If you'll forgive me a question exposing my ignorance if if we adopt RHF50 the changes that were proposed if that goes
through. So this this is an entire uh zone now that has uh increased height and density understand that not not guaranteed >> it's a zoning category. >> Okay. So it's a zoning category which allows every individual to come forward
with a site plan >> to request a reszoning. >> Okay. So in your experience if you say yes to this one are there criteria that we can adopt that we can arbitrarily or
objectively say yes or no to another one and doesn't that open us up to challenges? So the beauty and how it's proposed by the countywide rules is that you have to have that development agreement and that development agreement gives the city
absolute discretion. So >> So absolute discretion, we can just say yes to this one and no to that one without cause, without reason. >> Yeah, they can look at it and they can say I don't like how it looks. No, I I don't think it's compatible next door.
And certainly that's something that the city attorney would, you know, opine on as well. Not, you know, just from my point of view, but I I will tell you that's one of the things that a development agreement does give a lot more discretion than your typical zoning
that is a quasi judicial where you have to go through the criteria and if it if it fits and it's compatible, it should be granted, right? So, I do think that that gives the city a lot more control. And I think it's one of the big advantages to it because it does allow
the city to ask for things and to say, you know, we don't like this or we love this or move your building right or left. >> And and by the city, you're referring to this board and ultimately the commission and any process that they adopt for
review. A development agreement is required under the statute to go in front of you all as the LPA and then to the city commission for two readings >> and both have to be consistent with your comprehensive plan. So if there's a comprehensive plan amendment that has to
go forward that would need to travel somewhat simultaneous to the creation of the PD zoning district. In the composition of these boards, the LPA and the city commission then would have full discretion on whether to approve or not.
>> Certainly, the LPA would make your recommendation and then the city commission has discretion. >> So, if the board changes and we bring in a new set of representatives and commissioners and they are very pro-development for instance, they can
move ahead with that. >> Yes. Just like your commissioners can make any legislation they want to do now. They could decide what they want to do. >> Okay. Thanks. >> And Grant, to your to your point, I think it it definitely means that there's a level of
reasonleness. Otherwise, you you would be sued. The city would be sued. >> And on page 19 of the comprehensive land use plan that was approved in June 20th, 2024, it gives the district of the
resort facilities high. And that's the only thing that would get going quickly. The idea is like Lauren was saying, a catalyst project. Let's have let's show the world that hey, we're the phoenix rising back from the ashes of Hela. And
it should not have taken 15 16 months because it's been >> and uh but it's just not the Thunderbird. It is from >> John's Pass all the way to right here. So the for the purpose of this evening given it 10 after 6 um are we do do we
need to do anything at this point or has it all has our intention regarding this already been given to the commission to move forward with at least >> I'd still like to have a vote just to reinforce what we're trying to do. >> Okay, >> it's a good idea. Ross, you up for a to make a motion
>> to give the >> But I want to I mean I'd like the you mean Marvin's right there. He could >> Well, >> is it on the agenda? I mean >> three different Is that what we're voting on? >> Yeah.
>> And it's just to give some direction. >> Hey, just one other comment. I mean, I guess common sense would say is it seems to be there's a consensus that PDs are helpful. I don't think there's been any challenge. Not that one and two or three,
>> but PD then why can't we just make that >> forward like we need to like there's just I'm telling you I I don't want I've been meeting with this city since 2021 about downtown. It's this >> this >> someone's got to take a note, have accountability,
maybe the clerk, somebody. Someone needs to send an email to the chair. Like someone's got to hold this thing to the to the fire. And I know you I've seen the last three of your guys meetings. You guys are frustrated. You're going left and right. You're mad. Timelines, right? If it was your
business, you wouldn't allow for this. Somebody would be getting fired. >> Timelines. And I know that the Voss Group can do it. They're a big firm. They have a lot of land use. You've got a land use attorney here. You got my land use attorneys. you know if the if
the consensus of the board is to do it someone needs a timeline and PDS we can move forward on the other stuff but you know PDS gives everybody an equal opportunity a flexibility it is more flexible everything that the lady said is 100% right but
>> but I think we have to do the other because even if you >> give the PDS it doesn't give you the height and density change >> it will requires a comp plan amendment but it will PDS can give you that >> yeah no I agree Ultimately, we're going to get there. But the thing is, like Lauren was saying, doing the resort
facilities high thing gives you a speedier way of getting there. I just not real, let's put this way, I'm sure the Vos law firm can prepare a PD document in no time. I just think a lot of the work's already been done and it's just for that district basically from
right across the street all the way to John's Pass only over there. And uh that's where this city needs a kickstart. But the commission has already >> followed by the downtown, >> have they? >> It's not a matter of downtown. It's a matter of the city. >> They can't reconsider it. >> Okay.
>> No, they haven't they haven't voted on what we were what we were asking them to do. >> It's different. >> They were It was different. >> They have not the commission has not voted on the >> increase. Consider it. >> Maybe. >> Yeah, maybe. [laughter] It's a big maybe. Thank you.
>> Get divorced. >> Okay, fine. are Marvin if you would make a motion. >> I move to >> PD. >> They are >> request the commission to draft a resolution and ordinance for RFH-50 zoning district allowing for alternative
temporary lodging units at 100 units per acre for properties over one acre and 75 units per acre for properties below an acre and an increase in height of to 60 ft. And secondly, >> to 80 feet
>> to 80 feet, excuse me. Secondly, downtown PRMU core increase tourist accommodations density to 60 units per acre and 80 ft in height. And number three, recommend the establishment of
planned development zoning districts. >> Okay, sounds good to me. >> That's one vote or three. >> That's one vote just to get direction. one vote [clears throat] because it's a message that you're sending to city council or commission. >> It's a non-binding kind of message. >> Can I get a second on that?
>> Second. >> Okay. Can we have a roll call vote, please? To you. >> Valerie, >> yes. >> Ross Sanchez, >> yes. >> Chris Downing, >> yes. >> Grant Smith, >> no. >> Marvin Shavelin, >> yes. >> Richard Harris, >> yes. I understand your >> Well, that was >> I was hoping for a unanimous
>> Well, that was as predicted. Mr. Grant Smith is trying to save his marriage, >> you know. [clears throat] [laughter] You you might like to delete that. Mr. Grant Smith just wants the information necessary to make >> Yeah, you should have you should have attended the last meeting then.
>> I was having surgery. [laughter] >> Yeah. Well, you chose not to be here and we have an alternative who voted for you. So, it was seven to nothing. >> I did have the privilege of listening to the riveting discussion. [laughter] >> Yeah. Well, we're unimpressed. Anyway,
next LPA meeting is February 19th, 2026. Um, nobody in the audience who wants to make any further comments. >> Wait, 26th >> at this point. >> 26th 16th >> 19th >> February 19th. >> Okay. >> 26 >> 2026. >> Okay. He said, "Okay."
>> Yeah. >> You didn't hear what I said. >> Anyway, >> and in that meeting, so just walk me through the timeline on this. What we just did will be in front of the commission at some point or like >> the 20th >> that's next week.
>> Next week. And then so they'll make whatever >> they'll give whatever direction they they give and then we will do whatever they tell us to do. >> Would will if they say okay move forward with this when we come in on February 19th will that be in front of us?
>> That will the draft be completed? >> I can I could commit to the PD. I don't know the others. >> Okay. >> But I can easily draft a PD. >> Okay. >> Good point to your timeline. >> No, I'm just I'm trying to get some excitement going. I mean, the amount of Anyway, thank you.
>> Maybe you could put a good word in for us. [laughter] >> I I try. >> You know, we're trying to >> I know what you guys are trying to do. >> Okay. Anything else? Could If not, could I have a motion to adjurnn? Second. Yeah. We're out of here.