Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

But I do the near east group. I don't do that the extra. So it's kind of easy.

We need more room. We had uh I think 103 entries something like that. You ready?

All right, we're getting ready to start. Good evening and welcome to Bay St. Louis Planning and Zoning Meeting of February 11th, 2026. We ask that you please silence all cell phones and electronics at this time. I'm going move into a prayer. Father in heaven, we invite you to preside over this meeting. Give us unity of spirit even when our our opinions differ. Help us to listen politely to others points points of views and to remember that we are all a part of the same community. Direct our thoughts, words, decisions, and actions towards the right path and the best interest of our city. We ask this in your name. Amen. All right, we're going to move to the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nationy and justice for all.

I think beside that just to make the record more clear, I'll just go read the motion. So um call the worship. So just the first motion is motion to approve the minutes from last meet or from January 14th 2026 meeting. I'll make a motion. Second. All right. Motion by Commissioner Clark. Second Mr. No Romano. All in favor? I I I I All right. So now we're going to go to act action items that passed six to zero. Yes.

Um Budro. So first is application for variance to the zoning ordinance paid by David Budro. This application is requesting a variance of 5 foot resulting in a 20 foot setback to the front yard. The property is located at 507 North Second Street. The zoning district is R2 single family. Um so let me just start with the recommendation. So, this house has actually already been permitted. They all have their construction documents. Whenever they went to go and lay out, stake it out. Um, it's on the corner of North Second and Cedar Lane, which Cedar Lane's a 10 foot wide road. Um, the applicant was having trouble um pulling into the would be have trouble pulling into the driveway without going to his neighbor. So, hence the variance request. So what he's requesting is it's a 25 ft front yard setbacks requested. He wants to move it up 5 foot. So it' be 20 from the front yard. Administration's recommended just because there's no hardship present being a black and white one. But some things to to note is there's a sidewalk that's in front of this part of North Second Street. His property line is I like probably from the survey looked like three foot to five foot depends where you are. from the back of the sidewalk. So, his front yard is not his actual property line is not the back of the sidewalk. It's let's say four probably three to five foot back. Um, so the house would appear to be 25 foot back. Um, and then the other thing, I don't know if there's anybody here, but nobody has sent us any letters of opposition for it.

The applicant wants to the applicant's here. All right. Mr. Budro, if you would like to come up, you can state um your full name and your address. Just for our record, my name is David Wayne Budro. My address here is more is 507 I'm sorry, 509 North Second Street. Right.

The house uh that we're trying to build is going to be at 507 North Second Street. And as he as he stated, uh we thought we would be building right now. Uh it wasn't until we right before we started to build that I go out there and measure it myself and determine that because of an existing garage at the back of the property. uh the dimensions to get from the into the new garage from that space was not was was very tight. It's 25 ft. And so that's the reason for me being here asking for a variance of five feet. If we could extend that 30 foot from the existing building, like move it up five feet at them asking, it would be a lot better for me to get in and out of a building and my wife. Uh I drive a truck. Uh my truck is like 19 foot long, you know,

so I really need the spade. Uh, one thing I would point out that Jeremy brought up is that the street curve to the stake that they're that they measure the property off of, which is right at the corner of the two properties that we own. That stake is is 13 ft from the street. So, they're going to measure 13. They already got 13 feet from the street. Then 20 more would be would still be 33 ft off of the street, which is is a fair distance. Um, and in the back, I would line up with 30 ft as opposed to 25 ft, which is going to be a lot easier to get in and out of a garage. So,

any questions? Does the commission have any questions? It's so the survey, but like if you're looking at if you're up the street, his right side of his the corner of Cedar and North Second, it it doesn't show on the survey, but looking just at scale, it's probably 4 foot, three to four foot on the right hand corner, but the lefthand corner, it's probably like six feet or whatever. just the the road's not straight there or the property line's not straight.

And and I might add that there's we have no pro no uh we have no neighbors touching our property. Okay. We have we own the property from uh Cedar to McDonald and uh the McDonald family owns a little small stretch of property at the back of this lot but it's a very small but aside from that uh we have North Second Cedar and McDonald Link. Are there any other houses on that street that's like closer to the So like it's since it's old Bay St. Louis. Um, there was some further down. I saw that really close.

Yeah. Like some some of them are closed. Some are It's Yeah, but North Second Street, that block, it's not like as close. It's not like Main Street where it's basically a straight line. It's there's a little bit of jog everywhere. Okay. All right. You can have a seat. Are we ready to vote on it? Is there anyone? No, just him. Is there anybody else for public comments? I'll make a motion with passes. Second. All right. Motion. Uh, Mr. Cranky. Second, Mr. Romano. All those in favor? Uh I

I I I I The meeting is Okay. Oh yeah. meeting is it's the Wednesday next Wednesday. Yes. It's February 18th at 5:30. Yes. Thank you.

Oh, and just for not it helped. Everybody can get called up if they need to, but there's signin sheets which each name on there if y'all want to sign up there. That's what we go keep notes just for oursel. Everybody can pro but just for um organization kind of just helps us. All right, the next one is a major site plan review. So for field LLC application for major site plan review for a condominium development by Forge and Field LLC. The property in question is located at zero Webster Street and is identified by parcel number 149E-29-014- or 02. Um it is the property is zoned R3 and um multif family and C3 highway commercial. the site the proposed development consists of three two-story buildings that will um have 20 condo units amongst them. So um so this is for a major site plan review. So per the letter of recommendation for administration. So the administration currently recommends to deny the major site plan. So here's just some of the facts. Condominiums are allowed by right in these two zoning in this zoning district. Um so the use is fine. Um the developers have submitted a drainage analysis for the site plan. It but has received three comments slashquests that need to be addressed in a letter that was dated February 2nd, 2026 by uh the city engineer. So we and then no variances are being requested for this project at all. You know, correct parking, correct setbacks and everything. The developer has been in

communication with public works regarding improving the main drain that goes through there to hopefully approve drain well prove the drainage on the site, but actually try to approve some of the drainage upstream for it. Um the drainage analysis is in y'all's package. It was done by him Terry Morian um an engineer. So what happens is before they have this they have this property under contract um one of the things that if anybody passed by there there is a main drain that goes through it before um some projects site plans it would eventually needed to have a drainage analysis before we got they got too far down the road and everybody got too far down the road. I re we recommend and say we need to see what the drainage is if you're going to have this project come. So January they um we sent a drainage analysis to um the city engineer. They had some comments back and then it's go been going back and forth. They have a few comments that still need to be addressed on there. One of them is there's discussion about trying to straighten it up a little bit. Move it maybe two feet. um an agreement basically that it gives us maintenance agreements that they would give to the city of Bay St. Louis so we could we could m possibly maintain the And there was one other comment. Oh, and then if the drainage did get move the city engineer wanted to have kind of some design specs for it.

Would you be moving the actual drainage ditch or you be putting in culverts? No, I think that's an engineer question, but the discussion was it's going to be stay stay leave an open ditch, but kind of right when it goes across Webster Street under the street, it kind of zigzags and then goes back towards the seminary property. If you move I think the the thought was is if you straighten it out a little bit, it will help it will help just drain it generally. Not just for the property, but just drainage in general. I'm just worried about like I'm just not well verssed in the drainage calculations how the I mean how we can review the site plan but could you make a motion contingent whichever way it goes contingent on approval drainage by the city

if y'all want to send that to the city council that way that would be f because and I'll just tell you major site plan is one thing of hey this is how this is going to look you know this is where buildings are going to be do you have enough parking This is where I'm worried about dumpsters and you know Yeah. about to say but once actual construction documents come in for not just this project for a house we make sure that the drainage is correct like just in general but one of the applicant is here. Okay. Okay. If you if you all want to have get him to explain the project or public comments whatever way

the representative for forge and fields can you come to the podium please uh state your name. Hey yeah I'm Ty Densford uh Forge and Field representative tonight from Brandon Mississippi. Okay. So tell us about the situation. So um you guys may remember me from 507 on Maine. I do. Um

uh thank you guys for doing all that. We're currently handling that and we're excited about it. So, this one is another one a little bit similar. Uh we found this piece of property six months ago maybe. Um and we essentially wanted to jump on it because by right, you know, it it matched everything that we needed in our box. Little did we know there was a drainage issue there, which is fine. It's not a big deal. We want to correct it and we want to remedy it and we're working with the city literally every day to make that happen. Our engineers are so if there's an engineer question I can probably answer it but I may have to get back to you after talking to Mr. Moran. But uh I say that to say yes we have three buildings going in total of 20 units. We have no variance um request at this time. We don't foresee any in the future. We moved um buildings around to meet all of the required setback. The question about the drainage being moved was in order to keep the footprint of building A out of any kind of water issue. Um we're not so sure that this is exactly where this d dage ditch is on this survey. The survey is from 2020, five years ago. And if the um so all that to say, yes, we have three requests that we got yesterday.

And so maybe I'm a little uh premature being here today, but we do want to move forward. We've been waiting six months. We close on the property on the 27th. We're not going to be able to extend it again. So, we're going to close on um I think that uh other than that, I mean there I just now saw in that packet that there were some letters that were written uh regarding traffic, which obviously we can't do anything about that. That's a city issue. Okay. Well, we're going to get into that. So, let's things. So, we just wanted to hear about your case. Give us Oh, sure.

That's it. Okay. So other than the basis of like the case, is that it? And then we're going to go and let the commissions ask their questions and then we're going to hear from our audience and we'll go into the extra stuff. That makes sense. Okay. So did you say everything you needed to say? I think so. Okay. Have a seat and then we're going to question for you. Um did the the fire chiefs approve? Monty's approved. Oh yeah. Monty said that this these buildings can be protected because of the type of construction. It's going to be suppressioned anyway, but the actual Okay. It is sprinkler. Yes. Yeah. And the one dumpster is good for the whole um

uh we we if you notice on here uh on the western most part of the north part, we've left room for two dumpsters two dumpsters there. And then we also have an additional the other dumpster. That's No, it's okay. Okay. Gotcha. And then on the the southeast well the eastern most part of the southern it's kind of a weird shape but you see how that how it comes through like that. Yeah. Obviously on the other side of this drainage um swell there's room there for uh you know we we have some more room over here if we need it. That's that's all. We had a building there at the beginning but we're it's not there anymore. Yeah.

Okay. Did any of our other commissions have any questions they might want to ask? Okay. All righty. So, we have a few people. We also have letters. Jeremy, do you want to read the letters for us? Oh, yeah. Let's go.

There should be like three.

Sorry. No worries.

All right. First one would be from first letter um from Amy Kramer. Uh regarding the forge and field major site plan review for development. I visited the site last week with several other interested parties. We walked the entire site and wanted to I wanted to give you my comments. I'll be out of town all next week. Don't miss the public hearing. In the site plan development or site development plan, there is no wetlands determination and wet no or wetlands delineations. From my experience in the field, there is a dedicated water body that transexs the property that will require a 404 permit if impacted in any way. Also the upland portion of the site indicates drainage patterns and by stress indications of wetlands even though they are high in higher elevations. Adjacent properties are considered higher estimated 4 feet in elevation than the subject and appears to drain onto the subject creating a natural flow that will eventually lead to the bay. In my opinion this packet is not complete without the assessments being performed. Also, there is numerous protected magnolia and oak trees noted on the subject. The site did not include a tree survey. The zoning designation seems out of date, especially with all the property surrounding the site as single family residentials. Sincerely, Amy Kramer. And then we got one more. Um Kevin Lori Mariji. um opposition to the proposed 20 unit condominium development on Webster Street. Dear members of the planning and zoning commission, I'm writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed 20 unit condominium development on Webster Street. While I support the response

and well planned growth of Bay St. Louis, this project raised several serious concerns that remain unressed and that would ne neglit impact the surrounding neighborhood. Number one, unresolved drainage problems. The Webster Sheet area continues to experience significant drainage uh issues that have not been corrected. Adding a development of this size with additional hard surface and increase runoff would worsen the existing flood concerns and further stream what already inadequate drainage system. Approving new high dense struct construction before resolving current issues would be detrimental to nearby residents. Number two, roadway limit limitations. Webster Street is effectively a single lane road and is not designed to heavy to handle the traffic generated by 20 new units. This project could easily introduce 40 or more additional vehicles creating congestion, safety hazards, and potential potential issues for emergency vehicle access. Number three, impact on St. Augustine Seminary. The St. Augustine Seminary is a longstanding sanctuary sanctuary place dedicated to quiet reflection, study, and spiritual life. A dense resident res residential development directly adjacent to it would bring increased noise activity and disrupt disruption that is incompatible with the seminary's purpose and environment. Number four, shortterm rental concern. There is no legit there. There is also a legitimate concern that these units will be used as short-term rentals. This brings well doumented issues, increased noises, occupancy overflow parking, late night activities and reduced neighborhood stability without clear restrictions and

enforcement. This risk is substantial. For these reasons, I re respectfully request that the commission denies the proposed development or require significant modifications that address trainage, traffic cap capacity, neighborhood compatibility, and shortterm rental concerns. Thank you for your time and consideration. I appreciate your commitment to protecting the safety, character, and long-term well-being of our comm community. Sincerely, Kev Mariji, Lori Mariji. Those are the only two. the next um letter. Do you mind reading this letter from the engineering and surveying? Okay. Because I would like that on the record. All right. So, this in the packet. Yeah. Um yes,

this is the one that's in the packet that's I think I referred to. So, going back with the drainage analysis. Yeah,

Mr. Berg after reviewing the resubmitt from TME, which is the engineering company that re that was received on February 5th, 2026 for the proposed subdivision on Webster Street and have the following comments. Number one, in order for the drainage system to be fully approved, the proposed relocation modifications of the existing ditch would need to be detailed. The proposed route and cross-section of the new ditch will need to be provided. Additionally, the grading is required to be able to confirm with the drain to confirm the drainage area will drain as shown. Number two, please show the drainage inlets and contours for the swell downstream for the fallout for dep detention pond number one. As stated previously, the O and M agreement with the city would be required. Um, please let me know if you have any further comments. Jason Chinichi.

All righty. And the O and M1 is that maintenance agreement, which it's common whenever we have retention ponds or anything else. All righty. So, now we're going to move on to um everyone that signed up. We have a few people. Um the first on the list is um excuse me if I pronounce your name wrong. Yolandi Yolanda Bradley. Yoland. Can you come to the podium, please? and please state your name and your address.

My name is Yolan Bradley, 200 Seminary Drive, B St. Louis, Mississippi, right adjacent to the property that we're talking about and I come with representing um live right there in the area of course and I'm come representing I have a list of names uh some who couldn't couldn't come tonight, some who are here tonight and I based our concerns not as much engineering. Uh we're not familiar with the engineering concerns as well, but we do want to uh express uh the prompts that the concerns that we have. Webster Street is block long from Simmon Air Drive to Dunore. It's just a block long. The property that you all um that's proposed to be located there is on such a small street, very narrow. It takes many cars have to pass to pass side by side have to stop for other cars to pass by uh each other. Can't park on the on the street itself. Uh parking on the street um is too too uh is not u is not allowed for many of us who are who living there on the side of each side with so many extra vectors expected to pass side by side the part turn. It's going to add a lot of congestion. That's the main thing. street is just buried now. It's been like that forever. I've been there 40 40 some years and I know pretty much the property that you all uh for the concern um for the concern proposed uh complex uh has a major dish and water runoff. These extra sewer, water, plumbing concerns, flooding, and standing water areas have been there through the years and are still there. When the rains couple a few days, April March is coming up. You have a couple few days of running. There's water there on the across the street there. There's a

dipped area right there in the street right in front of the uh property concern itself. There's a dipped area right there. Water stays there for a while. Heavy rain falls right behind my house where the property is closest to me. This water just is just a ditch just it's just there. Water is just there and this is been on on just bound for heavy rainfall for storm conditions and just regular rain. The also I'm worried about filling in of the uh in the low elevation of that lot. I just look I mean I look right over over my uh to the right on my property which is right there. My poverty is right there. Just just look over uh line the uh it's such low elevation. I mean it's very low there and it would take a lot of filling in. And I've always been the result of having uh some of my property washed away. Uh and because of the water that's stand right there right to my own we have I come to a many sewer and drainage problem due to that area still with your site. And third thing, still with your sight plans, that narrow street makes it difficult for fire and emergency vehicles. That's your complex location with only a front front entrance there. That's the only way they can get out on Webster Street. There's no back street. It it um the property itself uh is close to the St. Augustine Seminary um historical uh cemetery there. And then of course you have the uh trailer park back there. there's no way to uh for them to access through the back or whatever. I mean, if people are living there on on the back area overlooking this uh seminary or a little overlooking the um trailer park, there's no no entrance back. I mean, you can have your little driveway, but it's everything enters Webster Street, which is so narrow coming out.

Number four, the additional excess of traffic and people, the inability to park on the street itself to to pass on such a small neighborhood street already surrounded by we already surrounded by many other condos or apartments and everything like that. It's just it's just an excess for just a one block street you know we have right there front of seminary we have rental use Webster then the Dunar there the 300 block of seminary all of these have are you know they're much bigger areas for the influx of people in traffic lastly a commercial multif family property squeezed on such a small street secluding and crowding a solemn burial piece of area like the historical cemeter cemetery that is there. Uh I don't know if you know but northern graveyard in uh Bay St. vicinity that has had such a has a commercial residential area bordering so uncomfortably close to it, you know, taking away it tranquility and that's really a concern saying a u it's been there for many years of course ever since that all was St. to help their property and uh the cemetery has been there for so long and like I say just the back entrance of the whole complex that you all are building um you know it takes away from what um the the solemn place of uh burial place of the area it's just such a small area you know with uh Webster Street and everything just included in right there you know most of the time trucks trucks or anything else. Anything you have to back up into our yards or our whatever little area. It's just such a small area in between everything else. Why not figure out some other place

other than street? So, that's pretty much my concern. I'd like to just submit um the names that uh uh neighbors in the area. like just submit that to the Miss Bradley. Miss Bradley, could you give if that's a letter that we could put for the record, could you give it to Miss Caitlyn? Kaitlyn. Okay. So, we could What do you What do you have for if you want your letter to go with it? So, it's in the city council package with the thing. Could you give it to Miss Caitlyn over there? Rolling, please. Okay.

I have a question for M. Bradley. Hi. Um, I live not too far from from where you're speaking. um the the new brightly colored buildings that were built further on that street by the Parkers. Um what kind of impact has that had on your neighborhood? Um I mean it's about a dozen buildings, right? I wanted to ask that same question. 16 I think now about 24. Oh, okay. So it's more units. It's more units than the condo. Okay. And uh you have quite a few now, you know. Yes, ma'am. So well and people are nice to each other, whatever. know it's okay if they find their own business but we like the area such as you know it's not it's a nice area

has it negatively impacted your your your quality of life is my question basically not you know and are they using them for short-term rentals as well are they using are they using that uh that current the brightly colored area I forget what they call it um as as short-term rentals okay that I'm not sure of other couple I've talked to, they actually pay they pay pay rent. So, it's long-term rental. That's all I had. I'm just curious. Um, but yeah, they're not all they're not all they're still for sale. A lot of them

quite quite a few for sale, right? Whatever. And there's really no other um like a like a common space. They really they didn't include that there, but you know, people whatever. But of course, neighborhood walk around. Yes, ma'am. It's worked out. Okay. Um, but it's a bigger space than what we are. I'm not sure about the acreage for the Jeremy. Do we need to include those names in our records or just she's going to give it so it's going to be in the um was just making sure. Thank you. Um, did anybody else have some questions for Miss Bradley before she sits down? All righty. Thank you, Miss Bradley.

Thank you, Miss Bradley. Okay. Next we have Josh McGee. Um, please state your name and your address for us, please. My name is Josh McGee. I live in 419 Webster Street. Uh, my main concern is the drainage. We've had serious amount of damage and development along this drainage artery. Uh, what scares of me about this is we're approving before we know what's going on. And what is a real concern to me, that's exactly what happened on the Almond development right across the street.

You know, it went up for a site review and just got a variance to make smaller yards. That's it. No, nothing about this sixoot bulkhead. Nothing about clearing all the trees out. It's it's very scary how we just give the approval and expect things to be done in the back end. There's when I go through our ordinances, there's a lot of due diligence of what's done and I don't fully understand. where we are in this process. We're just saying, "Oh, yes, you can put a apartment on right on the ditch. We're going to move the ditch." I mean, I don't know if any of y'all walk this property out. It's a pretty crummy piece of property. It goes from 18 ft elevation down to 8t elevation within 100 ft like that. You know, how much fill is going to go in? How how can you do the flow calculations before you know what it's even going to look like? And it's not cheap fo that we're worried about. It's when tidal flakes comes through. It needs to be able to drain it. You know, as the parking parker complex, you know, they put a lot of fill over there, too. It actually drains through there. We've already blown out that pipe and had to replace it. You know, the splash pads fit sp water down there. There's no due diligence and we're pushing forward on it. And again, this is how the other project got pushed through. Just a simple got the paper in. They got their init initial approval and there was no checks and bound all the way through the rest of the process and that's what I'm worried about.

Ask your name again. Josh.

All righty. Um, so next on our list is Anita Warner. Anita Warner as a citizen for 1730 and also on behalf of the live vote registry. Josh, Amy and I walked that property last week and you can see where the water flows through it very clearly and as Josh said the property drops and there's a manage main drainage swell there which is why I think Chinichi has questions about the whole thing. There are protected live oaks and magnolia on that property. Um by way of Amy's letter, Amy is an environmental consultant and has been for 25 or 30 years. She reviews properties for banks when they have to look at it for the environmental assessment. So when Amy says there may be wetlands there, you can believe her. So for all those reasons, I think this is a premature thing to ask y'all to approve the site plan because you've got this narrow street with sloping property with existing drainage problems. And if you go on the property, you can see the trash how the water has flowed through. And that's before we have a rain or a hard storm. And I think what Josh is talking about, particularly tidal flow, when we have a big storm and the water comes from the east, you're going to have a real problem. So for all those reasons, it should be denied.

Were there protected trees on the lot? There are some magnolia and some oaks. We didn't measure sizes, but just saying there's some of those on there, too. Okay. thing. Um, okay. So, this is all that we had signed up, but is there anybody in the audience that would like to come up and share a few words or opinions?

Questions. Okay. Well, did any um anybody else from our commission have any words so far? No. No. Okay. You can go ahead and come back up. Could you particularly about the protected trees, the wetlands. Yeah. So, um our engineering firm that we've hired, local guy, he our local firm would obviously that's one of the first things you look at when you look at property is wetlands because the amount of money it takes to move anything on that property that's in a wetland

is so expensive it'll kill a deal in a heartbeat. Um, so, so I'm not saying that that's off the table. I'm just saying I think we would have known by now we've spent an ungodly amount of money with these people. I think we would know by now if that was wetlands. But did he say something in particular about it addressing it? No. None. Okay. And all the maps that I've looked at, there's no wetlands there. But um, just me. So Okay. And there's no surveys regarding the protected trees. Sir,

we have not had a survey yet on the trees. We can't walk the property. I'm not sure how anybody else has it either because it's so thick. There are lots of green leaves. It's maybe magnolia. There may be some live oaks. And our intent is to keep every single one of them if we can. So, is that not part of the m the let's say it's I thought that was the thing. You had to submit it with the trees and if they they don't have any indicated on there like for a subdivision stuff we require them. But for this one, if they have none, that was denoted. It's just the assumption that there is none. So,

regarding the drainage issue, we're trying to fix it. Okay, pause. We got to address everything. Okay. Sorry. The trees. Yes. I mean, so, okay, you don't have information on that? I do not. So, then we're going to move on to the next question. What was your next question, Amy, about No, it was the trees because we first we were talking about the wetland, right? So, we're going to stay on the trees, then we'll move to the trees. I'm sorry. I must be the only one paying attention. Sorry. Go ahead. Um, no, the wetland stuff, nothing was done, but I'll I'll just say like that whatever the wetland map or stuff, there was nothing on it, but Okay. So, Jason would have brought it up, too. Okay. Yeah. Um, obviously he's I guess the drainage analysis should have that's an engineer question, but That is something that we would need. He should have access to this,

right? That's a it's a it's a major major issue. I'm telling you, it's like one of the first things you look at when you look at a property. Yeah. Is it a flood zone? Yes, it is. It's actually uh two different flood zones there. Uh is it a wetlands? No. Both AE or is it X NE? One's uh the 100 and one's the 500. Okay. Okay. How elevated will the house will the condos be? We don't plan on elevating uh more than three feet on the ones in the back that are in the big flood zone.

Okay. Wait, we can't talk out in the audience. We got to stop that. Okay. Next question. Did you have another one? Amy, did any of our other commissions have some? How many acres? Oh, yeah. Sorry, John. It's 1.7 and I think we're using like 1.3. Yeah. I mean, I I I don't find it to be a dense development. I think we need more housing. My my issue would be the hangup about I do not like not knowing what trees, you know, are we sitting like a condo is on three protected oak trees. Yes, ma'am. I don't like having that information. The drainage stuff does make me nervous.

Yes, ma'am. And you have to understand also think about the timeline is we don't own the property yet. So, we've only been able to do as much as we can do. We've not even walked it because we don't own it yet. So, yeah, I'm totally sympathetic to that, but at the same time, I mean, the work diligence came up. That's where we're going, you know, that's where we're going with this meeting, too. Yeah, Miss Michaela. So, okay. But also, hold on.

So, my issue is this. I understand you're on a time like a time frame, but we really don't have anything to work with and to go and make a recommendation when we literally have an engineer and a survey saying that there is a drainage issue and you basically want us to make a ruling when we have a tree issue, we have a drainage issue like No, ma'am. That's not I'm I'm again I'm asking I was about to ask you. So, can you make a ruling based on a contingency? Okay. Or do you just take it and go straight to the city council and say, "We don't like it." A variance is all about a hardship. I'm not asking for a variance, ma'am.

Don't cut off. Um, and well, not a variance, but um, this matter has to do with a hardship that not only affects you and your timeline, but it has to affect the city of St. Louis. And so we have to make a ruling based off of what's in the best interest of the city of Bay St. Louis when it comes to the zoning and planning. We don't have information that is supporting that this is a good move because we have a drainage issue. We've had several people come up. They don't know the answers to the drainage issue. You don't either right now. All I can say.

Wait. Then also on top of that, we have a tree issue. You don't have anything about the trees. So that's an issue. So I'll let you say one more thing, but then we're going to move on. So go ahead. Thank you, ma'am. Okay. Jeremy, did you want to say something before we move on to trying to vote? No, I think uh as typically speaking, voting yes, yay or nay, just having a and this is something I said original tableabling something's not prudent because it doesn't go to city council. So sending it to city council with the approval or denial is fine. Um it's there's a chance they can have this all rectified before the city.

Yeah. So if there's something that y'all want to put in the motion that approve it contingent on XYZ denying it, but stating that we have concerns, I would like if you deny it, could you state the motion that denying with concerns about drainage or whatever? You know what I'm saying? I think if it gets denied, then they need to come back, go through zoning and planning and the whole process again. Well, it's going to go to city. It's going to go to city council. It gets regardless. This is a major one, so it goes to city council regardless. Well, we can do it. All right. But we still need to make a vote basically. Is that what you're saying? All right. Do we have a motion either way? My motion is to deny it. Second.

All right. And and is there just for the record, can y can y'all state just the denial reason just because unlike variances whenever it's loud it just make it more clear. So if it's drainage that's fine but for me it for me it's going to be um several things. It's going to be the drainage. It's going to be uh the the trees and also just the surrounding itself the the road can't can't handle. All right. So the motion Caitlyn would be motion to deny with uh drainage concerns uh protected trees concern and then infrastructure concerns and then there was a second by Mr. Breland. Right

there was first by Mr. Kramer and the second by Mr. Osborne. Okay, Mr. Osborne. All right. All those in favor I I I I All right. Five out of six or Yeah. All of us. All right. So, the city council meeting is Wednesday, February 18th at 5:30. Thank you. All right. Next, we have South Mississippi Veterinarian Clinic.

All right. South. All right. Number four, South or South Mississippi Veterary Clinic. Application for special exception to the zoning ordinance submitted by South Mississippi Veterary Clinic. The applicant is requesting a special exception to allow a small animal clinic with or without boarding in a within a C2 neighborhood commercial district. Uh the property is at 560 St. John's Street in its own C2 neighborhood commercial. So um for this one it's motion to allow so per zoning ordinance a veterary clinic if it's in a neighborhood commercial it's not allowed by right it's allowed by special exceptions the uh property is under 5660 St. John Street is the former bay hospital Dr.

Dr. Mailor Dr. mailers building. Um it's getting sold to South Met Lander Clinic, but before we can they can buy it and we issue purbage license since it was over 6 months of them ceasing operation, we're they unfortunately they have to go back through this process to ask this for the special exception. So administration is recommend to the approval approve the special exception. Reason is Bay Animal Clinic has operated at this location for over 40 years and also South Mississippi Veterary Clinic will not be boarding animals at this location. It's just going to be like it was before. Okay, cool.

Would the representative like to come up share a few things with us? I'm Patrick Cleveland. I'm the president of South Mississippi Veterary Clinics. I live in Petristan and be happy to answer any questions, but we would just like to open a small animal clinic there. Sick animals only. It's not It's a small property. We can't board animals there and have really no desire to other than the sick one. And be happy to address any concern. We think this is a good market, handle another clinic. There'll be a little of that.

Didn't quite drop. Yeah. So, so basically you're going to just carry on what he did there at the sink. That's what we'd like to do. We would probably want to our employees to park in the back because there's not much parking there. So, that we may take some grass out and put some gravel in such as that. But nothing no major changes. Okay. No addition. No. There's really not room. and no plans to hope to make a go of it. Then you got the big building right next to you which is already

just because I'm curious. I know Dr. Mor he did like um simple things. He didn't do like the major stuff in veterary. Are you planning on doing more or just keeping it kind of kind of how he was? It might be a little more than that. Maybe a little more surgery. He referred a lot of things out and so we may do more than that. Okay. But nothing too crazy,

right? Okay, cool. All righty. Um, if you don't have Well, does anybody in our commission have anything to say? Okay. Well, you can have a seat. Um, no one signed up to speak, but is there anybody in the audience that might want to share something? Okay. Well, I think we could move on to voting. I'll make a motion we accept and pass. Second. All righty. First from Mr. Breland, second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I I I All right. 5 to six. Thank you.

All right. Next application. Application Bradley. So, this application for sketch plot and final plot approval by Richard Bradley for proposed reconfiguration of one parcel into three parcels of land along Third Street in South Beach Boulevard, Bay, St. Louis. Each of the three proposed parcels will meet the minimum lot size and minimum width requirement. The subject property is identified as U49N-30-23 039N-30-230- or 0. Port parcel one as identified in the survey will contain 1,0049,146 square feet and will be 246 ft that fronts along Third Street. Parcel 2 will contain will be 176,842 square feet and will be 49.5 ft wide along South Beach Boulevard and will from South Beach Boulevard and proposed parcel 3 will be 52,01 square feet and will be 198.68 68 square ft in front South Beach Boulevard. The property is zone R1, R2, R4, and R5. Um, so this this piece of property is um one,

it's current, the lot is 920 South Beach Boulevard. Um, it recently got sold and essentially the new owner just wants to make his one large estate lot and break it up into three. Um, the parcels that are going to be facing Beach Boulevard, um, both actually already have a house or a dwelling on each one of them, but with that being said, all the minimums um, or size of them far exceeds it. The width for all of them needs to be at least 100 feet wide and it exceeds all those. Um whenever they're whenever they per the survey, one thing we always look is we don't want those large lot. We don't want you to cut it up. So protected trees would be in the way of building anything. and they have protected trees on here, but you have probably on each one of them 75,000 square feet worth of lot to build on every single one of them. So, um, but we're recommend to approve it and a representative for the property is here.

Okay.

Hi, good evening. Hi, my name is Jean Baxter and I'm a local real estate agent with John McDonald Realy here in Bay St. Louis, I've been doing uh that for about 13 years. Uh I had the privilege of representing the Bradley's when they recently purchased this property and uh unfortunately Mr. Bradley um regrets that he cannot be here this evening. He's out of town on business and so that is the reason that I volunteered to come here for him. Um one thing I would just point out and thank you Jeremy for introducing this. Um the property uh I have it marked as parcel one but the large the largest piece that um will remain is about just over four acres and it actually it notes on the survey that there's 149 ft of beach frontage as Jeremy said but there's an if you look closely there's an additional 52 feet to add to that. So what you'll have essentially um this beachfront original parcel was 400 feet along the beachfront and basically um for the beachfront they'll be 200 feet for one parcel and 200 for the other. So it'll have a nice balance out there. Um additionally the adjoining property just um to the north of that also has 200 feet on the beach. So it it will maintain a nice symmetry there. Um, and then the property on the back end, um, that fronts on Third Street, you've got access there. They currently, he wanted me to share with you, they currently have no plans to do anything with that parcel on Third Street. Um, they just wanted to go ahead and subdivide it should so they didn't have to come back and do this process all over should one of their three daughters want to have a house there. And um, and and that's it. There's there's no variance to request. It was our understanding that the necessity for the meeting was because the um original

parcel was over an acre and so um there are protected trees we do and they're gorgeous by the way. They're absolutely stunning and um and and I feel that my clients are very sensitive to that um and to those trees. Uh, as Jeremy stated, there is ample room to build on this property without affecting any of those trees. Um, as indicated and I think that's all I have.

Yeah, I say I guess I forgot to say the reason this test come for pling and zoning is per our zoning ordinance. Any parcel that gets re configured or sub subdivided or subdivision that's over one acre has to go before here. It's just something that was written in our so that's why they're here. All righty. Um did our commission have any questions? Okay. We do have a few people that signed up to speak. So if you can have a seat, we're going to let them speak and if we have any more questions, we'll call you back up. Thank you so much.

Thank you. All right. So first on our list is Anita Warner. Nina Warner on behalf of the live oak registry and per the survey that's here there are 27 protected live oaks on the larger piece on the front there are five live oaks live oaks on the other piece on the front I've been all over this property I've been all over this property when m when Mr. McFale had it. I've been on it since. It's a beautiful piece of property. People always called it Brrignack property. This is actually the Zam Murray property. This goes back to Sam Zurray, the guy who started United for Sam the Banana Man. And this was his. And we have some fabulous pictures at the historical society of the houses that were there. And the house that Mr. Murray built in 1912 actually burned in 1994. Long story, but great picture. So, um, this I know the Bradley's I know they will do a good job with this property. They're not going to do anything to impair the trees and I'm excited because I never could get Jim McFale to register them. So, now I have a whole bunch of trees that I had to register. There's also significant magnolia.

So, uh, the other thing that needs to be noted about when we're talking about drainage, there's a big drainage ditch that goes across here. So, and because I've got Christ Church and then we had the Blitch property, now the Mayfield property, and that drainage goes across. So, there is a ditch back there, but there's also a bridge. So, nice piece of property. All right. So, next on our list is Mr. Cliff Raé.

Good evening, Cliff Ra. 702 Third Street. Don't know all of y'all. I almost uh I came to find out what they were going to do. You basically right answering said got no plans right now for the the back part, the third third street part. Uh that is zoned that section is zoned R2. And for no obvious reason whatsoever, it's zoned R2. And as we go into this P&Z meeting, I'm going to be suggesting that that entire strip along Third Street be reszoned to where it should be, which is what we currently call R1. But that'll fit in fine with whatever they want to do. Uh actually came to say in support of this because if we're going to subdivide something, these are the size lots that we need. I don't know how many y'all realize where I say I got Jerry Heisman's old house. I'm on two acres. My neighbor Craig Singleton, I don't know, he's got six or eight acres, maybe at least, maybe five or six. You know, we've got that area of the city has mostly big property. Yes, Romania Street's got some regular size 125, 125 lots. Those are the small ones on Ramen Street, but this is good. Liked it. Uh particularly with the SWK thing continuing forward. Uh, one question I do have, Jeremy, maybe this goes to you. At one point when you subdivide a problem, like we're going to take this one and make three pieces out of it, there was you don't get to subdivide it again. Is that rule still in effect?

I don't I think it's that' be that'd be somebody way above our pay grade to answer that question. No, but I didn't look into You're right. I think after this I think you're only allowed five splits but I think you're right because that's going to be one two right I looked into it before I was looking yeah because at one time we had you know 200 foot on Beach Boulevard and they would split down and split down you have to go look on the plan and they tell you to be they have the number on the right hand side it be 0 Z and it has a one split once.

Yeah. Okay. Well, you're talking about T part. Yes. T parts. Okay. Because that that you need to make them aware of that that taking that back piece or front piece and reubdividing it is is going to be an issue. Uh other than that, I support I support this subdivision. Thank Okay. Did anybody have any questions, concerns? All righty. Um, well, we're going Unless Did you have something else you would like to say?

I just like to thank the u the two people that came in support of the submission and for your consideration. Thank you. All righty. Well, let's move to a voting. I'll make a motion to approve. Right. Motion by Mr. Ky, second by Mr. Bradley. All those in favor? I I I I I six. Move on to our next

number six. Hollywood Casino. Motion for major site plan review for recreational vehicle park submitted by Holiday Casino. Property in the question is identified on tax as pars number 136K-38- 002.002. The property is located within the residential district and casino district. Um so administration is recommended to approve the major site plan per zoning ordinance. All RV parks have to go. Hollywood Casino already has one, but guess technically speaking, they're expanding theirs. It wasn't part of any plan I originally saw. So um when they said that this is what they want to do, we made them go back before site plan review. So what they're RV parks might be the only place in this uh this district might be the only place in the city of St. Louis that allow RV parks by right. Um and it's also that another thing we need to know is only RV vehicles that meet the definitions of recreation vehicle will be allowed in the RV park. Um the site plan was submitted. They have a representative here from Underbridgeidge Architecture. Um, it's if you're looking at the casino on the right hand side, if you go look by the marina, they're just going to go and throw put some units there that meet our specs. Um, fire department can protect them. Um, it meets the pad size and everything else parking requirement are exceeded or seated. So, um, we have no issue with it.

Is there anybody not speaking? Oh, no. Mr. Anderson. Okay. Yeah. I want to ask Mr. Anderson something. Yeah. Just real quick. Yeah. John Anderson unabbrided architecture. The question I have is John. It was um it's it says RV, but it's going to be the regular pin. It's going to be like the little modular houses. Yeah, they're they're it's not a these things don't have motors. No, they're trailers essentially, but they do have VIN numbers. So they are vehicle. Yes. That's I just want to make sure that they're they're like little homes. What they are, but they're on wheels. So they are correct. Yeah. That's why they can move them out. They can move them out when floods come.

That's the intent. Yeah. That they Yeah. But say we that was one thing that we checked on today. Um that they have VIN numbers and they're eligible to be titled and registered through the Department of Motor Vehicles. That's pretty cool. It was It was a question that we had. Like whatever goes there, if that's not what goes there, if they're just RVs, whatever, it's just going to be an RV. Consider an RV. That's why I'm It's not going to be a a manufactured home or anything like that.

Just because I'm curious, has uh is there another commercial business that you maybe worked with uh that's done this before? I'm just wondering how this idea came. I've seen them before. I I haven't personally. done. But yeah, like um tiny home park you could say. Yeah, I like it. Tiny tiny homes on wheels, right? We really shouldn't use that word, but um it is what it is. The main thing is they are RVs and they can be pulled out. That's exactly right. You'll never pull them out.

Well, the um Hollywood has a a hurricane protocol. Uh so you know when it if when this project is done these will be added to their protocol to make sure that they get removed because they are in school. Okay. But the idea is you know they're uh Hollywood is trying to make improvements to that harbor that's behind them. Uh they've got the Holly deck back there now which is you know right utilizing that space. And then what they would like to do is front the um the edge of the golf course there with these four to start with four in the future. Um and you know want to start with four to see how it goes. All right.

All righty. Thank you. Thank you. Ready. Is there any questions from our commission? All right. We're going to move to a motion. I'll make a motion to approve. Second. All right. Uh motion by Mr. uh Kra and second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor I I I I I uh the council meeting is Wednesday, February 18th at 5:30. I was talking to him and you you you move to approve, correct? Yes. Sorry. Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Geez. All right. So the last thing on the agenda is and this has to do with per our current tree ordinance you go and before I make tell you what it is it's per our current country ordinance whenever somebody puts in for a tree application and it's denied

it gets appealed to planning and zoning first and that and then gets referred to city council. I think the new ordinance that we're very close to getting done, it's just going to be started getting approved directly to city council, but her ordinance, it has to go to here for recommendation and then gets heard by planning and or then city council. So, um well, Kaylin, I have to recuse myself to present on this.

All right. So this is um request to appeals appeal or request for appeal submitted by Jason and Betty Galot. The applicant is appealing the denial of a tree removal permit. The property is located at 120 Citizen Street, parcel 149- 0-30.0000. Um, so Miss Doer is actually the one that's going to be representing the applicants.

So in the packet is basically the per the the permit that was submitted and it says the details is protected trees not diseased or damaged and it says possible to relocate footprint of home. Um that's one one exhibit. That's the reason it was for denial. And then I already looked uh they have she just passed out the site plan on it. It has a propo it has a proposed residence, a pool, a guest cottage. Nothing's permanent on this yet, but where it says tree

and I have a site I gave them copies of the site plan that has the the exact location of the That's a smaller pond. Um, I did there should be a letter in there that includes my major uh points of this, but just to give you an overview of the situation that we have here, there's actually seven mature oak trees that we're dealing with on this lot. It is a corner lot being on Citizen Street and Hancock Street. Um regardless of what happens with the pool or guest podge or anything, my concern is with the design of the main house being in keeping with the neighborhood. Um there's a lot the the nicest oak tree is actually um facing Hancock Street. We'll access that way to not sacrifice the other oak trees in the the back just the best overall use of the site. But we also do not want to get into the drip line of any of the neighboring trees. This tree that we're asking to remove is actually smallest of any on the lot or adjacent lots at 14 inches. It's just a little bit over. It's a 12 inch requirement that made us have to come ask for approval. Um so if we were to it was denied based on the fact that it it is healthy. It's one of the smaller trees like I said, but it is healthy. And um they said that we can move the house to a different position on the lot. That is true. I'm only focusing on the main house. If I were to move that main house back, it would have to come 70 ft from Hancock Street at least to get out of the drip

line of that 14inch oak. And then at that point, we would be sacrificing the health of the mature two oak trees that are on Citizen Street as well as getting into the drip line of the oak tree that's to the right on the right parcel. So you can I gave you the rendering so you could kind of see it's actually been carefully thought out about the roof lines to not interfere with any drip lines. We've actually cut back that back left corner of the house plan as to not interfere with the drip line of that those two trees on Citizen Street. Um the I'm just going to mention all the surrounding parcels um behind it and to the right are in a flood zone. This parcel is not. So it is advantageous you know for the best use of lot we want to do something that doesn't look out of the ordinary you know that we drive down the street and say why is that house you 70 something feet back you know from the neighbor you from the main road so if y'all have any questions I'm happy to answer anything I know um there's probably going to be some comments on this too I can answer

there so it wouldn't be a requirement. So, yeah. So, we looked into that. The spade for the company is not large enough to do so, but it might be young enough to do so. But there's one oak tree, I think, required or one tree required per 10,000 lot square footage. Obviously, we're at uh almost 13,000. So, we well exceed that, you know, having uh that many oaks on the property. So, and who recently denied this council or no the city.

So yeah, it comes from the building department. So a tree applications like is submitted with the building department and so we give the denial. So because it's over 12 because it's over whatever. Yeah, whatever the protected tree. Yeah, you close enough. Ricky did if we can throw him under the say I mean you're doing your job. Yes. I mean, I tried I mean, in all honesty, um, we spent hours measuring trees, drip lines, going through different iterations. This truly is the best use. Frankie, we're looking at if we were to move, if you were to move the house, you take one tree from here and you have the best way out.

I mean, it's a large lot. I'm not denying that. It's the narrowness. Um, and then having the additional 12 foot setback because it's on a corner street and versus the 8 foot. I mean really if we were to avoid all the trees you'd be in less than a 30 you'd be almost a 25 foot wide footprint which just isn't feasible you know with such a nice lot to put such a small so moving the tree is not at all possible because person sure it's far possible for a price but it

no I have we did not do that research because we figured we need you know the see the minimum of the it would be I guess since it's a hearing floor. Yeah. I think you need to

We can make you a couple more trees. Yeah. Adding more trees.

Um can we ever asked that the applicant go back and figure out about preserving the tree and then coming back just because I would hate for it to be unfair if somebody else came up and had the same situation and we didn't ask them to exhaust all their resources before we go and do that because somebody else I would want them to figure out how to preserve the tree. I just want to know. So I guess that something for that just the building department does and that was on the denial is healthy tree whatever else look to relocate the house like that's just what their note was also. So they're just appealing the decision as per so like yeah.

So can we go and ask that though? Can we ask hey can you all go back and exhaust you know exhaust the resources before we make it a decision? Is that so I mean if you want to go say motion denied we want you to go exhaust all three. It just go it just goes to the city council as a denial and they can Okay. And I think and ultimately the city council decides y'all might not know but they approved taking out a 90y old oak tree

in the middle of a lot which was gorgeous. And anyhow u with respect to this I'm very familiar with that. That's right in my neighborhood. I go past that all the time. You do have what you're trying to keep the best trees and this is the small tree of all the trees that are there. So in order to this area has not been developed since Katrina. It's becoming developed now. You want to keep your best biggest trees. Yes, you can move trees and there are companies that do it. But and here's the big butt about the whole thing. They won't really care. They they guarantee they can get it out of the ground

and you're gonna probably need a crane. You're gonna at least have to have a tree spade, but there's no guarantee that the tree will live once they try and transplant it. It's it's a very big undertaking. It's a whole hell of a lot of money and it's a it's a crapshoot. So, so considering the fact that you have the other trees that are bigger and in better shape, this one's sort of again like the other more into the middle of the lot. I'm not crazy about it, but if you're going to build houses, sure. Don't we have a lot of oak trees? I don't mean to diminish the important job that you do, but we do, but see,

like the polar bears. Yes. I mean, the polar bears are proliferating. Right now we do have oak trees. I'm not saying that there would be a species that would you know Well, here's the thing about we do, but I mean we have an awful lot of oak trees, live oak trees.

We do and we should value them because they are long life and our Gulf Coast oak trees are genetically different from stuff that's further up the coast. They've managed to survive through literally hell and high water, which is what we've been through with storms, heat, drought, all those things. So, when we can protect them, we want to. And I've talked to Amy about this on a number of things, and I know she's talked to John Benton, who really knows about oak trees. And so, I mean, in this case, it seems to me that would be prudent to allow that one to be removed. Okay.

I want to hear that from you. That's what I want. You know, I mean, you try and you you want to have the highest and best use of the property, but you've got some other trees that are bigger and better shape. The little trees, you know, they're nice, but Yeah, but it was like that one on the other side on the Yeah. No, understand. Yeah. So, anyway. Okay.

Did anybody else have any question? All right. Well, come on up, Mr. Probably. speak as chairman of the historic preservation commission. This was presented to us and we at length talked about moving things here and there and yonder and uh I have to the historic commission voted to allow that because of the house and the way it's been laid out and uh just had to be shuffled. So we feel uh from the historic commission that this house is an appropriate style and an appropriate area and yeah we did ask about the trees even there. So uh I would have to say I would have to support uh if it had that one small tree to be moved then I think we're ending up with the with a better solution.

All right. Thank you. Very good. All right. Well if the commission would like to vote we can move it to a motion. So it would be if you if you want to overturn it, just say we'd like to overturn and I want to make a motion that we overturn the denial. All right. Allow to be taken down. Which second? All right. Um motion Mr. Bradley, second Mr. Romano. Breyn sorry. Thank you. Mr. Clark is sassy. Okay. Uh, Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I I

I I All right. Four out of six. All right. Before we before we agend this meeting with unless she will reconsider, I just want to go point out that this is Miss Doer's last meeting as a member of the planning and zoning commission. Kind of sad. It's kind of sad. gonna be a weird monthly eight because it started right before my oldest was born. So, I don't know if she's gonna do with her time. If she wants to come back, she always can. I'm missing the playoff basketball game tonight. All right. So, you'll be missed, ma'am. Thank you.

All right. And then all we have is a motion to adjurnn. Make a motion. I'll second. All right. First, Mr. Kra. Second, Mr. Doer. All those in favor? I I I All right.