Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the Bay St. Louis planning and zoning meeting of May 14th, 2025. We ask that you all please silence all cell phones and electronics at this time. We can we are going to begin with a short prayer in the pledge of allegiance. In the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. Father in heaven, we invite you to preside over this meeting. Give us unity of spirit even when our opinions differ. Help us to listen politely to other points of view and to remember that we are all a part of the same community. Direct our thoughts, words, decisions, and actions toward the right path in the best interest of our city. We ask this in your name. Amen. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America to the republic. Okay, first um first Williams was withdrawn if anybody's here for that and you didn't hear that. Um but our first application tonight is graph application for variance to the zoning ordinance submitted by Adam and Regina Graph. The applicants are wanting to construct a dwelling on the property. The applicants are requesting a variance of 10 ft resulting in a 15t setback to the front yard. The property is located at 4137 Cardinal Drive. Parcel number 135N-1-39-233.0000 00 29 and 30 block 615 unit 6 at3 Shoreline Park and is zoned R1A residential single family district. Is the applicant here tonight? Yes, ma'am. Can you come up and um state your name and address for the record and then tell us a little bit more about the need for the varants? Uh my name is Regina Graph. Uh my husband would like to be here but unfortunately he was called out of town for business. Um, we are looking to move over here permanently at the address she

mentioned, 4137 Cardinal Drive. Currently, we live in Mie, Louisiana. Uh, 1400 Wisteria Drive. I don't know if you need the whole thing. Um, we had been originally told mistakenly that we needed a uh 15 ft variance from the street. We later learned after the house was designed that it was supposed to be 15 ft from the property line. We are at a dead end street with no possibility of a house being built across the street because it's basically wetlands. Uh so we're asking for a 10-ft variance which means we're 15t off the street instead of 15t off of the property line behind the street. Any comments or questions from commissioners? Um was there anybody signed up to speak? Nobody signed up. And I think one of the things that they didn't even mention, they included their survey on there and 10 10 foot rear yard of their setback is probably the top of their bulkhead because they own I don't know if you consider own the water bottoms, but the lots shallow. So if you if they didn't move it up, their pilings would probably be one or two feet away from the actual canal itself. because the property line extends into the actual. Yes. And I I don't know if it's in your paper. I noticed that. Well, I looked it up on GIS. Yeah. I don't know if it's in your paperwork either, but we walked around and introduced ourselves to most of the neighbors that were there and most of them signed letters that we turned in as well saying that they had I don't know how there there's shrink a post stamp. I don't know how they could build it without you. And I do I'll just read the general letter and just try to read some of the names and addresses. It says to whom it may concern we the undersigned are neighbors of Adam and Regina Graph and who are building a new home at 4137 Cardinal Street, Bay St. Louis. We understand that they are applying for a variance from the city of Bay St. Louis zoning board for the

following request. A 10-ft variance for the home to be built 15 feet behind the street rather than the code requirement of 15 ft behind the property line. We have reviewed the proposed change and have no objections. In fact, we support this request and believe it will not ne negatively impact the neighborhood or our property. We are confident that the proposed changes will be completed in a manner that is consistent with the character and appearance of our community. We respectfully request that the zoning board take our support into consideration when reviewing this application. Um we have uh Robert Doyle, 4129 Cardinal Street. Um maybe a Craig Willis, but 40 or Andy Williams. Um 4056 Robin Street. Rick Brady 4084 Cardinal Street. Jay Howard um 4107 Robins Robin Street. Steve Brown 4091 Cardinal Street. Uh, a Robinson 405 or 4059 59 Robinson. Um, Eddie Lavlet 4097 Cardinal Street and George Delp Delpidio 4114 Robin Street. Um, anyone in the audience I'd like to speak for against the application? Um, if not, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to be accept. Motion by Mr. Breland. Is there a second? Second. Second by Mr. Cranky. Dean, are you following us? Okay. Okay. All those in favor? I I I motion passes. Uh please be present at the next city council meeting and that's to be in this room Tuesday, May 20th at 5:30 p.m. Thank you. All right,

Mera. The next one just so I believe the board understands but just to go anybody general public. So the next application is an application for special use district. It's just something that we don't see that commonly. So what would this be is the property is currently zoned R1A and it's still going to be zoned R1A property. A special use district. it. The intent is if you have five acres or more, you can ask um property owner or application can ask for a special use district, meaning you can have the use of and then you fill in the blank of whatever it is that you want to use it for um for it. So, the one that's coming up, which happened in the pack, they're allowed to build since it's R1A, they can build single family houses on it by right pretty much that's about it. Um they want to take all whatever 20 22 acres overlay it to have a special use for an RV park but what if the commission or if it's granted to you all in city council it wouldn't be that a RV park just shows up then the next step would be um the developer would come have to submit for a major site plan. So then, you know, we go make sure drainage works out, the utility utilities work. There's actually it's it's denoted in the letter the memo from us. There's an actual section from our zoning ordinance that that deals with the density, how many parking spots, like it is pretty well done for RV parks. We make sure all of those are checked. So just by giving a special use district doesn't mean it's just going to show up there. that would check the first box that they have the use of it. And then they have to um invest in

engineering, infrastructure, every other part of that and then present the plan to y'all and to the city council and get that that site plan checked off on. So this first part is just setting the ball in motion. The next parts it's going to be the meat and potato say, "Hey, thanks for submitting this to us." Um, we understand you did this, but we need more green space. We need this or you told us this was going to have a pool and all this is is a concrete jungle with no trees. Try again. And y'all have y'all still have leverage of say so and city council will still have say so that yes or no. So, but this just gives the developer an opportunity the use and the only use would be for an RV park. It can be a bait shop can't show up there. uh you know a whole a whole list a convenience store is not going to show up there. It's going to be an RV park with, you know, lazy river, you know, pickle ball court, but an RV park. And then they would, if they were to be, just so everyone knows, if they were to be granted this special request, they have, is it a year? Then they would you have a year, I think it's basically a year, and then you you can ask for extension, but they'll have a year to activate that, meaning we start doing our due diligence, and then we're going to go start actually doing the project. So this project isn't going to be if the special use district is given. It's not going to be like all right now we have a special use so we can go and shop shop it around and sell the project and five years down the road they want to do an RV park. They have to pretty much you have to start having it in motion. So we because what Bay St. Louis doesn't want and the intent of it is we don't want somebody to get a get an approval for something and then the conditions of the neighborhood claim let's say an actual subdivision AC actually gets developed across the

street with that change the dynamic I think kind of for and it's on this this neighborhood hasn't changed in 20 years so it's intent that it probably would but that doesn't matter when this property was special you was granted the special use district for this exact same thing eight years ago. The neighborhood hasn't changed. So conceivably, my just personal thought is the conditions are the same, but they still had to come back to ask for it and then they're going to have to go do a site plan review. But even after that site plan review done, then they actually have to do the project. If they come back three years later and say, "Hey, we're ready to do it here." I will start back over at the beginning and ask permission to do it. And that's what I was going to bring up that the same parcel was approved several years ago for the same special use, but it's not transferable. So that's why the applicants Yeah. wanting to get um his individual RV uh park approved tonight. Okay. So uh Ajax LLC application for special use district. The applicant is requesting a special use district to allow the use of recreational vehicle park located on Chapman Road. Partial 138H-46-028.0000 legal description part gate on tooling claim part southeast 14 section 27-8S-14W and is zoned R1A single family district. Hey guys, we just everything being combined. If y'all he has a they have a presentation. It's in the packet that was online, but there's some hard copy still left if y'all if anybody would like one. It's just kind of follow along also. Can you state your name and address for

us? Uh, Chandler Rust and the address of the property is one60 Chapman Road. But he that's not his residence. So Utah whatever residence. Okay. I'm from Utah 2465 Farmhouse Lane. All right. Yeah. Tell us a little bit more about the project if you would. Okay. Yeah. So this is um this will be the eighth no sorry ninth RV park that I built or owned. And um this is that has me really really excited. Uh probably the most excited I've been out of all the parks I've purchased or built. Um this project um it's a 19.3 acre parcel um that we would love to begin building on uh this summer. So as Jeremy was mentioning, you know, we're not ones that are going to get this approved and try to pass it off or flip it. This is this is what I do. Um so we'd like to start as soon as possible and potentially be open by Labor Day of next year. a little ambitious on construction, but I think having ambitious goal is important. Um, this this part this parcel is quite unique with um the way it was originally developed back in 2005 just with the size of the roads and the elevation of the property. It was originally developed with roads, sewer, and water. Um, and I also have a representative from BMA here as well um to help answer any questions if needed on um engineering. Um, but this was origin developed to be a subdivision of 150 home sites, 23 feet wide and 80 feet long. So, really small homes, I I assume. Um, and then it was foreclosed on during the financial crisis of 2008. And it's kind of gone through multiple multiple owners and and forclosures and handovers since then um until we came across it uh recently. And uh it fits what we do pretty perfectly. Uh due to the elevation, you know, building that many homes, they would need to be, you

know, built on stilts and that would be quite the investment for this parcel. So just from information I've gathered, this appears to be one of the best possible uses and probably why it was approved last time. Um if you go to the third page, it kind of outlines what we plan to do in terms of site plan. Um but we want to do 200 pads. Uh we would consider this more of a RV resort than a park just with the quality of the development um with having each site uh paved fully paved and landscaped uh pickle ball courts. Um I've heard that the growing trend here um I know it is out west as well uh pickle ball. So if anyone wants to play, let me know. Enjoy pickle ball. Um, we'll have a swimming pool um with the lazy river and uh a children's beach entrance. If any of you have been to the luxury RV resort in Gulport um on the water there, um there are some pictures towards the end of this presentation that show what what their pool looks like and our intention is for it to be quite similar to theirs. Um page seven, closest comparable shows the Gulport RV resort. Um you'll see it's all paved and landscape and has a pretty impressive pool with a lazy river. Um it's going to look quite similar to that. Um dog parks, green spaces, um family areas throughout. Um full hookups at each site, picnic tables at each site. Um, I think I mentioned most of the amenities we're planning on, but this won't just kind of be a a dirt and gravel RV park, uh, with a lot of, you know, long-term trailers hanging out there. This will be more of a RV resort where we will allow snowbirds, of course, but um, this also be a a great place for um, people traveling through to stay at as well. Um, we also have um, already spoken with I don't here, but he just emailed me about two minutes ago.

um the president of the Bay Area Youth Soccer Club. He was supposed to be here but got held up at work and so he just ported over to me a letter of support from their league. Uh their property is just east of this parcel and I spoke to them. They're excited about this development because they've struggled to be able to host travel soccer tournaments at that because of the lack of short-term housing um around here. And so we've actually talked with them and are working on a partnership to discounted rates for their teams to stay at the park and also day passes for those amenities for the kids to use that come and travel to play and have time between games. So, um they're excited about it. I have their letter here I can also print out. You want me to read it into the record? Sure. My phone. Okay. It says, "Dear council, I'm writing this letter to express my support for Mr. Chandler Rust and and his proposal of an RV park development adjacent to the Scott Vimosski Memorial Soccer Complex in which Bay Area Youth Soccer Inc. organizes and manages recreational and competitive soccer teams for youth in Hanokut County, Mississippi and surrounding areas. This development will significantly benefit our community and in particular enhance the functionality and attractiveness of our soccer complex conforming with other premier locations for hosting tournaments. We fully support the implementation of this project and look forward to the enhancement and growth of attractions to our community. Thank you, Brennan Adam, president on behalf of the Bay Area Youth Soccer Court. Great. Um, any questions or comments for Mr. Russ from the commissioners and then I'll open it up to the audience to speak. Can I make a com? Yes, sir.

I would have said this was two years ago when this came up. I can't believe it was eight. So, this is a good thing. Yes, I agree. Um, I do have A few signed up to speak, I think. Uh, Mr. Rean Kaine, 504 North Beach Boulevard. Thank you all for your time. Rean Kaine, 504 North Beach. I'm also the listing agent on this property. And I just kind of repeat what Dean said. I've been involved with this property for probably six or seven years. and Chandler and his team are the first people who are willing to spend the capital that's sensitive of the community and willing to enhance the area because it's it's really been a challenge from the elevation issues and uh and location and uh just exciting to have have him him come aboard. I you know hope you know approve his project and see his vision for the future in the area. And that's it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else in the audience I would like to speak for or against? I know not everybody has a presentation package, but if you get a chance to look at it, it looks fairly nice and well thought out. And Brown Mitchell and Alexander can y'all do y'all and just I guess we had preliminary. How lowlying of this is this? Because I think this as Mr. Mr. Kane has been involved I guess I've been involved in it for four years and they've had a number of projects. I'm allowed by right that I promise you no one want. Um but this is I thought the property was about 12 feet above base flood elevation meaning that you have to go six foot up but so so Nick Gant Brown Mitchell and Alexander 131 Rude Magnolia pulls in Mississippi. Uh so we have not performed a topo of the site yet but just using Google Earth imagery and kind

of you know what what's shown on there. Yeah, you're around elevation seven and eight. Uh, and I believe the flood zone is around 18. Yeah. Um, so I don't I'm not sure what face St. Louis if you're a plus one or plus two. Yeah. Plus one. So you're 11, you know, 10 at least 10 feet in the air on any home that you built in the area. So I know that that was just good because I guess in my point I never knew this was as lowlying as it was. So essentially what this property is is an interior shoreline park property that's not on the water. So let's say Avenue 5, six, seven, eight where there's still no development. But if it is, it's you know pre-existing house from Katrina that didn't get washed through that or sometimes trailers but and it was filled in. So before when they built it before I know it was filled in when they raised it up some. That's one thing to that's all I I just had the general question for that the actual document. Yeah. And and you know just we're obviously very early on in in kind of the phasing of this but we've already had some conversations with the utility authority about what they're going to require for the water sewer. So we're already kind of starting to move and making some movement on that. Great. Appreciate it. Most topography from previous project and it was about six feet and seven are yeah really low generally. Um if there's no other questions or comments I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion we accept it. Motion by Mr. Breland. Is there a second? Second. I'll second it. Mr. Cranky beat you to it. I don't think you can hear. Um, but all those in favor, I I I I All right, motion passes. Uh, please be

present at the next city council meeting Tuesday, May 20th at 5:30 p.m. Thank you. Next agenda item is Phil Sim Properties application for variance to the zoning ordinance submitted by Jason Phillips and with Phil Sim Properties. The applicant is wanting to construct a dwelling on the property. The applicant is requesting a variance of 1 foot resulting in an 11 foot setback to the sidey yard on the Alabama Street side of the proposed dwelling. The property is located at 5051 Georgia Street. Parcel number 139A-40-99.001 one block 314 unit 3 add one Shoreline Park subdivision and zoned R1A residential single family district. Yes, sir. Hey, how are you? Um Jason Phillips uh 427 Lake Road, Hattisburg, Mississippi. Um the house is actually in construction. Um so the survey was done uh we're supposed to have 12 foot from the corner lot uh Alabama Street. Um believe when the pylons were placed that we once we got everything was set, the uh contractor pulled the tape and it was like roughly six or so inches off um from I include in the packet the actual measurement, not survey. It's just the contractor. Uhuh. Yes, sir. And uh so I'm just asking for one foot variance. And the the one foot is the cover just in case. Should be told you need a survey, but it's probably a seven inch variance like but our normal side set back is eight feet. So people in the audience wondering it's 12 foot at at corners. So that's why um asking for the variance. Yeah. You you don't have anybody signed up and like I wouldn't drove it. You're the 12 foot varian comes because sight

lines if you're at a stop sign you need to see around it and I wouldn't drive down corner like oh well I can see the cars coming. So yes and he's going to be 25 foot off the the front any from the property line not even the actual street further back than that should and you can see even with the construction already there. Yeah, you know. Um, do you all have any comments or questions? No. Anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against? Um, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion. Motion by Mr. Cranky. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Mr. Breland. All those in favor? I I motion passes. Please be present. Next city council meeting Tuesday, May 20th, 5:30 p.m. Okay. Well, towards the end, can you keep me straight on the the letters to read? There's Okay. I've got some, but I don't know that I have all my email. Okay. All right. Next agenda item is D. Um application for variances zoning ordinance submitted by Larry Das Jr. The applicant is requesting to subdivide one parcel into two new parcels of land. Both parcels will not meet the required lot area. A lot width. Parcel one will need a variance of 932 ft resulting in 11,68 ft to the minimum lot area and a variance of 26 feet resulting in a total of 74 ft to the minimum lot width. Parcel 2 will need a variance of 938 square ft resulting in 11,62 square feet in the minimum lot area and a variance of 26 ft resulting in a total of 74 feet to the minimum lot width. The property is located at 118 Ingman Avenue, parcel

136H-1-37-021-0000 5J, Rear First Ward, and is zoned R1 single family District. The applicant here tonight, yes, sir. Can you come up and state your name and address for us? Dice. My wife Dice Dice. Dice. Okay. One 032 Eden Street wave. Can you tell us a little bit more about the need for the variance? Yeah, we uh we purchased the property. It's 300 ft, so it's street to street. Um but when we purchased it, it was only 74 feet wide. I understand uh some of the houses in the area or some of the lots in the area are currently 150 ft and 150 ft. I think the problem came in is that when we purchased ours, it was only 74 feet instead of what would have been normally maybe 80 or 100. The neighborhood just wasn't designed that way from the start. So, we're asking that we divide instead of having it street, we would divide it halfway through. So, we'd have one lot on the front and one lot on the back, which is consistent to lots in the area. Any commissioners have any uh questions? I've got some letters to read into the record and then I have some people um signed up to speak. I I do have a question. Um so what is the reasoning for you wanting to to split it just to have two properties? You plan on building two on it or we would we would like to build one pogo first and then build onman. We currently have um just uh the need to to divide it in half so that we can build two properties. We live on Eden, right? We have a house there for the last 10 years, but it floods too much in Shoreline Park. Uh one year I had to move myself six times. So, we purchased that property in the hopes of still having to build elevated, but we could

leave stuff on the ground and not have to flood. You're gonna flood every once in a while. Just so I heard that's where I grew up. Just so you know, Pogo might flood more than England. Um Yeah, that's the purpose. Yeah. Okay. Um I'm going to try to go through as many letters as I can and then I'll open it up to the audience. Dear Planning and Zoning Board, as a resident and concerned neighbor of the property located adjacent to 118 Ingman Drive, parcel number 136H-1-37-021.0000, I am writing to formally express my opposition to the requested variance under review. According to the application, the proposed variant seeks approval for a lot size of only 938 square feet. I mean, I think they mistyped the variance. It's not it's more. It's 11,000,000. The minimum requirement for the lot size in our area is 11,62 square feet. Wrote that. This means the proposed lot is approximately 92% smaller than the required minimum, a significant and substantial deviation from the zoning standards. I think they misread the variance. Yeah. Okay. They're thinking it's a draft. They they think it's they transpose the number. Um yeah, I'm not going to continue reading it because I think it's taken under the wrong context. Yeah. I am writing to say I am against the variance for the property located at 118 Ingman Avenue. I will not be able to attend the public hearing. I hope you can take my objection into account. I have no problem with variances of a few to allow someone to add on to an existing home. This is much different.

This will take one lot that meets the minimum size and make two that do not meet it. If this is done, I see no reason to have a minimum lot size in the ordinance. Thanks, Harold Breck, 328 Julia Street. We received a public hearing notice from Bay St. Louis Planning and Zoning Commission to in regards to 118 Ingman Avenue. The applicant would like to divide one parcel into two new parcels. We respectfully request that the application for variance be denied. I like most homeowners have made a significant investment based on the city zoning as well as other factors in the purchase investment selection of our homes. We count on the city government to uphold the zoning when we make a purchase. Our expectation is that the city zoning is stable and not changed at the whim of neither an individual homeowner nor a larger entity that makes a purchase. If we create a density nightmare, how does that benefit those who live here? I am certain not certainly not opposed to growth, but I am opposed to irresponsible growth. Before the commission approves variances, they should consider the roads have not changed or expanded. A review of the architect's renderings or developers plans for the land must be taken into account for the size of the land and the variance requested. The most fundamental consideration for approving a developer's request is that it will be for the benefit of the current citizens, the people impacted by the change in the surrounding areas in the city. The current request will not benefit the current residents like ourselves. Our concern is the approval could have a snowball effect for additional like requests doubling the homes in our neighborhood. Thank you for the consideration in advance. Christy and Bo Royster. I don't see an address request. Um we received a public hearing notice concerning a request um for varian changes of 118 Ingman Avenue from the PNZ commission. and the land owners requesting to subdivide one parcel into two new parcels which in turn will result in either parcel meeting the lot area or lot width. The applicant was aware of the variances when the property was purchased. We are opposed to this request for variance

changes and respectfully ask that the application for a variance change and subdividing would be denied. This request would not serve our neighborhood's best interest. We purchased our property in this specific area because of the generous lot and home sizes as well as the zoning factors. This was is a considerable investment for us. Subdividing and changing the variances to create much more smaller parcels will then produce a smaller will then produce smaller builds that which will affect the value of our and other residences properties. In addition, this desire to subdivide could spark others to do the same resulting in a congested neighborhood. These smaller homes could be changed to possible vacation rental type homes. We did not purchase property here for such a neighborhood. Are the treasured properties of our quiet neighborhood being brought up? those who will not live and contribute to our community. We hope that Bay St. Louis planning and zoning will protect the existing zones and variances for the benefits of the voting citizens. Thank you for your attention and consideration. John and Tracy Oldfather, 501 Blakemore Street. Okay, I have some people signed up to speak. Um, Miss Christy Royster, 118 Pogo Road. Did I think you write a Did you write a letter? If you want to Okay. Um, and is it old father, I read your Yes. Okay. Anybody in the audience that have any more questions or comments? Yes, ma'am. Can you come up to the mic and state your name? And we're uh being recorded so so everybody can hear. Hi, I'm Ann Hall. Um I have a a place at 117. It's near the my made the but I I it was just pretty much on the same

level as the other two that you know I bought in this area with this certain with a certain zoning this increase and And it, you know, you may have a snow between. Thank you. Any comments or questions from the commissioners? I like to speak fair on this too, but like I said, the property next to it, the two lots are 150 by 74. Both of those on towards the And then the lots on the other side of it is 140 by 125. So those are all split in half. The ones across the road from it, they've been split in half at one time or another. They're all in half. So it looks like there's only what I'm looking at here. One, two, three. Right there on that side is just just one big lot. So, I'm just saying and I was going to bring up the same comment. Now, now we were asking for a subdivision of the the width. I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I'd be much more opposed to that. But the width is it's an existing non-conforming lot in regards to the width. The width is going to stay the same no matter what. even dividing them in half, which to be honest, the majority of the parcels in this area, even I don't even see one that runs runs through Cedar Ridge Avenue all the way to Ingman that is the is the full stretch from street to street, most of them are subdivided. I would be willing to guess that this lot was combined at some point in time and used to be two individual lots. And taking that into account, too, I mean, these are still super generous lots at

150 foot depth. It'd be a stretch to fill up the lot with 300 ft of house and depth. Um, so I mean I see it as more on the reasonable end. Now I don't know what he what the intentions are for the property at the end of the day, but just looking at it as an individual parcel, it's still two nice size lots at the end of the day. Yeah. No, but come Yes, please come asking. So, my name is Christy Royster and I own 118 Pogo Road and I also own 114 Ingman. Both are are 1acre lots. And so the g the the family that built on so it would be on the side of the 114 Ingman which is street to street on the pogo side they built a home which is a lot cut in half and their plans were I'm sure they were approved by the council or whoever permit you know do they ask for a variance as well? They they didn't and they built on my property. I mean like they're on my property line and so I guess we're really more or less like worried that like once they just come in and they just start building and there are no parameters, you know, and so I think this is this could really be a problem. And two, Pogo Road is very narrow. You cannot have two um cars going in opposite directions. And so, you know, I don't see any you plans for expanding the street. There's no there's no side uh you know there's

no land there's no easement. So with that being said, if you start to we're worried about the snowball effect of this that everyone, you know, I own 114 Ingman now with the size of my lot, I could go ahead and ask for a variance, too. Split it into four because it would be the same size of the lots that he's asking for. And then so now I have four lots and I can build four homes on there. Sounds like a great opportunity, but you cannot I mean like then there's four homes and then there's another you know the two homes and two homes and two homes and you know and you just keep breaking down the lots. I mean that's not why we bought our home. Bought it for the space, right? And you know be the only lots on that street. There might be one other lot that runs all dude. How many lots run all the way through? So the guy on the other So I own 118 Pogo Road. So the other guy on the So So I own your last name. So I own 118 last name. Oh, Royster. Royster. She's on She's on this map. Yes, I'm looking at the map. Those two. So I own 114 Ingman 118 Pogo. And then the gentleman on the other side of me just put his property up for sale. And he's also talking about like, oh well, you know, maybe I'll split my lots and sell them for, you know, split it in half, sell it for two lots. It's like, well, where does it end? You know, where does it begin? Where does it end? For us, I mean, when we bought our property out that way, um, you know, the idea was to have the space. And I also think this is, you know, I can't afford to keep digging into my own checkbook to make sure that I buy a property on the other side of me just so I don't get, you know, someone crowding in like two

homes or or more than that, you know, for for that. So those were, you know, one of our or many of our concerns that the, you know, the way that the pro prop, you know, you purchase a property and, you know, that's what you get. I mean, honestly, the neighborhood really couldn't take on a lot of density. It it just can't. The streets aren't wide enough. They're very narrow. I mean, all those streets are down that way. And then we also have uh an issue, too, and I'm not going to take up more of your time. But they've had stop work orders put on some of the property back there builder with, you know, inexperienced builders coming in filling up, you know, land with a bunch of dirt and then they put stop order on it and then nothing's happened to it and a year later we're still looking at it out there. So, we're just being protective of our neighborhood because we're not looking to have um you know, Airbnbs back out there. I mean, I live there. Yes. We're not just a uh weekend family. I understand. So, thank you. Yes. Thank you very much. Um and just to be clear, too, no matter what was bu if if they were to be granted this request, they still would have to abide by all the city setbacks front and back and side. Even if it were to be split into two parcels, right? So, which means they'll be coming back for another variance. Correct. Well, if they couldn't get it in 150 foot deck. So, I'm not trying to be smart. Right now, it looks like y'all don't just don't want anybody to build back there, right? Y'all don't want anybody to build back there, right? I'm just asking. No, no, no. I'm saying I'm looking and what I'm looking at. There's hardly any houses back

there and and there's where he would be building. He does split. There's a vacant lot on the other side and on both sides of it. So, I mean, I'm just trying to see I'm just stuck on the the width is the width, you know, it's it's going to remain a 74 foot wide lot. So, the next the two next to it. I mean, all the ones in the area really Majority is 80 foot width between him and his probably 80% of them. Yes. No. The majority the one next to the one next to him is split in half. It's 70. No. No. Probably 80% are not street. If you look on GIS that I was studying earlier today. Yeah. You want to come up and state your name and address that way if you have any question. Yeah, only a couple of them are street street if you want to look right here. That's fine. That's fine. John Oldfer 501 Blakemore. My question would be what is his intention on splitting the lots? I'm sure to build two separate houses or Yeah, that's what that's what he said. That's what he said. One on Pogo and one on Okay. That's Yeah, that's what he said. Yeah, he wanted to build on Ingman first and then he would build on Pogo after. Okay. So, his intention on building two houses is for what reason? So, that's my question. It's legal. Any other comments or Yes, sir. I think the only thing would be that I understand the the concerns, but if everybody had the concern about building on pogo my property, I could build my house on a pogo spot, which would be my

right. U when we purchased the property, um the property right next to us, the guy that's building it already had a fence in the middle of the property and we have a slab on the existing property which is gone. It was two parcels. So, I'm just trying to make it not what it used to be. That's all. Not trying to create any problem. Do you have an address or you you'd pick your I guess you'd be picking what where you It's 118 Pogo. Would you No, it's 118 England. We would have to get another address for the Pogo Drive. Well, if there's no other comments or questions for the commissioners of the audience, I'll entertain a motion. One one thing I would do say though, we're only a recommended board. So whatever happens here tonight, it depends on the city of B St. Louis. So you still have to go there. All we do is make a recommendation and there motion. I would deny it. A motion to deny by Mr. Frankie. Is there a second? Do you know you um following us? I'm here. Did you hear the the motion to deny? Did we We get a support for the motion. We have not. Need a second. We need a second. Uh second by Mr. AG. All those in favor? Nay. Nay.

Nay. So So the motion So the motion was to deny. So and it failed. So, um, we don't have to remake the motion. We didn't remake the motion. I'll make the motion to approve. I'll support it. Second by Mr. AG. All those in favor? Yay. Yay. Okay. Motion passes. Uh, three to one. So, so Caitlyn, it's you have two motions. one. The motion was just to deny which passed but then we had it so we have it. Okay. So, please be present in the next city council meeting Tuesday, May 20th at 5:30 p.m. Okay. The next agenda item is Stifle and I'm going to mess up this name too. Leus application for variance to the zoning ordinance submitted by Stifle and Leokus. The applicants are wanting to reconfigure two parcels into one new parcel of land. The new parcel will meet the required lot area. However, the applicant is requesting a variance of 21.4 ft, resulting in a total of 78.6 ft to the minimum lot width. The property is located on the 400 block of Sycamore Street, parcel 149M-1-30-126.001 186 and E 18.6 of 187 Third W St. and 137J-44-053.0000 C 108 109 B 110 111 Third W Bay St. Louis the property is zoned R1 single family district yes sir go ahead Matt Stifel 507 Citizen Street um I'd like to uh there's two two bearings requests which would be six and seven on this agenda and I just handed out a where the five current lot

configuration is now and then what we're proposing to do by just reallocating land and making it four single family lots and the the proposal now is just to reubdivide the land and then going forward we would be debating individual uh building permits for plans for houses etc. Question for Jeremy didn't we have this move forward how many times it was That was like the first time it was eight houses in a row. The second the second time it was one less lot and I tried to do five. Yes. And this time I've acquired one more smaller parcel on St. Francis which allows us to have more road frontage and then less parcel. So each parcel is between 18 and 19,000 square feet. Yeah. I think the when Mr. Stifle came out the last time, it never made it to the city council. But what he did was the issue was the width from the neighborhood. So what he does instead of giving up he said all right I'll go buy the piece of property so I can get it took a minute but we got a yeah in a minute but okay we have I mean basically we have five existing non-conforming lots that we're making into four. So three lots currently from St. Branch Street that would move to two and then a larger lot that will front Labot and a larger lot that will front Sycamore Street. And y'all pack it. It's kind of convoluted because um to survey all this to where it needs to be would be thousands. So we found every single survey we could and what we're doing now is asking for the variance. If the variances are added, then Mr. Stifle will go get it all surveyed. But he has the variance in hand. So he has have to do the sketch plot. But yeah, if you can't get the variance, why spend four grand on a survey that you can't use? Yeah. And I think some of these numbers

are more conservative. You're going to end up with even larger lots than what if we talk to the neighbors too, then they this is more palatable uh to them as well. So they not against it. Any other questions or comments from the commissioners? Yeah. Uh, I didn't get a letter on this. I just have people signed up to speak in the audience. I've had letters people call and ask about this. I explained it to them. They're fine with you like letter. They said no, we're fine with support. They said, "No, we're good." So, but they're not they're not against it, but they're not writing letters to support it either. So yeah uh but I have I have spoken to some of the I guess was one pal is another one talked to her about it as well if they were here they were here usually they they were here the last couple times and that's why I was like here she's here she signed up here I know she's here but she's she's she's aware of the situation for every she's been she's been here I have Miss Anita Warner signed up to speak okay and missed the album. Sure. Yeah. Sorry, I missed just one. Louis Leokus, 1830 Madison Street, Mandville, Louisiana 70448. Um I uh I just want to say that I u I'm very excited about this. Um from personal standpoint, our family's been looking to build a house over here for for some time. I know two years ago and um and so with the acquisition of this other lot that's facing St. Francis, we're now going to be lowering density in the neighborhood by generating four lots out of five. And I think that the neighbor be a lot

happier and I appreciate your consideration. So, thank for your time tonight. Thank you. Anita Warner on behalf of the Live Oak Registry. And yes, I remember this project. Is this the third time we've been here? Um, and I'm I'm I'm in favor of what Matt wants to do. My only reservation is of course the trees. There's a really nice live oak right on the front on St. Francis Street. There looks to be I don't know if it's a swamp maple or sycamore sort of in the middle. Sycamore in the middle. I did not go on the property, but I'm driving by. So, and the way the trees are, it looks to me like it's going to be fairly easy to build because the trees seem to be mostly along the sides. Uh, very nice trees also on LabOT and on Sycamore. So, as long as we preserve the live oaks and any magnolia that might be out there, um, I'm in favor of it. Thank you. And they will have to have the the oak tree surveyed when they do survey part that'll all be done with the the the actual replanting survey. And then the just so you know that the the live oaks the the big ones are those things we're planning on keeping there. We like to re and that's funny enough room on the 18 19,000 foot lot to build a house and not have that down. Okay, Miss Helms. Good evening. They pretty much covered everything, but my name is Fowler Holmes. I reside at 430 Labot Street. Um, as Miss Anita was saying, we was talking about the live oaks on Labot Street. Also talked with Matt about them. They're not going anywhere. They'll be there. They preserve um this construction or

um what's going on won't affect what's there. Um as far I know there has been no objections for this. Seems like everybody is in favor. Usually no news is good news for the area. Um and it's more in lines of what the community desires and has been requesting in the past. As you have said before, this has come before you guys at least three or four times. Um the main parcel sits pretty much a dation to my lot where I live. So it'll direct me specifically. So, I'm in favor. I don't think there'd be any problem with us making these five block parcels into four. As you say, lessening the density. Um, we appreciate that and hopefully you guys approve it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other comments or questions? I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion accepted, please. Motion by Mr. Breland. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Mr. Cranky. All those in favor? I I I I Motion passes. Please be present at the next city council meeting Tuesday, May 20th, 5:30 p.m. And and we're piggy back in. So, yeah, he had to do two motions done, but it's the same. So, can we just make a motion without intervening? They'll ask if there's any public comments. Any public comments on agenda item number seven? A question for commissions. I'll entertain a motion. So he had street. Now he needs it for the ones on street. Right. Right. That's what we just wrapped it up. So that doesn't So we make another motion. You would have to. All right. I'll make a motion. We accept. Second. Motion by Mr. Breland to accept. Second. Second by Mr. Cranky.

All those in favor? I I I table I I Hey, table the next table. The next one. I thought we had the drainage done. It was not. Did not get the blessing at eight. I'll make a motion to table number eight. Bella Mayor Development. Is there a second? A second. Second by Mr. Breland. All those in favor? I I And y'all don't have to do anything further. Dean and then I and then Williams has been withdrawn. Yes. Oh, okay. All right. So, we're on to agenda item number 10. Motion to recommend the Bay St. Louis City Council approve and implement tax increment financing redevelopment plan B St. Louis, Mississippi, 2025 conforms with the comprehensive plan of the city of Bay St. Louis adopted on July 2nd, 2024. Okay. So, B St. Louis City Council is about to one of the recommendations is to have um tax incentives. Um part per the state law, the tax incentive plan needs to be recommended by the planning and zoning to be sent to them so they can go vote on it. Like it's state statute. So the tax what they said was recommended in this comprehensive plan. So, we're here now and say, "Hey, y'all have an issue with this going to the city council for them to say yes or no?" I'll make a motion to recommend. There a second. Second. Second by Mr. Cranky. All those in favor? I I I I I motion passes. Um I always skip the minutes. Motion to approve the minutes of April 16th, 2025. I'll make Go ahead. I'll make a motion. I'll motion by Mr. Cranky. Second by Mr. Breland. All those in favor? I I I I I

uh last agenda item is a motion to adjourn the meeting on May 14th, 2025. Make a motion. Motion by Mr. Frankie. Is there a second? Uh second by Mr. Hijy. All those in favor? I I I I thank you. Meeting a journ. Thank