Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the Bay St. Louis planning and zoning meeting of August 13, 2025. We ask that you all please silence all cell phones and electronics at this time. We're going to begin um with a short prayer in the pledge of allegiance in the name of the Father, the Son, 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 towards the right path in the best interest of our city. We ask this in your name. Amen.

I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nation for all. Okay. Um our first um agenda item is going to be a motion to approve the minutes of July 9th, 2025. Is there a motion? I make a motion. Motion by Mr. Breland, second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I I I I.

Motion passes. First application tonight is Breland. Application for variance the zoning ordinance submitted by James and Lisa Breeland. The applicant is requesting a variance of two feet resulting in a three-foot set back to the sideyard and a variance of two feet resulting in a three-foot setback to the rear yard to construct an accessory structure. The property is located at 337 St. John Street, parcel 149E-29-322.002, part 80, Second W, B, St. Louis. The property is zoned R22 family district. Is the applicant here tonight? Yes, sir. Can you come up to the podium and state your name and address and tell us a little bit more about James the need for the variant

tearing down the carport build the pool double carport it's going to look just like the carport back

and yeah guys just for the record um in this this plan was already approved like the documents that is in there the carport and stuff. It was already pro approved by historical for the architectural um look of it. And then I guess I didn't give it as great explanation like administration was reckoning denying but it had more to do with not necessarily hardship. It's probably indicative with the neighborhood because I want to feel like there's one letter that the neighbor next door probably has the same setback on the other side of but it was just more that there's no in our eyes black and white hardship that was not that it's not in line with the neighborhood but

I do have some uh letters to read into the record and then um if any commissioners um have any comments or questions Um, I am writing to express my support for the zoning variance requested by James and Lisa Breland for the property located at 337 St. John's Street, Bay, St. Louis. I'm the owner of the neighboring property at 343 St. John Street and I've been informed about the proposed project. The variance which involves a request from setback of 5T to 2 and 1/2 ft from the property line to allow for garage addition and carport. It has been explained to me and I have the opportunity to review the plans and discuss the project with Mr. and Mrs. Breland. I believe the proposed changes are reasonable and will not ne negatively impact my property or the neighbor's character. I have no objections to the zoning variance and support the Breland's application. And please feel free to contact me if you require further information. Mike Bigs, 343 St. John Street, you will recall that we Dear Jeremy, you will recall that we worked together on the plans for my home addition and renovation project not too long ago. Your help and guidance were greatly appreciated and I'm now reaching out on behalf of my nextdoor neighbors, the Brelands who live at 337 St. John's Street. I'm aware that Jim and Lisa have uh planned some changes that are similar to the project that my wife and I recently completed next door at 335 St. John Street. I have seen the zoning variance request and have discussed the plans that I have necessitated the request. As you know, the variance request involves an adjustment of the standard 5 foot setback to 2 and 1/2 ft. have had the chance to review the plans and know that the project involves the expansion of the garage and carport. Mr. and Mrs. Breland have discussed their plans with us and we are in support of the approval of the zoning variance. My wife and I find the proposed changes to be reasonable and that this will not negatively affect my property or the neighborhood's character. Have no objection to the zoning variance and support the Breland's application. Uh Terry Eptton, 335 St. John Street.

Is this I have a copy of the same letter. Okay. No, the same letter from previously read but signed by Chris Roth, 346 Main Street. Is that correct?

It's a letter in support as well. I think it's the same thing. I'll read it. I'm writing to express my support for the zoning variance request by James and Lisa Breland for the property located at 337 St. John Street. I'm the owner of neighboring property at 346 Main Street and have been informed about the proposed project. The Bland properties directly behind our house at on 346 Main Street are properties back up against each others. The variance which involves a request to adjust the setback of 5T to 2 and 1/2 ft from the property line to allow for a garage addition and carpoint. It has been explained to me and I have had the opportunity to review the plans and discuss the project with Mr. and Mrs. Breland. I believe the proposed changes are reasonable and will not negatively impact my property or the neighborhood's character. The Breland have also have subsurface drainage to ensure drainage to the front of their property. Have no objections to the zoning variance and support the Breland's application. Chris Roth, 346 Main Street. Are there any comments or questions from the commission commissioners? And then I'll open up to the audience if anyone was signed up to speak for it.

I would just like to speak on the record that um my last name is Breland and I do not know Mr. Lisa Breland. I want to state that real quick just in case anything happens here tonight. So, I like the last name, but I'm not we're not can or anything, so just want to get that out. Let's see. Um, Carrie Eton, did you still want to speak? That's Thank you. Um, if there's no more uh questions or comments from the commissioners, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion we accept the application. Motion by Mr. Bridland, second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I

I I. Uh motion passes. Please be present at the next city council meeting, and that's going to be in this room Tuesday, August 19th at 5:30 p.m. Next application is Gloss application for variance to the zoning ordinance submitted by Robert and Lisa Glass. The applicants want to construct a new residence at 2:30 Leonard Avenue. They are requesting a variance of 10 ft resulting in a 15oot step back to the front yard. The property is located at 230 Leonard Avenue, parcel 144n-19-086.0000 13 block 5 Leonard subdivision the property zone R1 single family district the applicant here tonight

and then just before because I talked to applicant this morning whenever he came to apply three months ago this is the the 15t front yard is just to say like that's the most he would need. So, just to remind y'all, if the variance of 10 foot meaning a 15 foot front yard is too extreme for y'all, you can make it less. So, if you want to say, "Hey, 15 foot is we don't want to give you a 15 foot front yard setback. We want to give you 20 foot yard setback." You could make that um recommendation. And then though it's not shown very well in a document, the that's the front yard from the property line. He actually has I think 10 ft from

exactly 13 ft. Okay. From the asphalt this beginning of the asphalt to actually the start of his property line. Can you go ahead and state your name and address for the record? Robert G. And uh I'm not sure what address you want. We got Pennsylvania address or the address we're talking about. So it's the address they're talking about is 230 Leonard Avenue. So the reason you're asking for the variance it's like there's a live oak tree.

Right. That's that's one of reason we purchased. We used to live on Leonard Avenue. We sold it the store behind it. But then we moved to Pennsylvania where I'm from. Well last we p purchased this lot about about two years ago. And uh anyhow, last year after about getting 150 plus inches of snow, my wife said it's time to move back. So So now we're looking to build on on the lot. And we had it, you know, drawn up and everything. And my wife and I went kind of laid it out. And uh we when I laid it out, found out one of the pilings would basically go down to one of the the tree roots that fly. So, and that's that's based on a 25 foot set back from the front,

right? Do you know how far you are you out of the trees drip line or do you know how far away the house would physically be from the trunk of the tree? Oh, I got a drawing. It's probably 30 feet probably from the front. 30 feet. Yeah. The house. So if he puts it back 25 foot, he would probably have to do some decent pruning to one side of it, right? But the biggest though, but the biggest issue is they have like a big stump. And I just don't, you might know a little bit better. If you go drive a piling into the oak tree, live oak tree root system, would it possibly compromise and eventually

Yeah, we want to be at least 20 feet away from the tree to have a good chance. I'm speaking on behalf of Miss Anita because I think she's out of town tonight. No, I No, but I think that was just where one of his pilings of the back's going to go. It is going to go in. You can see the root system. Do you have a picture? We don't have a picture.

That's okay. That's why I'm saying Right.

So, I mean, you're going to try to get to as close to the tree as you can without, you know, without hurting. Yeah. Right. Right. I'm always for saving the the oak trees if you can. 200 years old. Yes. That that's why we're trying to do what we can to save the trees. Right. Um, were there other comments from the commissioners or questions? And all I want to say if I moved it 8 foot, they get like a 17 foot setback, but with a third be like a 30 foot driveway at the end of the street, right? Um, I do have some letters. Um, oh, look, Miss Anita Jeremy,

the live oak registry is in favor of the variance request by the Gluff family. The the lot at 230 Leonard contains a registered live oak tree, AVA, which dates from 1819. This 206 year old tree is one of the older trees in the city and should be protected by granting the variance and by being fenced off during construction. Anita Warner, chair of the live oak registry. Jeremy, I would like to submit email my object objection to this 15oot setback variance. I think the 25 ft should be upheld upon conversing with the neighbor down the street. We feel that this could cause congestion. Value their we value their input on this matter greatly. Best Burden Edmonds. I don't know what his addresses.

He's the house that's right next door to him. His house is like 40 foot back. That's okay. Did he know about the tree situation or Yeah. Yeah. Like he knows about the tree situation. Like it's just his house is 40 foot back. Even if it's 25. Was there anybody signed up to speak? I think there's one on that one. Is there one other letter of objection on that email thread? Another neighborhood.

Oh, yeah. It would be Stewart. Oh, I'm sorry. Part of that email thread is okay. This should absolutely be fault. The house is 15 ft from the property line. So, it will look like there's a bunch of cars parked on the street. Even worse, the stairs come out 15 feet, which we discussed, and it's Cindy Stewart. I do not know where she lives on the street, but obviously it's one of the neighbors. Okay. Um, was there anybody else signed up to speak for against this application? that 15 ft like I said is another 13 ft to the Yeah.

So, actually the stairs are uncovered. They don't count towards Yeah. I think he's going to go see about moving the stairs to the side of the house. So, they come straight off the front. Okay. Like it's dictated here. He's going to put them to the side of the porch so they go back. No other comments or questions? I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Motion to approve by Miss Brown. Is there a second? Second. Second by Mr. Frankie. As all those in favor, I I I I I motion passes. Please be present at the next city council meeting Tuesday, August 19th at 5:30 p.m. And welcome to Bay St. Louis again. Welcome back.

Yeah, it's fine. We have snow here, too. Pardon? We have snow here, too. I know. We You saw that. My wife We saw that last

next application of EMOS EMO Square LLC. Application for special exception to the zoning ordinance submitted by EMO Square LLC. The applicant is requesting a special exception to allow boat storage and warehouse storage on property zone C3 Highway commercial. The property is located at 707 Dunar Avenue, partial 149D-3-29- 003.00. Legal description 277C, First Ward, B St. Louis. The property is zone C3 Highway commercial. The applicant here tonight, you get the history of history.

That's why I said there's a history. Yes, I'm Martin Miller. I live at 113 Ferryway Drive in Pastor Stan, Mississippi. Uh, quick history is we bought this property before Katrina. For the next 10 years, we tried to get Rouses. We almost had them Freds. We've tried everybody. And the problem with the property is that it's very deep. It's four acres. And when you're driving from past Christian towards Waveling, there's no visibility. Just don't just the front acre has visibility. So after trying countless tries, we actually left the building up for years thinking we could reuse it. We missed grants. Anyway, we had to tear it down. We came with a boat storage plan where there's boat storage in the back that was blocked by the apartment complex and retail in the front. About 14,000 square feet of where of retail space. Over the last two years, we've had issues getting pricing down. It's a $3 million project. Um so we so we got the permit. We had the permit. We We paid for half the permit. We had a setback on the south property. Uh Bwood set back.

Yeah. Along where the houses are on whatever Rel Street. Rel No, no, it's the other street. Webster, I think. Yeah, Webster Street.

Webster Street. So, we we had a setback. So, basically, we we got our ducks in a row. We came to the city three months ago. They said, "Everything looks great. Your permit's still on the board. We need you to restamp your plans. we need you to do this, do that, get update a couple things. We updated everything, spent some money. They said, "We need me, we need uh drawings of the buildings." Well, to get the drawings of the buildings, we got to order the building. It's a catch22. So, we ordered the buildings. We submit the final draft of the building plans and then we get a rejection letter and we were collaborate. Like, we were ready to start and the rejection letter was based off the permit being two years old. And so, we were kind of confused because we were told to get all this stuff together and we just spent money. So, we ordered buildings and the whole thing was dead. Um, we had a meeting with the mayor. We kind of tried to figure out how to make this work without getting making it messy. And we basically redrawn the plan and the initial plan was we were going to do the back warehouse and then do the front retail once the back start to generate income. And I think that was an issue with maybe the new administration. They wanted the retail more important than the back. So, we took that into account. We redrew the plans and we're basically saying now instead of doing 14,000 square feet of wareh of uh retail in the front, we're going to do 5,000. We're going to take the best property, which is the front acre, and that'll be retail. And we'll agree to build everything at once versus before we were going to build the back and not build the front. And in return, we're asking for basically the same permit. I mean, the project uh the project is a closed door storage unit. So, they're 50 they're 40 foot units and 50 foot units with a roll down door, right? So the property has high elevation. We only had six inches in water and Katrina um that we built 150 m per hour wind load. So we've gotten I mean we get a million calls a week about this property just people want to use it. So in the new project we can't afford to have all the doors closed. So, it's going to be um a row of it which you've got on your

I think that submitted with Jeremy. Some of the property is going to be open open storage which will kind of be the same thing that's on Longfellow, but you won't see it because the back of that's going to be on the on the uh up against Bella. So, you won't see that. So, it it'll be the same look and then the front will do the retail. So, that's So, we're looking for the same and I think the setback wasn't listed on that which I think is a five foot setback. Yeah, we Yeah. So like this site plan that's here here they still have to come through and there might have be variances that they might need but this is I told them to submit something to give y'all a visual of and the city council like what is going to

and the only reason that setback if I remember right is two years ago but the setback was required because it backed up to a residential yes neighborhood otherwise it would have been zero lot line. Yeah. So yeah whatever Webster Street Those houses are our three multif family residential. The property that we're looking at now and the ones to the storage units to the back and the apartments are highway commercial. It's just you have to follow the setbacks.

Yes. So I think what happened was that that I know they built that storage on Highway 90. Nobody liked it. We have tried for 20 years to make this property work. And we are sheltered by the apartments, so you're not going to really see the the storage units. Um, we're I'm a developer by trade and we build 8 to 10,000 square foot buildings. We're going to lose on the 5,000 square foot build. Like I just worked for a year and a half on a deal in Diamond Head and I was so excited about this project. I was like, it's a slam dunk. It's going to work. And after a year and a half, we had to kill the project because we can't get the rents in these smaller towns. And so that 5,000 foot will be a loss for us. But we want to do what's right. We'll make it work. Um, the back will just have to pay for the front. But but I that's why I can't do 14,000 square feet. It would just um that'd be another $2 half million dollar project and it would just it would be a $6 million project at that point.

So if there's just so I can give you a little what he said is true like we have expect we have the site plan that we got approved two years ago you know we have expirations on it so it expired variances. I think last month we had somebody that we approved their plans, they never started construction, so they just had to come back and ask for the variance again. Um, not uncommon. Uh but the biggest outlier in this and I was when I don't know February February or whatever February of 2020 three or no no what whenever it originally got approved it was by right two or three months later the city council said and he's probably right that we want to kind of have control over many storage facilities so we're going to start making it by rights. So how last time by exception I mean by special exception we're not going against them but

that's kind of where we are. So once we realized that we couldn't building department couldn't issue a permit the way it was we told him to start back at square one but the biggest square one was get get it get get the allow the use allowed first and then we'll go from there. So the two uses that he's asking for is just because the type of his building is boat storage is one category. So we're going to have that one and then mini storage is another one. So those are the two by right by special exceptions that he's asking for. But we're going to kind of shroud those things with the retail.

But like the retail the retail building in the front that on here indicates going to be developed. That's about right. I mean, right. Right. It's a And I think I just told when I met with the mayor, I said, "Look, you I have a list of what I can put there." Like school bus. It's like like there's 18 wheel and I'm like like I'm not going to do that, but like and I I said if you just approve the permit that I still I still think the old permits active. That's a whole another story. But I said if you approve this, you know, it's going there for the rest of the next 50 years. If you don't and I sell the property, somebody can park buses. They can have a bar there. They can have a, you know, a smoke shop. I mean, it's it's a list. It's like a can wood lumber there. It's kind of a crazy list which I think might be getting changed. Um,

but they're a lot worse. There's a lot of u uses I don't think anybody wants to. Any other comments or questions for Mr. Miller from the commissioners? And then is there anyone signed up to speak in the audience for the application?

Okay. And then just for the even and though we have the site plan once again same thing with city council they're going to vote on the use if there's variances that are going to be needed those are going to come back before you say like hey we don't have a problem you doing it but you know that variance we gave you two three years ago figure out a way to make it happen without that's going to be y'all's call city council and then when the site plan comes back you know if it indicated that um it's going to be that front acre that's visible from the highway is going to be retail. If it comes back and he has nothing but storage units all over the same, he's like, "Well, that's not really what we talked about." So, we're rejecting the site plan application for the fact that

so he'd have to come back for any variances. And then after that, he still has to whatever gets decided and approved on, he'd have to come back for the minor site plan review process, too. It's going to be a major site or a major site plan review process, too. So, we're going to see it at least two more times. Yeah. two times or one time depends if you ask for the variance I would ask for a variance and then you'll ask for a site plan so you're not just possibly can well doing it been doing it anyway so at this point this point we already I mean already on the building so at this point it doesn't make any sense and like I always state you know we're just a recommending board I say this every time what we approve or deny it's up to the city council

when I've met with a couple city council members that that are for I mean they want to see it develop Right. They want to see the retail. I mean, it would be not. Yeah. I mean, everybody wants to see retail in the back and it just won't work. I mean, just uh numbers don't work. If you get it, it's going to be retail that you don't want. Right. It'll be like that. There's nobody to speak or nothing. There's nothing else. I'll entertain a motion. I'll move it. Motion by Mr. AG. Is there a second? Second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I I I

uh motion passes. Please be present at the next council meeting and that is August 9, Tuesday, August 19th at 5:30 p.m. Next application is Fit Simmons. Application for special exception to the zoning ordinance submitted by Ryan Fit Simmons. The applicant is requesting a special exception to construct a boat storage facility on property zone C3 Highway commercial. The property is located on the 3,300 block of Longfellow Drive. Legal description part uh get on tumi claim 46-8-14 parcel138G-46-16300. The property is zone C3 Highway commercial. Yes, sir.

Uh Ryan Fitz Simmons. Um we live in Kennor. We have several properties St. Louis area. Um we do not currently own this property. Part of the uh stipulation to purchase the property is if we get approved for the property is not currently owned by me. Uh if it's currently owned by other people, someone else, but this is wanted to go through this process to see if So this is the intention is an open storage. Uh I noticed there's one down the street on Longfellow as well. Um basically same concept as that uh open storage with open gates, not roll down doors, includes space.

I see you included the the flood map um too. That's why it can't be enclosed though probably is because we have to have all correct and the intention was we actually live right off our second home is right off of Central on Bayou Drive East and that new launch was installed few years ago right on Yeah. So there's been a greater need for in that area. Exactly. We were trying to buy the piece of property right next to that way too low. Okay. There are boats on I want to float in the building. Comments or questions from the commissioners?

Anybody in the audience that would like to speak for against the application? motion to approve by Mr. A. Is there a second? Second by Miss Brown. All those in favor? I I I uh motion passes. Please be present at the next city council meeting Tuesday, August 19th at 5:30 p.m. Yes. In this room.

Thank you so much. Next application is Jennings. Application for special exception to the zoning ordinance submitted by Michael and Kathy Jennings. The applicant is requesting a special exception to allow an accessory dwelling on a lot exceeding 15,000 square ft. The property is located at 131 Keller Street, partial 149L-30-2000.00 third board St. Louis, lot 60 ft. property zone R1 single family. Yes, sir.

Yes. Good evening. My name is Ed Wyoff. I'm the architect for the Jennings. They live in Lafayette, Louisiana, but they spend most of their time here as most people would. Um, their home was constructed um by a local contractor, Garcia. Uh, and it has an attached or I'm sorry, a detached garage currently with And we are requesting the garage, if you've been by the property, the garage has a pool installed in front of it. And the desire is to turn the garage into a pool house with a second floor that will have a bump room for they have eight children and multiple grand. So they uh they are looking to have a place for them to stay. So, we're converting the second or adding the second floor onto the existing structure so that there will be a living space adjacent to the pool on the first floor, second floor. So, that is the accessory dwelling uh that we were requesting a special exception for. Also, if you didn't buy the property, you know, rather large lot. is exceeding that 15,000

but actually they multiple lots there the lot that the house is exceeded 15,000 square feet adjacent lot the front yard between the house and the standard lots van practice park okay this is application we're going to convert the existing on this so we're asking yeah there are two things yeah so I just want I was reading those and I was like okay This one's the one we're going to convert what's already existing.

Correct. There's, as I said, there's an existing garage with a couple of garage doors, and we'll talk about that in the next one, but couple of garage doors, and it's full of bikes and surfboards and wave boards and kids stuff. And so, all of that's got to move

in order to make that space a pool house that of course upstairs bunker. So we have to apply for two things. The first one I didn't have any letters for or against. Is anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against the application? I'll entertain a motion.

Motion by Mr. A, second by Mr. Breland. All those in favor? I hurry over there. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you very next. Yes. Now this again, but hold on.

So it's the same property, same part. Um, Jennings application for variance of the zoning ordinance submitted by Michael and Kathy Jennings. The applicant is requesting a variance of two feet resulting in a three-foot setback to the side yard and a variance of 2 feet resulting in a 3-foot setback to the rear yard to construction accessory structure. In addition, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the existing carport to be 3 ft from the new garage instead of the required 5t per section 102.3. F. The property is located at 131 Keller Street, parcel 149 L-30. 2000.0000 third board St. Louis lot 60B the property zone R1 single family

paper. So, um you'll see on the site plan that uh and and we've already discussed that the current garage, which is a secure garage with two garage doors, is turning into a pool house today pool. And so, they're going to need an enclosed space to put all the stuff that came out of the garage that is now becoming a pool. And so um so the plan is showing a new garage, singlestory structure garage, reusing the two existing garage doors from the previous uh and putting this structure at the back part of the property. The uh existing carport, which is just a carport, it's not enclosed. It's not secure. Um the existing carport extends well back the property. Some um 21 ft or so from the rear property line. Now, the the property joged a bit, but um the with the location of the current carport and garage, we're somewhat restricted as to where we can put the new garage. And so in order to get a structure that is garage size, not exactly, it's 18 by 20 28 I think back structure to fit that back in that back property. We are requesting that variance to the side and rear of those additional two feet. That allows me to reuse the garage doors and the sizes of that stuff on that the width of the of the front of the garage. And I might add that they had requested the same variance and were given this variance years ago when they built the house and um they never used it. So expired. So now we're in a position where we can use

it. We've got children with children things expanding. And so this new garage, which is a simple one-story garage, is going to be providing space to put all of the things from the base that come out. So that is the reason for putting back. So I guess there and there's two variance requests in that one motion. I don't know.

Oh yeah, you're right. Actually, there is. Yeah. Okay. So, in order to in order to keep the new garage and the roof line of it from conflicting with the with the roof line of the carport, we need to keep some distance from it. And so, um, the distance of three feet is the minimum amount of space that we need with the overhangs of the roof. And then with the added width that's needed for garage doors, it results in that request of the three foot yard set after the so there's a few things that are working here obviously the fact that we're asking for the first thing and the accessory dwelling forcing the design you're center

yeah yeah it's centered between well so if you're looking at the garage doors the front of the garage

it's centered between the property and the footprint of the car in the back. So that we have that three foot space there. Yeah. And if you project up, obviously there are overhangs to the cardboard that's already there. There's overhang to the new Well, why wouldn't you just just move it all together? Just have it detached from the home. Move what?

Yeah. The the structure that you're wanting to build now, the garage that you're wanting to build now. I mean, because the proper you have plenty of property space there. So, should be. Yeah, it's highlighted. I see.

This is Yeah, in a way. And just for those I mean y can all read the administration's recommendation was the separation between the structures. We didn't have an issue with that at all, the variance that would be there, but we did we did have the denial to recommend the setback variances and it just had more to do with it's a 15 17,000 foot lot and I understand stuff exists there. Um that so but also if the accessory dwelling wasn't they're turning the garage that's the parking out into living space. So, it's almost creating your own hardship of I need places to store stuff, but that but so if y'all want to make two different motions, that might be easier for everybody understand if y'all choose to do one or the other.

It's kind of for them parking in the rear of the house versus trying to park on the street because they don't have any place to park. Yeah. And the and the existing carport makes difficult to use the rest of, you know what I'm saying? Can't You'd have to make an extreme turn to get around the existing carport and that backyard there that's I mean and the concrete and everything's already there. We don't wouldn't want to new concrete on the other side.

Um anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against Yes. Come up to the podium and state your name and address for us. My name is Maryanne Bethnel. I live at 118 Booker Street. My house is on the same property as the Jennings. Kathy Jennings is my sister. And um although Mr. Woff explained so well about what goes where, um I feel that this second garage that's going to be built would make things much simpler than trying to squish everything into the existing garage or that area. So, um I see it every day because I walk past that area.

So, you're for I'm definitely for it. Yes, I'm for Thank you. Thank you. Um if there's no other comments or questions, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve by Mr. Romano. Is there a second? Second by Mr. Brelin. All those in favor? I

can 33. It was 33. Oh, sorry. It was I'm sorry. So, was it not nay? Yay. Nay. Oh, sorry. Okay. It fails. It fails for the lack of maj of of majority. A majority. Uhhuh. Uh but so so it goes to council as a denial. Yes. But it's a three to three. So it's going to be

Let me ask you this. Um the the setbacks that we're asking for on the side and the rear of two feet. If if we were given the sideyard variant but not the rear yard variant, we could keep the width of the structure and still make sense of reusing some of the materials that are coming out of the existing garage just not, you know, not get it too further back. So So is there is that We're just going to take the motion that was passed, but if y'all want to amend something,

not the request, we'll go make sure to put in the packet that afterwards talk to the client and they would say, you know, they're fine with it, but would y'all consider just saying, "Hey, they're going to build it by foot, so only approve if you want to the sideyard before they get to city council." Yeah. No, they can say city council would say, "Hey, right, we're going to give you the sideyard but not the backyard without reason." And also this means that the the distance from one structure to the other, which needs to be five, but we're asking for three, that wasn't approved either. So, yeah, they have to have make sure that's part well or right when you get to

write me a wellcrafted letter and make sure they get All right. Thank you. All right. Um, next application is Elkins. Application for variance of the zoning ordinance submitted by Andrew Elkins. The applicant is requesting a variance of 7 ft resulting in an 18t setback to the front yard to construct a dwelling. The property is located at 1870 Blue Meadow Road, partial 136-1-37-16.004, lot 2, Riverview subdivision phase 2. The property zoned R1 single family.

Mr. before you start because I for I actually just found this out. He or they they applied for a tree protected tree removal because there's a live oak tree on the back of the property and Bay St. Louis denied the request because they said you have to exhaust all options before us letting you cut down a protected live oak tree which is I don't know 10 10 feet from the canal. So that's why he's here asking for it because we told him that we told him no for a tree permit and say you have to go and ask permission to move up your house. If they say no, come ask us again and we might reconsider.

Yeah. And also obviously Andrew El talking about 1870 Blue Meadow Road and he's exactly right. First and foremost, we're not here to try to cut down a tree. We we also respect that as well. Um, and so when I talked with Jeremy and he explained, listen, this is this is the proper route to go go about it, then obviously that's why we're here. I would rather say any we therefore would need to move the house towards the road, which we're almost on the very dead end of. So that is why we're we're asking for the variance. Um I do have some letters to read in. One from Miss Anita. Um the live oak registry is in favor of granting the variance request by Andrew Elkins. The property at 1870 Blue Meadow has a number of live oak trees that make this a very desirable lot on which to build. They provide much needed shade in an area with very few live oaks. They are all the size protected by our ordinance. The trees should be protected during construction by fencing them off. Anita Warner, chair of the Live Oak Registry. We received a postcard regarding a reasonzoning variance request from Andrew Elkins. He is building a home across the street from us. While we live in Baton Rouge, we purchased our home in Bay St. Louis in 2013. We have watched the 12 or more truckloads of dirt being loaded onto the lot across the street, 1870 Blue Meadow Road. Then we watched the grind, the grading, and erection of a small bulkhead. The people managing this lap prep also blocked the drainage on the ditch in the front of the lot causing over a foot of standing water after a recent heavy rain with an open drainage ditch in the front of this small lot already present. I do not see how Mr. Elkins can possibly move the house 7 ft closer to the street. My husband is out of town on a business

trip and we cannot attend the hearing tomorrow. To be more specific specific, we are not in favor of any variance 7 ft making an 18 foot front line to this about to be built home. We are against the variant. Thank you. CZ Heroin 1871 blue. Yeah, it sounds like she's directly across the street. She's not Are you keeping the drainage ditch open? I don't know how that would change things.

Yeah. So, so I went by there again. We live in Hattisburg. This is our second time to have a a place St. Louis. First time we had on North Nassau. We built a house, raised our kids, sold it after mom, dad was cool going down there with mom and dad. And so now we have grandkids and the kids want to come back to Bay. So here we are. So, the contractor I originally started with uh is now no longer doing the project. Um to be honest with you, in my opinion, me being uh in Hattisburg and a pretty tight work schedule, uh we're limited on when we can come down and see the the lot. So, to be honest with you, when some of these issues came about and I did come and see kind of what was going on. I wasn't real happy. So Jeremy about the replacement of the contractor that originally started this project and so now we have a new one that I had vetted pretty well. And so that's kind of why we're I'm here the contractor here because I've decided this thing is not going the direction that we wanted to go in and I want to see to it that we we have neighbors that are glad we're there instead of mad we're there. So,

no, I appreciate you're proactive about it and maybe if you see Miss Susie, just let her know that was something that happened with the previous contractor and we're going to be a little more just going forward. Yeah, I guess this is first time I heard about that, but I mean that's a separate issue. That's not what we're meeting about, but No, no, but typically whenever like something like that would happen, if they had a whole building permit, the building department would have called in, put a stop work order and say, "Hey, clean up your stuff before keep going." Because I doubt there's self fencing or anything there right now. Well, there's still there's still fencing there now. It wasn't at the very beginning.

Honestly, I'm I'm a little ashamed of the condition of the lot. Um, so that the prior contractor going to come clean up and get all this stuff out. So again, I wish I could paint a really pretty picture of all this, but it's not. But I'm here now to make sure this thing gets back on track and that again we try to make friends here at the last while we're here. Any other comments or questions? I'll entertain a motion. If not, I'll make a motion. Motion by Mr. Frankie. Is there a second?

Second by Miss Brown. All those in favor? I I motion passes. Please be present. City council meeting Tuesday, August 19th, 5:30 p.m. Thank you.

Next application is Barnett. Application for variance to the zoning ordinance submitted by Lynn Barnett. The applicant is requesting a variance of two feet resulting in a three-foot setback to the sideyard to construct an accessory structure. The property is located at 231 Kerry Court 137R-44-018.001 29 and 30 blocks 2 St. Charles subdivision. The property zone R3 multifamily District Barnett. I live at 231 Terry Court. Um I'd like to just build a carport over the existing driveway. Um I need a two two foot variance get it closer to the house so the the structure can fit between the fence and the house. I have a small metal fence there right now which will be moved. Um there is a registered libo on the west side of the house. U this structure is going to be on the far east side of the house. So it was originally that the reason why it was moved is to protect that oak tree was originally built and I know Miss Anita sent a letter.

Yeah. Yeah. Like the house is in center but it's because whenever did you construct the house or somebody else constructed the house? Whoever originally constructed the house obviously they put the house there because there was a tree there well before the house was there. Yeah. It's about 235. Huge. Yeah. It's a beautiful tree. So, um that's the plan. I talked to Alan Graham. Um he suggested a 10 by 20 to be able to match the existing house. So, that's it.

Um and I do have a letter from Miss Anita. The live oak registry supports the variance requested by Lyn Barnett. The property at 231 Kerry Court contains a registered live oak tree, the BGEOA. Oh, it's got a name that dates back to 1805. Because of the size and location of this magnific magnificent oak, there is only room to build a carport on the far right side of the property. Anita Warner chair live oak. Any other comments or questions from the commissioners? I don't think anyone in the audience has signed up to speak, but anyone who'd like to speak for or against?

Now, the one thing that I don't we don't have plans for this yet, but we'd probably recommend her putting gutters. So whatever if it does get past gutters to make sure the water goes in the gutter system opposed to the neighbor across the street. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Just as long as y'all have a swell between y'all to get get to the street. I'll entertain a motion.

Uh motion to approve by Miss Brown. Is there a second? Second by Mr. AG. All those in favor? I I

motion passes. Please be present at the next city council meeting Tuesday, August 19th at 5:30 p.m. Next application is Bellare development application for minor site plan uh review for a convenience store and filling station with an attached coffee shop submitted by Bellame Development. The property in question is located at 1083 Highway 90 and is identified on the Hancock County land roles as partial number number 137F-2-26-009.0000 legal description part 88 Joo Peak Claim bus uh highway 90 and parcel number 137F-2 2610.00 Legal description part 89 JB claim 26-8-14 the property zone C3 highway commercial district

so this one I guess it came back like January

fire department was fine with it zoning was fine with it building as they looked at it was fine they have been trying to overcome the drainage issues since then um not that possibly the drainage issues were wrong but it wasn't the most right way to do something. So, um, over the last few months, they moved. So, if you go drive by this piece of property, it is higher in the front than it is on the back. So, obviously, you would probably drain to the back to a ditch that's 400 ft. There's there's a house there and stuff like, all right, figure out a way to get it to the M dot M do drainage on Highway 90. And not that they have the calculations in those packet that they have if y'all want to read the 100page engineering report, but they have figured out a way to not impact the neighbors. And they're draining their stuff to the Highway 90 rideway drainage system to not interfere with Bailey's lumber or the neighbor across behind them, Miss Miss Nancy. And then um they already got the approval which was not necessarily requirement but they got the approval from MDOT put it on there in for all the driveways that are going to be cut off Highway 9 or the one but essentially it's a gas station and I don't know if they still do but they have a lease they're leasing out one side of it with a drive as they were going to coffee coffee shop franchise coming for it. So,

oh, so is the recommendation still the table or they Oh, I'm sorry. I did not update it. You know, I meant to go. That was the thing that I was doing today and I forgot to The recommendation is to approve. Okay. Sorry. Um, anybody in the audience with any comments or questions? personally see anything other than the engineer city engineer signing off on the drainage calculation. I'll entertain a motion. I'll move it. Motion by Mr. Ag, second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor?

I motion passes. Okay, I'm going to be recusing myself um from the reigns application. So, Miss Brown is going to take over for us. All right. We won't get a tie, so best of luck.

All right, we have Will Reigns has submitted a request for appeal regarding the denial of a tree removal permit. The property is located at 403 South Mease Avenue and contains a protected live oak. The request is to appeal the administrative denial and seek permission to remove the protected tree from the the subject property. This appeal is required to first be heard and recommended by the planning and zoning commission before proceeding to the Bay St. Louis city council for a final decision. So, and I say we in the packet is they asked to remove a tree because not they and it was just denied. So, though it's not exactly clear, the best we could figure out is they appeal it to y'all first and say this is a public hearing and say, "Hey, uh we think y'all misinterpreted and allow them to remove the trees so they can build the house because whatever else." But this is it's going to go before city council. I thought originally just go into them, but they say have a recommendation from y'all and then they'll take it up.

Hello, Will Reigns. Michael D'Angelo standing in as attorney. Nothing controversial.

So, do you want to tell us a little bit of like the backstory or you know better. Yeah. So we we first saw we bought the little lot. It was abandoned lot of battle of the the title clear. I mean I knew the lot there and then when I read the code and you read the tree ordinances it talks about you know there's some understanding. Okay, we don't really like this, but there's some give and take on if we let you take it down a plan to replace it for you with more trees.

I even exhausted I called Taylor and they said it's going to cost between 75,000 but then you have 20 30% chance of survival like well I was willing to spend 20 30 grand you know when they told me low and then I had multiple architects look at it what we're left with 925 and then have to build a lowerase L

and and so we ran into a host of problems it's you know one if I push a house all the way back to that lot and I have a whole packet it then creates a fire hazard because Let's say if I then there's an old home that they probably firewalls creates a a narrow alley for fire department. Um the uh other other thing is it won't perform good. I even have some pictures of we had postal postal Carolina style plan and I think it was a house at 107 sycamore copy off that you know the best I can and I submitted all that initial application we wrote a letter you know how can we work together and so yeah another another odd thing that occurred like in you know I'll let Mike look

yeah There's a um I guess in the code it says the ordinance that um the should be approved within within seven days of filing and I think it it went over a month five weeks. I don't know if that's anything that you know precludes uh denial but um that's that is one of the one of the things that took place as mitigation or replant But none of that communication I called eight or six I'd much joking with him. I'd much ra Sorry.

Um I mean it seems like this is a little more I guess procedural Jeremy know where to go from here. That's why that's It looked like they didn't really consider the the application, but that's because he wanted us to make it. So, you brought the property knowing that the tree was there, right? We did. Yeah. And but did you know that the tree was going to be an issue when it came to development?

I did not know that. No. I I I saw when I I knew that the city was more I say what's the right word very strict about if it's a big old old oak tree two 300 years old it's got a plaque don't even look at it you know right

you know but this one oh also I don't know if it matters but also what's funny too is in the tree code the tree ordinance, it says that a licensed horiculture for an arborist shall be the tree protection advisor. And then I was told some man named Don Adams is the tree protection advisor and uh I studied him. I looked him up and the man hasn't had a active license in horicultural since 2010. So I'm like who who was the tree adviser?

We never there was a lot of odd things that transpired. Uh I was like there was like black communication. So okay. Anyway, um Did we have anybody that wanted to speak or in the audience that was for against it or any letters? No, we don't. So, and it's the way that this hearing is like we don't send out you don't have to send out those little cards. I don't think we had a Yeah, it wasn't. We didn't even have to post it. Basically, this is just a public hearing. So it's not one that the general public but this is just the body adheres because generally speaking a tree removal is a administrative function.

Another thing too I some I forgot when I was talking to planning zoning a couple times off calls they thought that I also own the lot to the right. I wish I did you know I'd have I'd move the house to the second you know. Uh there's the the the property is properly surveyed. I even have PC stakes markers right next to survey, but you'd have to have an app on your phone. It's it's still overgrown, you know. You'd probably have to have the OnX app or one of those apps to go look at it and walk around and maybe there was some uh you know as what lot I own

the neighbor uh Philip Miki was It was for Nase and he's the house that's on the corner that we had to go do the variance for. That's on the corner of South Nik and Union Street. The one that got knocked out, the one that they removed the house and they're building a new one. They own the piece of property right next door to it that's wooded lot, right? And we're trying to just hopefully put something big, you know, something nicer back there that you know, we have good intentions. We want to make it a second home like a lot of people All right. Is there any uh comments from the commissioners? All right. Let's entertain a motion. I'll make a motion.

To I guess to approve to allow the removal of the tra. Yes. Is there a second? All in favor? I I

four to one. All right. Motion to approve one. So, you'll have a council meeting. It's August the 19th. It's in here and it's at 5:30. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I'm back. Y'all want me to pick that up? And our last agenda item will be a motion to adjourn the meeting of August 13, 2025. Thank you. Is there a motion? I'll make a motion adjourn. Motion by Mr. Frankie. Is there a second? Second by Mr. Romano. All those in favor? I I

Mr. Brilen, did you? Yes. That's not right.