Local Planning Agency - Regular Meeting

Okay, Jim's still on. I'm ready. Our light's still red.

You're We're good. Okay. Super, super. Good morning, everyone. This is a regularly scheduled meeting of the Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency. It is Tuesday, March 10th, 2026, and it's 9:00 a.m. If you would please stand for the pledge of allegiance and the invocation. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I thought that went well. So, um, the invocation this morning is just for us all to keep, um, in our thoughts and prayers the families of the servicemen that are, um, out somewhere in the world, uh, and that they stay safe. Amen. Amen. [clears throat] May I have a motion, please, for the approval of the final agenda? So move. Second. Thank you, Jim and Jim. Is there any objection to that motion? Hearing none, the motion passes unanimously. And now an approval for the uh minutes of February 10th, 2026 or if there are any corrections or additions. I move acceptance. Thank you, Doug.

Second. Thank you, Don. Any objection to the motion? Uh it carries unanimously. Before we go any further, may I have uh a motion to accept the excused absence of Jane Plameumber? So moved. Second. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, any objection to that motion? And uh, just for kicks, could we have a motion to accept Nancy appearing? No, we don't need one. I reject that motion. You reject that? Nay. Nay. [laughter]

All right. First item on the agenda is public comment. If anybody's here to speak about anything that is not a uh a case and uh, seeing no one. All right. That we'll close the public comment. move on to our first hearing which is a special exception sees 202600021 for 7954 Steroile Boulevard a resolution of the Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency approving approving conditions or denying special exception SEZ 202600021 to allow like for-like replacement of an existing 494 square ft deck of which 89 square ft extends into the environmentally critical EC zoning district seawword of the 1978 coastal construction control line the CCCL recorded for the real property located at 7954 Eststerero Boulevard providing for scrier's error severability and an effective date um is there any exparte Jim

no exparte how about you Doug none and Don no exparte Jim none I have none either Madame Chair, may I read the uh the quasi judicial uh announcement? I w I wish you would. I wish you would. Go ahead. Go ahead.

So, a um special exception is quasi judicial in nature and this requires that your public hearing today comply with procedural requirements that have been established in Florida law and in our land development code. Um, your quasi judicial proceeding will be less formal than the proceeding before circuit court, but it will be more formal than the remainder of your meeting. And you will be following basic standards of due process that require certain noticing, the application of the correct standards and decisions that is made on competent substantial evidence um in written or through oral testimony. Your your responsibility today is to evaluate the testimony and the information for this one item and draw a conclusion regarding whether or not the criteria in the land development code or state law as may be applicable has been satisfied. So pure speculation or mere opinion that is not based on competent facts cannot be legally considered by you today in evaluating this agenda item. Testimony by professionals who are qualified as experts in a particular area has been considered competent evidence by Florida courts as well as testimony by neighbors and residents who have fact-based information such as minutes, surveys, engineering reports, or testimony that is based on personal information. If you intend to speak, please keep this in mind. When you come forward, please state your name clearly for the record whether or not you have been sworn in. I do want to remind you that ordinance 25-18 expanded the LPA's authority to approve a life forlike special exception to replace a lawfully or uh permitted structure in the EC zoning district in effect prior to a national natural disaster. And should this be the case, um, a unanimous decision by eligible

voting members today would constitute final agency action subject to a request by anyone for an additional hearing or review of the matter by the town council if the request for an additional hearing is received by the town clerk within 10 days. And for purposes of efficiency, I just want to ask the town clerk, has this item been properly noticed? Yes, it has been. Okay. Does anyone have any conflict of interest that would prohibit them from voting on this one item? Anyone? No. No. No.

Okay. So, it um at this time it would be appropriate to go ahead and uh swear in anyone who is intending to provide testimony today uh just to make our our hearing a little bit more efficient. and I'll defer to the clerk. If you'll raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Okay. All been sworn. So, Madam Chair, I think we're ready for the first item. Thank you, Nancy. The only item. Thank you, Nancy. Um, thank you, Jason. Good morning, LPA. Good morning.

My name is Jason Smallley. I'm with the planning and zoning department for the town. So, as was mentioned uh earlier, as we were reading in this uh this proposal, uh what you have before you is a request for a special exception for a an existing property. Uh this property also uh at 7954 Boulevard also contained a deck, which is the focus of today's special exception request. Uh the structure was originally built in 1977. um staff can validate through LEPA. Um to the best of our understanding, the deck was permitted concurrent with the house and so the 1978 CCCL line which today denotes the separation between the town's EC or beach area and the upland building uh areas. Uh that line effectively was put over the existing structure. um and it therefore put roughly uh [clears throat] roughly 89 square feet into the EC area. The request today is for replacement of the deck, the 494 square ft. Um as part of that plan, staff did uh offer the applicant a administrative variance to deal with the sideyard setback which was uh non-compliant at 6 feet. Unfortunately, uh the code does not allow staff to uh administratively deal with these structures that end up in the EC. And that's what they're here today to request is the rebuild of the like forlike replacement of roughly uh 89 square ft within the EC area. Staff is here for any questions that she may have and the applicant's representative is here as well.

And Jason, the staff recommendation was approval with conditions. I apologize. Yes, the the recommendation was for approval with the three conditions listed. Thank you very much. Any questions for Jason? None. Thank you, Cara. Wonder where our I wonder where our podiums are. I like still downtown. [clears throat] Yeah. Where's your lectern from the events? I Oh, yeah, probably. I like the um I like the table, though. Okay, go ahead, Nancy. Go ahead. Go ahead. Stewart

here. I have been established as an expert in the past. I'm thinking that carries through today. Um I'm here representing the owner at 7954 Steroile Boulevard. It's very simple request and really if you have any questions I'm here to answer them. It's 89 square foot. The rest of the deck is permitted by right. So any questions for Cara? No. Okay. That this is this is like the easiest agenda we've ever had. Wonderful presentation. Okay. Very good. Very thorough. Very thorough. An achievable challenge sometime.

It is good. Yeah. All right. Thank you very much, Cara. Um uh public comment. Would the property owner like to say anything? You're just here to um just just here to be here. You're welcome to say something. If you'd like to let us know who you are. Sure. Uh I'm Tom Matthews. I actually grew up here in Fort Myers Beach. This is my childhood home. And I just want to thank you guys for your time and consideration. It's really appreciative so we can get this back together and I can move my family and have another generation here on the beach. So, thank you guys.

Thank you, Tom. Thank you very much. Okay, the public comment is closed. Any follow-up questions for Jason or Cara? Uh, hearing none. Um, is there a motion to approve the request or deny the request? I make a motion to approve SEZ20262179 54 Eststero Boulevard Estero Boulevard along with three conditions recommended by the staff. I'll second. Thank you Doug. There's a motion to approve and a seconded by Doug. Any discussion on the motion? Your motion. Jim I. Doug I. Don I. Jim

I. And I'm an I. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Administrative agenda. Anything from anyone on the administrative agenda? We'll move on to LPA items and reports. You're welcome, Tom. Good luck. Good luck. Good luck. Um Jim, anything for LPA item reports? Don, anything? Don't think so. How about you, Doug? No, ma'am. Jim. Uh, unless we want to talk about a special meeting next month. You [clears throat] can do it now or under staff.

Uh, I think they'll probably Nancy, you want to talk about a special meeting next month now or would you like to wait until your items? [clears throat] Um, I think I thought that our planning staff were was going to handle that. Is I don't know if Jason Green is present. No, Jason Green is not present. Uh he uh he was going to flying someplace. Um uh Jason Smallley. Yeah. So we'll just hold off on that for a moment. Take any Jason. Okay. And um I just I'm Oh, come on up. You know, I haven't met you, so I I can't call you by name. Oh, well, my name is Georgina Sid and I'm the I'm the assistant uh community development director. Oh, wonderful to meet you, Georgina.

Thank you. Likewise. Very nice. Well, have a seat. Um, I just um I guess Jason is back, but I think the special meeting um I I think we were not ready yet for the special meeting. We don't know when that's going to happen. Uh yes. Sorry. Are we talking about We're talking about a special meeting. So the regularly scheduled meeting is the 14th and I believe a special meeting has been requested for the 21st. [clears throat] That that is what I was uh that's what I was informed this morning. Yes. By email that understanding as well. I I concur with that. That's what I have been told.

So, should we check our schedules? I mean, we J we don't know about Jane. And you know, all of a sudden, I'm missing I I kept looking over here and I'm thinking, oh, John moved John moved up. He's uh we we missed him, but congratulations to him for being appointed. Um, so does anybody have a conflict in May I add one more little thought?

You may or bit of information. So my understanding is that on the 14th that staff would be bringing forward regularly scheduled um LPA items and because of the size and the public interest [clears throat] in um another project which is the outriggers in London Bay that uh the idea of having a separate meeting just to allow enough time for everybody to um particip participate as they wanted to. Uh that's the basis for having this special meeting on the 21st.

Yes. And that and that's a uh that's a multilevel case. So it's an all day adventure. Yeah. Correct. So, I believe that there is and um please correct me if I'm wrong, but the last I heard was that there's a comp plan amendment, a reasonzoning request, a special exception, and possibly also a variance. So, there's like four um land use items that you would be reviewing on that day and and the CPD. [clears throat] Yes. Yes. The the resoning to CPD. Um, so trying to put that on uh an agenda that we have other regularly scheduled items would just be overwhelming.

No, there's there's I mean we've talked about that from the beginning that this would be a special meeting. The question is is everyone available on the 21st. And is that a firm date? I am not. I'm good on the 21st, but Don Sudith is not. We don't know if Jane is or is not. And when are we getting a new LPA member? Does anybody know that? Nancy, do you know? [snorts] I believe the answer. You do? Good. I know. Trying to Yeah. When the cut off. Wait, wait. Nancy, hold on. Nancy, wait, wait, wait. Amy's going to talk. Go ahead, Amy.

Um, yep. The deadline to apply for the vacant seat is March 19th by I think it's like 3:00 in the afternoon. And we will plan on putting that on the first April meeting, which I think is the sixth. Okay. I can't log into my computer. So the 6th and so on the meeting of the 14th we would have a second a a new person. Okay. Okay. All right. So we won't we won't know whether or not that new person will be available [clears throat] on the 21st either. Right. Okay. And as of right now we only have one application. Uh can we public knowledge? Sure.

Yeah. So maybe we could ask I mean that I know who that you all know who that person is. It's Ed Skoonover. So, could we ask Ed if he's by chance available on the 21st, should he be appointed? And then anybody else, let's ask them so we [clears throat] know. Sure. I I I mean, I think that this case needs a full complement of LPA members. And if Don Sudith can't be here, I say we move to a different date. Does do you all agree? I guess. Yeah. Thank you.

Oh, well, you're you're important. Thanks. Well, we are all important, but It would be nice to have everybody here. So, um Jason, maybe you could reach out to the London Bay Group and just advise them that one of our members for sure isn't going to be here. We don't know about Jane. Um and we don't know about the uh the currently. Yes. Who whomever that's going to be and and we're talking about the 21st? These 21st [clears throat] the 14th goes on as normal. And if somebody can't make it, well, we we handle it anyway. Are there any dates in May that the LPA at this point kind of thinks that might work?

Hold on. And you guys are you April 28th. April 28th looks good. Well, we still have the same problem. We don't know about Jane or the new member. We don't know that for May either. Yeah, that's true. That's true. Um so, you know, but maybe um May would be a better idea. You know, the only problem about May, here's what's going to happen. Uh, seasonal folks will be gone in May and they'll want to be here for this case. Um, but you know what? That's that's just that happens. So, I

So, if is there a possibility of reversing 14th and the 21st, the all day meeting on the 14th, then push the 14th folks to the 21st? That was my next question. That work? I' I'd have to consult with the with staff and and the management because everybody's got that on their calendar today. So yeah, the only thing is is that I think that there they did not want the 14th for whatever reason. Okay. Correct. That's that's what I am under the understanding of indeed. And that's why they proposed the that versus a month or six weeks may change their priorities too. Could very well. Yeah. Yeah. We will we will let them know that that's the request from LPA. Is it okay with you? I I think the scheduling is just fine for staff. We'll make it happen. Okay.

Okay. So then as a question, are there any tenative dates for review by town council? Should this be approved by the LPA? Are we do we have any restrictions there as far as scheduling Amy? I was kind That doesn't come till July. So they'd have they'd have all of May and all of July to hear it. That's right. Okay. All right. Okay. So, so right now our request is going to be that they schedule that Londonbased schedules for the 14 and that the 21st is for the cases that were on the 14. Exactly. To reverse it. Great idea. Thanks, Jim.

And uh Okay. Anything else on that? So, my my item and Georgina, you might have some info. So, thank you for being here. Uh I I am hearing and I suspect everyone is getting a lot of questions about the Windham property. What's going to happen? What's not going to happen? Um uh the main concern is they're hearing 269 parking places. That's what I heard yesterday. That was the first I'd heard of that. And I think they're just if there could be some discussion about what the process is so the public has some ease as to, you know, what to expect because they're under the assumption that they're just they're just going to come in and do what they want to do and nobody's going to have any input whatsoever. They're concerned about lighting. They're concerned about trash. They're concerned about sanitary functions.

[clears throat] They're concerned. Most of all, I think the highest concern is if there's 269 parking places that are going to be there, that corridor with Lenel Street intersection is dangerous. And what happens with is there going to be traffic monitoring is what's what's going to happen? And madam chair, if I may add to your your list,

there's also a concern on a basic respect level. That place took forever forever to be taken down and taken care of. So there's a little bit of suspicious concern around anything we're hearing whether or not it's legitimate and timely and appropriate. So I'm sure others share that same thing as we drove by it for three years. Um but the facts need to be the facts and I think that's what you're asking for.

Yep. And it it's just a um the excitement of what that potential could be has now been completely clouded by suspicion and and and more than suspicion. And I'm going to say concern concern about the about the implications of what overflow parking looks like. What happens to those condos if everything isn't properly planned for, you know, are people having uh, you know, four margaritas and then wandering off into the pool that's belongs to the adjacent property. All of these things are huge concerns for not only the adjacent condominium properties, but I think the south end [clears throat] as a whole,

overnight parking, all of that. All of that. And do you have any information? Do you want Which one's the process? [laughter] Yes. But what is the process? What is the process? Because that's what that's what I couldn't answer that question.

Understandable. Okay. So, uh, Jason Smallley again, senior planner with the with the town. Right now, we've had a few applications come in versus this site. Um, the process in general that they've, uh, proposed and the staff understands it to be would be the application of a DA, a development agreement. That ultimately is what they want to get to. The DA, much like a CPD, is going to lay out the rights, the responsibilities. So that would come before us and go before the council.

That is absolutely correct. Uh so the DA ultimately is uh worked with the staff and then is moved up to town manager and then ultimately that DA is presented through LPA to town council. So you will have the ability to speak on and you know investigate uh the DA before it comes in. Now, once the DA has been agreed to, generally there would be some sort of development order. Uh whether that be an LDO or a full-on development order, and that's where we would start planning out the actual layout of the site, where any structures going to be, where's the parking going to be, where the utility is going to be. Now, in the interim, they have asked for a temporary use to begin using the project as they go through the DA and ultimately the DO.

Here in lies the concern, correct? Okay. So, the request at this point for the temporary use is uh has been uh given to staff. Staff has reviewed it and has elevated it up for review. Before they can bring any trailers or any temporary use on site, they would need to get that um that temporary use application approved by the town through the town manager.

Jason, what's temporary? temporary should be for roughly a year to 18 months, but that agreement can be made and brought to you guys if they want to present a phase project. They they can ask for what they want and what they're prepared to do and what their rights and responsibilities are. Ultimately, that would need to be agreed to by the town manager for the temporary use. Now, the temporary use um could entail multiple trailers uh for things like bathrooms, uh ice, pantry, and and bar uses. So, it wouldn't be five full trailers of just food and and drinks, but that would be the

So, they be fully operational. They would be fully operational from the trucks. Yes. Under temporary permit, they're fully operational. Well, they would have the development agreement. sort of after the path. Yeah, exactly.

So, the development agreement would be the long the medium and long-term view of what that site is going to be. And I believe that they've proposed, as I said, a phased uh I believe the number was 5 years to go from essentially the temporary use and then build themselves into a permanent use. So, how is there any this goes [clears throat] back to my my original comment? How's there any interaction um with those of us that will have opinions on the DA DA at some point about all the conditions that the peers are talking about what's temporary, fully functioning as temporary versus a a reduced footprint, a consolidated offering, something that puts the pain on if it was all built out, we could do better and do more. Otherwise, the incentive dissipates very quickly as to move forward with the DA and get an extension of temporary and it goes on and on. It's why started with the suspicion on the site and the way it's handled this point in the first place. So, how how do any of us have any input on the temporary approval status?

So, I think the temporary status is something that's done internally. That's what the town council through the ordinance has passed and has given the the responsibility to the town manager. So, I don't think that I can step in and and speak for the town manager as far as what his decision-m is, whether he's going to grant what they've asked for, but I think your question is a larger one of how how can the community trust something they didn't have input on the temporary use. Um, I don't think I can answer that. I think that's a ultimately an answer for the town manager, but right now the the long-term and the medium-term project is one that is going to come before everybody and have

that's not what anybody's concerned about. What they're concerned about is tomorrow 269 or however many cars being parked there. Is it beach parking? Is it only parking for the uses that are being temporarily granted? What is it? And and if those things aren't defined, I I mean, I think that's I think that's a real disservice, especially on a parcel that large. Uh it's not only a disservice to the community as a whole, but for sure that South End corridor that I mean, if you've ever tried to make a right or a left turn onto Lenel Street, it's it's a nightmare and this will complicate it dramatically. What what are the conditions for turning down a temporary request? Why are they acceptable

except in extraordinary circumstances which I can't conjure up a platform for this one being that? Why are they acceptable in staff's view? So I can't answer that because staff doesn't make the ultimate determination of whether or not it meets those requirements that um the right to dictate that is higher than us. Um I think the argument here is one of that Windham was recognized as having an active uh restaurant there. They had other amenities and so all as part of a hotel. They were ancillary uses to a hotel.

That is that is absolutely correct. But that's that seems to be what they believe that they can get moving on a short time frame on the temporary use as they plan out the larger long-term buildout of that site. Well, Amy, maybe we're out of our purview. Maybe it's none of our business in official capacity, but um having an interaction with town manager on how we adjudicate these type of things. So, we can understand as we have to explain as Anita is talking about the conditions of criteria under which we let somebody operate as if they have approval under some short-term arrangement which has all the uh possibilities of renewal and extension. We've seen that all over uh from other parts of the town. So just maybe a dialogue in some way shape or form that would help us understand the approach that be taken how we can best advise what we're hearing.

So um I needed to jump in. So in your code there are two sections regarding temporary uses. Um one section talks about like temporary sales for instance like seasonal things um or perhaps a open house uh those type of temporary uses. We also have the temporary placement permits which is what we uh evolved from after Hurricane Ian. And I'm not I have not been involved in this project um or for any review. I haven't been asked. Um so I'm kind of wondering which ordinance um

we are proceeding under as far as vesting that discretionary authority in the town manager. um without really any oversight. It puts a lot of pressure on him because I'm telling you this is going to blow up. It it's really gonna blow up. But aside from that, Nancy, I was under the assumption, maybe I'm wrong because I often am. Uh that the town council had given direction for no more temporary uses to be established. Is that not what happened?

Madam Chair, and and I I agree with [clears throat] you, but again, in your code, there is a distinction Temporary uses and temporary placement. Emergency temporary placement permits. Emergency. Emergency. Temporary placement. What's the emergency? What's the emergency? I got to have a beer, right?

I You know what? I I'm I've mean I've brought something up because it is I'd say it's the number one hot topic right now, especially on the South End. [clears throat] and and and it's a hot topic, not because people don't want an an amenity an an amenity there, but because they're concerned of what exactly it's going to be. And nobody nobody I don't think there's a soul on this island that believes that the word temporary is real because, you know, it's been proven that temporary isn't real. Temporary is what can I get right now and when that expires, can I get it again? And all it does is delay what we hope and what we are working towards the the rebuilding and the renaissance of Fort Myers Beach. It completely delays it because somebody's able to just kind of get by.

Maybe maybe I'm wrong on that. Okay. I recall um a meeting that was held at Diamond Head and I believe that the authority given to the manager was to extend the existing emergency temporary placement permits. And I'll have to go back and look at the minutes to see if there was additional authority to grant the new ones. I don't remember that happening, but I could be wrong. And so I'll go back and check the minutes.

This came up. This came up as well this this past weekend when we were all down in Times Square. I got asked at least 20 times about how we're more they referred to them [clears throat] as trailers being set up in Time Square when we thought that that that temporary nature was ending and we were all moving towards uh [clears throat] the future. But it seems that on on the uh the beachside lots, it's now covered with temporary uses, which again begs the question, how long is that for? And for what purpose and to what end?

And in that case, the temporary use was predicated upon a building being built and plans being submitted which have now been withdrawn. and so will this one be which is exactly the is there a temporary permit that is existing and was there any condition that if the building didn't go forward the temporary use would go away bingo and bingo yeah so Nancy where where does the next conversation happen um just so we can leave both the public informed and us too

um I will follow up and it may end up back at town council I mean town council may be okay with um perhaps expanding whatever prior authority they gave to the town manager. Georgina, do you see what our do you understand what our concerns are? Yes. Okay. Yes, I do. Okay. And we'll we'll research that, Nancy, and get the information back to you.

And if I may rabbit trail for a minute, please Jason, back to you. um you weren't involved directly, but um when we were going through the DA issues before um we we read every single word in that ordinance and um I think Sarah and some others were involved in the last one who went through like this. But the reality of that is there is a presumption by the public and I think the receiving bodies here that that is a negotiated document that has the endorsement of management on behalf of the town when it comes to us.

Theoretically that's both the process the due process and ultimately the the product that it it's attempting to create but that is not entirely accurate and true in each and every case. And that's the reason I [clears throat] want to bring it up to you because I think this needs to be at some point disclosed and I I know it puts well and a lot of other ones in very touchy situation. But the ordinance goes on to say that if negotiations break down, the applicant can come anyway with the DA bring it right forward and represent it without saying anything as a fully negotiated document by they and the town. And I don't see there's a requirement in there to indicate that we we quit negotiating. We're not in agreement with the direction it's going. We the town now. And therefore, the document stands on its own by the applicant, not an endorsement or a full working product of the of the of the town as the ordinance represents. So I just ask you when you get into this whether you've done it before and the others before you, it it needs to be clearly disclosed in my mind where things are in agreement and where things are not because that gap is what we're paid to deal with and whether or not we care to close it or not. And if it isn't represented that way, we get a whole lot of emotion and fact-based representation that may not be true that we're processing. We went through that last time. So, just a word of the Y, especially to the new the new employee we have here. Those things matter to know how much we're aligned and how much we're not. And I think we can deal with that if we know what it is. So, I put that out there for the future.

Okay. So, if I if I may restate that um y'all would like to have an idea about during the negotiations with management what um what was agreed to, what was still not agreed to. So that way if it comes before you as a standalone document, you at least know where they where they haven't agreed to this. I don't know about my fears, but that's what I want because at as a result of it coming, there is a belief that this is a fully negotiated document. That's right. And I don't think that's fair and appropriate and accurate in all cases. It may be, but if we could make sure that's understood, I'd like to have the benefit of this time.

Okay. Thank you. Is there a list of criteria on what is included in a temporary use for a parking lot? I mean, the town itself is getting criticism for the parking lot that they're putting in. And what about drainage? And what about landscaping? And what about striping and and drain um material that's going to be used? [snorts] Is there any criteria that says that what's consistent here is going to be there or is it just if it's temporary it's whatever they throw and whatever is agreed to is fine.

So on the temporary side we would do a development order through that we would look at landscaping and what landscaping needs to be brought back uh into uh conformity to the greatest extent possible because it was already a developed site. We will be talking about lighting. I know that Chad is interested to know what's going on with lighting, but we haven't gotten to that point where we have phototrics. Uh we'll be looking at the storm water as part of the LDO or the DO process. So, these things will be looked at by staff. They will have to provide us actual documentation that they are providing for, for instance, the the minimum storm water uh necessary for what uses they're going to put on there. So now we're talking about both the Windham site and the town hall site.

I have no doubt the town hall site is going to be held to the same standard and requiring that a review uh through the that's the criticism it's receiving right now. Yeah. Well to when it comes across my desk I will review it just like anything else as far as an LDO [clears throat] or a DO. Okay. So there is a criteria and it is consistently applied on any temporary use. That's my intent. Nobody. Nobody has nobody has fear or favor here. That's the intent. Okay. Um, anything else on any of this rat's nest we just stirred up? Thank you very much. Uh, well, you [clears throat] know, I mean,

it's it's important and I think it's part of our job is to I mean, LPA items and reports, we're reporting what we're hearing and it's it this the Windham thing is a huge huge concern. And again, not anything contrary to the the property owners, but there's just there's absolutely no visibility of transactions or what's happening right now. So, I think if nothing else, what maybe people can Well, no, they can't because a temporary use could just be signed off and boom, they could go. That's right.

That's the worry. Um so I would make one caveat here. Until we are provided uh staff are provided with um some sort of documentation that they have a existing special exception to allow for paid parking out there. It's staff's that would have to come to us. Exactly. So to for as much as staff at this early point in the process can try and allay fears out there, the the paid parking itself is going to require a special exception. That's not out of the ordinary for anybody else, the town or any private interest.

So, ostensibly for some of those parking spaces or a great number of them, the special exception would have to come before you and then ultimately go to town council. So, the discussion of how to protect the quality of life of neighbors and the surrounding community. I think that's the due process point for it for the parking issue. For the parking issue in particular. That's good. That's good. Okay. But has some order been issued because they're actually doing underground over there?

Uh I believe they were okayed for doing some site grading, but I don't believe that any construction should have happened yet. They are they have two applications in they have one for the temporary placement and then they've got one for the DA. Uh once the DA process goes through, we would do an development order and at that point we would be start talking about actual utilities, right? You know what? I'm just going to say it. I think these temporary uses are a huge mistake for the town. I really do. And it's it's I I am I am certain beyond certainty that if that was my property, I would want one. But when I'm looking at the scope of the town's rehabilitation and renovation and all those rewords, it just delays us. It delays us so dramatically because it doesn't make anybody push forward, you know. But anyhow,

okay, so um attorney items. Nancy, you have anything? Nancy? Yes. No items today. Thank you. Uh Jason or or Georgina, do you have anything for community development items? I don't think Did we give you enough? [laughter] Welcome. Welcome. That's right. We're glad. So, it begins. [laughter] Um, and items for next month's agenda. Uh, we don't really know because we don't know if we're going to switch or and um, the sooner we could find that out, I guess, the better. And, um, we want to let the public know when. That's exactly right. That's [clears throat] right. So,

we we will let the applicant know of your request for the change in the date. Um, we'll elevate that to them and then hopefully we will have a response ASAP about what they can and can't do because the 21st is out. The 21st is out for London Bay. The 21st is not out for the normal course of events. So, we'll have two meetings potentially in April. That's right. If London Bay chooses the 14th, if they don't, then we only have one meeting. Gotcha. And then we would be looking at May to schedule whenever is the 28th a possibility too. We agree

is the 28th a I don't know but you know without Jane here or without whomever you know without this person it's hard to decide to. So okay um anything from anybody else? Motion to thank you Jim. Uh it is 9:41. Thank you all.