Planning Board - Regular Meeting

December 8th panel city planning board meeting  is now in order. Please take role. Board member   Stamps here. Board member Barker here. Board  member Rich here. Chairman Dubauer here. Are   there any changes or deletions to the agenda? Uh  Mr. Chairman, I'd like to recommend that the board   uh table the item 6B concerning the yacht major  development approval for the yach club. Um item   6B was noticed as a major development. Notice  was proper. It was posted on the city's website   and on the property in accordance with the land  development code. Uh but this morning staff had   received several comments and request from nearby  property owners. Uh tableabling the item would   uh give us the opportunity to uh facilitate a  meeting between the nearby property owners and the   yach club uh and uh time to address the concerns  raised by those neighbors. I don't know if you   want to talk about it during the actual item, but  I did want to mention that before we got into the   agenda. Slight refinement to that. Okay. Would  be to that that will be the recommendation to   table it. However, individuals are here and so I  believe we believe it'd be appropriate to go ahead   and take evidence and testimony and to hear all  the issues and to get educated. But then we just   wanted you to know at the beginning of the meeting  that our recommendation would be after you,   you know, hear everything that to ultimately table  it till you next year. Right. How about when we   have the uh item on the agenda, will the applicant  just agree to table and we'll go from there? Does   that work? Yeah. Well, you can ask when we get  to that item, obviously, the applicant will will   appear. We'll make a presentation. You can ask the  applicant what what they think about that as far.  

But once again, that's just a recommendation  coming from uh me and Mr. Ford. Okay. Staff.   Sounds good. Address week that item. Okay. So,  no action required at this time. Just a heads   up. Okay. Any other changes or additions? Thank  you. All right. Any announcements or disclosures   by board members? Uh, I spoke to Mr. Wyn earlier  today about a different business topic, but we did   briefly touch on that there was a meeting today.  So, I got a phone call with uh J about. Okay. I'll   disclose that I'm currently the vice commodor of  the St. Ar yach club and as you guys see in your   packet Burk and blue wrote a letter um that allows  yach club members to participate based on their   findings. I received phone call I did not answer  but I'm a member of the yach club. Okay. Thank   you. All right. Approval of the minutes for the  November 10th meeting. Do I have a motion? Motion.   Second. Have a motion. Second. Please take role.  Board member Stamps. Yes. Board member Barker.   Yes. Board member Rich. Yes. Chairman Bower. Yes.  Right. I'll now read the process for uh quasi   judicial proceedings. Step one, public hearing  announce introduction of application by staff.   Step two, exarty communication disclosure by board  members. Step three, identification of applicant   and affected parties that attend to participate  in the hearing. Affected parties that only attend   to make a statement may do so at the public  participation part of the agenda. An affected   party means any person or entity that will suffer  an adverse effect to an interest protected or   furthered by the ELDC including interest related  to health and safety, police and fire protection,   service systems, densities or intensity  development, transportation facilities,   healthcare facilities, equipment or services  and environmental or natural resources.   adverse interest may be shared in common with  other members of the committee at large but   must exceed and agree the general interest in  community good shared by all persons. Now turn  

it over to council for swearing any witnesses.  Um if you have any intent if I'd have planning   commission members come and not come but stand  and be sworn anybody that's here that intends on   speaking on any of the items today will just swear  you all in at once. If for some reason you feel   you would like to speak even though you didn't  stand up and were sworn, that's okay. You just   uh we can swear you in at the time that  you come before the meeting. So, anyone   that intends on presenting evidence or speaking  on any of the items today, if you can stand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the  whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes,   it is. Thank you. Thank you. All  right. We'll again request letter A. Item 6A is case number CPC PLN 20260095. It is a variance is a request to vary from the  side setback regulations established by section   104 36.3 of the unified land development code  establishing the regulations for neighborhood   residential or NR zoning. Uh the subject  parcels located is located at 1013 e 7th court.   Uh essentially uh the applicant would  like to split the two this this lot. Um   so the subject parcel 1013 E7th court uh is  writing is there's there's two structures on   the parcel. So the other structure is 1015  E7th court. So the other one is actually   um dealing with code enforcement issues. So the  goal is to bring the whole site into compliance  

so it can be split in order for it to for the  applicant to make necessary upgrades to the   adjacent structure. Uh so so staff is recommending  uh um approval on this. Essentially the goal is   to bring again the whole site into compliance  but in order to do that they they do need a   variance from the side setback regulation. Thank  you. Any questions from board for staff? Is that   on the east side of the property where the  variance would take place? It would be on the It's an existing setback of one foot. So that  would be the Yes. What? The the west the west   side. Okay. All right. Thank you. And that's  for an existing structure. Yes. All of these,   yes, that's the main issue. They're all  existing. So, uh, they're there, of course,   we're not going to be able to tear it down and  reposition it in order for it to satisfy with   the new neighborhood plan zoning district. So,  in order for it to be split, we can't split it   um and cause more nonconformities. So,  the goal is to have the variance and then   um bring it into compliance to the variance  review process. Okay. Any further questions?   Thank you. Is the applicant here to speak  on this item? Yes. Please come forward,   state your name and address for the record and  whether you've been supported to the record. Cuz Davis McCrae and mainly uh like she stated,   we're trying to split it. We're trying to 10:15  from 1013. And 1013 was built in like 1940. And   uh when we tried to do the split, you  know, that's when they told us it was  

a variance. I guess it's supposed to be like  5t between the property line and it wasn't 5t. Questions for board for the applicant. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Is anybody  else here to speak on this item? Please come forward. State your name and  address and whether you've been sworned. Good afternoon. I'm Shirley Robinson. I am  a neighbor across the street of 40 years. My   question is not so much as what they do with  their land per se. My question is going to   hinge on what will happen to future lands. For  example, military uh owner has a large lot next   to me. So once we allow one property owner  to change its variance and I do understand   there are existing structures on that land but  since Glennwood has been cut and sliced as you   know into many variables so that they can get  new housing my concern of 40ear tenants that   this large structures is next to me with a  variance change can be hacked up and three   or four houses can be put what was truly  been one or two currently on that issue   We have a sewer house or plant on Seventh Court  that is older than I am and I'm in my 70s. So,   I know it doesn't hold what's there already. I'm  concerned about the future. I'm concerned about   what's going to happen to the larger lots with  one owner who now has a variance but can come in   and says, "You let A and B did it, so why can't  we go four lots rather than two lots?" We don't   have the parking the unfortunately the emergency  vehicles because of the width of the street. We've  

almost had houses to burn down one in front of me  because they can't get through to where they need   to be. And I live in that curve on Watson Bio.  And so I've seen it all in 40 years. And what I   haven't seen is the infrastructure change enough  to support that. For example, within the last 10   years, the neighbor across the street could not  bathe and have a washing machine going at one   time because the water pressure itself didn't  support it. However, praise God to the city,   they set a fire hydrant there to mandate that we  get the water pressure that we need. But I lived   there 30 years with with no water pressure per se  in that s. So my concern is not so much as that   I don't want them to do whatever they want to do  with their land but once you open that door that   you can do it then how do you close that door that  they can't do it any other variance would have to   come to this board to be approved but if staff  wants to council wants to add anything to that   to them that's correct so in terms of variances  um there is a process so um if if you have an an   any property owner within 300 100 f feet of  the variance would be notified just like you   were notified here. So that is the process is that  they would have to submit a formal application to   the development services department. Staff would  review it, write a report just like you see here   and that request would have to come before that be  be before this body for consideration. And that's   good to know and I'm glad that's in place. um my  experience with the city, a retiree from the city   as well as been a resident there. It's good to  see familiar faces, but in the blink of an eye,   the whole landscape of who's here in charge  can change. So, I do understand what you're   saying. Any new requests will have to meet with  new requirements. But I'm still concerned about  

the fact that we've got larger lots in Glennwood  that we are attempting to make a neighborhood and   keep a neighborhood that's going to be split up  into pieces where traffic, emergency vehicles,   low water pressure, sewer availability, all  of these things are still in existence even   though we are building house after house and I  can provide some additional insight. So, not to   go too too far into the weeds, but what what you  are referring to and what you're getting into is   um really development review. And so, when you  have these proposed developments, when people want   to subdivide land, and people do have the right  of course to submit to request that, they do have   to go through a process. So this is one aspect  of a of development review is is a variance but   they also have to receive uh they have to receive  approval for that for that development and in that   review staff has to review for water for sewer  for traffic. So if we're talking about dividing up   land and uh whether it be two, three, four lots,  what whatever the case may may be, all of that   information has to be taken into consideration  during the review process. Particularly if you're   talking about a larger lot, they they'll they'll  obviously want to carve it out into more pieces.   So um just remember the more lots that you are  requesting there there are standards for review   that that have to be met per per our code in  this city. So um but again if if you want to   reach out or learn more about it we're here and  we're available to provide additional insight   but there is a process for development review  regarding subdivision of land. Okay. Thank you.  

And I have reached out and I have attended the the  development meeting. So, it is good and I'm glad   you have that. And I'm just going to presume that  from what all we've discussed, you're basically   saying each case, each each request is going to  have to have a new set of eyes or at least the   same set of eyes to govern it by the laws that's  on the books. Now, correct. So, it is a case-byase   b basis because not all lots are the same and  not all locations are the same. So each each each   request will have to be reviewed based on what  they're asking for and um the amount of lots that   they're asking for as well. So all of that has to  be considered. Well, I and I thank you for that. I   I know it doesn't resolve I mean my concerns and  only the time will tell that. But we're going to   be hopeful that as the future progresses that we  don't have the uh community per se start looking   like just basically quickly develop homes in  very small lots. But thank you. Absolutely.   Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else here to  speak on this item additional questions? We have   to record this. So if you there's anything else  you want to say, please come to the microphone. Could you restate your name and address for  the record? My name Name and address for the   record. Um, Pazetta Davis McCrae, but I do  not live in Panama City. So, Oh, it doesn't   matter. Address is fine. 6946 Pomelo Drive, West  Hills, California. Thank you. Um, so I just wanted   to know whether or not it was any additional  questions for me because on the lot right now   it's already two buildings here. So we would  not be addition. Thank you. Great. Thank you.   Does anyone else here to speak on this? Seeing  none, do I have a motion? Uh motion to approve.  

Second. Motion to second. Please take role. Board  member Stamps. Yes. Board member Barker. Yes.   Board member Rich. Yes. Chairman Newower. Yes.  Motion passes 40. Thank you. Request letter B. Item B is case number CPC PLN 2026176. The  application is a major development. The request   is under the provision that any development  activity that is not subject to less than minor   or minor development review. Must request major  development approval. The owner of the property   is St. Andrew Bay Yach Club. The applicant is  Robert Carroll and the address of the parcel is   218 Bunkers Cove Road. Thank you. So, staff and  council has recommended we table this um item to   the next meeting. Uh is the applicant here? We  I feel like we need to hear from the applicant   to confirm that. Yeah. Well, let's see if it's  Yeah. And our recommendation was to hear any any   evidence or testimony. I don't know if I need to  wait for y'all to swear me in again or not. Oh,   you've been sworn I was sworn in. I didn't know if  I if you've been sworn in once. Well, again, good   afternoon everybody. My name is Michael Wyn. I'm  appearing here uh before you all in my capacity   as commodor of the St. Andrews Bay Yach Club. Uh  as was indicated uh previously by Mr. Zimmerman   and by Mr. Fuller. Uh we became aware today uh  that there were some welltaken concerns which   have been raised uh regarding portions of this  proceeding. um in the best interest of I believe   the yacht club of time and efficiency and uh for  making sure that this is handled appropriately   internally with within the yach club as well. I  do believe that it's important uh to uh accept   the profer of continuence as made by Mr. Fuller.  Again, we do not oppose uh the motion to continue   that I believe was presented to you all by a third  party council today. And I think what would be in  

the best interest of everyone uh would be for  this to be continued to a later hearing perhaps   in January. Um from a practical standpoint when  we became aware of this issue we reached out to   as many parties as we could to notify them that it  was our intention to not oppose the continuence.   As such uh Mr. Robert Carroll uh was told that  he did not need to appear here today. Uh I have a   promise to my engineering friends. I practice law.  I don't practice engineering and I asked them to   do the same. So, I'm not in a position to discuss  with you all the nuances of uh the plans that have   been put forth by Mr. Carol. I think everybody  would be best served if we allowed this hearing to   be continued until a later date. Thank you. If you  want me to say anything else at this point or not, do we need to I mean, if we're just continuing,   do we really want to I mean, we have public  participation part of the agenda. Yeah,   there is public participation part of the agenda.  Um but I think you heard the applicant uh accept   the recommendation and would prefer to present  their with their engineer and their experts   uh at at the continued hearing rather than right  now. Uh there are individuals here. There is a   public participation. But uh hopefully  everyone would understand that this is   uh the the body of this case if you vote  to continue it will be picked back up,   renoticed and and off at a later time. Mhm. And we  would like to for the city to facilitate a meeting   between the applicant and and the interested  neighbors during that during that time. Right. Do I have a motion to continue on this?  If I may briefly address the um city plane board   simply on behalf of the amount of time that  you wish to Sorry. Could you please set your   name and address for the record? Sure. Meredith  Bush, uh, council for Harvey Hollingsworth. Uh,  

my address is 314 South Balin Street, Pensacola,  Florida, 32502. Um, so we filed the a written   motion to continue along with several other uh,  pleadings and a memorandum. We would agree and   appreciate the fact that the yach club is willing  to continue and that the city wants to facilitate   uh, discussions. Our motion requested a minimum  of 60 days for the delay. Um given the holidays,   given the need for meetings, given the fact  that we've also filed a public records request   um and need time to review the documents  which have it was all submitted today,   so those have not yet been provided.  We would ask for the February date. I think we need to yield to uh  the applicant on that question. Good afternoon. My name is Douglas Sale  316 Buckers Cove Road and I rise today as a   merely a neighbor and also a member of  the yach club. I did not stand to be   sworn because I don't intend to present  any evidence today. What I do intend to   do is follow up on something Mr. Fuller said  about giving an opportunity for the club to   reach an agreement with these neighbors.  Gentlemen, that's not going to happen.   And I rise now to tell you that this is  an opportunity. We have an opportunity   here with competent council representing  Mr. Hollingsworth who is a knowledgeable   businessman and competent board members at the  yach club to take their positions and have the   final decision of what has been grandfathered at  that yacht club and what is allowable under the   special historical non-conforming conditions.  These folks need a referee. And unhappily,  

you folks are that referee. And you're  looking at a real honest to God adversarial hearing, quai judicial hearing, like a court.  It could go on for hours and hours and hours.   And so my plea to you as someone who has been  involved in this issue for over 20 years,   who wrote the nonconforming historical language,  my plea to you is to consider this board asking   the city to appoint a special magistrate  to hear this case between knowledgeable   lawyers and real fact witnesses and make you  a recommend. commendation. So you five, four,   ultimately five will not have to sit here and try  to make a decision that in the end only a judge   can make. I fear that if you make the decision  based on whatever that we'll end up in front of   a judge and it'll be two years from now before we  have a decision. Now that's why I rose. Point one.   Point two, in case you don't have a magistrate and  you decide to take this on yourselves, then I must   ask each of you again to revisit your disclosures.  In my humble opinion, it is not sufficient to   merely disclose that you were contacted. I I  ask you to disclose who contacted you and what   they said. The reason I do that is I have only  glanced through the papers filed with you today,   but I'm impressed that Mr. Hollingsworth has hired  knowledgeable, well-versed counsel who is going to  

be able to help us reach a solution of this if  we have not a mediator but a uh a someone who   can hear this case and give you a report. So I I  don't want at the end of the day for further delay   to be occasioned by very competent but aggressive  counsel. And I don't know how aggressive she is.   I just met her. But very very aggressive.  She says I would expect a very aggressive   counsel to say that. I don't want her to throw  this whole thing into a cocked hat because you   didn't say who talked to you and what they told  you. You see, as the story goes, if someone said   if you have a petition before you, but it's over  an environmental issue, and the the uh the the   applicant says it it it's it's just an osprey,  but in fact, it's a bald eagle, and someone   calls up and tells you it's not a bald eagle,  it's an osprey. You got to say who called you,   and you got to say what they said, or otherwise  the other side can't figure out how they're   supposed to respond to it. And that's just the  way it is. And I know that's a pain in the rear,   but in a tough tough case where there's going to  be an argument. Anyway, you need to disclose it   and I ask you to please do that so we don't have  a deficiency in this record starting at day one.   Thank you. Applicant like to address the Thank  you. Thank you. Um I under the circumstances uh   let me I guess kind of echo two points. Um, one,  um, to Doug's, uh, Mr. Sales, uh, contention about   having, uh, the city appoint a special master,  again, I I think that's well taken. Um, I believe,   uh, as those familiar with the situation, uh, know  there is one man who has been retained by the city   previously, uh, who carried a lot of that load, a  man by the name of Mr. David Thorriak. Um, I would   recommend and ask that the the planning board  and the city consider re-engaging Mr. theory act  

uh to finish the job that started in 2018 and 2019  um to the contention of council uh that we may   need 60 days. I I understand that I don't want uh  it has never been the intention of the yacht club   or of its board uh to rush this process to try and  do anything with less than disclosure. We want to   be good neighbors. We want to be a great member of  this community and that comes through transparency   and open dialogue. And so if the if the request  is for 60 days in order to be able to do that   efficiently, I I don't see any reason in fighting  for 30 days over whether or not we're going to add   an additional 30 days. Um I I'd prefer to do this  via consent. So if the request is 60 days to be   moved to February, we have no I would have no  objection to that as the applicant. Thank you. One last thing in the colloial in the   colloquialism that I should  have added at the endialism I should have added at the end of this what  I mean by these parties aren't going to ever   agree is they need a referee. If you guys want to  be the referee, okay, but I'd ask you to consider   having somebody else who is well well-versed  in local government land development, land,   land regulations to be the referee. Thank you.  Thank you. All right. We have a request to table   item for 60 days to the February meeting and the  applicant has concurred. Do I have a motion? Is   60 days sufficient? We can always continue.  Yeah. Yeah, I I wonder if we need more. So,   I think we can always continue at that time.  So, okay, this is a little further guidance,   I guess. We've heard a request uh for a special  magistrate. I would like to u look into that and  

then I can bring you back a report in January  as far as a special magistrate and uh we could   because I do believe it would take action by this  uh commission to actually set that up but you'd   need to know who it is, how it works, things  like that. Okay. Um, so that that's that's what   uh so at least 60 days sounds very appropriate.  The one thing I would say in response to that   regarding the magistrate, there's a provision in  Florida statutes uh 70.51 that is an alternative   dispute resolution for land use cases. Um, this  commission, it's my understanding and belief based   on my experience, wouldn't have the authority  to order the parties to engage in that. However,   part of our request in the memorandum expressed  a willingness to engage in that. So, I believe we   very well could, if we can come to an agreement to  do so, um, engage a special magistrate and begin   that process. Um, I don't know that it would  be completed within 60 days, but of course,   we're happy to attend a status conference in 60  days. Um, we'd also be willing to come back in   um, January if the only purpose of January  is to discuss and update on that process.   uh understanding that we would not  be prepared at that time given all   the things previously mentioned to  proceed with a hearing. Thank you. I I will make one other comment. U this has to do with Mr. Sales uh comments as  far as disclosures go. the purpose of giving   a general notice that yes, you have talked to  somebody. There's no obligation to initially   say exactly what was discussed or anything,  but it does put people on notice that there  

were expired communications um also uh and  that there is an opportunity for someone to   inquire further about that. I believe firstly  that it's premature to I don't know that Mr.   sale. He wasn't sworn. So, I don't  know that he's really asking you   u in his in some particular capacity to disclose  exactly who you talked to, what you talked about   um at this time. Obviously, at some appropriate  time, that would that would be that would be done,   but uh I don't know if anyone else out there  is really asking for some further particular   disclosure. So I I would give the advice that  that yes, you gave some general disclosures. I   think everyone knows that. Yes, you have talked  to other people uh about this. People that are   on the board obviously of the yach club have  information about this. At the appropriate time,   I believe the disclosures would come out. This  is not even though this is noticed as a hearing,   I don't believe we're going to have a  full evidentiary hearing of this meeting.   and whether or not you're going to rely on  information that you heard outside this meeting,   you don't know because you haven't heard what the  presentation is. So, that's my take on it. Uh but   of course, if um but I just wanted to be able to  raise Okay, Mr. Sail withdraws his request. Thank   you. All right. Have a do I have a motion to table  the meeting to the February 9th? Uh yes. Yes, sir.   I'd like to make a motion to push a continuence to  uh at least the February meeting for agenda item   B. I'll second that request. A motion second.  Please take vote. Board member Stamps? Yes.   Board member Barker? Yes. Board member Rich? Yes.  Chairman Newower? Yes. Motion passes for zero.  

Thank you. No non- action items. Uh this brings  us to the audience participation portion of our   agenda. Does anyone wish to make any comments  on this? Any items for good of the order? means a