Local Planning Agency - Jan 14, 2026

Thank you for coming out this chilly evening. I did not move down here for this, but I'll be okay. Anyway, the January 14, 2026 meeting of the local planning agency of the city of Dunedin will now come to order. The local planning agency is an advisory board of citizens appointed by the city commission. This board is comprised of volunteers who represent the thoughts and concerns of the community. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to make recommendations to the city commission regarding each item on the agenda. Except for items 1B and 1C, tonight's format will be as follows. I will introduce each item on the agenda, after which the city representative will present information about it. Thereafter, the members of the local planning agency will have an opportunity to ask questions of the city representative. Anyone from the public may come forward. Those from the public wishing to provide comment will need to please approach the lectern, state your name and address, and then utilize the microphone at the speaker's lectern in order for their comments to be recorded. Individual speakers will be limited to three minutes of speaking time, and we kindly request that speakers are respectful of the countdown clock. Citizens speaking on the agenda or during citizen comment shall not engage in loud, boisterous, and or disruptive speech or conduct. Any speaker that has continued inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be requested to relinquish the podium by me. The first item on the agenda is to approve the minutes of the December 10th, 2025 LPA. Are there any corrections, additions, or deletions to the minutes? Hearing none, do I hear a motion to accept the minutes as submitted? I make a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. I second. Thank you. It is removed and seconded to accept the minutes as submitted. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Thank you. While the local planning agency is not a quasi-judicial board and therefore has no final decision-making power, our procedures for quasi-judicial items are structured in a quasi-judicial manner. Those three words always bug me. For the benefit of those who come before it, the commission will be the ultimate quasi-judicial decision-making authority. The next two items on our agenda tonight, which are quasi-judicial in nature, are items 1B and 1C, and the format will be as follows. I will introduce the item after which the city representative will present information about it. Thereafter, the members of the LPA will have an opportunity to ask questions of the city representative. The applicant will present information about the item. Thereafter, the members of the LPA will have the opportunity to ask the applicant questions. Finally, any member from the public may come forward. Those from the public wishing to provide testimony will need to approach the elector and state their name and address and then utilize the microphone in order for their comments to be recorded. Individual speakers will be limited once again to three minutes of speaking time, and we request that you be respectful of the countdown clock. Finally, both the city representative and the applicant will be provided any final comments. Upon conclusion of each public hearing, the LPA will consider the evidence before it and will vote on the agenda item. That voice vote is the rendition of the order of the board, and there will be no written decision issued by the board. Anyone in the audience who wishes to give testimony to these items on the agenda will need to be sworn in by the city clerk. The clerk will now swear in all persons wishing to speak to give testimony to tonight's quasi-judicial items. These are the folks who won't want to give testimony this evening. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do, I do. Thank you. Okay. Application DR-2025-002, request for design review approval for the development of a new project called Main Street Exchange. We've been waiting for this for a long time. Consisting of a three- or four-story mixed-use building comprising an 89-room boutique hotel, marketplace, theater, food hall, restaurant, social establishments, retail spaces, and a parking garage on a 1.78-acre parcel located at 830 Douglas Avenue. Has anyone had any ex-parte communications regarding this item? No. No. Thank you. George? Mr. Chairman, thank you. Members of the board, the committee, LPA, George Keating, on behalf of the Community Development Department. Since this project is in the downtown core area, also seated to my right is my learned colleague, Bob Ironsmith, with the Economic Development Division. And, Mr. Chairman, if it's all right, we're going to quickly go through a PowerPoint, and we'll hit on the land development code provisions of the project. I'll turn it over to Bob. Bob will talk a little bit about the economic development aspect of it. And I know the applicant is here with their team, and they are prepared to present a presentation as well to you all. So, again, thank you to the LPA for this consideration. This is application DR 2025-002, as was noted by the chair. This is a design review approval for Main Street Exchange. The owner is Bill Mazas, who is here, along with the applicant, is Crickor. And I'm not even going to try the last name, I don't think. It's Kazarjian, I believe. The representative is Brian Onks. The street address is 830 Douglas Avenue in Dunedin, Florida. As you noted, Mr. Chairman, it's approximately a 1.78-acre site. The land use plan and the zoning plan I'll get into in a little more detail in some slides and some following slides. And the existing use, as most of you know, is a vacant three-story office building and parking area. The aerial that you see on the left-hand side of this first slide kind of shows you where it's located. It's located off of Main Street in Douglas, and to the rear is Monroe Street. So, it does face three public rights-of-way. Very quickly, on the project description, again, the Main Street Exchange will consist of a three- and four-story mixed-use building comprised of 89 boutique hotel rooms, a marketplace, a theater, a food hall, restaurants, social establishments, retail spaces, and a parking garage, as was mentioned. You can see one of the renderings center to the screen there, and then you'll see a street view to the lower left, and then the survey to the upper right. From a land use plan perspective, this acreage is comprised of two separate parcels. The parcel against Main Street, and then the parcel against Monroe Street, and you can see that black line separates those two parcels. It is, however, entirely under one land use designation, and that is the activity center designation. This activity center designation permits up to 30 dwelling units per acre. For temporary lodging, it goes up to 50 units per acre. There is no minimum floor area ratio required under the activity center zoning land use category. And the activity center category does permit a maximum impervious surface ratio of 0.85, and 0.824 is proposed, so it does comply with that impervious surface ratio requirement. From a zoning standpoint, again, it is uniformly zoned under downtown core. I'll show you on the next slide, though, it is split by two different street types, street type A and street type C, and there are some minor distinctions between what can happen in those two categories with regard to height, and I'll get into that in one minute. Again, the height request for the street type C portion of the parcel, I'll defer that to the next slide. There is a step-back requirement that the board is aware of that's required for any project in the downtown core that exceeds two stories in height, so there is a 10-foot step-back requirement, and there are some iterations to that that I'll also speak to very quickly. The hotel rental unit minimum floor area of 300 square feet and maximum floor area of 600 square feet for all 89 rooms do comply with that special requirement in the Land Development Code. This is just a breakdown of that street type that I was mentioning. The street type C is to the rear against Monroe, as you can see in the slide to the right. The difference between that and the street type A from a height perspective is that street type C, you can ask for, with commission approval, a fourth floor up to 43 feet in height, and the applicant is actually requesting that as part of this application. For the type A portion of the parcel, the maximum height is 36 feet, and this plan does comply with both of those height requirements. From a compatibility perspective, I'll spend just a minute on this. The surrounding properties are all zoned downtown core. It's consistent with what this particular site is zoned at. A three-story, 40-foot-height vacant office building currently exists on the property. The existing development in the surrounding urban downtown activity area is a varied mix of one- and two-, three-, four-story buildings with a broad range of commercial, residential, and mixed uses. Mixed-use development projects are encouraged in this particular category and in the activity center land use. A mixed-use development with a variety of permitted uses, including a boutique, hotel, marketplace, theater, food hall, and all of the things that are part of this particular ask are encouraged by the downtown core zoning and encouraged through our economic development perspectives. From a design standards standpoint, as you know, each design review must be thoroughly vetted against the design standards that are outlined in the land development code. I'm just going to walk through a couple of them. They are compliant with all of them, but I'll just provide a little bit of detail for each. With respect to the common open space, vertical mixed-use developments are required to provide 50 square feet of common open space per 1,000 square feet of non-residential space. The total square footage for this ask is roughly 117,745 square feet, so at least 5,888 square feet of open space must be provided, and the applicants are providing more than 6,000 square feet. From a parking, loading, and stacking standpoint, off-street parking, loading, and stacking are provided as required along with a public transit pull-off area, so I'm sure the applicant will show you a little bit of that in their presentation as well. So they did provide for a transit pull-off area, and they have provided for bicycle and golf cart amenities distributed throughout the site, and you'll see that as part of their site plan. From an off-street parking requirement, to satisfy the off-street parking requirements, the Main Street Exchange Project plans to operate a valet parking service between the ground floor parking area and a new 318-space parking garage that is to be built about 700 feet north of this project area, and just south of Skinner at 968 Douglas Avenue. So 125 spaces in the new parking garage will be dedicated to the valet parking operation, which is 36, which will ultimately result in a 36-space surplus for the project. Applicant has indicated that a significant number of employees working at the Main Street Exchange will be required to park at the off-site garage to free up parking for hotel guests and customers. So as part of this, there is what's called a reciprocal or a revocable parking agreement, and that is part of your package, and it's part of what will be the recommendation going forward to the City Commission, which ties these two buildings together. From an architectural style standpoint, the applicant has opted to utilize an alternative architectural style, where they have basically, and I'm sure they'll talk a lot more about it in their presentation, but they've basically married a number of different styles to create the style that you see in the renderings, and that are part of your backup in Exhibit I. From a sustainability perspective, the pre-development score of 122 points was obtained, and only 100 is required, so we're comfortable that they will meet that sustainability matrix provision. From a public art perspective, as the board knows, any project requires 0.5% of the total project cost to be dedicated to public art. In this case, the applicant has at least initially indicated that that art will be placed on-site as opposed to a payment into the public art fund. I wanted to hit quickly on the citizen participation plan. Although one's not required here, I want to compliment the developer for really getting out there into the public and getting this project widely considered by a number of different groups, and Bob will talk a little bit about some of the participation they had at the CRA meetings, the Chamber of Commerce, and some other folks. So they have been out there, and they have really responded to all of the comments that they've received to this point, and particularly to the staff comments. From a traffic impact analysis standpoint, this project, there is a chart in your staffing where it talks about the daily trips, and it looks at the net difference between the existing site and then what the proposal will be. That net difference is about 3,659 trips, with 567 of those trips being AMP and peak trips. Because this development project generates more than 300 peak trips, we did have to do a peer review, and we do have our peer review. Jerry Davkowski is in the audience, and he is the one that performed the peer review on behalf of the city, so if you have questions regarding that peer review, happy to bring him up as well. Although I don't think he really wants to come up as well. We'll make him if he has to. So that's really it. That kind of hits the design standard evaluation. Again, a little bit on the traffic and parking. I kind of just went over it, but I wanted to show you a picture of that parking garage that they're planning up the street. The valet parking, as I mentioned, is proposed to the parking garage that is owned by the applicant, and then the city commission, as I mentioned, will, through a revocable parking agreement, then tie that to the project site. Additional multimodal inclusions for the project overall have been included, including some deeper sidewalks. Again, transit, bicycle, and golf cart amenities. Some additional detail that was offered by the applicant, and I believe it's in Exhibit I. Some of that detail are a compatibility statement and exhibits showing the height and mass of the surrounding structures. Some of those bicycle and golf cart provisions and amenities to be included in the project. They also provided some commitments or responses related to undergrounding of utilities. They provided some estimates on delivery vehicle sizes, types, and frequency of deliveries. There are narratives for justification to go to the commission and ask for that fourth story, for that type C street portion towards Monroe, and a waiver of the passageway requirements. Justification for the, they are also requesting, I wouldn't say a waiver to the 10-foot setback, but a modification, because in some places they do step back, but in other places they've architecturally configured it to eliminate that canyon effect. So they are asking for a 10-foot setback waiver, but that narrative and justification is in the, is in your backup with no objection from staff. They also included some amenities, which will be open to the public versus hotel guests only, and they also provided a fiscal impact memorandum. As I mentioned, they have been to the design review committee, as is required for design review application approvals. They have been to the architectural review committee on multiple occasions and have really responded to everything that the architectural review committee has asked of them. So, from a staff determination perspective, staff finds that application DR 2025-0002 for design review is consistent with the applicable review criteria for the approval subject to the following conditions, and those are standard conditions. The applicant developer is responsible for meeting the minimum criteria of the land development code and for acquiring all other jurisdictional permits and approvals. Two, construction plans shall be consistent with the approved design review plans and drawings. Three, city commission approved of the revocable parking requirement agreement is for the valet parking operation as a means of satisfying the off-street parking requirement. And four, design review approval shall expire in 12 months, if not, if the project doesn't break ground in that time. So, with that, board, I'm going to ask Bob to make a few comments, and then we're happy to answer any questions you might have. Okay, thank you, George. Bob Pop, Iron Smith, Economic Development, Downtown Development Director. Just a few thoughts. This is a really significant project for downtown. There are some great projects that we've had recently in our downtown. One is Victoria Place. One is the Artisan. I call them signature redevelopment initiatives. This is another signature project. This is one that there have been past developments that we wanted to get going. Didn't quite happen on this project for a number of reasons. This one kind of checks all the right boxes for us. It has gone before CRE Advisory a couple times and received their approval unanimously for it. When we look at this project, not only just from the regulatory perspective, but as far as what other boxes does it check, a hotel is very attractive in a downtown environment. It's what we call a captive market. Those 89 hotel guests, guess what? They're going to the restaurants. They're going to the cafes. They're going to the stores. They're going to the retail. They actually help preserve the small-town feel because otherwise what you're going to see is just a lot of restaurants, a lot of different breweries, nothing wrong with them. But you want to have a balance. In order to make some of the other retail stores very successful, like the bookstore and some others, you want to have that captive market. The hotel kind of provides that. The other thing is the food hall with the culinary kiosk. That's a different experience, which really attracts a lot of people and is very, very interesting. The developer here, Bill Mazas, and his team have really put together a very interesting project, something that we definitely support. It just is something which is an activity engine for us. You have to remember this has been kind of a sort of a dead zone. Nothing has happened on this property for as long as, geez, I've been here almost 30, well, 30 years, and I can remember just Ocean Optics. There was an office in here. After that, it's been dormant for a long period of time. This is what we call adaptive reuse, changing the size, nature of it. Making something that is interesting for the downtown, something that people want to go to. Again, a signature project like the artisan, like Victoria Place. This is what we feel this is going to be. We like the kind of U-shape of it. It has a kind of open courtyard. It doesn't overpower Main Street, another great feel. The developer has really invested quite a bit and given a lot of thought to it. He's prepared these renderings, but also, as George has mentioned, he purchased the old art incubator on Douglas for parking. He recognized, well, I need to go ahead and provide additional parking for this project. So we're very happy with that, and there's going to be some additional public parking that will be available, too. So we really are very thankful for him doing that. All in all, this is something I think that is long time in the waiting, something I think that will mean a lot for the downtown. And I think it goes to the nature that with the CRA, with the downtown improvements, we've created an environment which is conducive for this type of investment. We've created these capital projects. You know, currently it's the city and the downtown. We're investing over $25 million in the capital projects. Well, this is what we're getting attracted. And there are other development projects that are also looking to come on board downtown. So I think this all ties in very, very nicely. It also takes, really looks at the opportunity for walkability. We want something walkability. Hotel guests will stay here. They can walk east, west, north, south. That's what we want to see. And then having the valet parking just 700 feet away is very good. The other thing that George mentioned to me earlier, which I think is important to note, the previous building that was here was a bank. Deborah probably remembers it. I think it was the first federal or something like that. It was 40, this current building right now is 41 feet tall. This project is going to be 43 feet tall with that step back with that fourth floor. So I think that's also very important, which George just kind of mentioned to me. So I think you're really going to appreciate and like the presentation by the developer and his team. And I'm here and happy to answer any questions. But again, I think this checks all the boxes that we're looking for. LBA, do you have any questions of the staff? Bob, can you go through? We're going to be losing parking space during the demolition of the Ocean Optics property. That's, what, 55 spots? Yeah. And so how's the timeline of the construction of the new ramp, and what will be the gain for the public once that's available? Yeah, we're going to lose about 55, which we currently lease from the developer. They're Ocean Optics. I know those are prime parking spots. We still have some underutilized parking in the Monroe Parking Garage. And, of course, he's going to get his parking garage built first. So there will be another 125 that will be available for the public. We are continuing to move forward with the downtown city public parking lot on Scotland and Douglas. But that's going to take some time. We're probably a year and a half away or so on that one. But I think during the near term, some underutilized parking is still available in the parking garage. And then him building his parking garage will kind of take care of this situation during the demo. So your answer was he's going to build his new parking garage before he builds the other project. Well, I think I'm going to let him speak. He's looking to go forward with building the parking garage, and he's in for a site plan review right now. So he's moving quickly and forward with that. He's sort of demolition to take place. Building this project, I'll let him talk. It's going to take him some time. So I would imagine that he's going to have this parking garage up and running. But there will be a time period where there will be no parking in front of Ocean Optics during this transition. No question about it. And people will have to start to park either in the parking garage or some of the other lots that we have available. So it will be initially people will get a little bit inconvenient. But we saw that with Skinner Boulevard too. And we saw what the end product is when it turns out. Paul? Believe it or not, I have another question. Oh, okay. Construction, for the buildings, will there be pilings going in? Will there be footings? And are there any requirements around construction hours, just given the amount of residents in the vicinity that will be hearing construction noise during the construction? Sure. I'm going to defer to the developer, but George can talk about the business hours because there is a code requirement on that. Yeah. So, I mean, it's our standard noise ordinance. There's some provisions in there for the hours of operation. And you can ask for exceptions from that for, you know, unique situations through the city manager. But, you know, I anticipate they'll follow the noise ordinance. Yeah, we didn't, you know, everything is different construction. It wasn't, we didn't see too much with the artisan, you know, which is a fairly significant project too. I have a question for construction too, George. Will this require any road closures or is it something? I don't know you've been dealing with it. No, I haven't talked about any road closures with this. We're pretty strong. We're going to work in a way that we don't see that kind of disruption. I mean, it's a big project, so I just didn't know if you were going to ask for any road closures. Yeah, no, I think it's a fair question. And with the parking garage, there was talk about a road closure. We actually have said we can't just do a permanent road closure. We need to work something out. So I think that's something that needs to be negotiated and mediated. I do. Did it? Super. Let's hear from the representative, please. Good evening, Mr. Chair, board members, Brian Angst, 625 Court Street, McFarlane, Ferguson, and McMullen. Here on behalf of the applicant, Bill Mazas and Mazas Development, very, very excited to present this project, the Main Street Exchange project, to you, a project that genuinely and uniquely delivers a downtown Dunedin experience and builds on the cultural, social aspects that have been so successful in downtown and in the downtown core over the last several decades. This project was very deliberately and thoughtfully conceived by an all-local development team with decades and decades of experience and the vision of Bill Mazas, who is a lifelong North Pinellas County resident and a longtime business owner and supporter and active in the Dunedin community. His office is actually directly across the street from the construction site, so he will be actively managing it. Next slide, please. You're very familiar with the site. It currently has a 1976-era vacant office building. It's not quite an eyesore, but I'd say it's getting eyesore adjacent. One of the beautiful things about this project and the sister project of the parking garage is that you are eliminating two eyesore sites, the office building at 380 Main Street and the industrial yard at 968 Douglas, which has already been demolished in one fell swoop, in one complimentary project that will instantly revitalize and infuse economic development. And not only that, but just the aesthetic and cultural nature will be improved by both of these projects. So it really is a very special signature project, as Mr. Ironsmith laid out. Here's the site plan. We can come back to this with our experts. We have our civil engineer here, our architect, our traffic engineer, and obviously also the owner, Mr. Mazas. So you can see Main Street is extremely pedestrian-oriented. It has over 14-foot sidewalks, and then it invites you into that theater entrance, which will be a boutique theater. We have the 89-unit boutique hotel. The food hall is seamlessly integrated into the Pinellas Trail. We'll get into the elevations. We actually have videos to show you as well. So I won't belabor the point on the site plan, but if you do have site plan-specific questions, we can always come back to this slide. Here's the south elevation facing Main Street. Next slide, please. This is the north elevation, and then we're going to go to the west elevation and to the east elevation. West elevation is the food hall that is interacting with the Pinellas Trail. And so you can see that there's multiple pedestrian and bicycle-oriented entrances and interaction and interactivity with the trail. Next slide, please. And you can complete this, George, until we get to that. There you go. Perfect. I'm going to ask our architect, Mr. Pantazas, to come up and provide some testimony regarding the architectural design and compatibility of the project. Thank you, John. Good evening, Chair and members of the LPA. My name is John Pantazas, and I'm the architect of record for Main Street Exchange. It's been about close to three years in planning. But as we know, the site sits on a prominent location for Main Street, and it also is adjacent to the Pinellas Trail. Our main focus in this design was to keep the respect of Deneen's character and also bring the downtown core vision that everyone had. Our building does comply with adapted zoning, has already received architectural review committee approval. But since then, we're still refining and still listening to, like, staff comments and community feedback. One of the concerns was, you know, the scale and the massing. Obviously, it's a prominent project, and that would be a concern. But we stepped the building back on Main Street. We provided public plazas. We broke down the facade. That's part of the design concept. We provided multiple architectural expressions with balconies, canopies, and building materials to reduce that massing and maintain a pedestrian-scale experience. While Cooper Johnson styles and the standards are well-suited for smaller buildings, because of this project's mixed use and the size of it, the, you know, it has the retail, it has the food hall, it has the theater, it has the parking deck, it has a rooftop gathering space. It has it all in it. Well, it requires a little bit more flexibility. And so what we did is we took a hybrid of all the styles in that Cooper Johnson thing to kind of create a pattern that would reflect the eclectic downtown fabric. So with that, it breaks down the massing. Most importantly, we've designed this project to activate the street and trail and create public gathering spaces. So we appreciate the city's guidance in this and respectfully your request for support. Thank you. Thank you very much, John. Don't go too far, John. I'll ask him to talk about the architecture for the parking garage as well in a moment, because I do want to fully present on that as well so you can see how this will complement and work together. These are the heights in the surrounding area. You're very familiar with all these properties. The artisan is pretty much right next door. That is a four-story multi-residential condo with retail on the bottom. Several of the properties in the area are either hotels that are three or four stories or multi-family residential projects that are three or four stories. It's important to note the land use is activity center. Activity center is where you want to have your most intensive multi-use projects. You want residential, you want live-work-play in the activity center, and Dunedin has just captured that brilliantly, and this project captures all of it together in one extraordinary multi-use project. The next slide will show some additional height comparisons. Again, this would be facing in the opposite direction from the last slide. Again, we spent a lot of time with the ARC, the Architectural Review Committee, and we're very committed to the compatibility of the height for this project. The maximum height is 43 feet. We'll go through the flexibility requested. You can just skip to where we get to the last bullet point at the bottom there, George. So, as we stated, we're requesting city commission approval of four feet. The city code allows these developments in the downtown core to go to four stories. This isn't a variance request. We're not asking to exceed the code. We're just trying to prove that we've met the conditions to get granted that fourth floor, and we believe that we have. And this is to accommodate the hotel rooms, the rooftop bar, event hall, and those other alternative accessory spaces. The 10-foot step back is above any floor that's two floors or above is required to be set back 10 feet, step back, stepped back 10 feet, unless you receive a waiver. And this site, again, has been architecturally designed with architectural defenestration, extremely interesting building modifications, balconies, different breakup in the architecture, and is incredibly interesting from an architectural perspective. And certainly, we believe, meets that waiver requirement. Next slide, please. This is a short video. This is obviously from the Douglas side going towards Main Street. And then here's the theater entrance on Main Street. And here you'll see the interactivity with the Pinellas Trail, the food hall, the landscaping, and the very generous pedestrian-oriented aspects. So, now we want to talk about the parking garage, which is currently under construction. So, I do want to answer those questions from board members. So, we've demoed the industrial yard. We are going through permitting for the parking garage. We're hopeful to have a groundbreaking for the parking garage in about a month or so. Mr. Mazas' goal is to have the parking garage completed in this year, in 2026. If the City Commission approves the Main Street Exchange Development Review, which is the specific request before the board tonight, it'll take probably around six months to go through building permitting. So, before we could demo that site, and we're going to probably have our second hearing in front of the City Commission in April, because I'm unavailable for the March 18th meeting, by the way. So, I do need to let the staff know that. It's spring break. We'll be out of town with the kids. So, we'll probably have our second hearing for City Commission in April, so that would put you towards the end of summer, early fall for the groundbreaking for Main Street Exchange, which should be just a month or so before the parking garage is ready to be open. Obviously, Mr. Mazas is incentivized to get that parking garage open as quickly as possible, and the plan is to do that as quickly as possible. There are no proposed street closures for construction for either the parking garage or Main Street Exchange. Next slide, please. You can go to the end of the last elevation. I'll ask Mr. Pantazas again to come up and describe the architectural features related to the parking garage. Well, yeah, this is an interesting companion to the project. We're proposing a separate parking structure. The Main Street Exchange does have its own parking structure that's hidden in the middle of the building, but this one will be a separate one, about 700 feet north of the project. It's primarily used for valet and public parking. That's the main part of it. Architecturally, the parking deck is designed with coastal vernacular in mind. That reflects the Dunedin character. Its facade incorporates Bahamas shutters, decorative brackets, horizontal layering, and a mangrove-inspired screening effect to kind of soften the mass, you know, that you typically see for a garage. A light coastal color palette is chosen for this one, white wash brick elements to make the structure feel warm and bring it down to a human scale. So, I think together, this parking deck with the Main Street Exchange is a well-coordinated system and it will be supportive, supporting the downtown activity. I think it's a very vital key to this whole thing that, you know, the growth is happening. So, I really hope you support this. Excellent job, John. Thank you. And excellent work. I mean, the architectural, I hope you all agree with the arc. I mean, the architectural here on this project is very special and it was very, very well thoughtfully designed. Okay. So, I wanted to show you what the parking breakdown is for the specific uses. So, on-site at Main Street Exchange, so we're talking about 380 Main Street, there will be 133 spaces in a structured parking garage, which is basically the Texas Donut. It's the parking in the middle of the building, in the center of the building, with the uses around that. There are 89 valet spaces that will be in the Douglas garage that are required to meet the code minimum of 222 spaces. We're actually going to have 36 valet spaces in excess of that. So, we're going to have a total of 125 valet spaces that are dedicated to this project. So, you'll have 133 spaces in the project itself and you'll have 125 valet spaces. Those valet spaces, plans are to have those available first come first serve on the ground floor. So, it won't be restricted to the hotel. It'll be for whoever's using the Main Street Exchange will be allowed to valet as that need comes with the 133 spaces being occupied. Next slide, please. So, that parking garage, now we're talking about the 968 Douglas parcel. The parking garage itself, the standalone parking garage, has 318 spaces. So, we have 125 of those restricted through the revocable parking agreement to the valet use for Main Street Exchange. That leaves 193 additional parking spaces, which more than makes up for any of the surface parking that's currently on site. And that says city employees. That was a typo that should say it's remaining parking for the public or for employees of local businesses first come first serve. That will be an extra 193 spaces. I think that that is obviously a very, very, very attractive aspect of this project. And the fact that Mr. Mazas was able to get both sites under control and to develop them in a coordinated manner, I think, is an incredibly beneficial aspect of this project. Next slide, please. This is another short video showing the parking garage. That's the Pinellas Trail side. As you know, there's surface parking on that. So, that part of the Pinellas Trail had never been particularly aesthetically pleasing, in my opinion, particularly with the industrial yard that had been there. So, this will definitely be an improvement with the landscaping. There will also be pedestrian and bicycle access to the garage, similar to the Artisan. I'm sure you've all been in that garage. They've done a good job making that garage connected and walkable and also having the bicycle parking. And that's the video. I will ask our traffic engineer, Jane Caldera, to come up and present on the traffic study. And we'll be wrapping up here shortly. Thank you. Good evening, Chairman and fellow board members. My name is Jane Caldera. I'm a professional engineer, specialized in traffic engineering. I've been practicing traffic engineering in the Tampa Bay area and Pinellas County for about 38 years. And the traffic study that we put together for this project, in coordination with staff, was to look at the traffic impacts of the Main Street Exchange mixed-use development. And at the same time, look at the traffic impacts of the proposed Douglas Street parking center. And specifically, the valet operation between the two. So what you see in front of you here, as you're familiar with the area, the Main Street project is in the lower left. And then the parking structure, approximately 700 feet to the north. And the green dots just represent all the different study intersections that we looked at in the traffic study. Next slide. Thanks, George. So the traffic generation for the Main Street Exchange mixed-use development, we look at both AM and PM peak hours, make sure we've analyzed both conditions. And in this case, the PM peak hour will have the biggest impact on the adjacent roads. And our estimates are about 230 vehicles coming in to the project in the PM peak hour and 192 exiting. And so that's just associated with the project. And then if you go to the next slide. So on top of that, we're going to add the valet traffic. So, you know, if you're coming to the project and it had 100% of the parking on site, you would come in, stay, and leave. But in this case, because roughly 38%, 40% of the parking will be valeted, we're reassigning and kind of double counting those cars. So I wanted to point out that also in the PM peak hour, we're looking at approximately 74 cars coming in, getting valeted, that car being driven up 700 feet, and then as a return, 61 cars. So we have looked at not just the impact of the development, but the additional traffic on Douglas for the back-and-forth valet. So that was accounted for. The next slide kind of just talks about capacity in a pie chart format. Your two adjacent roadways are just two-lane roadways, 15 miles an hour, and I believe it's 25 on Main. And the capacity of those roadways, according to the statistics in Pinellas County, is 750 vehicles in a peak direction. So what this pie chart shows you is in the purple areas, Main Street and Douglas have, you know, roughly 130 trips out there today. Our project would be adding 43 estimated on Main Street and the higher number of 152 on Douglas, because those are where the primary access points are. And what that leaves is between 400 and 500 for each roadway is what we call available capacity or excess capacity. So we will, we're not anywhere close to hitting the limit of the roadway capacity. Next slide, thanks. This is just another slide of really the same information, just shown in more of a bar format, with the green being 750 cars and, and the other colors representing the existing and, and additional traffic from the project in blue. And, and to wrap that up, you know, we, we studied all the intersections. I think there were seven of them in detail. And the roundabouts up on Skinner are working very well. They will continue to work well. They're very well designed to work out. And I think DOT looked at a 30 year horizon for those. So there was very good level of service there. And the other focus location is the signal, right at the intersection of Main and Douglas. It's currently operating at level of service B, as in boy, in the peak hours. And just for those not familiar, the, the level of service on roadways is similar to grading in school. So A is the best and F is not acceptable and you just, you got to improve. So, you know, the level of service B, um, is going to be able to be maintained with the addition of this traffic. So, uh, we don't feel there's going to be any noticeable significant impact on the signalized intersection operation. And I'm available for questions. Thank you. Gene, can I ask a question quick? Yes. I just want to understand the flow a little bit. So the entrance to the exchange, it's a one directional U. So the traffic coming out is going to be a left turn on Douglas and then a left on Monroe. Or if it's capacity, then it's a left up Douglas and left into the ramp. So really all the traffic is going to be on Douglas except for a little bit on Monroe. They're not going to be looping around on Main Street and crossing the trail. So hopefully this really won't increase traffic anywhere at the trail crossings, correct? That's correct. That's why I think you saw on the pie chart where, you know, we're looking at 152 on Douglas, but only 43 on Main. And, and that reflects Main going eastbound, you know, up towards the hospital, um, you know, in both directions. But Douglas will have the, uh, the vast majority of the traffic impacts. Okay. I have a question for you. When did you, what time of year did you do this report? What month? Uh, we, we did the data collection in the summer and it was July. So what, what, what we do though, is we factor those numbers up to peak season conditions as required. It's kind of a standard. So we increased those volumes to represent, uh, the peak season for Pinellas County. Jane, real quickly before the, I think, uh, Benjamin pointed out just how complimentary the traffic that will be egressing from the Main Street Exchange will be able to access the garage on Douglas. Um, can you talk about this concept of standalone parking garages in and of, in and of themselves do not generate trips. People do not come to downtowns to visit a standalone parking garage. The standalone parking garage is what gets the folks who are already coming here for all of the great amenities off the street and into a parking spot. Can you just address that briefly? Sure. Yes. So just to clarify what, uh, Brian said is that the 318 space garage, um, the valet operation, what we've already talked about, but the traffic available to the public, this 193 spaces, their parking space is available. Um, they're not bringing in, they're, they're to supply the existing parking for the existing uses and demand that's already there. So they don't generate new trips only time parking garages would generate new trips. If you have like a, a parking, a park and ride for a rail station or an airport or something of that nature. Thank you. Next slide, please. Uh, this is just showing the revocable parking agreement. I don't have to get into a lot of detail. You've seen it and we've talked about it. Next slide, please. Uh, this is our close to second to last slide. Just wanted to reorient you. We started looking at the site plan. Again, the yellow is what is required for the minimum sidewalk for pedestrian access. The red is what the city requested. They requested seven feet. We have provided what you can see in orange, which is in many places, X in excess of 14 feet. So in terms of setbacks, this is a very compatible project that really, um, leans into the pedestrian oriented nature of downtown Dunedin and will serve the public very well. Next slide, please. And you can go through to the very last conclusion at the bottom. Uh, so therefore, again, uh, we respectfully believe we've provided the competent, substantial evidence necessary, uh, for the waivers, uh, and slight modifications we've requested. Uh, we support the ARC's recommendation, uh, the CRA's recommendation, uh, and the staff recommendation. And we are happy to answer any questions that, uh, uh, you have, and hopefully we'll have your support as well. Thank you. I'm not really sure when I ask these questions. It's architectural. So do I talk to the architect? Yeah. I'll be happy to direct whatever questions. You can ask whoever you want directly, or I can direct the questions, however you'd like to handle it. Okay. Well, um, when I first saw this, and I have deliberately not tried to see it, because I knew I would eventually sit on this board. Um, and I really do appreciate that you took two whole styles, which is New Orleans, French Creole, and the Medref, which I love, and you see a lot of in Miami. What, the thing that bothers me, that I really thought about, is how much, how many pops of color do you need before it begins to take the eye away from the true design, which is a thing of beauty. Because now I'm seeing an orange slice, and I'm seeing this green thing, and I'm seeing pink and blue, and, you know, it distracts the eye. Well, the computer renderings are a little bit more vibrant, um, but it, it would be like a softer wash. I mean, if you currently look through downtown, you do see those colors. No, and I understand exactly what you did, and I looked at downtown, and those are little tiny shops. Tiny. One's green, one's, you know, brick, one's purple, one, and I get it. The, the majority of the building is brick. Okay. The majority of the building is brick. And there's, uh, two different brick types, a light and a dark. Um, when you're dealing with the massing, uh, you want to break it up. You, you, like, if you were to do, uh, a monotone or, or something in that nature, what happens is it becomes, um, I guess, like, uh, uh, an institutional kind of feel. Um, so, so, so you want to create that interest, you know, and, and what we do have is we have balconies. Uh, we have, uh, we have the, uh, the ironwork rails, we have the canopies, and it all has a, a certain play. But we are, you know, still looking at the colors, you know, we are looking at it. Um, the initial response was, uh, when we first were looking at it was, you know, when you do a whole slide presentation of downtown Dunedin, you see the colors everywhere. You know, you do, and, so, it, from the very first concepts, it has been taming downs more and more and more, you know, and, also, some of the more traditional elements are coming into play as we're detailing the project. So, yeah, I mean, I, I do understand that, but I also think that, um, making something monotone or a little bit more serious, it would actually create an institution looking kind of building, I mean, we're not trying to build a, a federal courthouse or a city hall, we're trying to create some activity, you know, and, and create some more. Can I say something? So, I agree with Debra, so, I'm, I'm sorry. Did you finish? Yes. Yeah, okay. So, I agree with her, it's a beautiful building. It's gorgeous. I love the brick, I love the architecture of it. I just totally agree that sometimes less is more, and, when I'm looking at this, I'm, I'm looking at so much, and you're talking about an institution, but the design and the concept, if you take that, just like I said, sometimes less is more. The sides are beautiful, they're simple, they're clean, and then the only thing that I have a hard time with is the front of the building that I'm looking at a theater where, you know, reminds me kind of like Ybor City, you know, where you see this big Ybor thing. That's just my personal opinion. I love the building, I love the two-tone, I love the rooftop, I love the lights. It's very simple, very European, until you start getting in with all the colors and the throw-to. That's just. To let us know, yeah, give us feedback. Yeah, it was just feedback. No, I still have a question. We sort of hopped over. I'm sorry. Oh, sorry. Okay, so here's my question, as an architect, and I get, you know, I've been listening to you, and now you can hear me. I'm a classicist. This is going to have to last way past my lifetime. So how much color becomes kitsch? True. And only you can answer that. True. How much color becomes kitsch? That's a good question. You could ask yourself this one question, you know, when you're looking at this building, does it look like it's multiple styles, or does it look like it's a blend? This looks very clean, and it has color. I thought about that. It has color in the signage, it has a beautiful art piece, and it has lighting. But otherwise, it's really clean. Right. And so, you know, we are looking at toning the colors. Again, you know, in this slide presentations and things like that, the chroma pops out, you know, so it's not really a fair presentation of the color. But as far as, you know, the marquee and the theater, that's a gesture to the Main Street kind of element. You know, when you see the Cooper Johnson guidelines, you see those images in that particular ordinance package. You know, you do see those. Is it the final, final? It's close, but, you know, yeah, things could be toned down. It's not like it's, I mean, by the time we're doing all the details and working it out, it's, but there is an elegance to this project. I do feel that. I do feel like what you were saying, you know, that it's simple, it's clean. It's very beautiful, the MedRab. I just, I just. But without the red canopy, how do you know it's not a cafe? I mean, that's. Well, again, it's, that's something only you can answer. When does color take away from fenestration and become really kitschy? Okay. Board Member Kynes and Board Member Karen, I spoke with Mr. Mazas, and as John said, these are conceptual elevations. The main thing we're trying to convey here is the physical design of the building as opposed to necessarily the colors. So if you would like to recommend as a board that we work with the staff to revise the conceptual elevations to tone down or blend the colors better, that's something we're happy to do. So just let us know. And we're happy to work on that. Thank you. Are there other questions that we have? I do. I've got some ticky tacky type questions. But so we talked about the ramp that hopefully could be done by year end this year, which is phenomenal. The exchange. So if we're looking at about six months before we'd start construction, after the commission approvals, what's the duration of the construction before that may open? And then also, can you tell a little bit about the construction? Again, getting my question, is there going to be pilings, footings? What kind of noise might the neighbors experience during that construction, especially at some of the earlier phases? Good evening, Chair and members of the LPA board. For everybody to know, I'm Bill Mazas with Mazas Development. And to answer your question specifically, the duration, like the project, from the minute we finish the designs, which we're looking at anywhere from six to nine months to get the construction package done, we submit, we go through approvals. I'm sure it'll go back and forth a couple of times. And then after that, I think a two-year construction window is reasonable. In that period of time, what our goals are, are to take the garage. And we're hoping that by end of year, maybe worst case scenario, first quarter of 27, the garage will be completed. So, I think that timing-wise, we're going to try to work with the city because it's really, this has been a project that's taken, you know, multiple years just to get it to where it is today. And we've had, you know, dozens of meetings with city officials, downtown stakeholders, Dunedin Chamber of Commerce. We've listened to everything they've said. We've gone back. We've redesigned. Come back again. And our goal is to try to make it as minimally impactful for the downtown as we can. We understand that we're going to work together with the city. And, you know, when it comes, I've heard, road closures. You know, these are big projects. They're not easy. But we're going to get through it. We're going to figure it out. And we're going to make it work. I'm just trying to understand, what should we expect? We're expecting construction and excited for it. It's just, what will it be like? There will be a thing, thing, thing, driving pilings? No, well, I think that the building is going to be post-tension. So you're not, we don't have piles being driven in the ground, correct, John? Good. Yeah. Good. So post-tension building, of course, the garage is going to be precast. Yep. Correct. So that's a little bit more difficult, more complicated. Big pieces are, you know, being trucked in. So with that, we're going to have to coordinate together with the city and come up with a plan that just works for the businesses and works for everybody. Yeah. Good. Precast is speed of construction. Speed of construction, correct. Correct. If you want that garage up quickly, precast is the... Yeah. Wonderful. And I believe I understood all the utilities are going to be undergrounded, correct? So no pull. Excellent. Will there be a backup generator? And the reason I ask about that is just from a storm resiliency standpoint. We do lose power in the core sometimes during big storms. That's a great facility, one, if it was to maintain power, certainly for the guests, but also as an emergency facility if we were to get hit by a major storm. That's something we're definitely looking at. Okay. Good. I got a question. Is it parking? Is it paid parking or the one on Douglas? The one on Douglas? Yeah, the one you've got. So the way that we're looking at it, parking is a supply and demand thing. We obviously understand that parking is a very sensitive issue in Dunedin, and that's why we've taken it seriously. I believe it's fair to say that, you know, during the week, really it doesn't make sense. When you do have special events, when you do have times when the, you know, the downtown is quite active, we will be looking to charge a fee, but it's going to be something that's going to be affordable. We understand it's a very sensitive issue. We're looking at parking systems to make it very simple. You know, these are systems that, from what I heard previously when Dunedin tried to go parking, it became a big issue with, you know, citizens. They were upset. I think it was more the way that, you know, I heard it was complicated. I heard that, you know, you had to put your license plate number in. We're going to try to make this very painless and very easy. You know, today with the smartphones and the technology, if you're signed up with an app, there's going to be a license plate recognition to where when you're signed up and your car shows up, the gate will actually go up and it'll just, you know, you'll pay right from your phone. But again, the fee, I wouldn't be so fixated on that. We're not a city. We can't just put a, you know, special assessment on something and cover the cost of a garage. We're actually paying for this garage and we need to recover some of its expense. But again, it's going to be a matter of, you know, being sensitive to the city and to the community. Are there other questions? So, you guys stay there because I'm going to come back to you. But George, will there be a development agreement following with this and or, okay, let me stop there and ask that question first. No, no, they've met all the code provisions, so no development agreement is. Okay. And then since the parking garage seems like it's going full speed ahead, obviously it doesn't look like we'll be seeing that at all, specifically just that parcel coming to this LPA. Is that correct? You may see it in the future in the form of a rezoning. So, what's interesting about that particular parcel is it's zoned downtown industrial. It's one of only two in that area. And then actually the adjacent parcel towards Skinner is also zoned downtown industrial. So, I believe, and I don't want to speak for the applicant, but I believe there's an intent to create some retail space at the bottom portion of that garage. And to do that, they'll be looking at rezoning the property from downtown industrial to downtown core. Okay. Well, good. That leads me into my next question because looking at the renderings, it did appear that there was some retail as part of that garage. And it was either going to really mesh in with everything else there because it looks like it'd be faux retail, but that didn't quite make sense to me. So, I was going to ask that question. So, as Mr. Kenney said, right now the zoning is downtown industrial, which allows for parking garages as of right. So, we did not have to go through development review. Of course, we did take it to the arc because we wanted to make sure that we were going to meet the architectural style element for downtown core. Because ultimately, as Mr. Kenney said, the goal will be to put in a little bit of retail on that bottom floor, activate it just like the Artisan has, and that will require a downtown core rezoning. We're not there yet. We want to get the garage up. And so, that retail will not be there when the garage opens, but it'll be a process that we'll be back. So, you'll be back seeing this again for a rezoning at some point. Okay. Good. Thank you. With the soil replacement out there and the, Vivier, how deep will you be going with that? Do you have a feel? This is our civil engineer. Okay. Thank you. What's your project? For the exchange. Creek Orca Sergeant, 13825, Icott Boulevard, Clearwater, Gulf Coast Consulting, engineer on the project. So, for the most part, the main portion that we'll be taking out, excavating, would be for the underground storm vaults. So, there isn't really anything in a geotechnical report or anything that requires any kind of soils replacement or anything at this time. So, the majority would be the foundations, the footers, the underground storm vault. Okay. I thought I read something in there on the four-story part of that, that you were going to have to do some additional work to make sure that the ground could support the four stories. I think that's the area where we're going to do viral replacement. Okay. And then, yeah. And is there a depth to that or? I'm not 100% certain. And usually, though, viral replacement goes 20 feet, 30 feet down. Okay. And are you familiar with viral replacement? I am a bit. And the reason kind of I'm asking to, because, you know, from the actual, as the name sounds, there is vibrations involved in looking at the neighbors around that. But also, not wanting to affect Dunedin's oldest drinking water well, which is only 102 feet away from that. So, it's- Yeah, no. We don't go that low. And it's by far probably the least evasive. It's not that pounding of those, you know, columns. So, I think it's a good recommendation. Great. Thank you. I have a question. Go. Where's my little thing? Um, so, reading the notes, what type of fencing will be around the building and the height? I thought I read something on the bottom that there was fencing that's going to be around the building. Are you talking about for construction or once it's built? I, that was my question. Which project are we talking about? The exchange. No, the exchange has no fencing. No fencing. Okay. Yeah, no fencing. So, there's no fencing whatsoever? Okay, because that's when I was looking at that. But in notes that I was looking at said something about a fence, that it's required, but they haven't decided. Maybe that's during construction? Okay. Then what type of fence is going to be around there for construction? Well, I'm sure it's going to be, it's going to be a construction fence. Okay. It'll be driven in and, you know, one of those nice decorative. It'll be co-compliant, for sure. Okay, I have one more question and then I'm done. Condo hotel. Are you selling only the hotel rooms? No. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Just a couple quick questions. First, on the parking ramp, I notice there's a north and a south entrance. Are those, is it one way or are both of those both ways? Which garage are we talking about? The parking ramp on Douglas, the industrial arts building. Okay. The parking ramp, it's one way. The, so on the, on the south side, that is the actual entrance to the garage that takes you up and it brings you down. The other side is just a, a side access road that puts you behind the building for servicing, you know, trash and all other type of things. And we will have some golf cart parking back there too. Are they going to go in the building when they deliver like deliveries and things like that? So you won't hear like. Correct. Okay. Okay. Okay. And then, um, are we locked and loaded with the county on trail access, landscaping, all that? Well, they obviously would like to have a connection to the trail. We certainly support that. We'll be working with the county. We've been pretty successful in the past to get a, uh, some type of easement from them or ability for right away connection. So that's still in the works. Oh yeah, absolutely. That it folks? No. I have one. If you have noise complaints during construction, will you do noise monitoring or any mitigation? I think the answer is we'll do whatever's required by the city to be code compliant. Okay. Yeah. We're, we're not going to be a problem. So if it takes a little bit of extra noise monitoring or we're going to fully comply with the noise code and, uh, that construction limitation on hours and decibels and whatever else is in the code. Okay. I think Brian would say his office is going to be right there. Right. Bill's office is right next door. So he will, he will be able to find him. Yeah. Right. Exactly. As much as anyone. Thank you. Um, Bob George, may this question is for you. Um, there's, um, either one or two little islands in Douglas there as you come up on, on main street. Are those staying or are those going away? Uh, the one island that's right at the intersection on Douglas will stay. The other one will go away to make room for his, uh, for the bus pull off and also for his parking garage. Okay. Thank you. Um, and then, um, Jane, um, just a couple questions on, on the traffic and, on traffic analysis. And then I guess maybe stacking too with, especially with, uh, the valet and so just the normal number of cars coming down Douglas and then the valet going back and forth. Is there going to be any kind of, or do you foresee any kind of stacking issues with trying to get out of the, the parking garage on site or where they're going to be picking up the, the valets are going to be picking up the cars and then getting them back up north again with the cars that are stacking up to try to go through the intersection at main street. So that is one of the things we looked at in the capacity analysis. So the queuing or stacking from the traffic signal, um, I believe the, the numbers in the current version of the traffic study, it's about 115 feet. So it won't reach the, um, location of what would be the outbound driveway from the, the valet pull through. Um, you know, that is the 95th percentile queue on the average queue. It's, it's usually, it's about 60% of that. Um, so we don't see that there is going to be a, the stacking from the signal interfering with the in and out from the valet. Underneath itself when they go in, we've got a lot of width in there to be able to stage cars, you know, they unload, they, you know, so we've got a lot of room to hold cars underneath before they exit and go up, you know, 800, 700, 800 feet north. So we don't anticipate the valet interfering, valet operation interfering with the traffic signal. Thank you. And then, so some of what I was reading in there and from either your report, or ISIS, uh, a report, um, one of them talked about, uh, uh, the current traffic being, um, 2,850 vehicles a day. And then, uh, another part talked about 3,659 trips and, and it's not like for like and it just seems, or I guess it was additional trips. So to me that kind of caught my eye as just a big number. I don't know if that's a big number to be afraid of. A daily number always seems very big. So, you know, I think what was reported in the ICE analysis, I did a recent count and there was somewhere around 2,800 average daily trips and that's both directions on Main Street. Um, our development itself is in the 3,600 range both. Now that will split between Douglas and Main Street with more on Douglas. But the capacity, daily capacity of Main Street is, uh, 14,800. So we'll put those two together in whole and be conservative. We're five or 6,000. We're not even half of the 14,000, which is the daily capacity of a roadway. And we don't really analyze daily a lot because it's kind of, you can't really, you can look at generalizations and things, but you can't fine tune operations on a daily basis. But I think you interpreted that right and it'll be well below the daily capacity. Okay. Well, the way you explained it was absolutely fantastic. So thank you for that. Um, and then I'm trying to remember if there was one other part to that, that I had a question. Oh, it just, um, and maybe now because of the way you explained it, it doesn't matter as much. But I was thinking of, you know, if ocean optics was being fully utilized at this time, there'd be that, um, traffic on the roadways as well. And, and what that estimate would be to kind of fill in the blanks as to, you know, what you're going to have with, with those, you know, 3,600 extra trips, but taking away from if ocean optics was there, if it was fully functional, what those trips would be and, and what the delta was with those. Right. And I think that was a comment too in the, the comment letter from, from the, uh, engineering consultant. Um, when we did the counts, ocean optics was, was not active. There wasn't even much parking going on there. Um, in the traffic study, I did provide estimates of if it were to be reoccupied, at its square footage of, um, I don't know if it's 28,000 or something as an office building, what it could generate. And that was not used in our calculations. It was really just shown for informational purposes. But we didn't take any credit for that. Like we didn't really need to, and it's not appropriate to do if it's not in full operation. Yeah. No, I, like I said, once, once you explained it, it made so much more sense in the, and that there is, uh, it seems like plenty of capacity for that. So, thank you. Okay. Anything else? Thank you. I got one more. Oh. Um, and, and this is the, to go with stormwater. So you're, you're going to be, sorry, I couldn't be more organized. That's okay. No problem. So, uh, with the stormwater, so you're putting in a, in a vault system and are you designing that to the minimum of what's required or are you going above and beyond in any way with that? And then where is that outfall going to go? So the outfall is going to go to the north on two Monroe street. There's a, an inlet right there, uh, on our side of the street. So it'll be connecting to that. Uh, the stormwater system is standard 25 year storm event. Uh, and there'll be a little bit of a free board. So there'll be a little bit of extra capacity. Okay. And then that, um, uh, I'm assuming then would ultimately end up in that, uh, DOT pond, uh, on Broadway. Honestly, I don't know. Okay. You just know where it's going from your property. I gotcha. All right. And I think that's the last of my questions. Super. Thank you. All right. We're going to open up for public input. Does, does anyone from the public please come? Norm Herman, 620 Edgewater drive. So I just have a question from an engineering perspective. Has there been an engineering, uh, analysis of noise, uh, from the HVAC for the hotel area? And for the restaurants and so on? And is there a, you know, for example, decibel levels at different times of the day? Is there anybody ever? Peter? Is there anybody who's got to answer? We can address that at closing. Good evening. My name is Peter Kreuziger. I spent most of my life here in Dunedin and nearly all of my professional life in hospitality. When I came to Dunedin in the mid-70s, downtown looked very differently than it does today. Boiled up windows, uh, overgrown lots, spaces, very little activity, tumbleweeds, and garbage in the street. I opened Bon Appetit, uh, during that time because I believed this community and what it could become. Over the years, I've been fortunate and honored to be involved in Dunedin through Bon Appetit, restaurant, Café Arfesco, and other interests in the, both downtown and Honeymoon Island in Kaladisi Island, and to witness firsthand how, how thoughtful this development can help a place to flourish. I share that only to say this, Dunedin matters to me. I care deeply about how it continues to evolve. I'm here to express my strong support for the project proposed by Mr. Maslow. Uh, from my perspective, this is exactly the kind of thoughtful mixed-use development that contributes to a healthy downtown, one that supports economic growth and development while strengthening Dunedin's culture and sense of place. After a lifetime in this industry, I have learned that successful communities are built when people are invited into spaces that bring together art, commerce, and human connection. When I offer my support, it's because I've looked closely and considered a long view. This project has my full endorsement, and Mr. Maslow has my complete confidence. I believe this development will be a meaningful addition to the City of Dunedin, and I respectfully encourage the Council to support it. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. My name's Charlie Klein. I live on 2045 Jefferson Avenue. I'm here in Dunedin, and I'm here representing the Dunedin Public Theatre Foundation. And, uh, we are excited about any good projects that go on downtown, and we like the idea of this project. We are just considering competition with what we're looking at. Just want this board to know that we were not involved in any of this planning. I think we sat in on the first CRA advisory when they went through the inside, and what they had as a theater was a long event room, which is fine, but we just don't know what kind of iteration this has gone through since then. So, we are just concerned about the marquee looking like a theater, and yet it looks like old downtowns used to be, but I'm not sure the theater in there is what it's actually going to be, and we're just looking at competition. And, um, we original, we did have one meeting about, uh, that project, and it didn't look like the place they had was going to be able to do what we're looking for, because we are trying to do. Our mission is to create a professional, fully-equipped theater facility for the purpose of programming live theater, dance, film, music, and other performing arts and events in the city of Dunedin. So, um, we, you know, we don't mind a different event space, but, and I think in some of the literature we've seen it is called an event space, but it's also called a theater, and a marquee might be misleading with what they actually have in there. So, we just want you to consider that as it goes into the final programming. Um, we don't mind competition. We just want to make sure it's, uh, you know, it's, um, not misleading, and you know what we're getting into. That's it. Thanks. Thank you. Good to meet you, folks. My name is Father Bob Swick, and I'm the pastor of St. Francis of Assisi, uh, Old Catholic Church, right across the street from here. And, well, I'll tell you, I've been sitting here as a fellow citizen, listening to the detail, uh, concerns, and, uh, you've obviously done your homework. And it's very impressive to me as, as a citizen here. Uh, I find this project to be exciting, exciting. Uh, we have youth in our community. This draws attention to some place where they can go and, uh, be involved. I think more so, uh, than before. Um, there are so many positives to this. Are there negatives? Probably so. I can't see them, but I'm sure there are. However, uh, in the overall, I think this is a cultural, um, dynamic, uh, addition to one of our most beautiful communities we have here in this part of Florida. So, uh, I strongly recommend, uh, favorable approval of this. And I want to thank you all for your diligence. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Sabra Rosen, and I live on 445 Palmetto Street. And I was born and raised here. And I remember when there were only a few places to go out. We'd go out in high school. Um, so I love the idea of more restaurants and bars and retail. But I feel like this project just kind of takes away from the coastal vibe of Dunedin. Um, the giant buildings will just kind of swallow up the charming restaurants like Salty Soul, uh, Sandpiper. Um, and if we keep allowing more and more of these buildings, how long is it until all of those small buildings are torn down? Um, I lived in Austin and I'm not sure if you guys are familiar with Rainy Street, but it was this cute little street full of charming bungalow houses that were turned into restaurants and bars. And it was like the best place to go when we were in our residency. But then around 2019, they tore down a couple of the houses, build a multi-story building. And then just like this with one building after another, and then they completely destroyed the uniqueness of Rainy Street. And I feel like that's kind of what's going to happen here. Um, I mean, maybe not, but you know, we already have two giant buildings right down there. So what's, what's stopping any others? Um, I also am confused about the need to build another hotel since Grant Street Inn isn't full at all 11 months of the year. Um, why not make it something like permanent housing or other, other things? Um, even I just went on the Grant Street website today and the only month it's sold out is March. And every time I walk by it's empty. So I just feel like maybe we could use it for something else. Um, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Hi, um, my name is Beth Waybrand. I live at 1429 San Mateo Drive. And previously I lived downtown on Grant Street. So I'm familiar with living downtown and living a little north of downtown. And, uh, I support the project. I, I think it's nice to have the theater to add something for, uh, children, families to go to. Cause you know, a lot of downtown's breweries and restaurants and they're not all suitable for younger people. And this gives us one extra thing. Um, as far as the colors, I, I like it. Uh, Dunedin's an artsy place and I, I like the coastal vibe. And I think if it was all beige, it would look institutional and really boring. And, um, I don't have a problem with the marquee either. I, I like the idea of all the parking that's being added. That's a benefit for everybody. Cause right now, sometimes during events, there's not sufficient parking downtown. And, um, I just liked the whole thing, the rooftop, the theater. Um, I can see the gentleman who spoke about the theater. I guess he would want to know if we could use it for things like the film festival or public performances, which I'm not really sure, um, if that's something that you're planning or not. And, um, I hope that the parking fees are not too high cause that was a huge thing the last time. And it will keep people from coming downtown and you know what happened. Everybody knows what happened, who lived here then. So just wanted to add that and I'm in support of it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else? And applicant and staff, do you have a response to anything that you've heard? Good evening again, Mr. Chair and board members, Brian Onks on behalf of Bill Mazas and Mazas Development, the applicant. Uh, you've heard a lot tonight, but I think what has been imparted is just how, again, deliberately and thoughtfully this project was developed, conceived and evolved over time with a lot of input. A lot of input from the arc, a lot of input from the CRA and now we've gained even more valuable input tonight, uh, from you, which will be incorporated. Uh, and we look forward to hearing, uh, your final discussion and, and what those recommendations might be. Um, in terms of the HVAC, I did want to address some of the just specific questions. Uh, obviously it, it will be, uh, on the roof, uh, which is standard for mechanical equipment. Uh, it will be screened and, uh, it will be code compliant. So if there's ever any issues with that, it will be inspected, repaired, fixed, whatever. But it is going to be on the roof, uh, as is standard for any type of development, um, of this nature. Um, I did want to give Bill the final word. Uh, he'll address the theater event space and his overall vision and commitment to the project and to the city of Dunedin. I just last bit for me, I think this shows you, you know, what a high quality, unique project that can be developed by an all local development team of folks who really care, uh, and who live here. Thank you. Okay. I'd like to address the, uh, the comment about the theater. The space that we're developing is a multipurpose space. It will be available to the theater and other theaters and anybody who wants to, you know, it could possibly, you could have a, a, uh, you know, a black box event. You might have a comedy, uh, you know, show going on. They might put on a recital. We're, we're developing a space that can be multipurpose because I don't quite know if it's just a theater, if that will be always full. And that's why as a developer, we had to be mindful of this and realize that we want to bring something to the downtown. That's really going to make an impact. So we're calling it a multipurpose space. We are designing it to be able to double as a, as a mini black box theater, but will it be a performing hearts theater? Probably not. But will it be enough to host events and do things in there and shows? Yes, it will. So would you be willing to have a conversation with that? Absolutely. I've spoken with them. Uh, we've spoken a couple of times and I've told them that we're, we're open to discussion. Um, it's just that we're not designing a space specifically for just one company and one purpose. This, when we came up with a whole idea to the development, again, it was, it was a lot of media. Right, Bob. I mean, we met a lot of times. We really sat and looked carefully and analyzed Dunedin. We looked at, you know, what does this community need? And really it's about the community and the socializing. And that's what we tried to accomplish with this development is bring everybody together. You know, sometimes in a community, things get a little bit stagnant and you're going to the same places over and over. What we've accomplished, what we can accomplish with Main Street, uh, is you're going to strengthen the downtown. You know, you're going to support the local businesses. You're going to create jobs. There's going to be a walkability to it, uh, an excitement to it. I think there's going to be a reason for people to want to come and visit. And again, through the whole process, we're going to work with the city and the community. Like Bob says, now our office is here, our base is here. So you can be sure that we have a vested interest to be sure to do it right because we know you can come find us. So, you know, we want to do it right. And with that, uh, we're going to be sensitive to everything and we're going to be working with the city on this. So again, I thank everybody. I'll take all the comments that come positive, negative. Uh, I request, you know, kindly request that you support this project. Okay. Thank you. One or two questions. Yeah. Um, Bill, um, question for you with that theater space, two, twofold. One on the theater side of it, will there be a stage or a temporary stage type thing? And then secondly, as an event space, will this help be an economic driver to the point? Because this is combined with a hotel, do we have the ability to attract business conferences? Absolutely. Even wedding events and use that space for that as well? Was that flexible? Absolutely. So when we were designing the theater, originally it was, it was much smaller. And when, when we started doing the design, we realized that we were missing an opportunity. Our consultants came to us and said, Dunedin's really missing a venue that can host, you know, 250, 280 people. It has the venues for 100, 120, 150, but you're missing that venue that can sit down, you know, 250, 280 people. So we went back to the drawing board and we stretched the building. We, we tried to fix it as much as we could. And really it's been a blessing that we were able to, to secure this other property and build a garage. Because without it, and that was one reason why it took so long to design this. Because as the ideas were coming, we were realizing that parking was going to be our issue. So by securing the other site, that parking issue went away. So what did it allow us to do? In the development, all of the parking spaces that are, that were up next to the theater, we took those out. And those are going to be now quick storage areas that you'll be able to stage, you know, different stages, different setups. So it'll be quick and easy to set up. We were looking at it that it will be a huge benefit to the downtown because now together with the boutique hotel, you know, you're going to be able to host events. There's additional rooms in the area. They'll be able to come, people will go out, they'll dine, they'll visit the shops. So I think it's going to be very good for the downtown of Dunedin. Thank you. I think we need a motion, please. Do you have a question? What is your motion? My motion is to approve with some consideration for tweaking of softening of the colors on a very, very beautiful designed Medrev and French Creole building. And I would also, in this motion, I would ask that they do sit down with the public theater group. I think that would be a very important thing to look at that. And in the motion, I'm not sure I can put this in the motion. So I guess that's my motion. Thank you. Is there a second? I'll second that motion. Thank you. Thoughts before we take a vote? If you want to add, I'll... No, actually, I'm good with your additions. So, no, I think they're very well thought out. And I think those are very important. And one thing, just more of a comment, I just wanted to, you know, say I appreciated the thoughtful design. The expanded walkways going around on Main Street and Douglas. I mean, and that's not something you usually see a new design going in and providing that extra space, basically extra public space. And to me, you know, looking at it from above, it is, it's a very large building. But looking at the renderings and getting the feel, it, the renderings make it feel like it's something small and something Dunedin friendly. Right? So, I just wanted to mention that. I'm also happy that you included the bicycles and multimodal and, of course, golf carts, because we are a golf cart community. Thank you. Deborah, did you have something else that you wanted to add? No. Don't we need to second? Are we in discussion? He seconded. He seconded. Okay. So, let's, no, I think we should vote and then we can make comments. Or do you want us to make comments? Well, once we vote, it's good. Okay. I got it. I'm a little confused here. That's okay. Okay. You know, the older I've gotten, the more I want things, they just have to be right. I just, because, you know, I'm not going to be here in 30 years. Maybe when I was 30, I sort of had that conceptual thing as, yo, this is going to be here now. I won't be here. But you all will. And your kids will. And your grandchildren will. And now I try to think so hard that it's going to be something that is going to stand. It's going to be a legacy. It's going to be a testament to Dunedin. And that's what I want. So, those are my comments. Thank you. I just, I want to take a moment to thank you because I know you've put tremendous thought. And I've seen you in other meetings listening to the input. And I can tell you've really factored that in. It's very exciting. Very attractive structure. I agree with the energy it brings. I love how you fit it into the area with the wide sidewalks, with the trail. It is an exciting project. I agree, too. I think, too, it's going to be an exciting economic engine for the city. This downtown core is the heart of our town. It is, and this brings a whole new dynamic of business opportunity for us. And also, the parking facility up there on Douglas, I think, is tremendously exciting for a few reasons. One, not only does it net add capacity of, I think I calculated, 138 spots. But its location, it actually keeps some of the traffic off of the downtown core because they're pretty quick off Skinner into that ramp. And then they're walking, which is what we want them to do in front of our other stores. Plus, its location may help us with the north side of Skinner as well. So, thank you for purchasing that property and adding that facility to it to make the whole project work. But it's got tangible benefits elsewhere, too. So, thank you. Final comments? I got. Thank you. We need this garage so much. I love the one on Douglas. My biggest fear, and I'm just going to tell you, and I've said it since day one, when people drive down Douglas, the buses and everything else, they're crazy. They speed. I mean, you have to stop there and try to get across Douglas. The only thing that scares me about this is the valet. I have a son. He was parked cars one time during a summer when he was home from college with valet. When they come out, I'm so scared they're going to speed down Douglas, park a car, and run back. That's my biggest fear is traffic on Douglas. Other than that, I think it's a great project. I love the garage. That's my biggest fear is the traffic, like with valet. That's it. Final thought? No, I think it's a great project. I support it. Super. All right. Then, all in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Are there any nays? The ayes have it. Thank you very much. And their teenagers kids are going to come out of the garage. Okay, folks, you need to move along because we've got other work to do. Folks, could you go outside and chat, please? Thank you. Okay. Folks, if you're going to meet and greet, please do it out in the hall. Ah. Please do your meeting and greeting out in the hall. Well, let's see if we need to. Keep moving, please. All right. Please keep moving. We are moving on to application DR 2025-0003. Request for design review approval for the development of a new four-story, three-stories, overground floor parking, multifamily residential building with five dwelling units, total of zero-point-two-one-acre vacant parcel located on Skinner Boulevard. Does anyone have any ex-parte communications regarding this item? That's good. All right. Staff? Just real quick. Do we need to be sworn for this one separately, or? I think we're okay with this. For both? Okay. Yes. Yep. Just wanted to be sure. Thank you. And the LPA members, George Kinney on behalf of the Community Development Department. This is application DR 2025-03. Again, design review approval. Project name is 444 Skinner Boulevard Townhomes. I'm sorry. What? Yes. Oh. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's the project name. Yeah, so project name is 444 Skinner Boulevard. The owner is Land Development LLC. Applicant is Ashley Reinhold. Representatives Dave Hesliff and Brett Green of Archway. Oh, I'm sorry. That is a typo. That is not correct. The representative is actually, again, Brian Ongst, who represented the last project. The street address is Skinner Boulevard, Dunedin, Florida. The area is approximately 0.21 acres. Same land use plan as you saw in the last project. Activity center. And also the same zoning district. Downtown core. This is a street type C. Which, again, does permit you to ask for that fourth floor. And it does require the step back that can be waived by a city commission approval. It is currently vacant land. And you can see from the aerial here its location. There is a three-story structure behind it that was part of that parcel that included that three-story structure. And was basically recently carved out sometime last year. Very quickly, the project description. This is a new four-story request. Three stories over ground floor parking. It's a multi-family residential building with five dwelling units. You can see the floor plan on the left-hand side. And the street view at the bottom left. And then, of course, one of the architectural remnants to the right. From a land use plan perspective, it is activity center. Which is the plan category. It does permit up to 30 dwelling units per acre. The activity center also permits, again, a maximum pervious service ratio of 0.85. Which the applicant meets. And you can see on the table to the lower right the density calculation. So six are permitted. Five are proposed. And, of course, five is what triggers design reveal, as the board knows. From a zoning district evaluation standpoint, again, as the board knows, there are those three distinct street types. This is street type C. It does comply with all of the requirements. However, the applicant is requesting the city commission to consider the fourth floor addition. And is also requesting a waiver of the 10-foot step back. And all of that backup material narrative is in your packet. From a compatibility perspective, you can see the map that's been provided as part of the background materials. There are 25 properties that we looked at immediately adjacent to the surrounding subject property. I would point out that only one existing structure exceeds two stories in that analysis. And that is that three-story apartment or three-story structure apartment building to just to the rear of the subject property. Just collectively, the average observed number of stories is approximately 1.4 with an average overall height of 17.96 feet. So, you know, this would be a considerably larger project than what currently exists on the ground around it. The staff has advised the applicant on several occasions that a one- to two-story project would probably be more appropriate in this location. We also suggested at the onset of this project that a three-story project might be possible subject to the development review of a compelling compatibility analysis. And more specifically, to kind of complement that building that's exactly, you know, right to the rear of the property. We do, I just want to, I do want to point out that the staff has consistently stated that the current four-story project would not be supported. So, you will not see a positive recommendation at the end of, at the end of the presentation. And I, you know, the applicants are aware of this. The surrounding area is predominantly built out and includes a mix of uses ranging from low to medium density single-family residential and multi-family residential to commercial and retail. One other aspect of this, and, you know, Bob might speak to this a little bit, the urban context has certainly been modified in this area due to the completion of the complete Street Skinner Boulevard project. And staff, as part of that, finds that the public realm that's been created is consistently framed by the modest mass and the height of the structures fronting the multimodal corridor. And again, staff would consider a four-story product to be disruptive to that, to the consistency of that corridor and that public realm that's been created. There are no additional planning efforts or conceptual development programs for future development to take a form greater than that already existing. So that's kind of important because we've had other projects where you're kind of looking at a catalyst project to maybe spark something and there's a plan or something in place to kind of ask for something out of context to get something started. That's not the case in this area. There are no, again, there are no four-story buildings that exist or are otherwise planned area immediately surrounding the project site either north or south of the newly redesigned Skinner Boulevard. And, in fact, the more recent development that has occurred out here has been limited to not more than two stories. Just kind of rounding out the compatibility evaluation, the three-story structure immediately to the north of the subject property was part of the same parcel at one time, as I mentioned. And that's really that picture you see on the right-hand side there that was part of a building permit and a plat from some time ago where you can see that three-story structure to the rear was constructed. And at that time it was anticipated there would be a complimentary building where the subject building is being proposed. So, just from a summary standpoint, the applicant is requesting City Commission approval of the four-story with a maximum height of 42 feet. In addition, the applicant is requesting the City Commission weigh the 10-foot step back above the second story along Skinner Boulevard and approve their proposed design. A four-story 42-foot high multi-purpose multi-family residential building as proposed on this property together with potential development patterns of the very limited vacant lands in the area would be considered incompatible from a staff perspective. From a design standard evaluation perspective, again, we show you this with all the design reviews to see how they comport with the provisions of the Land Development Code and specifically each of the design standard elevations. Just to hit on a few of them, from a common open space perspective, residential developments are required to provide 100 square feet of common open space per dwelling unit or a minimum of 500 square feet for five units. A total of 1,116 square feet of open space is shown on the green space plan which would comply with that requirement. From an off-street parking perspective, this type of development requires 1.5 spaces for each dwelling unit. For five units, a minimum of eight spaces would be required and ten are provided, so it does meet that standard as well. From an architectural style standpoint, there's been some recent, I want to be fair here, there's been some recent submissions to the staff. They came in yesterday and the evening before. Staff has not had an opportunity to review those, so we don't know whether those comport with what the ARC was requiring from those submissions. So we can't really provide you any information on that at this particular point. But we would say that the architecture review committee did review the project subject to conditions. You know, those conditions were articulated in the chronology if you had an opportunity to look at that. The ARC did request that either staff or the applicant bring back those conditional changes, and that has not been done. From a sustainability standpoint, it does meet, there's a pre-development score of 105 points. 100 is required, as the commission knows, so it does meet that. Public art is proposed on site at 0.5% of the total project cost. Just very quickly on parkland impact fee as well, this type of proposal would generate approximately $8,000 per unit for a parkland impact fee, or just short of $40,000 in total. From a committee action standpoint, the development review committee did see this project on July 17, 2024, and the architectural review committee did see the project on June 3, 2025, and considered the project and recommended the application to the LPA subject to those conditions that are in your background. So, in fairness, again, that statement says the applicant is elected not to address those conditions. They have been addressed, it's my understanding, but they came in only yesterday, so we have not had an opportunity to review those. Nor has it gone back to the ARC as the ARC had requested prior to advancing to the LPA. So, from a staff termination perspective, staff finds that the application is inconsistent with the criteria for physical compatibility of the proposed application with the surrounding environment to set forth an objective 2.9 of the future land use element of the city comprehensive plan. And again, in addition, staff finds that the ARC recommendation of approval to LPA was based on conditions that may or may not have been addressed at this point, but certainly not taken back to the ARC at this point. And so, for that reason, we are not recommending this project. I'm happy to answer any questions. But this is a downtown CRA project, so Bob is here, too, if you have any questions. Bob Ironsmith, economic development director, in alignment with George. Obviously, the city has spent a pretty good investment on Skinner, $14 million to create that complete streets. As George mentioned, the urban context has changed, and we also find it kind of incompatible with a four-story component there. Okay, well, I saw, this is sort of strange. I've never really seen this for a long, probably ever, that the staff came forward and said, I don't think you said it was kind of incompatible, I think you said it was incompatible. In your opinion. In my opinion, yes. But here are the four things, reading over this, that did not meet the recommendations of, you said, the Architectural Review Committee. One was additional illustration and architectural expression on the east elevation. Two was roofing elements to have variable material instead of fiberglass shingle. Three was additional screening for the parking area. And four was arborist report of existing trees and a full landscape plan drawn by a landscape architect. Now, you said you got something, but you have no earthly idea whether they met these conditions. That's correct. We received the submission yesterday and the evening before that indicated that they had addressed these provisions, but we have not reviewed the submission. So, you know, you haven't verified that these conditions have been met. Right. So, I mean, what do you usually do? Postpone and give them a right to verify or? I mean, that's the prerogative of the applicant. I will tell you that staff's position regardless to this. Is the incompatibility. Would be the height and mass is inappropriate for this area. You would go up to two, but it's at four, correct? So our suggestion from the very beginning, we've got documented correspondence telling them from, you know, telling this team from the very beginning that the city would support one or two stories. Potentially would look at a third story because of the structure that is to the rear and the precedent that was kind of set by that building permit. Maybe in mixed use. Yeah. And, but for, we would not recommend, we're not recommending that you recommend four stories to the city commission. Okay. Gotcha. Thank you. Any other questions of the staff? I've got questions. So I want to look at this from both perspectives for a moment. First of all, so now we've got this beautiful complete street. We've, we've also talked about, you know, we're fully developed. So really for the most part, we are trying to increase density because that's going to help drive economic energy and so forth. Um, this property has some density to it. And when I look at the view, there's several properties bordering that thing to the east and the west that are older dilapidated properties. What is your position or thoughts around, could this be a catalyst? You get something like this and it leads to improve development of some of these other lots to the east and west, as well as potentially straight across the street, uh, to get more density out of those. And then ultimately not only improve the economics of the situation for the city, but also creates a nice buffer for the residential behind that from the Skinner Street. What are your, what are your thoughts on that? Great question. So a couple of things. Um, number one, there is no future plan to, um, look at a more aggressive scale and mass than what is already kind of sitting on the ground out there. Certainly we would encourage redevelopment. We would just encourage that redevelopment at a lesser mass and a lesser scale. So for instance, uh, you know, again, I think staff would be willing to potentially support a three story project that maybe doesn't exceed the height of that existing structure behind it. But once you get beyond that, um, you know, it's, it's not really a catalyst in the sense that we don't have a vision for that particular area other than the vision that is created through the community reinvestment area and the, and the CRA master plan. And we just don't from a, and, and quite frankly, that's the reason the compatibility provisions in there so that we can look at that surrounding area. Not only think about what's on the ground, but think about what's coming and see if we can make that determination and where we fall is kind of in the middle of that. So we're saying you don't need to be one story, but we just think four is completely out of place. If you think about it from a visual perspective, as you're walking down that street, what you're going to see is this, this, this, and then this. And it's just from a public realm perspective, it just doesn't make any sense without any assurances that there's any incentives to further redevelop that, that, that particular area. And the driver of that fourth story, when I look at the, the floor plan layouts, cause, uh, over the dining living kitchen space is really a two story ceiling so that we can add a third bedroom in that mid space so that you can have a gigantic master or primary area on the top floor. Is that right? And so your thoughts with that beat that, no, we should really maybe shrink that primary, put the third bedroom up there if they want three bedrooms so that we can bring that height down. Is that kind of the ideal? Well, we, uh, yes and no. We, we don't necessarily look at the design aspect of it. It's more about, from our perspective, it's more about the code analysis and then kind of bringing in that CRA perspective. So we don't, we don't take that deep a dive, but. Yeah, that's, that's the developer. Yeah. Okay. So is the representation person here? Yeah. Yes. There it is. Hello again. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe you could address that question and what was the economic driver of that design as you've created it? Sure. And it, we'll get into our presentation and it won't be nearly as long as the last one and, uh, hopefully answer all those questions. We have our architect here, uh, Tulio Zalaga and also the owner representative, uh, Mr. Reinhold. Um, and I do have a PowerPoint. So wait till get that up. And I do, uh, again, Brian on 625 court street, McFarlane Ferguson, on behalf of the applicant land devs. Um, I do want to start by just saying that we always strive to get staff recommendation of support. Always, always, always. And I do very much appreciate the, uh, interactions that I've had with the staff. Um, I got involved with this case, uh, back in August. Um, at that point in time, there had been another attorney handling it up to that point that was no longer able to handle it. Um, and so what I saw when I got involved with this case is that once again, this site, it's 0.21 acres, but from a land use perspective, it has an activity center land use. And as the staff report points out, you know, the activity center does incentivize density. It does incentivize intensity. It also has a downtown core zoning. And as the staff report turns out, uh, points out the downtown zoning creates the opportunity to help revitalize the downtown economically, visually and functionally to ride an aesthetically pleasing and efficient multi use center, which includes, uh, residential and multifamily development, including luxury condos, uh, as is being proposed here. It almost seems to me. It almost seems to me, and again, we meet all of the code criteria. We're not asking for a variance. We're asking for what's allowed by code and we're meeting in our opinion, subjectively those, those criteria. What we have a disrespectful disagreement about with the staff is the compatibility of the, of the 42 foot height by code. We're allowed to go to 34 feet. Um, and so we are allowed to ask for a waiver of up to 46 feet. So we are not acts asking for the maximum height. We're asking for the most that we believe is reasonable to use the property. And that is primarily for the structured parking. The structured parking is to get the cars off the street and make them not visible from your economic driver, your activity center. You want those cars to be screened. You want them to be, uh, protected from any kind of storm or flood or any of that type of thing. It's about sustainability and resiliency. So I want to point out, as Mr. Kinney stated, this site has six units on a 0.21 acre site. That's 30 units an acre. That's the max condo density available in the city of Clearwater. So this is a highly dense site and it was done that way legislatively through the comprehensive planning process. So the city commission and the city staff have legislatively designated this site, a dense activity center site that they want to see activity on the staff report respectfully. In my opinion, almost is ignoring that legislative intent, which really drives the market and drives development and sets the expectations for a property owner of what could I do here? Well, you could do six units. Well, how, how can I go? Well, you could go to 46 feet if the city commission approves it. But you have to pay into the public art fund. That's $18,000. Pay the impact fees. That's $8,000 per unit. If this site was 34 feet, we would not have to pay the public art fund. We would not have to have a resilient and sustainable building process. We meet all of that. So we're, we've gone above and beyond, uh, to meet those criteria. And so we have proposed the site at five units per acre. I'm sorry, not five units per acre. We've proposed the site at five units. So we're not asking for the max density and we're not asking for the max height. So I did, from the, from a fairness, open-mindedness perspective, I did want to just point that out up front. This isn't a developer who's looking to get the absolute most they can possibly get. It's a developer who's responding to market-oriented conditions. And again, respectfully, in my view, it's almost like the staff is using the complete streets to, like, bifurcate this part of the activity center from downtown. Well, it's not. It is, it's downtown core. It might be on the edge, but it's the heart of downtown. And that's what it is entitled for. So it's impossible. And our architect will explain this. It's impossible to meet that legislative intent of the comprehensive plan to have the five units without having a little bit of extra height. And in this case, we're asking for the 42 feet, um, so that we can do the structured parking and we can do the five units. Uh, the step back again, next slide, please. Uh, go to the, there you go. Perfect. Um, so this is the, this is the rendering that, that you saw. Um, and respectfully, in terms of the architectural design, it is the coastal Mediterranean revival. It does fit in with what is consistent with the architectural plan. Uh, and the architectural review committee did review it and did recommend approval with conditions. Um, again, in our view, this is two and a half stories over parking. It's really not a true max four story building. We made it, uh, the height as restricted as we possibly could to yield the five units and to yield the luxury product. If you were to make this a one or two story building, how would you put six units in a one story building? You would have little tiny, um, units that just don't meet the intent of an urban downtown core, which is what the zoning is and what the land use is. So there's a, there's a friction. I think the staff is judging compatibility based on a single family home next door that isn't compatible with the current land use and zoning. You can't build a single family home in the activity center anymore. So you can't judge the new legislative standards, the new comprehensive plans compatibility based on non-conforming properties that aren't, that are, that are not compatible with the current goals, objectives, and policies of the city, that the city has set itself, that the city has set its market conditions. Um, and so that's our perspective and, again, respectfully, and I, I hope you take it into consideration. Uh, Mr. Kinney, one more here. Okay. And I'm going to let the architect again explain in this, in our view, we do meet the intent of the step back because we are, we meet fully the setbacks. Um, and again, we meet everything. We meet the lot width, lot size, parking, number of stories subjectively based on the criteria. Um, and the front setback is 10 feet where a zero is allowed. So you're allowed to have a zero setback on this site. That's urban. That's downtown. That you're allowed to have a zero setback on this site as of right. I wouldn't even have to be here if it was three stories and we had a zero setback, but we don't want to design for that. We want to design for something that is market oriented and makes sense as a luxury product that will activate that residential use in the downtown, uh, and contribute to our downtown. Uh, the, uh, setback to the residential is 17 feet and then the rear setback, uh, is zero, but the property owner to the rear supports the project. We have a letter of support, non objection from the adjacent property owner to the rear. Um, and again, that site is three stories. Uh, go to the next slide, please. Okay. So this is the architectural review committee and this is directly from their minutes, which are in, in your packet. Um, so the architecture review committee heard the application on June 3rd and concluded quote, based on the applicant's compatibility analysis, the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding area and recommended approval for the proposed actual style architectural style of the project with the below conditions. And those are the four conditions that board member kinds, uh, read out that respectfully we believe we have met. Um, applicant has addressed each and every one of those conditions. Uh, next slide please. And, uh, okay. So this, these are the board members of the architecture review committee. I'm sure you're, you know them well. I've been in front of them a whole lot lately with the, with the projects that I have going on. They are incredibly thoughtful. They're renowned architects. Uh, some of them are architects and landscape architects, architects, some specialize in architecture, some specialize just in landscape architecture. But they unanimously found that the design was compatible and that includes the height. If they thought it was too tall, they would have said, no, that's my experience with them. When I took the main street exchange in front of them, they asked us about the height. I wasn't at the arc hearing. Cause like I said, another lawyer was representing the client at that time, but I did read the minutes. Um, and that's, that's my expectation. I also didn't see anything in the minutes where the arc said, come back. They voted, made a motion, seconded, voted unanimously to recommend approval with conditions. I wasn't there. The owner's representative did not understand the arc to request them to come back. That, that, that's, that's the truth of the matter. Uh, next slide, please. Okay. So this is, I'm going to ask our architect, Mr. Zilago to come up now. This is to address the, uh, specific, the four specific conditions, these next three slides. Now, what happened with the recent middle? These plans were revised in July and August after the June 3rd arc meeting. I got the case in the middle of August and I did not realize that while these plans had been done, they had not been resubmitted. I realized that when I read the staff report on Friday and I said, wait, we didn't address the arc conditions. That doesn't sound like something I would do. Uh, and we determined that unfortunately those things had not been resubmitted at that time. We resubmitted, uh, the landscape plan and the arborist letter on Monday and resubmitted the, uh, the architectural elevations, um, on Tuesday. Uh, and that is, that's our, that's our fault. Um, that's our fault. But I do want you to know we did take the arc conditions seriously and we did address them. Um, and so I'm going to ask our architect to come up now and, uh, and explain that, please. Um, you know, my name is, uh, Tulio Zuluaga. I'm a registered architect. Address is 14055 46th Street North in Clearwater. I'm going to speak specifically for the comments, uh, made by the ARC. Uh, and on this slide, um, they expressed some concern about some of the continuity of the walls and, uh, what they felt there was a lack of, uh, fenestration and detailing around the windows. So, uh, carrying over the details from the other sides, we added some fenestration. We added some trim work on top of the windows. And we also added a fence to screen the parking from the view, which is going to be very, uh, hard to see because it's a very tight setback with the next property. But regardless of that, we, we added that, uh, uh, fence. Uh, yeah, the, um, as you can see on the top was the previous one. And, um, we added all the details around the windows, um, and more detail for the fences. Uh, the other comment, uh, related to, um, to the design was, uh, there was a confusion with the materials we expect for the roof, uh, surfaces. And, uh, we always, um, um, show those, uh, uh, roof surfaces as, uh, concrete tile. But when we produced the documentation, um, a previous version came in that, uh, um, that we used as a model and, uh, shingles were into the mix. But that was clear on the submitted, later submitted, uh, package. Yeah. As you can see, the previous submitted doesn't show that fence, uh, to shield, uh, or screen the parking lot. And then we added that. But, uh, that's a very heavily, uh, vegetated side of the building. Uh, regardless of that, uh, the fence is gonna, uh, provide more screening. Mr. Zulu, explain to the board, you know, what would it do to your ability to design the project if you were limited to, to two stories or three stories, knowing that you have the entitlement for six minutes, but physically, how would you be able to design that project? What would it do to the character of the project, to the quality of the project? I think the project will, uh, lose the dimension, uh, the, the, uh, I would say the static, uh, prominence, um, uh, the units will have, uh, obviously less square footage, which will make it, uh, uh, less desirable for, uh, the market, especially in that area. Um, and, uh, that's why we, um, I mean, the, the units, if you look at the design, has some, uh, great features like that mezzanine that overlook to the living areas, which, uh, gives that, uh, sense of, uh, or, um, uh, aspect of, of a lofty design, uh, which is, uh, very, um, very, uh, very, very, very appeable and, and without sacrificing the square footage, having the master bedroom on the upper floor. Thank you, Mr. Zalajk. And he's here, obviously, to answer questions, uh, as we, uh, as we wrap up. And these are six units, right? Five. Five. Five. We could go to six, but we are only asking for five. I thought you said that the, that the parking garage was on the second level. Did I... Parking's on the, on the bottom level. Okay. Uh, and then this is the last condition that the ARC asked us to comply with, which was to the arborist report of existing trees and full landscape plan drawn by a landscape architect and we did meet both of those as well again just a little tardy maybe very tardy in getting them to mr kenney uh and mr ironsmith next slide please um you can go down until there we go so this is a contextual you know fit and again some of these buildings are conforming and were approved and the buildings that are conforming are the taller ones and some of these buildings are non-conforming a lot of these buildings are non-conforming for stormwater impervious surface ratio parking this is compliant with everything just subjectively does it deserve to have 42 feet or not and so i wanted to show you that this is by far not the tallest request in the area and you can't limit your compatibility analysis to just the house next door that doesn't conform you have to expand it to the surrounding area the other downtown core zone properties the other activity center properties in our view is it compatible with those approvals especially the recent approvals yes we think it is uh next please this is a a slide that shows the existing heights again you have large multi-family developments directly across the street the artisan and the main street exchange garage our caddy corner on douglas to this to this project next slide please again this is showing some existing developments that are very close you know within 250 yards that are consistent with what we're proposing in terms of mass and height and architectural feature and benefit to the city and to contribution to the downtown and to the activity center and to the downtown core next slide please and this is not in the downtown core and we supported this project i'm actually an attorney for the pinellas county housing authority so we very much supported this project but i wanted to just put into context this project has this property has the same available density as the property behind the lucans at 1419 carnation drive at 0.21 acres and so that yields six units we're only proposing the five uh and so we're consistent with the density and the height on this project that was just recently approved and this project that was just recently approved is in a similar mixed use area you have businesses and you have single family homes that are directly adjacent to this project directly adjacent so respectfully we think that the same compatibility standards that were used to review this project should be used for our projects as well next slide please okay these are the floor plans i'm not going to talk about the floor plans if you have questions about the floor plans our architects here to answer those but you can see there's the structured parking next slide first floor or second floor third floor and then that's the top floor next slide and all right so again um just to wrap it up here the city commission may waive the required 10-foot minimum step back that says setback it's supposed to say step back uh where there's architecture architectural articulation defenstration and features integrated public benefits that's the green building initiatives which we meet we have the resiliency and sustainability report uh the public art fund which we also are contributing to which we would not have to if we didn't ask for the extra height at enhanced streetscape requirements and bicycle accommodation all of which are provided for all of which meet those code criteria for the extra height um and the existing setbacks are uh the proposed setbacks are consistent and within what's allowed by right um and again to impose some additional requirements would just make the project impossible to do from a quality uh quality and product orientation perspective of of what's being designed and proposed next slide please next slide there you go okay and so respectfully you know this request would allow for the approval of five brand new high quality uh very well designed townhomes in the downtown core in the activity center which will contribute economically by adding residents in within walking distance of the downtown core in the activity center within the downtown core and activity center um and we believe it's consistent with prior approvals and for the intent of the code and the intent of the comprehensive plan which designated legislatively this site as an activity center with downtown core zoning so uh like i said 99 times out of 10 i always come here with staff support and unfortunately this time we didn't quite get there but i appreciate your consideration and having an open mind i'm looking forward to your feedback thank you questions of the applicant um i'm not sure that this wouldn't be to staff maybe to the applicant too but is arc i don't is arc normally are they supposed to weigh in on compatibility i'm going to defer to george on that one but i think it's a great question i think it's a great question so they are trained in looking at compatibility their responsibilities via their bylaws is to look at architecture and architectural compatibility okay architectural yeah i think it's a little outside the box but size and mass use they are they compatibility is not part of their purview okay and they so i'm i'm not really sure that they weighed in on something that they didn't that they you know they didn't weigh in on it because that's not within their purview i think it may be the purview of the lpa and the commission on true compatibility issues that's how i feel understand that perspective um i think that what i saw in the minutes and what i've heard from the client i think i heard mr kenny or mr ironsmith maybe say is they they went they did consider it but they might not ought to or maybe it's not in their purview so i think you know my experience with the mainstream exchange is they did talk about the height they did talk about the mass they did talk about the scale they did talk about the step back is that definitive in terms of an approval no but it is a recommendation of experts that we think is persuasive and and that's why i mentioned it people that are highly respected by the city as as experts in architecture thank you does anyone from the public i've got questions you do george uh two things so if i understood this correct architectural review had four stipulations they wanted to address and the new submission which just came in did address those stipulations correct unknown from the staff perspective okay so you haven't had a chance to look at it but it sounds like from brian's input it does meet them okay and and i would just quickly add so this is from the meeting minutes the the the arc did ask that the revised submittals be shared with them either from staff or from the applicant prior to moving forward to the lpa but when we had that discussion they chose at that time and i don't think i'm not sure brian was on at that point but but at that time they they chose they said no please put us forward regardless okay so you know that's why it's here okay and it looks like we've got what they intended because he showed us updates okay the other thing if i understood brian correctly the zoning there would allow a zero setback correct and right now that whole uh south wall is pushed 10 feet back so if for some reason they took the first two stories brought those out to zero they would have a 10 foot setback on the third and fourth yeah so there's a window for setback i believe in downtown court zero to 17 so yes it can be anywhere it can come up to a zero lot line and be set back as far as 17 feet i mean so if if they would have done that if they would have moved trash holding or whatever and built out those first two stories whatever they would they wouldn't be asking for a 10-foot waiver because they would qualify correct but instead they've pushed the whole thing back to keep the more open feeling on the sidewalk there yeah i mean i would defer to the applicant on that but it's their design we're just kind of you know again looking at it from a compliance standpoint so it would meet the way it's presented okay and okay you you are looking at a height that's almost the same as main street exchange just want to make that point to you correct okay uh it's important and compatibility is something just because a car can go to 150 miles an hour doesn't mean you're going to drive the car at that type of speed yeah so i was over there today though and the properties around there they're small they're fragment my hope would be this would start to be a catalyst to redevelop that whole north part of that area that's an opportunity for that doesn't disagree we're we're just trying to put it in the proper perspective from a compatibility standpoint so we're not saying it has to be a one store to build it yeah and we can yeah your professional recommendation is it's too big a little bit too big yes a size of mass obviously you could go with some more units just because the zoning allows certain or density just like a car you're not going to drive it 150 miles an hour you want something that's compatible certainly want to see redevelopment on skinner that's why we did the complete streets certainly we'd like to see more mixed use in addition but want something that fits in with that scale you know and staff is not objecting to the request for the height and the and the step back waiver that is a provision that is allowed to be requested as part of our code provisions we're just suggesting that regardless to regardless to that the the project itself is not compatible from our perspective okay questions so uh one thing brian said was you would not be here if it wasn't because of the height and um you wouldn't also not be required to have to meet the art requirements is that correct so designer the trigger for design review is five residential units or more so if you're if you're if you're if you're proposing five units or more it goes through this design review process irregardless okay if it's less than five units then um it would be considered administratively however even with that administrative consideration we would still apply compatibility as part of that review okay yeah i just want to make sure with with with brian that we're on the same page um and then yeah and i i do think maybe there's some miscommunication about compatibility and and which compatibility with architecture architectural or if it's you know within the the community in the height um i i did also go drive that today and and and looked at the size and massing of the the buildings around it and and i'm having a hard time imagining something that large and and um being in that area with the the surrounding properties so i want to mention that and then i'm gonna have some other questions later but i'll i'll let somebody else ask them so they could actually go five so they they have a complete it's apples to me that one's apples oranges it is a completely different zoning category it's multi-family 12 and a half has a completely different land use uh they actually have a development perspective that can go to five stories in that particular site so and they chose three stories well we we pushed them to three for sure i mean that was how the deal was done they also got a density bonus it was a little different set up than it is over here so it's really not compatible is what george had said so they it's it's they're really just different projects yeah the only other thing i would add is you know when we look at compatibility we do it consistently with each design review you've seen those maps with every every design review submission that we review we take this immediate surrounding area and that's what the that's what the comprehensive plan says look at the immediate surrounding area consider any anticipated future plans for those areas and also the existing conditions of that particular area so from a consistency standpoint we have always looked at the surrounding area this i i think they're pointing you the the flats for instance i believe is about a mile or a mile and half away from the project site we we're not and it's a completely different zoning category and then the only other thing i would add is a comment on you know the fact that this is still activity center it's true but it's transitioning into residential properties to the rear of it so from a transitional standpoint um it really doesn't make a lot of sense to have that height as you're moving back into kind of a residential community from a planning perspective and and again the flats is three stories yes it's a three-story farm have you got another question thank you paul was next okay so um a few different things um with regards to the sustainability matrix um i saw that in there and actually i've got it pulled up and i was having a hard time understanding the points and and uh how they have they were determined um some of the uh sustainability uh questions either just says okay or on another one it has a check mark so with regards to that i'm i'm a little confused on on how you got to the 100 points or maybe even i think was over 100 points just based on on what was submitted there um um and then i guess more specific to the the rear neighbors and um you know it the i'm not sure how the property itself was actually subdivided then but with uh that retention pond or almost i'd call a retention hole there um what happens to the drainage for that property that's existing where does that go is that being brought in as part of your your vault uh are you meeting minimum requirements are you going above and beyond and then where does uh that storm water then go uh once it leaves the property or does it leave the property depending on how you designed it i want to answer uh to that question on behalf of the civil engineer who created the the solution for that uh he's not here today uh but uh the project um um considers the construction of a bolt on the ground bolt system to compensate for eliminating that drainage hole and he provided all the calculations uh for it and i think they are on the site civil sheet that it was submitted okay um let me do one more i guess and so now going just out of more curiosity and economic benefit to the city uh so what you know looking at like a performance for this what are you thinking uh cost per unit for these five units and then these are uh called out as being townhome so is this going to be a fee simple uh type of product so yes yes and yes yes so chris reinhold sorry uh dreamer visionary creator that's who i think i am so um i looked at this a lot i looked uh surrounding areas and i saw that there needed to be something different made there right but they obviously conformed with everything and look um if you look in the area you have a lot of one to two-story units um and that's kind of what they recommended a one and two-story unit which doesn't make sense to me really because there's a three-story townhome right on the property basically that we split up so that was a little that was where i guess the confusion started just so everyone is absolutely clear here before i even purchased the property yeah before i purchased the property i came and i went and met with the staff and showed them the clients and it wasn't a you know it was just an informal meeting before i purchased it they all agreed it was it was great went to a meeting obviously we got to the arca meeting i understand the compatibility what you guys are saying that you know they can other their their purview is only to a certain uh compatibility i understand that um but i just thought there was something missing right i'm i've been here 24 years i don't live in done eden but i've been in the area for 24 years so i am local and that was one of my worries when i talked talked to the city manager talked to all these guys um and i think there was just something missing in the area and um i thought this project would be wonderful for the area i thought you know putting the flamingo working with a local artist um bringing that to life and um giving something to the community something different so i think mr stanick was asking sorry sorry i'm sorry i got a little i guess i got a little right i'm very passionate okay so let's move along please i'm really into myself i'm sorry the value of the units and yeah so the value's gone up and down i've been tracking the value obviously been on this journey for about a year and a half trying to get this through um you know we would we would we would price it according to market whatever that is you know 400 a square foot 350 a square foot it's we're not going to be obnoxious about it you know got to make a little bit on the investment you know um now that we've waited so long i mean the land's worth more than i paid for it to be honest so you know but that's not what this is about um i come from a third generation developer um my my grand grandfather was a developer in ohio my dad was and um yeah so sorry i'll speed it up i'm sorry sorry sorry i apologize go ahead so so i saw vision for the place and this is my vision and more than happy like i said to work with the city we've done everything that they asked for thank you sir thank you sir so i don't know if i actually got the answer to the fee simple yes or no okay no worries paul are you finished i'm finished for now deborah um my question is looking at compatibility was what was there some theorem that on a main thoroughfare that the compatibility should should arc up instead of little to big what i'm concerned about of course is a canyon effect on a busy thorough thoroughfare did i mean i don't think i dreamed that up it seemed to me that what a long time ago when we did the a b and c there was some thought about it would go like this if you're playing legos you know you go the height goes to more the behind rather than stationary along the the very edge of a busy thoroughfare so no i don't your question that's my question no but i think it makes sense what you're saying kind of a tiered type of fact i mean remember this could be a three story product this doesn't have to be one or two story i think they kind of get lost here in the shuffle they certainly can do a three story and of course a lot depends on the size of units and the other things they want to do but yeah i think a three story in this situation can be pretty good i think george and other staff have been pretty clear with uh the representative and developer that uh there's a lot of two story in the area there's some three story you know some of the new townhomes were all two and three story there they're just down the road so it really comes down to what's the fit what is the compatibility how and what's going to be the future of this corridor and in our mind in my mind it's it's more of a three story type product and we'd love to see more of a mixed use i also could see some lots being assembled not just a lot i could see things being assembled over a period of time yeah yeah i mean i i want to be clear there's no objection to doing something that's a little more substantial than that that that's out there and certainly there is the right to request that four store we just think that's too much and we've been consistent in that uh position with the applicant and developer and um you know our recommendation to you and again to the city commission is that that four story request not be not be granted other questions then does there anyone from the public wish to speak to this thank you uh i uh my name is billy labree i live at 451 palmetto street here in dunedin i've lived in pinellas county for 67 years i've only been in dunedin for 20 years at the same address and um yeah i drive home and uh 20 years things have changed a lot here in dunedin and i come down skinner boulevard every day to to come home and and you all have done a real nice job with bringing in the roundabouts and all the construction and new developments that are all you've done all up and down skinner boulevard and uh everything looks good but if you won't go up and down skinner boulevard all the new developments and all the remodels everybody's done is all one story or two stories and i think you know putting anything more than that in there is just uh it's like the highest point there on skinner and that canyon effect uh that's going to be the start of it and it's not going to fit in and you're right about the properties to the east of it that all needs to be redeveloped but to the west there's a couple of properties there that were just built 20 years ago there's some offices right there and all um and they're one story i look at that and i see people coming down the road and saying oh there's a parking garage and they're going to try to turn in there because that's what it looks like and that's what they're going to see also your um your hole there they need to do something with that because there's been an ongoing problem since they built that building with water runoff when we get those gully washers in the summertime that retention pond retention hole fills right up and the water comes flowing down because all the water flows to the north and it all comes in the properties to the north and it comes right up to my back door so what are they going to do you know they need to do something with the water already there's already a problem thanks thank you i'm sabra rosen and i live on 445 palmetto street directly behind that three-story building it's horrible um water flows into my yard i had a contractor out today he's like oh the fence posts the the concrete supposed to be underground it was just put in two years ago or a year ago and that's their their fence 434 um and so water is already pooling in the back backyard every single time i don't know where this building's water is going to go um you said there's an underground water system that you're going to put in but there's i guess a billy he's my neighbor said that there's an underground water system too and that's probably why all the water is in my yard the trash from the current building is constantly falling in my yard despite this new fence i don't know where you guys are going to put the trash but i don't really need any more in my yard there's constantly broken glass cigarettes everything it's disgusting um this building doesn't fit in it looks like a parking garage i i i don't understand how it fits with the rest of the buildings near us there's brand new like he said um offices um i just also worry that you know again if we build another three-story building four-story building this just gives people more reason to build another one and another one just like we're doing downtown um i'm just hearing from them that if they limit it to two stories they're going to lose money on it or make less money um so it's really not about the people in the area it's about the developers trying to change the heart of dunedin make more money um but really not take into account the people that already live there um i'm supposed to do 250 000 worth of renovations to my home and i'm i'm like should i even bother with this giant thing right behind me um so hopefully we can get a two-story building i'm happy with that um but i don't think that this is appropriate thank you my name is jane beauchamp and i also live on palmetto street for 39 palmetto street and my neighbors i love them all and i agree with the progress in dunedin is beautiful i'm a native of 78 years born in clearwater lived in dunedin for most of my life the progress is beautiful but mainly it's the size it's so much building every where we look we see something come down and then something brand new go up there's no land left in this county there's no land left but besides all of that mostly it is just the water problem i have my house you know it it takes every penny i can just afford to keep my house let alone remodel and landscape if i had to worry about water problems coming from this new structure it's it's just too much it's too big maybe something smaller and i know that one day and i probably will live to see all the changes made on skinner and that's wonderful but i think it just needs to be more quaint more friendly more more like just little restaurants open the few restaurants that are there they're so nice they're so nice and they're quaint and they're clean maybe they're not you know four hundred thousand dollar units going up but they're just something that's really lovely thank you thank you there anyone else wants to speak good evening i'm donald eicher at 446 skinner boulevard the lot right next to east of his um my major concerns are quality of life is going to hinder for me on that property due to the size of the building being four stories and all the windows on be on the one side and there'll be no privacy in my backyard at all for one the second thing is the water runoff from the existing two-story building they built in the back it floods me out it floods all my neighbors out behind me i don't know if they plan on digging a bigger pond or trying to even share that pond that's another main concern the other thing is i think if you consider keep putting big buildings like this in the downtown corridor area you're going to lose revenue from people that come down for their old dunedin charm i mean i i that's why a lot of people come here it's like key west they come down for the buildings the charm the oldest not the four-story concrete buildings and make it look like las vegas i guess and um so that's about all the recommendations i can say thank you for hearing me thank you very much is there anyone else that wishes to speak staff applicant do you want to respond to anything you've heard but no speeches please sir mr chair uh just in response specifically to the comments that we heard um again uh the this is about bringing this property up to code right up to current code and that includes storm water and it includes attenuation and treatment and there is a high quality storm water vault that is shown on the plans that will retain the water from this site on this site and it will not it will improve whatever the current uh runoff conditions are it will not make it worse it will improve it and that's what this is all about it's about revitalizing the site consistent with the comp plan and the current code as envisioned by the goals policies and objectives of the current code and the current comp plan and i the canyon effect was brought up i think that you know board member benjamin brought up a good point first off there's no way that this prod property can be developed with any number of units more than one without structured parking it's not going to work it has to have structured parking on a point two one acre site to have even four units and so you're going to have to have that first level as parking okay and if you had a zero foot setback on the on a two-story building with a 10 foot step back on the second floor that would create a huge uh canyon effect on the sidewalk so this is pushed back and i think that that is an important design element we're designing for compatibility under the current vision to revitalize the property and revitalize the area and this is a reasonable and best use of the property considering all of those things and making the improvements that are required any reduction is going to impact the ability to redevelop the site period and then it will just continue to be non-conforming and an eyesore and that's what we don't want to do um that's that's what i have to say sir thank you thank you do we have a motion please i have questions well well let's hear a motion and then we'll deal with questions please well the questions might affect the motion yeah we're going to address the question okay paul thank you um question i guess for staff if you know or maybe the developer um with the way that the uh vehicles are going to um park underneath there there's they're putting in an additional curb cut on skinner has that already been cleared with dot from previous um dealings with them i remember a lot of times that was difficult getting the additional curb cut so um that's a question for staff i'll defer to the applicant on that yes okay thank you um with regards to sizing in that area um i drove by and i saw the the demolition has occurred at the johnson's furniture site um i haven't seen any renderings for that do do we know what size building as that's kind of coming in off of bass and and skinner in that area and what's going to be the heights out there it's a one-story chase bank okay without a drive-through it's another one of our code requirements in order to make you know walkable type urban environment all right but it's going to be one story and then but then the same question for directly across the street with that with oak bend and those town homes i don't think we we've talked about those or showed those in any of the renderings and and those aren't are new and so i'm curious of the height of those and i also do know too that they did some extra work for the neighbors behind them because they did tower over those single family homes back behind them so there there was uh different things done to be able to help protect the the privacy of those people back there and thinking well let me just ask answer the question about the the height if you know it off the top of your head so it's in i'd have to go back into our powerpoint uh mr stanick because i think it was part of our compatibility exhibit and i don't have that in front of me so i i might need a little bit of time to take a look at that we'll see if i can find it okay and then um i i also have one other question that i hopefully will be done um but uh one of the the speakers that came up mentioned about the trash and then what is i know for the the site that you're developing that the the cans are going to be brought up front but what about the existing property that you where is their trash going how is that going to we don't own that property we own the we own only the front portion that front skinner we don't own the property to the rear okay so i understand that but but uh with working with the city how are they going to actually get back there to remove the trash yeah so we've been brought out he's on trash he's asking how is their trash oh they have a sidewalk there's a sidewalk that we're building with the full access to the front okay roll their trash out to the curb okay right now it's contained how they have it it's contained in the fenced area right they open the fence and they roll it out right now to the curb oh they run it roll it out now to skinner roll it out the trash they don't come in okay that yeah yeah now you got my question about you get your answer okay trash on this property will be fully enclosed in the garage and rolled out and the trash for the other property will not change it's the same way as it has been we don't have any control over that property or what they do they will have access to roll their trash out for sure there will be a right of easement that provides them access to roll out their trash to the front which is i believe what they're supposed to be doing but i don't personally know because i don't manage that property and no no i understand that but with the way the the property has been set up for 20 years or whatever if there was a trash vehicle going in there to pick it up that was kind of my question and and not knowing how that that that would transition to you know the new property owner and and the building that it would now be in front of that taking up some of that excess space the trash vehicle doesn't go over your property bill pickram bill pickram okay paul has your question been answered so i it's hard for me yeah i'm not sure if my question has been answered or or not um so i guess i'll just leave it at that and then going back to the storm water and and you're talking about this site so this is mr reinhold site okay so i'm still concerned about the property behind you since part of your site is taking that retention hole away so where does their storm water go now if what was so that retention that i understand so that that hole will still be there so there and that was my question initially and and so i didn't necessarily get that answer so you're not doing anything with the the property behind you storm water that's correct nor nor would we be allowed to without their consent this is again going back to the problem in that area with the non-conforming lots and the more non-conforming you keep it the worse it's going to get and so the only way to change that is to revitalize the area by having new development redevelopment yeah i'm still i'm i'm still lost on that because based on what it looked like your property footprint was you were encroaching on that area okay okay is your question answered it is i don't like the answer well well that's right my questions are easy go okay real quick trash handling so i presume it's five it's a receptacle for each unit so they'll have a trash receptacle and a recycle receptacle so it could be that many cans out on the street for the truck to pick up yeah yeah okay real quick is that going to be any problem with the garbage truck blocking skinner or anything picking up all the cans yeah not much we can do about it but i don't have bill's comments in front of me um so we don't know i'm sure it's something that would be worked out though as part of infrastructure okay got it second thing the water runoff i know like half of that lot is already concrete so it's impervious the vault that's being put under this uh structure what level rain level is that thing built to hold and is it possible to to have it hold even more just because runoff seems to be a large issue in that neighborhood the data from the civil engineer plans but i don't have a large copy with me okay um if that was asked of us we'd be more than happy to comply or more happy to like if they're like hey could you build it a little bigger you know more than happy to do that okay yeah more than happy to do that okay i have no more thank you i'm ready to make a motion please do um uh mr onks with all due um with all due respect for your argument i still believe that there is a real issue with compatibility and i re in in this case i'm going to accept the um staff's recommendation that would be my motion is there a second that's okay i tried can i make a new motion the motion dies i'll make a motion that we advance um dr2025-003 to the city commission with the caveats uh that the water holding system um be assessed to make sure it has as much capacity as possible well let's see if we have a second okay but you oh is there okay thank you um you know you you realize that it has to go to the commission to even get the third you realize that to even get a third is that correct that's what that's correct no to get the fourth so it's 46 feet okay i can correct the motion that the motion um that we move it forward to the city commission with uh recommendation to allow the 42 feet and without the temp to consider to consider the 42 foot height and waiver of the 10 foot setback due to the entire setback of that space and with the caveat that the water retention system be maximized to avoid water in the neighboring areas let me sorry let me step in so your motion is to recommend approval the approval of the design review would require essentially that waiver of um the height correct and the step back waiver as well in reference so that's already going to be part of your motions once you recommend approval you don't really have to specify the first just want to clarify so we don't get these misunderstandings now there is an additional condition in regards to some water correct okay so that's the only one that we need to specify on the record so back to the original motion i make a motion to approve the r202025-003 to proceed to the commission with the caveat that water holding be expanded to its maximum capacity thank you all in favor aye aye opposed the ayes have it okay we are done for this evening take care everybody wait didn't we have more in the agenda no we have oh we're not done sorry about that yeah i think we're at the halfway point this has been a long boy i have run out of gas for sure we need okay okay so so let's keep moving uh so selection of the chair and vice chair of the lpa for 2026. do we have uh any nominations i have a nomination to nominate kevin benjamin as chair all in favor we need a second we need a second on that i can't vote kevin for myself we don't have to have a second on on the motion for the nomination this record okay so we don't require unless someone would like to nominate someone else yeah right yes okay we have any other uh nominations for chairs no we do not have other nominations so let's vote all in favor aye aye opposed ayes have it any public input on that sylvia do you have anything to say michelle do we make a motion then for vice chair that's our i would like to make a motion we're moving on chair go right back ahead and claim your meeting please move right along okay so we are now open for nominations for the vice chair please i'm going to nominate paul stanick okay and and i was going to nominate deborah pine nope too late we got to vote on the first one are there other nominations oh yes so we have two nominations no no no no we just have one so you are not accepting i will not accept no thank you okay can you do that yes yes so we just have one correct all right all in favor aye opposed all right we're done with that one we have one more thing recommendation to select members for the local academy we have one vacancy of the lba and we typically move our alternate number one into a regular position leaving the alternate vacancy open we are now open for recommendations of of applicants to the alternate vacancy and chair i'm happy to report that tonight we do have one of the applicants present that would be sylvia i can also share that the others have all attended a meeting other than jude zentmeyer she she has not yet confirmed attendance at a meeting super all right any public input on that i guess sylvia what do you want to say to to us please i represent 221 main street downtown dunedin um i'd be honored to be on this on the committee on the board here i've been on a few boards in dunedin on the community on the cra advisory board i've also been on the board for the jolly trolley so i i think i would have some input and some knowledge to be able to be on this board as well because i do own multiple parcels downtown and i'm very passionate about downtown dunedin and the development that does happen here um and i appreciate you considering me for it thank you um can you state again what we're actually doing so we have we have the vacancy but we're so it's a point right we are turning it okay i'm asking for a motion to move jim jim johns to be a regular member and for sylvia to be the ultimate that is what we're voting is that that's correct is that we alternate or alternate number one alternate number two tim young goes to alternate number one she would come to alternate the park's office is responsible for one and two it's you all you're worried about is alternate okay okay okay yep okay well um i have another uh nomination you know i've really thought about this and i'll do respect to sylvia but i really believe we could use an architect back on this board and i would bring up dan massaro thank you so let's vote on these two so let's vote on sylvia first all in favor aye all opposed well i think you you just got one four and i mean yeah we're at four abstentions i'm having trouble processing this because i'm i'm for both of them so you have an attorney so but you need to vote for one or not vote at all so no wait can i start you have you have to vote the number one the first alternate that we're bringing up the architect right no that would be the alternate that we're there's two are moving up correct no ma'am so jim johns as alternate the longest we'll move up and then but we have one alternate we can replace that will leave one alternate vacancy one dan massaro dan massaro who was on it many years ago for many years yes and he he is an architect we i with okay okay let's see if there are other questions about what it is we're doing now are there any other questions so you're nominating for the alternate member vacancy that's the only position that you're considering right now okay okay and i nominated sylvia and got one vote and four abstentions yeah nobody made it okay so we're going to need a formal verbal vote on that nomination well i would say then it carries right because it's unanimous okay slow it out slow it out okay so so we have one in favor all opposed please say nay okay i want to go back to being in favor and if i can just mention this too i love dan um but i would also like to see somebody who hasn't been on this board for a long time so you're voting for sylvia is that correct that is correct thank you and wait two opposed i'm sorry two four and who are those who are not voting for sylvia okay let's let's do this again because we need a clear record you're recommending approval of sylvia the current nominee for appointment on this alternate member chair right so you're voting for her recommended approval as an alternate member you have a nomination we don't need a second correct for this you do you do all right so okay so we have a nomination i need a second for this motion to even be voted on okay do we have a second on the sylvia nomination we do yeah paul paul okay perfect we have it so right now we have the formal motion to recommend approval of sylvia as your alternate member we're going to vote on this now okay and i honestly i think a a roll call would be best at this point thank you oh member stanick yay yes member kines yay member benjamin yes member karen and member telford nay that is four that would give that would approve sylvia and it's done i think we are done everything now is that correct yes sir i move that we adjourn that's been a long one thank you thank you so much really you deserve it i don't feel like