Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Item 1]

[00:00:11]

GOOD EVENING. TODAY IS FEBRUARY 26.

IT'S 5:30 P.M. WE ARE CONVENING THE PLANNING AND ADVISORY BOARD WORKSHOP WHERE WE WILL BE DISCUSSING AN ITEM THAT WAS CONTINUING FROM OUR LAST MEETING.

WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED INFORMATION PROVIDED BY KELLY AND HER DEPARTMENT. ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, IS

THERE COPIES FOR THEM AS WELL? >> I WILL ALSO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE ON THE SCREEN. SINCE THIS IS A WORKSHOP, WILL YOU TAKE A ROLL CALL FOR US SO WE AT LEAST HAVE OUR NAMES.

ROLL CALL. >> SINCE THIS IS A WORKSHOP, IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CASUAL THAN OUR MEETINGS.

WE WILL JUST HAVE NICE DISCUSSION.

KELLY HAS DONE SOME WORK TO LEAD US OFF IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO START OUR CONVERSATIONS. THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING IN MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WHO ALSO COME TO BE PART OF OUR

[Items 3 & 5]

CONVERSATION. >> ALL GET STARTED WITH THE MATERIALS. MOST OF YOU HAVE COPIES OR THERE ARE COPIES AVAILABLE HERE AND I WILL PUT IT ON THE SCREEN.

THE REVIEW OF MATERIALS OUT PROVIDE TO YOU IS THE FIRST TIME THEY'VE BEEN SEEN. THEY ARE CREATED TODAY.

I WANTED TO GO BACK, ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEFT THIS DISCUSSION WITH AT THE PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING WAS THE INTEREST OF LEARNING WHAT ARE WE SOLVING FOR SO TO SPEAK AND IS THE SOLUTION WERE LOOKING AT KEEPING WITH THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE SOLVING. IN TRYING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD THE MEETING MINUTES FROM JUNE 16, 2018 WHERE THERE WAS THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION WHICH DIRECTED THE PLANNING BOARD TAKE A LOOK AT BUILDING HIGH ENCROACHMENTS. THERE WERE SOME OTHER BUILDING HEIGHT ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED, SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN RESOLVED AT THIS TIME, BUT ONE OF THE FOCAL ITEMS THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS HEIGHT ENCROACHMENT, THOSE THAT EXTEND BEYOND THE ROOFLINE. I THINK EVERYONE CAN PICTURE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. SO THE PROPOSAL THAT THE BOARD WAS CONSIDERING UP TO NOW INVOLVED LANGUAGE THAT WOULD AFFECT ALL CITY PROPERTIES FAIRLY, WHETHER IT WAS RESIDENTIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL, BUT IT AFFECTED EVERYONE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE ZONING DISTRICT AND LIMITED THE HIGH ENCROACHMENTS THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

AFTER THAT MEETING, AND HAVING REVIEWED IT, IT CAUSED ME TOO PAUSE AND THINK WHAT ARE WE SOLVING FOR.

WITHOUT TRYING TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THAT, I WANTED THE SUBCOMMITTEE THIS EVENING TO REALLY THINK ABOUT SEVERAL PRIMARY QUESTIONS. THE FIRST IS.

ARE WE LIMITING IT TO BASED ON ZONING DISTRICT OR IS THERE A LOCATION YOU ARE WANTING TO RESTRICT THIS IN OR IS IT SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SEE ESTABLISHED CITYWIDE? THOSE ARE THE THREE KINDS OF QUESTIONS BASED ON THE OUTCOME OF THAT CONSENSUS I DO HAVE SOME LANGUAGE AND THAT HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED HERE THIS EVENING. IT SPEAKS TO HOW WE MIGHT APPROACH IT FOR PURPOSES OF US BEING ABLE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION HERE TONIGHT AND BE PRODUCTIVE I WILL MOVE IT BACK TO THE FULL BOARD AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING SO, TO START, WE HAVE THREE QUESTIONS THEN. WHAT ARE WE SOLVING FOR?

[00:05:01]

IS THIS GOING TO BE BY ZONING DISTRICT OR LOCATION, AND IS THE CITYWIDE OR SPECIFIC TO, ISN'T IT ALSO THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER IT'S RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL?

IS THAT PART. >> YES, I THINK SO.

>> FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WE WERE SO CLOSE AT OUR MEETING TO VOTE, I WASN'T VOTING, BUT YOU GUYS WERE VOTING.

SOME OF OUR MEMBERS HAVE BEEN LISTENING FOR TWO AND HALF YEARS ON THIS CONVERSATION. ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS HAD AN ISSUE THAT FELT LIKE WE WEREN'T QUITE THERE YET, AND SO THAT'S REALLY WHY WE THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE THIS WORKSHOP TO FLESH THIS OUT AND TRY TO MOVE FORWARD. MY OPINION IS THAT THIS SHOULD BE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE LOCATION OF THE HEIGHT. I'M NOT SURE IF I'M REPAIRED

TALK ABOUT COMMERCIAL. >> AND I AGREE WITH YOU, ESPECIALLY HEARING ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE VERSED WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES AND OBSTACLES IN MAKING THESE DECISIONS, THEY KNOW A LOT MORE THAN WE DO ABOUT ALL OF THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, ESPECIALLY WITH COMMERCIAL, SO FLOOD ZONES HAVE CHANGED, RULES HAVE CHANGED WITH THE CCC L.

I KNOW WE HAVE SOME NUM MEMBERS WHO KEEP TALKING ABOUT WE BUILD ALL THESE HOMES IN THE OLD DAYS BUT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD THOSE ANYMORE. YOU ARE NOT A LOT ALLOWED TO HAVE FIRST FLOOR RESIDENTIAL ON THE OCEANFRONT AND I THINK REALLY, ULTIMATELY THE PROBLEM WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE IS PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TO SEE THE ELEVATOR SHAFT AND THEY DON'T LIKE TO SEE THE PARAPET WALLS. TO ME THAT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM, BUT IF WE BLANKET ALL OF THIS, THAT IS GOING TO ELIMINATE A LOT OF REALLY CUTE AND FUN DOWNTOWN POSSIBILITIES WITH THE STANDARD MARINE BUILDING, WITH FIFTH STREET LOFTS, THAT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED IF THAT WASN'T ALREADY THROUGH, AND I DON'T LIKE THAT. I'M KIND OF FOR LIMITING IT TO OCEANFRONT OR RESIDENTIAL, AND I THINK WE ARE JUST PUTTING WAY TOO MUCH INTO IT. IF WE ELIMINATED THE ELEVATOR SHAFT AND THE PARAPET WALL, I THINK EVERYONE WHO HAS BEEN COMING AND VOICING THEIR OPINION AND NOT LIKING THE WAY THE OCEANFRONT LOOKS, YOU REALLY COULDN'T SEE OVER ANYWAY.

I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY.

>> WOULD IT SOLVE, I GUESS WE ARE SOLVING FOR X RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS LIKE AN EQUATION. X PLUS Y EQUALS HEIGHT.

>> AND I THINK, I LIKED, I'M SORRY YOUR NAME AGAIN, WHEN HE BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE ANGLE AND THE LINE OF VISION AND EVEN IF THEY DID PUT AN AIR CONDITIONING UNIT ON TOP, HABIT SETBACK X AMOUNT OF FEET SO EVEN THAT WOULD BE IN THE WAY BUT WITH THE WAY THE LOCKS ARE WE REALLY NEED TO ALLOW AND BE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBLE WITH STUFF LIKE THAT.

>> I THINK OF THE PAST TWO WEEKS SINCE WE HAD OUR REGULAR MEETING I KIND OF HAD AN EPIPHANY WHICH IS A LITTLE SCARY, HOWEVER, THE MORE I GOT THINKING ABOUT IT, I HAVE A NEIGHBOR WHO WAS A SAGE LONG-TERM RESIDENT AND WE JUST GOT TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE THING. I THINK THE ISSUE IS REALLY COME UP ALONG THE BEACH. THE 35-FOOT RULE, WERE NOT TRYING TO REWRITE HISTORY. THERE ARE SOME VARIANCES THAT THIS DOCUMENT, AS IT'S WRITTEN, ALLOWS RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE TRYING TO TIGHTEN UP AND IT APPEARS THAT MOSTLY EMOTION HAS BEEN ON THE OCEAN SIDE. NIGHT ON EIGHTH STREET OR NINTH STREET OR UP WHEREVER. I'M NOT SO SURE THE SIMPLE SOLUTION IS TO JUST TIGHTEN UP THE RESTRICTION WE WANT ON THAT ZONE, I'LL CALL IT THE 800-FOOT ZONE ALONG THE OCEANSIDE.

[00:10:04]

THE OTHER THING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED WOULD BE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER ANOTHER, I DON'T KNOW, LET'S CALL IT A 1000-FOOT ZONE THAT WOULD REACH THE WEST SIDE OF FLETCHER AND GO OVER TOWARD EGAN'S CREEK. YOU MIGHT WANT TO DO SOME RESTRICTING THERE. I'M NOT SURE IT'S NECESSARY BASED ON THE TRAIN BUT IT'S JUST ANOTHER THOUGHT.

YOU MIGHT HAVE A STRIP OF LAND THERE.

BUT I THINK WE ARE REALLY, I LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER ZONES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE AND I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO MESS WITH.

THERE ARE SOME CREATIVE THOUGHTS GOING ON.

IT'S BASICALLY THE EIGHTH STREET CORRIDOR AND THERE'S BEEN AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK DONE. I SUSPECT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BASICALLY HONE UP SOME SOLUTIONS FOR IT.

AT SOME TIME WE WILL SEE IT. I DON'T WANT TO SEE US TO GET TO UNPREDICTABLE OR TOO WISHY-WASHY IN TERMS OF CHANGE, A LOT OF PEOPLE DID A LOT OF WORK ON IT AND THE MORE I LOOKED, THE MORE I SEE THEY DID A VERY GOOD JOB. I WOULD BE OF THE OPINION THAT, IF WE ADDRESSED THE ISSUES TO PUT ADDITIONAL CONSTRAINTS OR RESTRAINTS ON THE 800-FOOT SECTION ALONG THE OCEAN, BASICALLY THE FLETCHER CORRIDOR, THAT MIGHT SOLVE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEM. I WOULD MAYBE SUGGEST THAT WE TALK TO COMMISSIONER ROSS. HE'S BEEN PART OF IT AND LET A LOT MORE DISCUSSIONS THAN I HAVE TO SEE HOW HE FEELS ABOUT IT.

>> KELLY SENT AN EXCELLENT ATTACHMENT TO US IN PREPARATION FOR OUR MEETING WHERE IT WAS THE PUBLIC RECORD OF THE MEETING IN 2018, WAS IT JUNE, YES, JUNE 2018 WHERE COMMISSIONER ROSS WAS OUTLINING WHAT HE EXPECTED FROM THE PAB TO COME FORTH WITH. ONE OF THEM WAS STRENGTHENING THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. I THINK THAT GOES ALONG WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. WHAT I THINK THOUGH WE NEED TO GET, I DON'T WANT TO SAY CREATIVE, BUT THE ISSUE OF THE ELEVATOR SHAFT IS REALLY A FUNCTION OF WANTING TO GO UP THREE STORIES AND HAVE A FLAT ROOF BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO GET ONTO THE ROOF AND SO THAT'S WHERE THEY SAY WELL I HAVE TO HAVE AN ELEVATOR SHAFT OR A STAIRCASE IN ORDER TO GET UP TO

THE TOP OF THE BUILDING. >> THAT DOESN'T OFFEND ME.

IF THEY HAD THOSE LITTLE WIRES THAT ARE SEE-THROUGH AND HAD A LITTLE VIEWING DECK, THAT'S NOT OFFENSIVE AT ALL AND I'VE SEEN HOUSES DO BOTH. IT'S REALLY JUST THIS BIG SHAFT THAT I THINK, LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC, THAT'S WHAT THEY DON'T

LIKE ARCHITECTURALLY. >> I TOO, EVER SINCE OUR MEETING, I HAVE REFLECTED A LOT ON THIS AND I REALLY, YOUR COMMENTS OVER THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD REALLY SORT OF KEPT COMING BACK TO ME WHICH IS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE HOUSES JUST BEING BOXES AND THAT THERE IS NO, I DON'T WANT TO SAY WIGGLE ROOM, BUT AREA FOR CREATIVITY BY AN ARCHITECT OR SOMEONE WHO HAS PURCHASED A VERY EXPENSIVE LOT LOOKING AT THE OCEAN. THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EVERY SINGLE SQUARE INCH OF ROOM THEY CAN POSSIBLY DO AND THEY WANT TO GO UP AS HIGH AS THEY CAN POSSIBLY GO.

WE HAVE A RULE THAT SERVED US WELL, 35 FEET.

I THINK THAT, ONE OF MY THOUGHTS IS IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A FLAT DECK AND ACCESS TO THAT AND PUT YOUR PARAPET OR YOUR GRILL OUT THERE, YOU CAN'T TAKE THAT ELEVATOR SHAFT AND GO UP ANY

HIGHER. >> SO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET,

35 FEET. >> SO YOU STOP AT TWO STORIES.

IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A FLAT ROOF TOP.

>> SO IT'S NOT A TRUE TWO-STORY SPOUSE.

>> THAT'S TRUE, BUT THEY HAVE THIS ENVELOPE OF 35 FEET AND IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A ROOFTOP DECK AND ALL THE AMENITIES, THEY STILL HAVE THE VIEW. THERE IS NO ONE IN FRONT OF THEM

[00:15:03]

IN FRONT OF THE BEACH SO THEY STILL HAVE THE VIEW OF THE BEACH SO IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT WHEN THEY BUILD AND ACCESS STAIRCASE OR WHATEVER ELEVATOR THEY WANT, THEY BUILT IT, AS LONG AS IT FITS INTO THAT 35 FEET SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT, THEN THEY BUILT IT NO HIGHER THAN 35.

THAT PROBABLY COULD MEAN THAT YOU COULD HAVE 10-FOOT CEILINGS, 12-FOOT CEILINGS, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH YOU HAVE TO HAVE BETWEEN THE FLOORS IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THAT SPACE. BUT IF YOU SAY YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT BUT 35 IS IT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 1500 FOOTPRINT AND NOBODY'S GONNA BUILD 1500 SQUARE-FOOT HOUSE WITH THESE LOTS. I'VE HEARD THE COMMENTS PEOPLE MAKE, THEY DON'T SEEM TO CARE ABOUT THE ECONOMY OR VALUE OF THESE HOUSES EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE PAYING THE BULK OF THE TAXES, WHICH, AND IT'S NOT JUST TO DECIDE WHAT THEIR ARCHITECTURAL DESIRE IS, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO, HOWEVER WE ARE MAKING THESE RULES AND CHANGING THINGS FOR IT NOT BE US TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO JUST BUILD UP BUNCH OF BOXES.

THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO. >> BUT IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU DON'T, YOU GO UP, YOU CAN GO UP THREE STORIES, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET TO THE TOP IF YOU WANT TO HAVE YOUR ROOFTOP ACCESS.

>> BASICALLY STOP ME IF I'M SAYING THIS WRONG, BUT NOBODY HAS EVER COMPLAINED ABOUT FIREPLACES ON THE SIDE.

THOSE LOOK BEAUTIFUL ALONG THE BEACH AND NOBODY CARED ABOUT SOME OF THE STEEPLES AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS, THOSE GO OVER BUT IT'S JUST THAT ELEVATOR SHAFT THAT EVERYBODY'S HAVING A PROBLEM WITH. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, IF ALL WE DID IS TAKE OUT THE ELEVATOR SHAFT AND THE PARAPET WALL THAT JUST LOOKS LIKE THIS BIG WALL AND HAVE MORE OF A SEE-THROUGH OR STILL BE ABLE TO DO THE FIREPLACES BECAUSE I'M SPOKE WITH MY ARCHITECT, IT HAS TO GO HOWEVER MANY FEET ABOVE THE HOUSE OR IT'S NOT SAFE, BUT IF SUMMARY ONCE A FIREPLACE THEN

YOU'RE BACK TO A BOX. >> WE EXEMPT CHIMNEYS?

>> THAT'S WHY I SAID STOP.

TO ALL WE REALLY NEED TO DO THEN IS DESCRIBE THESE TWO THINGS, AND WE STILL HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, WE'VE MADE EVERYBODY HAPPY AND WERE NOT DISCOURAGING EVERYTHING ELSE. I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN GET TO THE TOP OF YOUR ROOF WITHOUT SOME STRUCTURE GOING UP ABOVE

35 FEET. >> THERE IS ONE ON THE OCEAN AND IT'S NOT THE ONE EVERYBODY DOESN'T LIKE AND IT HAS THE ALUMINUM WIRES OR WHATEVER THEY ARE.

>> THANK YOU. SCRATCH THAT FROM.

TOP AND THAT'S IT. I'M JUST THINKING SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS ACCEPTABLE BUT IT STAIRS, IT'S NOT AN ELEVATOR SHAFT BUT IT DOES GO OVER THAT 35 MARK.

IF SOMEBODY NEEDED TO GET TO THEIR AIR CONDITIONING UNIT AND THAT WAS UP THERE WITH THIS AROUND IT, THAT DOESN'T OFFEND

ME. >> WHERE IS THAT? IS THERE A DEFINITION THAT TALKS ABOUT WHAT CURRENTLY CAN BE

ABOVE THE 35-FOOT LIMIT. >> IN THE MATERIALS YOU HAVE THERE, I HAVE INCLUDED.

I ALSO INCLUDED THE MOST RECENT LANGUAGE THAT THE BOARD CONSIDERS UP TO THIS POINT. SO BETWEEN THOSE TWO INITIAL

FUNCTIONS. >> THERE WAS A DEFINITION THAT

TALKS ABOUT 35 FEET. >> ROOFTOP ARCHITECTURAL

FEATURES AND ONE -- >> I'M LOOKING, I KNOW IT'S IN HERE I JUST CAN'T FIND, IT DEFINES EVERYTHING THAT IS A

[00:20:06]

ALLOWED ABOVE THE 35 FEET. >> THAT'S IN THAT FOR.2.0 THREE

C-SECTION. >> YES C2.

IT STATES CALCULATION OF THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT SHALL NOT INCLUDE ATTACHMENTS SUCH AS CHIMNEYS, ELEVATOR SHAFTS, ANTENNAS, DECORATIVE OR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT, ENCLOSURES, WEATHERVANE'S AND OTHER SIMILAR MINOR BUILDING FEATURES. THAT'S REALLY WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING SOME LIMITS ON. SO THAT'S NOT NEW.

THAT'S BEEN HERE. >> THAT IS YOUR CURRENT LANGUAGE. THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE DOCUMENT

I'VE GOT RIGHT NOW. >> BUT WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED IS TO STRIKE FROM APPURTENANCE THROUGH FEATURES.

>> AND MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO DO ALL THAT.

>> WELL, CERTAINLY THE ELEVATOR SHAFT WHICH KEEPS COMING BACK IS THE BIG ISSUE AND THE PARAPET WALL.

>> STAIR SHAFTS AS WELL. >> STAIR SHAFT, YES.

>> I JUST THINK THAT IF WE ARE SOLVING FOR THE ELEVATOR SHAFTS

OR STAIRCASE. >> SO MAY BE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO

HEAR FROM THE AUDIENCE? >> YES, I THINK THAT WOULD HELP

AT THIS POINT. >> IF YOU CAN JUST COME UP AND

GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> RON FLAKE, GATEWAY BOULEVARD SUITE 201M AS IN MIKE FERNANDINA BEACH.

I GUESS FROM YOUR STARTING BLOCKS THAT IS TO DETERMINE GEOGRAPHY OR IS TO DETERMINE WHAT WERE HERE TO FIX, WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. THE PROBLEM APPEARED TO BE, FROM WHAT EVERYBODY'S SAYING, APPEARS TO BE A FEW RESIDENTIAL PARTIES WHO HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF SOME LOSS OR POTENTIALLY AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE THAT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT THINK THERE IS.

I JUST THINK YOU JUST USE AN EXAMPLE AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT SOME OF THOSE EXAMPLES ARE JUST SO THEY CAN SAY HOW DID THEY ACHIEVE IT. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO PULL BACK, THEN THAT'S THE LANGUAGE YOU CORRECT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE RIGHTS AWAY FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD HOMES THERE FOR YEARS AND IF THEY TRY TO REPAIR IT OR RESTORE IT, IF YOU HAVE DAMAGE ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO REBUILD IF YOU HAVE A STORM? YOU'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT ALL THOSE THINGS IF ALL THE SUDDEN YOU HAVE A CRISIS AND A LOT OF UPSET HOMEOWNERS. I'M NOT THE PRIMARY SPOKESMAN TO BE A RESIDENTIAL GUY, BUT I BUILT ON THE OCEAN SEVERAL TI TIMES. I HAVE SEEN OTHER JURISDICTIONS. HOW THEY CONTROL IT IS THEY SAY THEY OCCUPY ABOVE LEVEL SO WHEN YOU STOP AT 35 FEET AND ONLY THE APERTURES OR THE OTHER ELEMENTS THAT ARE THERE, YOU CAN LIMIT THOSE THINGS IN HEIGHT AS LONG AS THEY ARE REASONABLE, I THINK, AND AVOID, SEE I LOOK AT THE ROOFTOP UNIT AND I SAY HOW YOU GET THERE. THE ONLY WHERE YOU CAN GET THERE IS YOU CAN STOP AN ELEVATOR ON THE SECOND FLOOR OR WHATEVER AND YOU CAN WALK UP STEPS TO THE THIRD FLOOR TO GET TO THE ROOFTOP. HOWEVER, I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY WELL I'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO GET PEOPLE UP THERE SO I HAVE TO HAVE STAIRS OR AN ELEVATOR AS AN OPTION.

THE ELEVATOR IS AN OPTION TO ME BUT IT CREATES AN OCCUPY A BOLT LEVEL. THAT'S MY VIEW.

DON'T YOU HAVE TO SET AN OCCUPANT LOAD ON A ROOF #THAT'S HOW MOST JURISDICTIONS SAY IT'S THE OCCUPY WILL LEVEL.

THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT YOU CAN CREATE ON BEAUTIFUL HOMES ALL OVER THE PLACE. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS YOU CAN DO WITH ELEVATIONS TO GET YOU NICE LEVELS.

WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE TRYING TO STICK TO THAT LEVEL OF 35 FEET SO, IN MY VIEW AND HISTORY WHEN I'VE TRIED TO BUILD HERE BEFORE AND ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT ROOFTOP THINGS, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS I ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD I COULDN'T DO

[00:25:04]

ANYTHING. I COULD MAINTAIN SOMETHING UP THERE THAT HAD TO BE STORED UP THERE AND THE ONLY THING THAT I COULD CREATE TO SCREEN THAT, WHICH USED TO BE CALLED THE SCREENING, MECHANICAL SCREENING FOR ROOFTOP UNITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT NOT AN ELEVATOR LANDING UP THERE, BUT AN ELEVATOR DOGHOUSE WHICH YOU HAVE TO HAVE IN A COMMERCIAL WORLD.

YOU DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO HAVE IT IN THE RESIDENTIAL WORLD, I GET, BUT THEY CAN BE STRADDLED LIFT UNITS.

OR HYDRAULIC, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE LIKE IT'S DONE IN SOME COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, MOST COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

SO THAT'S WHY I WAS SAYING JUST ATTACK THE PROBLEM.

IF THAT'S THE PROBLEM AND THAT'S EXAMPLE WHERE TWO OR THREE PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE, I PERCEIVE THAT THE CITIZENS, AND IF I OWNED THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THERE, WHICH I DON'T, BUT FOR PEOPLE THAT I WOULD BUILD FOR, I WOULD SAY PEOPLE WHO HAVE TRIED TO FOLLOW THE RULES ARE NOW THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALL GOING TO BE PUNISHED FOR THE THREE PEOPLE THAT TOOK ADVANTAGE OF US AS A CITY SO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE, I CAN'T QUALIFY IT BUT ARE SOME OUT THERE THAT I AME- SHOCKED GOT APPROVED.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. BUT THAT'S WHY I SAY, IF IT'S AN OCCUPY ABLE LEVEL, NOT TO MAINTAIN SOMETHING TO GO UP THERE AND FIX A LEAK ON THE ROOF OR GO UP THERE AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON SOMEBODY SHOULD BE ABOVE THAT IN MY VIEW OR MY ESTIMATION BECAUSE IF YOU DO OTHER THAN THAT YOU MAKE AN OCCUPANCY L LEVEL EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T HAVE A ROOF OVER IT. I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A LIVING ROOM WHERE YOU CAN LIVE AND SLEEP, BUT THAT WILL BE NEXT.

I'M JUST TELLING YOU. IT'S HAPPENING IN JURISDICTIONS AND I'VE SEEN IT AND EVERYTHING BECOMES TEMPORARY AND THEY PUT A TEMPORARY SYSTEM UP THERE AND NOW YOU THINK YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT IT IS NOW, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU GO TO, I WOULD JUST SHUT IT OFF. I WOULD WORK MY LANGUAGE TO PUT AN OCCUPY ABLE LEVEL AND I THINK YOU WILL SEE ABOUT 90% OF YOUR

RISK AND PROBLEMS GO AWAY. >> HOW WOULD YOU WORD THAT?

>> WHY DIDN'T SIT HERE AND WRITE IT UP, BUT I'M SURE THERE IS SOME DRAFTING LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE CREATED TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME THING FOR ME.

I'M IN A BE HONEST WITH YOU, WHEN I WAS DOING THE HOTEL AT MAIN BEACH, BELIEVE ME I HAD EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD COME UP WITH A GREAT DREAM, WHY DON'T WE HAVE A ROOFTOP BAR AND RESTAURANT. I SAID NOT GONNA FLY.

FIRST OF ALL I CONSIDER THAT, EVEN THOUGH I MAY HAVE THE RESTAURANT ON THE THIRD LEVEL, IT WAS SORT OF STUPID PLANNING BECAUSE YOU DON'T MAKE ROOMS AND MAKE A LOT OF MONEY IN A RESTAURANT. I MAKE MONEY SELLING ROOMS. NIGHT. I WAS ABLE TO SQUASH IT BY THAT FINANCIAL COMMON SENSE, BUT THE REALITY OF IT IS, TO GO UP THERE, THAT I WOULD HAVE TO MAKE OCCUPY AMPLE SPACE TO GET THERE. I HAVE TO CREATE AN ELEVATOR TO GET UP THERE BECAUSE I HAVE TO HANDLE PEOPLE AND I'VE GOT TO HAVE, AND OH BY THE WAY, WHEN YOU'RE UP THERE, HOW DO YOU MANAGE YOUR RESTROOMS. THAT'S WHY THE COMMERCIAL MARKET TO ME WOULD JUST NEVER FLY SO I HAVE NEVER, IN 25 YEARS LIVING HERE TRIED TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT I THINK WAS NOT INTENDED BY OUR CITY FATHERS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM, THE LEADERS OF THE COMMUNITY. I DON'T THINK WAS EVER INTENDED TO BE ABUSED THAT WAY, I SHOULDN'T SAY ABUSE THAT WAY, I SHOULD SAY USED OR INTERPRETED THAT WAY.

THE INTENT WAS TO LIMIT OCCUPATION OF ELEMENTS ABOVE THE 35-FOOT LINE. WHEN YOU DO THAT YOU PUT THAT LID ON THEIR, IT STILL DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T GET UP THERE ON THE 35-FOOT BECAUSE, 35 OR 45-FOOT, WHATEVER YOUR HEIGHT RESTRICTION IS. WE STILL HAVE LADDERS AND I CAN GET UP THERE AND MAINTAIN MYSELF BUT BECAUSE WE WERE SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, KNOWING THE RISK OF WHERE WE HAVE OUR HOTEL AT MAIN BEACH, THE IDEA WAS I CAN'T AFFORD TO PUT TOO MANY TALL THINGS UP THERE EVEN THOUGH I WANTED TO PUT A STAIRWELL. OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ABUSED IT, I'D BE ACCUSED OF THE SAME THING. WE STOPPED OUR LANDING ON THE FOURTH FLOOR AND WE GO UP BY LADDER.

IT'S A FOLD-DOWN SYSTEM THAT'S PROVIDED, AND THAT'S HOW WE GET

[00:30:01]

THERE. BUT THAT'S JUST TO MAINTENANCE.

IT'S NOT AN OCCUPY ABLE LEVEL, IT'S NOT DESIGNED TO BE ILL THERE THAN PROVIDE MAINTENANCE OR OBSERVATION OF BUILDING MATERIAL PRODUCTS, TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE MAINTAINING YOUR

BUILDING. >> IS THE ELEVATOR TECHNOLOGY SUCH THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE CASES THERE IS A SOLUTION THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE AN OVERHEAD, WHAT DO I CALL, AND OUT HOW.

>> I WILL TELL YOU, THE CODES EVEN REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE WHAT WE CALL THE DOGHOUSE, THE COMMERCIAL MARKET AND FRANKLY, I'VE SEEN THEM, THE MOST SHALLOW I'VE EVER SEEN THEM IS WHERE IT STOPPED ABOUT 18 INCHES ABOVE THE ROOF LINE ON A FLAT ROOF, BUT MOST OF OURS ARE 48 INCHES ABOVE THE ROOF LINE MINIMUM.

>> THAT'S COMMERCIAL. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> IT WOULDN'T BE AN EXTRAORDINARY CHALLENGING ACTIVITY FOR AN ARCHITECT TO DESIGN A RESIDENCE WITH AN

INTERIOR ELEVATOR. >> ABSOLUTELY.

IT'S DONE, EVERY HOME I'VE BUILT ON THE BEACH HAS HAD AN ELEVATOR INSIDE AND THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DEMAND.

I'VE NEVER PUSHED ANYTHING ABOVE THE LIMIT.

>> IT'S ONLY TO GET UP TO THE THIRD FLOOR FOR SAY OCCUPATIONAL, BUT IT'S TO HAVE PARTIES AND ENJOY.

>> THAT'S WHY WE SPEND ALL THE MONEY WE SPEND ON SYSTEMS THAT ALLOW US TO HAVE BALCONIES AND ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS, BREAKOUT AREAS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF LIVING ON THE BEACH.

I'VE JUST NEVER, UNTIL HERE RECENTLY, SEEN THE 35-FOOT RULE BE USED TO THE FACT THAT WE ARE NOW OCCUPYING LOADS ABOVE THAT OF THE 5-FOOT. THAT'S WHY I THINK, THAT'S THE WAY YOU WERE GOING TO ATTACK IT, YOUR PROBLEM SINKS RIGHT THERE.

>> NOW CHIMNEYS. >> CHIMNEY IS DIFFERENT.

IT'S GOT SOME CHIMNEYS DEPENDING ON WHAT TYPE OF SMOKING IT HAS TO BE 9 FEET OR SOMETHING ABOVE.

>> YES, IN ORDER TO GET IT ABOVE.

AGREED WITH RON, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE ISSUE IS REALLY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, ESPECIALLY ON THE OCEANFRONT, AND YES, I'VE BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT GAMES HAVE BEEN PLAYED IN THAT CALCULATION.

BEFORE YOU GUYS HAVE 35 FEET TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF, THE LEC SAID 35 FEET TO THE AVERAGE OF THE HIGHEST ROOF.

WELL GUESS WHAT HAPPENED? THINGS LIKE ELIZABETH.LODGE.

THAT BUILDING COULD NOT BE BUILT.

THE REASON IT WAS BUILT IS BECAUSE IT HAS A BIG ROOF SO YOU AND THE LOWEST ROOF, THE AVERAGE IS HALFWAY IN BETWEEN.

THAT'S THE GAMES YOU PLAY WHEN THE RULES ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.

SO THAT AFTER PEOPLE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT FOR SOME EXTRA HIGH HOUSES WHERE THE ROOF STARTED UP HERE BUT ENDED WAY DOWN HERE AND ALSO THEY GOT A 45-FOOT TALL HOUSE, AND THEN THE LDCS WERE CHANGED TO MAKE IT THE PEAK OF THE ROOF WHICH IS WAY THE COUNTY HAD ALWAYS CALCULATED THEIR BUILDING HEIGHT.

SO NOW WE ARE INTO THE TREND WITH FLAT ROOF DESIGN ESPECIALLY ON THE OCEANFRONT AND THERE IS SPACE OCCUPY ABLE ABOVE THE 35-FOOT LEVEL. THERE'S YOUR PROBLEM.

SO, IF YOU FOCUS ON RESIDENTIAL USE AND RESTRICT WHAT POPS UP ABOVE THAT, WHETHER YOU CALL IT OCCUPY AMPLE SPACE OR ELEVATOR SHAFT OR STAIRWAY, THEN YOU START TO NIP THAT IN THE BUD AND YOU DON'T DICTATE THE ARCHITECTURE.

OBVIOUSLY THAT WILL BE DICTATED BY CLIENTS AND WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD ON A SITE. BUT EVEN ON A 50-FOOT WIDE LOT, YOU CAN GET TUNA HALF, MAYBE THREE STORIES IF YOU DO A FLAT ROOF, BASICALLY IF 35 IS 35 WE START FROM 35 AND WORK OUR WAY DOWN AND WORK OUR WAY UP DEPENDING ON WHERE THE FLOOD ZONE IS. YOU HAVE TO WORK THAT FORMULA.

YOU MIGHT GET 8 FEET ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND NINE ON THE SECOND AND TEN ON THE THIRD DEPENDING ON THE DESIGN.

THERE IS FLEXIBILITY THERE BUT I THINK YOUR ISSUE IS PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE OCCUPY AMPLE SPACE.

WHAT IS THE WORDING ON THAT. HELP US HERE.

>> YOU WANT ME TOO WRITE THAT FOR YOU?

>> YES. >> WELL, I THINK YOUR CLOSE.

I THINK THE ISSUE WE HAD A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WHEN YOU GUYS

[00:35:02]

HAD YOUR MEETING WAS THE FACT THAT YOU ARE WRAPPING IN COMMERCIAL INTO THE MIX AND BASICALLY YOU ARE SLITTING YOUR OWN THROATS BECAUSE JUST AS A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT TO A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY DOESN'T MEAN ALL THE SUDDEN YOU CAN'T GET ABOVE THAT 45 WHEN WE KNOW THAT THE TREND IS YOU TRY TO MAXIMIZE WHAT YOU BUILT. ESPECIALLY COMMERCIAL WORDS VERY COSTLY. RESIDENTIAL IS A DIFFERENT STORY. YOU'VE GOT A LITTLE MORE ELBOW ROOM ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. 35 FEET CAN OBVIOUSLY BE A HARD NUMBER THAT YOU SETTLE ON AND YOU JUST GIVE A CAVEAT OF WHAT CAN GO ABOVE THAT AND WHAT CAN'T GO ABOVE THAT.

SO WHETHER THAT'S OCCUPY AMPLE SPACE, IF THAT'S THE LANGUAGE YOU WANT TO USE AS NO YOU CAN'T GO ABOVE 35 FEET, OR IF IT'S SPECIFICALLY ELEVATOR SHAFTS AND STAIRWAYS, THOSE ARE BOTH TECHNICALLY OCCUPY A BULLET FOR GO UP THERE TO GIVE YOU ACCESS.

SO THOSE OF THE TWO ISSUES. IF THAT LANGUAGE WAS IN THERE, THEN A LOT OF YOUR PROBLEM GOES AWAY.

>> I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT I GOT THINKING ABOUT AND HAVE A FEW OTHER POSITIONS ON IT IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS LIKE A STREET, HISTORICAL DISTRICT, HISTORICAL HISTORY HAS A WHOLE SET OF CONTROLS ENTER TRADE AREA.

DON'T MESS WITH IT. IT WORKS FINE.

LET THEM DO IT. YOU KNOW HOW TO DESIGN TO THEIR CRITERIA AND YOU CAN HAVE A HAPPY CUSTOMER.

I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT ANYBODY COMPLAINING ABOUT HEIGHTS IN THE HISTORICAL

DISTRICT. >> IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE AUDIENCE I THINK, OR THE NEIGHBORS.

YOU DON'T WANT TO GET INTO ANY KIND OF A DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS THAT'S BASED ON WHAT PEOPLE LIKE AND DON'T LIKE BECAUSE THAT'S JUST ABSOLUTE CHAOS. IT'S HARD ENOUGH IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE YOU HAVE CONTEXT AND GUIDELINES, BUT IF YOU START TO APPLY THOSE RULES TO OCEANFRONT, WHAT'S YOUR CONTEXT? WE HAVE 1930 LITTLE BEACH HOUSES NEXT TO 1970S CONDOS.

WHERE IS YOUR CONTEXT AND HOW DO YOU ESTABLISH PROTOCOL AND WHO WANTS TO SIT ON THE BOARD THAT REVIEWS EVERY SINGLE, NOBODY WANTS TO DO THAT. YOU TRIED TO DO WITH THIS LANGUAGE AND SAY OKAY, WHAT PROBLEM ARE WE TRYING TO SOLVE.

IF IT'S HEIGHT ABOVE 35 FEET ESPECIALLY FOR RESIDENTIAL WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF THE BEACH, THEN CODIFY IT THAT WAY, BUT DON'T MAKE A BLANKET APPROACH FOR ALL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, ANYTHING RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THAT'S JUST, YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO OPEN UP PANDORA'S BOX ON PROBLEMS WHERE WE WILL RUN INTO THE INABILITY TO BUILD IN THOSE COMMERCIAL

PROPERTIES ESPECIALLY. >> IF WE SAID THEN, KELLY, AS WE LOOK AT THE LOCATION, AND WE'VE ALREADY SAID SOMETHING HERE, AND AGAIN, I'M LOOKING FEET TO WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES LOCATED 800 FEET OF THE MAIN HIGH WATERMARK OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN.

NOW THAT WOULD BE ON NORTH AND SOUTH FLETCHER, THAT WOULD ONLY

BE ON THE OCEANSIDE, 800 FEET? >> NO YOU WOULD GET OVER TO.

>> IS THAT EAST AND WEST SIDE. >> YOU WOULD GET ALMOST OVER TO

FIRST AVENUE. >> IT'S AT LEAST ONE BLOCK.

>> SO BOTH SIDES OF NORTH AND SOUTH FLETCHER, THAT WOULD BE THE LOCATION THAT WE WOULD BE TRYING TO IDENTIFY HERE?

RIGHT? >> AND YOU HAVE SOME MAPS THAT HELP DEPICT THAT FOR YOU, BUT WHAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU IN TERMS OF SOME DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGES TO CONSIDER THAT WE MIGHT NARROW IN ON THE COASTLINE LOCATION WAS THAT YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THIS BASED ON THE READ OF THE EXISTING TABLE WHICH HAS A DEFINITION INCLUDED IN IT RELATED TO BUILDING HEIGHTS OF 800 FEET WHERE THE.

THERE. YOU ALSO HAVE SOME LANGUAGE IN CHAPTER THREE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT SPEAKS TO THAT COAST COASTAL UPWARD PROTECTION ZONE.

THAT'S A THOUSAND FEET OF THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL.

WITH USING THAT DEFINITION SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE YOU WANT TO

[00:40:02]

MAKE SURE YOU CAPTURE THE EASTERN SIDE AS WELL.

YOU DON'T WANT TO, YOU DON'T WANT TO USE IT AS DEFINED SO YOU HAVE INCLUDED IN THE MATERIALS AND I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND SHOW ONE EXAMPLE OF IT, AND MR. JACOB PLOT PROVIDED THIS FOR YOU TO LOOK AT THIS EVENING, IS WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

OH. I'M LOOKING AT MY SCREEN AND YOU

CAN'T SEE IT. >> SO IF WE INCLUDED COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ALL WITHIN THAT THOUSAND FOOT.

>> YES. >> SO THERE ARE THREE LOTS THAT ARE COMMERCIAL ON THE END OF SOUTH FLETCHER.

THE NORTHERN PART OF SOUTH FLETCHER THAT ARE FOR SALE.

>> SO JUST TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT, THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THAT CONTEMPLATES VARIABLES IF YOU WANTED TO RESTRICT IT TO JUST RESIDENTIAL I POINTED OUT AN OPTION FOR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE RESTRICTED FROM ANY HEIGHT ENCROACHMENT WITHIN A DEFINED

AREA. >> BUT TODAY DON'T WE, IT'S NOT BY ZONE TODAY, IT'S WITHIN 800 FEET IT'S 35 FEET.

, DOESN'T MATTER IF IT SEE OR ARE ZONE.

>> AND THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE UNDER ANY OF THIS.

IT WOULD STAY EXACTLY THE SAME. IT'S ONLY SPEAKING TO THOSE

ENCROACHMENTS BEYOND THAT. >> THAT WOULD NOT CHANGE.

>> SO WHEN YOU SAY RESIDENTIALLY ZONED, DOES THAT ADDRESS THAT?

>> IT WOULD ADDRESS THE ENCROACHMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL, BUT ALLOW IT FOR NONRESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL USE.

>> SO IF WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE WHERE, DO WE HAVE TO SAY OR REFERENCE THESE REFERENCES, THESE MAPS WHERE THEY'VE GOT THE

DIFFERENT TYPES. >> RIGHT OVER TO ALTERNATE LANGUAGES THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR MATERIALS GIVES YOU WAYS OF LOOKING AT IT TO CONTINUE AT THAT 800-FOOT LINE OR YOU COULD REDEFINE IT TO BE 1000 FEET BUT INCLUDE BOTH SIDES FROM THAT COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE.

>> DOES THAT BUFFER SO THAT WOULD THEN INCLUDE THE 800 FEET

MAIN HIGH WATER BUFFER? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SO IF WE REFERENCED THIS WE WOULD COVER BOTH OF THEM.

>> YES. >> SO THIS IS 800, THIS TAKES US EVEN FURTHER AND WERE ONLY TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL.

>> ARE WE ONLY TALK ABOUT RESIDENTIAL OR ALL OF THEM.

>> THAT'S FOR YOU TO DETERMINE. THAT'S ONE OF THOSE DECISION POINTS. ONE IS WHERE AND THE OTHER IS

WHO I GUESS. >> MY CONCERN WOULD BE MINORITY.

WITH THE RESIDENTIAL IN THAT ZONE YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW AN ELEVATOR SHAFT OR A PARAPET OR A STAIR SHAFT ABOVE THE 35.

>> YES. >> A LOT OF PEOPLE IN RESIDENTIAL WOULD WANT TO HAVE A ROOFTOP ACCESS FOR THEIR ENJOYMENT. THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO DO IT, IF YOU DON'T ALLOW SHAFT IS LIKE THAT.

>> YOUR WITHIN THE ENVELOPE OF THE HOUSE.

>> YES. WHERE YOU POP OUT A LITTLE NOTCH OUTSIDE THE HOUSE, GO OUTSIDE, GO UP A STAIR AND REACH THAT ROOF LEVEL AND THEN YOU TURN ONTO THE DECK SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A NOTCH OUT OF THE HOUSE SOMEWHERE.

YOU COULD DO IT THAT WAY IF YOU WANTED TO DO IT.

>> YOU COULD DO IT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A SHAFT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO CUT A NOTCH OUT OF THE HOUSE FOR THAT STAIRWAY PORTION, GO OUT YOUR DOOR, GO UP YOUR STEPS, TURN AND GO TO THE ROOF.

YOU NEED A PARAPET OR A HANDRAIL THOUGH.

[00:45:01]

>> IT'S CONSTRUCTED FOR OCCUPATIONAL LOADS.

>> YES, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE YOUR 50-POUND DEAD LOAD PLUS HE WOULD HAVE TO DESIGN IT FOR PERSON TO BE THERE, NOT EQUIPMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT YOU COULD PUT A CHAIR, AN UMBRELLA, YOU COULD SIT THERE AND ENJOY IT BUT YOU COULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT A PARAPET OR A HANDRAIL, UP TO 42 INCHES WHICH IS A CODE HEIGHT. SO THERE'S A COUPLE WAYS TO DO IT. IF YOU DON'T, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO ALLOW ROOFTOP ACCESS ON RESIDENTIAL.

I AGREE FULLY WITH THE CONVERSATION ABOUT COMMERCIAL, I THINK THAT'S OPENING A CAN THAT WOULD PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO OPEN UP, BUT ON THE RESIDENTIAL A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO HAVE THIS PARTICULAR FEATURE, BUT COMMERCIAL IS ANOTHER

PROBLEM. >> I KNOW ABOUT THOSE LOTS, IT'S ADLER AND SOUTH FLESHER. THERE COMMERCIAL THEN THEY SHOULDN'T APPLY TO WHAT WERE DOING HERE.

IT SHOULD STILL BE UNDER THE COMMERCIAL RULES, RIGHT?

>> THEY DON'T HAVE ANY HOUSES BEHIND THEM SO IT DOESN'T REALLY OFFEND THAT MANY PEOPLE. THERE'S A FEW LITTLE HOUSES IN FRONT OF THEM, BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY LOOKING BACK.

THIS IS NOW WHEN WERE DECIDING WHAT WILL GO IN THERE.

IT WILL DEFINITELY AFFECT THE VALUES OF THE ONLY COMMERCIAL

LOTS AVAILABLE ON FLETCHER. >> BUT EFFORT COMMERCIAL, WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL PAPER ONLY TALKING ABOUT

RESIDENTIAL. >> RIGHT BUT WE DO HAVE THE OPTION IF WERE INCLUDING JUST THE COMMERCIAL ON THIS 1000-FOOT

DEAL AND WE CAN DO THAT. >> BUT IF WE SAY AGAIN, SAYING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES LOCATED, IF YOU SET A THOUSAND FEET OF THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN, THEN ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THAT THOUSAND, THAT ARE COMMERCIAL, WOULD NOT BE AFFECTED BY THIS RULE, IS THAT RIGHT? DID I SAY THAT RIGHT KELLY #IF YOU SAY, IF YOU HAVE A COMMERCIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS IN THE THOUSAND FOOT AND WERE NOW TALKING ABOUT STRICTLY RESIDENTIAL, THEN THEY ARE NOT AFFECTED THIS RULE.

>> THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. THERE WILL STILL BE SUBJECT TO A

35-FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT. >> NO.

>> BUT THEY CAN HAVE ENCROACHMENTS.

>> OKAY. >> I DID WANT TO ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU, THE TREND IS PEOPLE DO LIKE TO BE ON THE ROOFTOP. I THINK THE MOST OFFENSIVE PART THAT PEOPLE DON'T LIKE ARE THE NON- SEE THROUGH PARAPET WALLS, BUT THE ONES THAT ARE THE STAINLESS STEEL AND JUST A RAILING, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY COMPLAINING AND I PERSONALLY LIKE THAT TREND AND THERE MIGHT BE HANDFUL.

>> OR COMBINATION PARAPET AND HANDRAIL.

MAYBE THE PARAPET COULDN'T EXCEED THE HEIGHT.

>> WHAT I WOULD SAY IS JUST THE TOP, WHAT YOU CANNOT SEE THROUGH THE TOP OF THE PARAPET PART B THE 35 FEET, BUT FOR ME THE RAILING ISN'T OFFENSIVE TO ME AND I REALLY LIKE THAT TREND.

THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT LOVE IT THAT JUST AREN'T HERE TO

SPEAK ABOUT IT, BUT. >> I CAN SEE A ROOFTOP BEING ABOVE THE ROOF DECK, ANYWHERE FROM 12 - 16 INCHES HIGH AND THEN ABOVE THAT A HANDRAIL OR A SERIES OF HANDRAIL THAT.

RAILING, THEY HAVE A LARGER RAIL ON TOP AND THE CABLE RAILING IN BETWEEN AND A SMALL PARA- BELOW, THAT COMPOSITE VIEW OR COMPOSITE SECTION THROUGH THAT HANDRAIL, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A TREND THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD WANT THAT, I THINK.

>> DON'T YOU NORMALLY COME ON A FLAT ROOF HAVE SOME LEVEL.

>> ABSOLUTELY TO GET THE DRAINAGE TO WORK.

IT'S NORMALLY LIKE THE SLOPE ON THE ROOF, LIKE A QUARTER INCH.

RUNNING FOOT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT NATURE.

>> SO IT'S NOT A BIG AMOUNT, BUT YOU CAN GET UP TO A FOOT OR 16 INCHES DEPENDING ON THE AREA OF THE ROOF.

>> OR IT COULD BE MUCH HIGHER. >> THERE ARE SOME LITTLE TINY

[00:50:09]

LOTS THAT ARE THERE THAT THEY JUST DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT AND NOT

HAVE ANY OF THE OBSCENITIES. >> OFFENSIVE ELEVATOR SHAFT.

>> YOU HAVE TO TAKE THAT NOTCH OUT WHERE YOU'RE NOT IMPAIRING THE VIEW BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO SELECT WHAT YOU WANT IF YOU WANT A CURTAINWALL OR WINDOW WALL OR IF YOU WANT WINDOWS AT ALL BUT PERHAPS THAT WOULD ELIMINATE ANY WINDOW.

>> SO YOUR MEETING THE NEED WITHOUT DOING ALL THE OTHER OFFENSIVE PARTS. IF SOMEONE HE WANTED TO DO A LITTLE CHAIRLIFT, THAT'S NOT AN ELEVATOR.

>> YOU COULD PUT A CHAIRLIFT ON THAT EXTERIOR RAILING.

THIS IS JUST ANOTHER WAY TO SOLVE A PROBLEM BUT YOU NEED TO HAVE A BLANK WALL OR ENOUGH EXPANSE OF THE WALL TO GET THE RISE AND RUN FOR THE HEIGHT THAT YOU WANT IN THAT TOP STORY.

>> ITS CREATIVE DESIGN AND A LOT MORE AFFORDABLE TO DO IT THIS

WAY THEN THE ELEVATOR. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE LOTS. ARE THOSE LOTS NORTH OF SLIDERS

ON THE SAME SIDE AS SLIDERS. >> NO.

>> THERE'S AN OPEN LOT THAT WAS GOING TO BE HOTEL AT ONE POINT.

>> THERE'S ONE THERE. >> I THINK THERE'S ONE THERE.

>> THERE'S 230 ROOM.

>> BUT THE ONES I WAS TELLING YOU.

>> SO THEY ARE UNDER THE CURRENT RESTRICTIONS.

>> 35 FEET. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD REALLY LIKE IT IF WE, NO MATTER WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME WAY OF BEING ABLE TO IN RESIDENTIAL, ACCESS THE TOP LEVEL OF THE ROOF AND IN A RESIDENCE, ONE OR TWO OR THREE BEDROOM RESIDENCE IS NOT A HEAVY OCCUPANT LOAD IN THAT SIZE OF STRUCTURE.

>> THIS CONVERSATION STARTED ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO AND I THINK, THIS IS MY PERCEPTION, I WAS ONE OF THE MAIN ARCHITECTS OF THE CONVERSATION BECAUSE WHEN I WAS RUNNING THREE YEARS AGO, ONE OF THE HOLY GRAILS IS 35 FEET AT THE BEACH AND THAT CAME ALONG BECAUSE OF ALL THE CONDOS THAT WERE BEING BUILT AND NOW IT TURNS OUT THAT NASSAU COUNTY IS ATTEMPTING TO DO 35 FEET OF THE BEACH. SO, IT HAD TO DO WITH SIZE AND SCALE AND WHAT YOU ALLUDED TO HERE, ALL THAT'S BEING BUILT NOW AS BOXES, AND THE REASON BOXES ARE BEING BUILT IS BECAUSE THEY MAXIMIZE THE ENVELOPE. PEOPLE ARE PAYING BIG AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THESE LOTS AND THEY WANT TO BUILD THE BIGGEST HOUSE POSSIBLE SO WHAT CONSTITUENTS THAT I TALKED TO WANTED WAS 35 FEET IS 35 FEET IS 35 FEET AND YOU CAN BUILD A SMALLER HOUSE IN THAT ENVELOPE. THE OTHER THING THEY WANTED WAS NO EXPANDING OUT TO THE LOT LINES YOU CAN SEE BETWEEN HOUSES. THOSE WERE THE TWO HOLY GRAILS, GOING AND SEEING BETWEEN THE HOUSES AND NOT HAVING THIS HUGE MCMANSION AND IT WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, AS YOU WELL KNOW, YOU NEED, IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT ELEVATOR SYSTEM, BUT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHICH THIS WAS INTENDED FOR, THIS WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR THE ENTIRE CITY, THIS WAS INTENDED FOR THE BEACH BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE 35 FEET IN THE SCALE ALONG THE ARE BEING BUILT AND THAT'S WHY WAS PROPOSED AND ORIGINALLY IT WAS PROPOSED AND I MET WITH A NUMBER OF ARCHITECTS AND I WROTE SOMETHING UP AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT WENT FROM THERE, BUT IT'S BEEN TWO YEARS THAT THIS HAS BEEN KICKING AROUND.

MORE THAN TWO YEARS. SO THE IDEA WHERE WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE IS BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE CONCERNED, NOT ABOUT RAILINGS OR PARAPETS, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SIZE AND SCALE SO IF YOU COULD DO IT WITHIN THE 35-FOOT ENVELOPE THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING CODE THAT HAVE TO GO ABOVE 35 FEET, THE EXHAUST PIPES, THE CHIMNEYS AND THAT SORT OF STUFF, THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED BUT THE IDEA THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WAS ABOUT 35 FEET IS 35 FEET AND WE BUILD WITHIN THAT. YES, PEOPLE WANT TO BUILD THE BIGGEST HOUSE POSSIBLE AND THEY KEEP PUSHING THE ENVELOPE AND THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS EXPENSIVE LOT AND I WANT TO

[00:55:02]

BUILD AN EXPENSIVE HOUSE WELL, THE 5 FEET IS 35 FEET.

ANY QUESTION. >> THAT'S THE PERCEPTION I'M GETTING FROM PEOPLE WHO LIVE AROUND HERE.

I FOCUSED MORE ON OKAY WERE GOING TO CHANGE EVERYTHING THIS WAS INTENDED FOR THE OCEAN, INTENDED FOR PEOPLE SO WHEN THEY DRIVE ALONG THE OCEAN THEY DON'T HAVE THIS CANYON.

IT WAS A CANYON. IT'S BECOMING A CANYON.

LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT IT. ALL PEOPLE ARE BUILDING OUR BOXES. AND IT'S NOT THREE.

THERE ARE MULTIPLE. THROUGH BUILDING HOUSES, SCRAPING THEM AND PUTTING UP BOXES.

IT WAS ABOUT SIZE AND SCALE AND CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY.

PEOPLE CAN BUILD WHAT THEY WANT.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT BUT IT WAS ABOUT SIZE AND SCALE WHAT WE WANT AS A COMMUNITY. YOU WANT BOXES ALONG THE WATER OR SOMETHING OF REASONABLE SIZE AND SCALE INSTEAD OF JUST DRIVING, FLETCHER BECOMES A CANYON YOU CAN BE ON ANY STREET ANYWHERE. THAT'S WHAT ALL OF THIS WAS ABOUT. IT WAS ORIGINALLY PRETTY SIMPLE. IT WAS WITHIN 800 FEET, THOUSAND FEET, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT ARE, BUT THE IDEA WAS TO MAKE IT 35 FEET AND CERTAIN THINGS CAN GO ABOVE IT AND THOSE ARE THINGS YOU NEED FOR THE BUILDING CODE OR STEEPLE OR SOMETHING BUT THAT'S WHERE ALL THIS STARTED.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I THINK EVERYBODY'S JUST SAD THAT ALL THE OLDER HOMES ARE GOING AWAY, BUT WHAT YEAR DID THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE MAKE THE RULE THAT THERE IS NO

GROUND-FLOOR LIVING. >> IN THE 70S.

>> 19721976. >> IT MAY HAVE BEEN BEFORE THAT.

>> MAYBE I'M THE EXCEPTION BECAUSE I'M NOT JUST INTERESTED IN THE OCEAN AND I'M NOT JUST INTERESTED IN THE VIEW, I'M INTERESTED IN THIS ISLAND NOT BECOMING MANHATTAN.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED SKYSCRAPERS DOWNTOWN ANYMORE THAN WE NEED THEM ON THE BEACH AND I DISAGREE ABOUT THEM BECOMING BOXES. I DROVE DOWN THE ROAD AND MOST OF THEM HAVE ARCHITECTURAL ACCENTS.

THEY ARE NOT BOXES AND I THINK MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A BOX, YOU HAVE YOUR FEW PEOPLE THAT ONLY CARE ABOUT, I JUST WANT EVERY SQUARE INCH BUILT ARE GOING TO BUILD THE B BOX. I DON'T CARE WHAT KIND OF RESTRICTIONS OR LIMITATIONS OR WHATEVER YOU PUT, THEY WILL BUILD THE BOX AND SAY BUILD THIS FOR ME AS CHEAPLY AS POSSIBLE AND GIVE ME AS MUCH SPACE AS POSSIBLE AND THIS IS WHAT I WANT. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO CODIFY THAT. I FEEL LIKE THERE IS SO MUCH FOCUS ON WHAT'S FUTURE BUILDING.

WHAT ABOUT THE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT, TALKING ABOUT THE LITTLE HOUSE THAT'S RIGHT THERE THAT WAS BUILT AND FITS IN THE LOT, WE DON'T BUILD THINGS TO THE LOTS ANYMORE, WE TRY TO ADJUST THE LOT TO FIT WHATEVER SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT THEIR.

THE WHOLE REASON FOR HAVING SETBACKS IN HEIGHT LIMITS AND LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS IS SO THAT'S WHAT ALL OF THIS IS SUPPOSED TO WORK TOGETHER TO ACHIEVE AND EVERY ARCHITECT DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR FOCUSES, WHETHER THEY'RE RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO BE HAPPY IF YOU ALLOW ENCROACHMENTS IN WHATEVER THEIR SPECIALTY IS.

SO WHATEVER THEIR AREA IS, DON'T R RESTRICTED ON MIND BUT YOU CAN DO IT ON THE OTHERS SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT, FIND THE LITTLE HOUSE THAT FITS ON THE LOT AND ALSO IN MY HAVEMAN STRATEGIES ON BOTH SIDES OF ME AND NOW I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT.

WE'VE ALLOWED ALL OF THESE THREE-STORY BUILDINGS ON THE FRONT BEACH, NOW THEY MONOPOLIZE THE VIEW.

WHY DID THEY GET TO MONARCH ALLIES THE OCEANVIEW.

IN THE OLD DAYS THEY BUILT ONE STORY BUILDINGS ON THE FRONT

[01:00:05]

BEACH AND TWO-STORY ON THE BACK BEACH.

EVERYBODY HAD TO SHARE THE VIEW.

THIS WHOLE THING OF THERE BEING NO.

BECAUSE I REMEMBER THE OLD DAYS.

I WAS BORN AND RAISED HERE SO I REMEMBER WHAT IT USED TO BE LIKE WHEN YOU COULD ACTUALLY DRIVE ALONG HERE AND ENJOY THE OCEAN.

I JUST REALLY FEEL LIKE ROLAND'S ARGUMENT ABOUT 35 FEET IS 35 FEET, I THINK THE ARCHITECTS WILL ADJUST TO THAT.

WHAT THEY NEED, WHAT ARE THE LIMITS? GIVE THEM THE LIMITS AND THEY WILL DESIGN W ASSURE YOU.

WERE NOT GONNA SQUELCH DEVELOPMENT, WE'VE BEEN DISCOVERED SO WERE NOT GOING TO STOP PEOPLE FROM COMING.

THEY ARE COMING. IF THEY CAN ONLY BUILD 81500 SQUARE-FOOT LOT THEY WILL BUILD THE 1500 SQUARE-FOOT HOUSE.

THEN WE WILL HAVE A TOWN THAT LOOKS MORE BALANCED, THAT LOOKS MORE LIKE WHAT I THINK THE COMMUNITY WANTS, NOT JUST TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT, THAT BUILT WHEN DECENT SIZE HOUSE WAS WHAT WAS THE STANDARD, INSTEAD OF THESE MONSTROSITIES THAT WE ARE BUILDING NOW.

THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT, PEOPLE ARE GONNA WANT, MAYBE PEOPLE ARE GONNA WANT, BUT WHAT ABOUT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS, AND I DISAGREE WITH YOU JENNY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S LOTS OF PEOPLE THAT LOVE WHAT'S HAPPENING OR ALL THE ROOFTOP STUFF, MAYBE IN THE ONES THAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH BUT THE PEOPLE THAT I AM DEALING WITH, THE RESIDENCE THAT I'VE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS, THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING SO I JUST WANT US, I REALLY WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER 35 IS 35. LET'S GET RID OF THE ENCROACHMENTS AND PRESERVE WHAT WE HAVE.

>> JUST TO ADD, BASICALLY, IN OUR LDC, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2006, ANYTHING LESS THAN A PAR THREE RESIDENTIAL HAS BEEN 35 FEET ALL ALONG.

IT'S WHAT I CALL THE CREEP ON TOP AND I THINK WERE ALL TRYING TO WRESTLE WITH HOW DO WE DO THAT TO HAVE THE CONCEPT, THE FACT THAT THE TALLEST BUILDING, 45 FEET IS THE LIMIT IN THE CITY BUT THAT ALLOWS THINGS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, ET CETERA, ET CETERA AND COMMERCIAL BUT I THINK WHAT WERE TRYING TO DO IS FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE MAINTAIN YOUR VIEW OF HOW WE'D LIKE TO KEEP IT A LITTLE BIT LIKE IT WAS IN THE 70S OR 80S AND STILL NOT, WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH PROGRESS, BUT HOW DO WE MANAGE THAT PROGRESS IN AN EFFECTIVE WAY SO WE PROTECT THE CITY.

>> RIGHT, AND I THINK THESE LIMITATIONS OF, BECAUSE IT IS, IT'S JUST CREEPING, CREEPING, CREEPING AND IF WE DON'T LIMIT THOSE, IT'S MANAGING. IT'S NOT RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT, IT'S NOT STOPPING DEVELOPMENT, IT'S MANAGING IT SO WE END UP WITH THE TOWN THAT IS REFLECTIVE OF THE COMMUNITY, WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS, AND WHAT I HEAR IS, ALL THAT STUFF ON THE BEACH IS JUST SO DEPRESSING AND IF WERE GOING TO START TALKING ABOUT REALLY TALL BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN, I JUST DON'T

THINK IT'S WHAT WE WANT. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CODIFY THAT BUT I REALLY THINK THAT STARTING WITH 35 FEET IS THE WAY TO START.

>> BUT YOU DO KNOW THAT ONE STORIES ARE NO LONGER LEGAL,

EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO DO THAT. >> I KNOW BECAUSE.

BUT WHAT I'M SEEING IS THREE LEVELS SO, LIKE I SAID.

>> THANK YOU BONNIE. >> YOU SAID THERE IS ONE EXCEPTION TO THAT, THERE'S NO HEIGHT RESTRICTION, ZERO HEIGHT

RESTRICTION. >> THAT'S TRUE.

THAT'S CORRECT. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO, AGAIN WERE TRYING TO CRAFT SOME WORDS THAT JUST ADDRESS THE OCEANFRONT, NORTH AND SOUTH AND RESIDENTIAL, THAT

[01:05:05]

IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR.

IT'S ONE OF OUR X. X PLUS Y PLUS THEORY.

>> LET ME THROW A LITTLE WRINKLE INTO THAT JUST IN TERMS OF.

ROAD YEARS AND YEARS AGO. I WONDER ABOUT HOUSES POPPING THROUGH THE TREES BECAUSE IT IS LOWER ELEVATION OUT THERE.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD PUT THESE SAME RESTRICTIONS BACK THAT FAR EMMA IF YOU DID THE THOUSAND FEET YOU'VE CAPTURED IT SO IF YOU WROTE A RESTRICTION THAT SAYS YOU NOT GOING TO HAVE AN ELEVATOR SHAFT OR ANYTHING ELSE GOING ABOVE THE 35-FOOT.

>> DOES 800 FEET GO TO ENCOMPASS, LET'S SEE, ON THIS

MAP, 800 FEET GOES TO FLETCHER. >> IT'S ONE BLOCK WEST OF

FLETCHER. >> IT DOES CAPTURE SOME OF FIRST

AVENUE. >> YES.

THE EASTERN SIDE IS FULLY CAPTURED WITHIN THAT.

WHEN YOU ARE USING THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK.

THE BENEFIT OF USING THOUSAND FOOT CONSTRUCTION LINE IS THAT IT'S A SET LINE THAT IS EASY TO MEASURE AND DOES THAT MOVE WHERE THE OTHER IS FLUID. WE WANT THINGS.

THE SET CCL DOES NOT OR AT LEAST IT HASN'T ANY TIME I'VE BEEN HERE AND I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN SET SINCE THE MID- 70S SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE RELIABLE AS A MEASUREMENT.

>> I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO GO WITH THE THOUSAND FEET BUT FOR ALL STRUCTURES AND ALL ZONE CATEGORIES FOR THIS COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL, THOUSAND FEET OR LESS.

>> 'S ARE. >> LOOK AT ALL THOSE PROPERTIES.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS DOWN FIRST.

>> CAN I HAVE YOUR NAME AGAIN SIR.

>> RON FLICK. JUST REMEMBER HOW YOUR ISLAND IS CREATED ITS GEOGRAPHY OR ITS GEOMETRY TOPOGRAPHY IS A BETTER WAY TO SAY IT. THE AREA YOU ARE PREDOMINATELY TALKING ABOUT IS ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE PRIMARY DUNE SYSTEM SO AS SOON AS YOU HIT FIRST AVENUE HERE IN THE HOLE SO YOUR FLOODPLAIN WILL BE BACK UP THERE TO SO ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE TAKING WHAT PEOPLE HAVE MAYBE CREATED A PASS, I COULDN'T TELL YOU ALL THE HOMES THAT ARE THERE BUT I KNOW THERE ARE SOME TALLER HOMES. THERE'S THREE STORIES ABOVE PARKING UNDER BECAUSE THEY CAN TECHNICALLY BUILD 45 FEET.

>> NO. AT THIS HIGH RESIDENTIAL ZONE STRUCTURE, THE EXCEPTION WOULD BE THE ARM ARE THREE ZONE.

>> SO THERE'S APARTMENTS AND STUFF, BUT ANYWAY, I'VE ALWAYS HAD THIS THING ABOUT, AS FLOODPLAINS CHANGE, SOME JURISDICTIONS USE THE FLOODPLAIN, 1 FOOT ABOVE THE FLOODPLAIN REQUIREMENT WHICH IS WHERE YOU ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE YOUR FIRST LIVING LEVEL, THAT'S HOW SOME JURISDICTIONS HAVE STARTED TO MEASURE BECAUSE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF IT AND ALL THE LAWSUITS THEY GET INVOLVED IN, BUT TO ME, IF I WERE AN ADVOCATE FOR GETTING A MORE PURIFIED SYSTEM, I WOULD USE THINGS THAT OTHER PEOPLE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE HAS A BUILDING HEIGHT AND HOW YOU SET IT AND ALL THAT STUFF.

IT'S IN THE VERY FIRST CHAPTER OF THE BUILDING CODE.

NOBODY EVER READS READS IT, BUT TECHNICALLY WE ARE SUPPOSED HAVE THAT REGISTERED WITH THE STATE IF WERE GOING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. BACKING UP, I HOPE YOU DON'T ENTER THE COMMERCIAL SIDE END TO IT BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHAT ALL THE IMPLICATIONS ARE OF ALL THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

ALL THE SUDDEN YOU GET SWELLED IN MASS.

>> THE TOPIC TODAY IS JUST RESIDENTIAL.

[01:10:06]

THAT COMMERCIAL IS A WHOLE MOTHER.

>> I'M JUST MAKING SURE. I HEARD A LITTLE BACK-AND-FORTH

SO I WASN'T SURE. >> WE CAN WIPE OUT COMMERCIAL FROM THIS AND JUST LEAVE COMMERCIAL HOW IT IS, IS THAT

WHAT WE. >> YES.

>> THE WAY IT ORIGINALLY WAS. THERE WAS SOME WORDING, I

THOUGHT. >> WERE TO TAKE ALL THAT OUT.

>> I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE IT TO THE THOUSAND FEET MARK. I ONLY SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S ANOTHER LAYER THAT YOU'RE PUSHING BACK.

MAYBE IT GETS RESISTANCE, MAYBE IT DOESN'T.

YOU'RE JUSTIFYING IT BECAUSE. >> AND KIND OF WHERE THAT LANGUAGE IS COMING FROM FROM THE STAFF SIDE OF THINGS, IN EXAMINING THIS, I'VE ALWAYS WONDERED WHY IT'S 800 FEET, WHY IS SORT OF THAT THE MEASUREMENT AND WHY THE ATLANTIC OCEAN BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY MUCH AN ANOMALY.

IT'S ONLY NOTED IN THAT FOOTNOTE, BUT WHAT WE DO HAVE IS STRONG LANGUAGE THAT REPRESENTS OUR COASTAL PROTECTION ZONE SO IF WERE TRYING TO PROVIDE TEST OF OCCASION FOR WHERE WE WANT TO HAVE GREATER SCRUTINY AND SENSITIVITY OF BUILDING HEIGHT, THAT IS A SOLID PLACE TO COME FROM.

LOOKING AT IT AND THE DEFINITION OF HOW WE HAVE IT DEFINED, YOU CAN'T LEAN ON THAT EXCLUSIVELY BECAUSE IT'S ONLY LANDWARD UP SO THAT, I BELIEVE IS WHY WE HAVE THE 800-FOOT MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN IN THERE AT ALL BECAUSE WERE TRYING TO BACK INTO A BUILDING HEIGHT SOLUTION FOR A DEFINED AREA WITHOUT CHANGING, IF I HAD TO GUESS.

THAT'S HOW I'M THINKING IT GOT THERE.

IF YOU CORRECT IT, NOW YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU CAN POINT BACK TO FORT DEFENSE, BUT THE HEIGHT ENCROACHMENTS WOULD BE LIMITED SEAWARD AND LANDWARD. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THEN IT'S A THOUSAND FEET AND YOU HAVE A SOLID LINE THAT

YOU'RE MEASURING FROM. >> YOU'RE USING IT TO MEASURE FROM THE TRIPLE CO WHICH IS CONTROLLED BY THE STATE.

>> ALL I'M SAYING IS THIS IF YOU DO GET RESISTANCE THE MEASURE FROM AGAIN. IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE THOUSAND, I GET YOUR RATIONALE, I'M NOT HERE TO

OPPOSE THAT. >> I GUESS YOU WOULDN'T CALL ANY DWARFING, YOU'RE ONLY CHANGING SOMETHING 10 FEET, BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT IS IF YOU DO LOSE THAT AND SOMEBODY SAYS NO THEN MEASURE FROM THE TRIPLE CM AND GO BACK 500 FEET.

>> ANY NUMBER FROM THE TRIPLE CL YOU'RE IN GOOD SHAPE IN THE

CITIES PROTECTED. >> IN THE TABLE FO FOUR.ZERO.TWO.THREE, THE FIRST FOOTNOTE SAYS THE BUILDING ON ANY LOT WITHIN 800 FEET SHALL NOT EXCEED 35 FEET.

THAT TO ME INCLUDES COMMERCIAL. >> THAT'S CORRECT, AND IT DOES.

IT ABSOLUTELY DOES TODAY. WHAT THIS SECTION, AND THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE, EXCEPT TO HAVE IT READ 1000 FEET AND IT WOULD INCLUDE COMMERCIAL FOR 35 FEET. THE OTHER SUBSECTION WE ARE DEALING WITH IS ENCROACHMENTS SO THAT YOU WOULD RESTRICT WHAT YOU ALLOW FOR ENCROACHMENTS ABOVE 35 FEET OR ALLOWING IT IN COMMERCIAL. CHANGES WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE TO BOTH WHICH IS HOW IT'S PRESENTED HERE.

>> WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION MANY, MANY TIMES HOW THAT'S WORDED. I APPEARED HERE ONE TIME IN THE EARLY 2000'S AND THERE HAVE BEEN PROPERTIES BUILT HERE WHICH SAYS THAT THAT MEANS THE BUILDING BEING BUILT, THAT'S THE DEFINING ELEMENT. THERE IS A CASE THAT APPEARED NEAR THAT RESTRICTION GOT CHANGED OR, IT WAS NOT CHANGE, THAT'S HOW IS DEFINED AT TWO PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SO ARE YOU SAYING WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT IT'S THE LOT NOT

THE BUILDING. >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE WAY

IT'S WORDED IS STILL CONFUSING. >> IT IS CONFUSING BECAUSE WHEN

[01:15:01]

YOU DIAGRAM THE SENTENCE, IF YOU DIAGRAM THE SENTENCE THAT 800 FEET IS APPLIED TO THE BUILDING SO IF THERE'S ANY LOT, YOU'RE NOT DEFINING THE LOT, YOU'RE DEFINING WHERE THE BUILDING IS. IF THE BUILDING IS WITHIN A LOT, 800 FEET FROM THE WATER OR THE MAIN HIGH WATER LINE, THAT

BUILDING. >> I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

>> IT'S A BUILDING NOT A.

>> IT'S A HUGE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT OUT THERE THAT, IT'S LOT IS WITHIN 800 FEET BY HUNDRED FEET, BUT THE BUILDING IS BEHIND THAT 800-FOOT LINE THEREFORE THAT BUILDING WAS NOT RESTRICTED TO THAT 35-FOOT. SO THAT'S WHY SAYING, I WAS IN AN ADJACENT PROPERTY TO IT AND THAT WAS THE RULING USED BY US AND I DID NOT WANT TO MOVE OUR BUILDING BACK ANY FURTHER SO WE STUCK WITH THE 35-FOOT ON THE CONDOMINIUM BUILDING JUST TO THE

SOUTH OF THAT. >> THAT'S JUST SO FAR BACK.

>> IT'S A LONG WAY. >> I'M OKAY WITH IT, JUST THE

BUILDING. >> THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.

>> DO WE NEED TO FURTHER DEFINE IT.

>> BUT HOW WOULD YOU CHANGE THAT THEN? TO BE MORE SPECIFIC? HOW WOULD YOU CHANGE THAT

WORDING? >> GIVE IT A GRAPHIC.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO. >> ALL RIGHT, SO THE GRAPHIC, JUST DRAW A GRAPHIC AND GIVE AN EXAMPLE, A GRAPHIC RIGHT UNDER IT THAT SHOWS A BUILDING THAT'S 800-FOOT, 500 OR THOUSAND, WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING, WHATEVER THAT LINE IS IT'S WHERE THE BUILDINGS LOCATED BECAUSE IS ABOUT THE PURPOSE? WERE TRYING TO CONTROL THE RESTRICTION OF HEIGHT SO IT DOESN'T BLOCK OTHER PEOPLE. WERE TRYING TO GENERATE THIS BUILDING. THE BUILDING JUST CAN'T BE

WITHIN 800 FEET. >> THE BUILDING HAS TO BE A

THOUSAND FEET. >> ON ANY LOT.

>> SO CAN STAFF HELP US WITH THE GRAPHIC.

>> I JUST CHANGED THE LANGUAGE AND REMOVED ON ANY LOT.

>> IT'S THE SAME THING. >> WORKS FOR ME.

>> I'LL BE HONEST, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.

>> ANY BUILDING WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF THE CCC L.

>> I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR IF YOU DEFINE THE DISTANCE.

>> THE LOT DOESN'T MATTER, IT'S THE STRUCTURE YOU'RE WORRIED

ABOUT. >> THE OTHER REASON TO DO IT, IF THEY WERE TRYING TO BE NEIGHBORLY.

CONCERNED WITH NOT THE LOT. >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT FIXES BACK.

>> BUT YOUR ANSWER IS CORRECT IF YOU MARKED OUT ON ANY LOT.

>> SO WE NEED TO GO UP TO THE NEXT PIECE AND LOOK AT NOW THE EXCEPTIONS. SO, AGAIN WERE BACK TO RESIDENTIALLY ZONED, LOCATED WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF THE CCC L, THE CALCULATION HEIGHT SHALL NOT INCLUDE ROOFTOP ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, INCLUDING CHIMNEYS HAS BEEN ELIMINATED.

ALL THOSE EXEMPT FROM THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT SHOULD NOT BE HABITABLE. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

ROOFTOP ARCHITECTURAL. >> IT'S DEFINED AS TOP AND

MECHANICAL ARE HERE. >> BUT YOU CROSSED OUT

DECORATIVE. >> BUT YOU'VE ADDED WALLS WHICH

IS WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO STOP. >> BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT ALL IF

IT'S RESIDENTIAL. >> THAT'S RIGHT.

IT'S COMPLETELY NOT ALLOWED. >> I'M CONFUSED.

>> GO BACK TO THE LANGUAGE. DOESN'T SAY THAT THE ROOFTOP

[01:20:01]

ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES ARE EXCLUDED.

>> WITH THE EXCEPTION OF. >> SHOULD NOT EXCEED.

>> DOESN'T THAT MEAN THAT ALL THOSE FEATURES CAN BE ABOVE

35 FEET THAT'S IT. >> SAVE GOTTA GO BACK UP.

ABOVE. >> IN THE DEFINITION, THAT'S THE

LIST. >> I'LL TELL YOU, PEOPLE CAN MAKE A LOT OF THINGS, JUST BE CAREFUL, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE.

>> I WISH WE COULD HAVE, I WANT PHOTOS OF ALL THESE HOUSES AND EVERYONE CAN SAY I LIKE THAT, I DON'T LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY BEAUTIFUL HOMES THAT DO HAVE KUBLA THAT EVERYONE LOVE.

>> I LOVE ROOFTOP BUT.

>> ONE OF YOU GENTLEMEN MENTIONED THIS EARLIER THAT YOU CAN YOU CAN PUT A CUPOLA, YOUR LITTLE FIREPLACE, YOU HAVE PEOPLE UP THERE, BUT THE NEXT THING YOU KNOW IS THEY'VE GOT TENSE UP THERE, NOW THEY'RE PUTTING THEIR KITCHENS UP THERE, THEY THEN START TO PUT TARPS OVER IT, AND THE NEXT THING IS,

EVERYBODY'S LIVING UP THERE. >> TARPS?

THAT WOULD BE HORRIBLE. >> IT WOULD BE HORRIBLE.

THAT'S WHERE IT GOES. YOU'VE GOTTA THINK ABOUT HOW CAN SOMEBODY GET AROUND THIS? ONCE YOU GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO GO TO THAT THIRD FLOOR, AND THEN LIVE THERE, THEN THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE THERE AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA WANT TO SAY WHY HAVE TO HAVE A ROOF. I HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING OVER

ME. >> I WOULD SAY DEFINITELY STRIKE

PARAPET WALLS. >> SO GO BACK UP A LITTLE BIT

KELLY. >> ADVOCATES THAT ONE RIGHT

THERE. >> WHAT IF YOU WENT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL C2 AND JUST PICKED UP, TOOK ITEMS OUT ABOUT THAT YOU DON'T WANT IN THERE. THAT'S THE BASELINE THAT WERE WORKING FROM, IT SHOULD NOT INCLUDE APERTURES AND ATTACHMENTS SUCH AS CHIMNEYS. OKAY WE SAID THAT'S PROBABLY OKAY, ELEVATOR SHAFTS NOT OKAY, DECORATIVE ART, POTENTIAL FEATURES, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A PROBLEM.

>> STEEPLES, AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT, ENCLOSURES.

>> I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT CAN TAKE

OFF. >> THE AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT AND WE DON'T WANT KUBLA WAS BECAUSE OF THE WEATHERVANE'S AND SIMILAR BUILDING FEATURES.

>> NOT KUBLA'S? IT'S PRETTY COASTAL.

HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE VERY NORTHERN END OF THE ISLAND, THAT BEAUTIFUL HOME THEY JUST BUILT WITH THE SHAKER SHINGLES COME ABOUT HAS A KUBLA AND A WEATHERVANE AND IT'S STUNNING.

>> BUT IS IT LIVABLE, IS IT PALPABLE.

>> NO, IT'S JUST AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE.

>> WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE, BUT THERE NOT OCCUPY ABLE OR HABITABLE. IT'S A LIGHT WELL, YOU CAN'T GO

UP INSIDE AND LOOK AROUND. >> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE LIKE

PIPPI LONGSTOCKING. >> SO THERE'S NO STAIRCASE THAT

GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TOP. >> IF YOU ADD UNOCCUPIED ABLE, YOU MAYBE NEED TO ADD SOME LANGUAGE SO IT'S DEFINED AS

OCCUPY ABLE SPACE. >> THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

>> I DO SEE WHY YOU DO NEED TO KEEP PARAPET WALLS RIGHT HERE BECAUSE IT IS A ROOFTOP ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, BECAUSE

[01:25:03]

IF YOU DID A ONE STORY HOUSE AND DID THAT ON THE ROOFTOP, IT IS A ROOFTOP FEATURE BUT THAT'S THE ONE.

>> IT'S ONLY IF YOU GO UP TO THE THIRD FLOOR, IF YOU'RE ON THE THIRD FLOOR, OR THE SECOND FLOOR.

>> YOU CAN STILL BE ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND DO IT.

>> WE ARE MAKING UPWARDS HERE. LET'S JUST LEAVE UNINHABITABLE SIR, PLEASE WORK ON YOUR LANGUAGE HERE.

>> OR THE SPACE WHICH IS UNINHABITABLE OR UNCONDITIONED PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

RAILINGS, WEATHERVANE'S, SO HAVE WE AGREED WE SHOULD KEEP THE

WALLS AND RAILINGS THEN OR NOT? >> UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES YOU MIGHT NEED THEM IF YOU'VE MAXED OUT ON YOUR ELEVATION.

>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW OCCUPANCY LOADS ON THAT ROOF, WHETHER IT'S ONE PERSON OR OTHER THAN MAINTENANCE YOU WILL HAVE

TO HAVE. >> THEN I THINK WE GET BACK TO THE POINT OF 35 IS 35 AND THE KEYWORD HERE IS OCCUPATIONAL SPACE, OR OCCUPATIONAL LEVEL AND MAYBE THAT'S WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE PUT IN HERE SOMEWHERE THAT SAYS THAT THE ROOFTOP WILL NOT BE AN OCCUPATIONAL OR OCCUPATIONAL SPACE.

>> I THINK SHE'S GOT IT THERE, SHE HAD IT A MINUTE AGO.

>> BUT ONLY IF THERE OVER THE 35 FEET.

>> BUT THE PARAPET, IF YOU GOT TO 35 FEET, FLAT ROOF, I'D NEED ANOTHER 6 INCHES FOR WATER CONTAINMENT.

>> I THINK AGAIN YOU'VE GOTTA START AT 35 AND START TO WORK YOUR WAY DOWN, THOSE ARE THE CHOICES YOU MAKE IF YOU WANT A

FLAT ROOF. >> YOU HAVE TO NOTCH DOWN.

>> OKAY. >> SO THEN I THINK SHE'S ADDING

IT RIGHT NOW. >> 36 INCHES.

>> MAXIMUM 36 INCHES. THAT'S GUARDRAIL HEIGHT FOR RESIDENTIAL. FOR COMMERCIAL IT'S 32 INCHES BUT WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO DEFINE A PARAPET HEIGHT.

>> THEY WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO BOTH.

>> THEN YOU HAD TO PUT 42 INCHES BUT THEN BE PREPARED IF THERE ARE PARAPETS ALLOWED OVER 35 NOW WE ARE 35 PLUS 42.

>> GUARDRAILS AS DEFINED BY THE BUILDING CODE.

>> THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. THEN I WOULD DETERMINE IF YOUR

COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL. >> IS THIS SECTION 1.07? IS THAT APPLYING TO BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL?

>> YES. >> WHY?

>> THESE ARE GENERAL DEFINITIONS THAT WE ARE ADDING INTO THE CODE. THEY WILL APPLY.

>> TWO WEEKS AGO WE TALKED ABOUT ALL OF US WERE OKAY WITH 42 INCHES BUT IT GETS BACK TO.

I THINK THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BECOME IF WE GO THAT WAY WE NEED TO SPECIFY THAT IT HAS TO FALL BELOW THE 35 FEET.

>> WITHIN THE ENVELOPE. >> SO THE WAY THAT IT'S READING RIGHT NOW FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS IT WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE YOUR CHOICE, IT WOULD HAVE TO FALL WITHIN THAT 35 FEET.

THERE IS NO OPTION AROUND THAT. >> BUT DOESN'T REALLY SAY THAT? A PORTION OF THE WALL EXTENDING ABOVE THE ROOF LINE, WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT THE PARAPET IS GOING TO BE WITHIN THE 35.

>> IT IS PART OF THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AND

[01:30:01]

ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE IS LIMITED TO ONLY NONRESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES WITHIN THAT AREA. OTHERWISE, IS NOT ALLOWED.

>> I THOUGHT LOWER DOWN IT DOES ALLOW.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.

LIKE RIGHT HERE IT JUST SAYS IT DOES NOT.

>> WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES, THE CELT ENGINE CALCULATION SHALL NOT INCLUDE.

>> SO YOU CAN'T PUT ANY OF THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OR THE

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. >> SO IF EVERYTHING HAS TO BE UNDER 35 FEET, NOT EVEN A WEATHERVANE.

>> MIGHT THINK YOU HAVE TO SAY THAT A LITTLE CLEAR.

>> IT IS. IT IS NOW DEFINED.

SO IF YOU ARE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED, IT SHALL INCLUDE.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN TO SAY.

>> IF YOU SAY SHALL NOT INCLUDE, THOSE THINGS CAN POP UP ABOUT 35. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IF THE

WRITTEN LANGUAGE ISN'T RIGHT. >> SO IT SAYING, BASICALLY YOU'RE SAYING COMMERIAL PROPERTIES DO NOT HAVE TO INCLUDE THOSE FEATURES FOR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

>> WE CAN JUST SEPARATE THIS. >> OTHERWISE YOU JUST SEPARATE.

>> IT SAYING TO DOUBLE NEGATIVES.

>> THAT'S WHAT IT IS TO ME TOO SO IF YOU TOOK OUT.

PROPERTIES, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. >> SHE'S GOT IT RIGHT.

>> RIGHT. SO THEN WHAT APPLIES TO

EVERYTHING ELSE. >> I'M OKAY WITH THIS.

>> SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS VERIFIED AND CERTIFIED NOTES

EXCEPTIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL. >> DO YOU HAVE TO ADD

SOMETHING. >> I DON'T GET MATTERS.

DOWN BELOW THAT, THEN YOU'RE FINE.

>> BUT WERE NOT INCLUDING ALL OF THE PROPERTIES DOWNTOWN.

THIS IS ONLY. >> AND ONLY WITHIN A THOUSAND

FEET SEE CCL. >> RIGHT, UNDER THIS ONE.

>> I GUESS THAT'LL HAVE TO BE A THOUSAND 1 FEET TO GET MY

WEATHERVANE. >> NO YOU JUST HAVE TO DESIGN LOWER. YOU HAVE TO DESIGN IT.

>> NOT IF I WANT 9-FOOT CEI CEILINGS, 8-FOOT CEILINGS IT IS.

>> SO IF IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SURF, THEY CAN'T

REBUILD. >> I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

SO IN THE CODE YOU HAVE A SEPARATE SECTION THAT TALKS NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES AND NONCONFORMING USES.

IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS A DISASTER SITUATION, THOSE CAN BE REBUILT TO NO GREATER EXTENT THAN PREVIOUSLY EXISTED.

IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAVE SURVEYS AND DOCUMENTS THAT DEMONSTRATE THAT NONCONFORMITY AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD TELL EVERYONE WHO HAS NONCONFORMING SITUATIONS, BUT YOU CAN REBUILD EXACTLY AS IS. YOU CANNOT INCREASE IT IN ANY

WAY. >> ARE WE NOW SAVING

CONSTRUCTION PLANS. >> MOSER.

>> UNTIL THAT POINT IT IS ON A PROPERTY OWNER TO MAKE SURE THEY

HAVE THEM. >> OKAY, SO THEY WERE ON

MICROFICHE FOR YEARS AND YEARS. >> I THINK WERE GOOD.

ALL MOVING FORWARD WITH? SO WE ARE ENCOURAGING ALL THE

LITTLE BOXES. >> I DON'T THINK SO.

I THINK WE ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE A LOT OF CHOICES AND YOU CAN GET AS CREATIVE AS YOU WANT, BUT IT'S 35 FEET.

>> BASICALLY WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO, EACH CLIENT IS DIFFERENT.

THEY COME TO THE TABLE WITH PRECONCEPTIONS AND TRY TO WORK WITHIN THE LANGUAGE. SO THE TRENDS YOU SEE, IT'S ALL BASED ON HOW DIFFERENT EVERY INDIVIDUAL IS SO YOU CAN'T

POLICE THAT. >> AND I AGREE WITH YOU.

[01:35:05]

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE MAKING DECISIONS ON THE MARKETING ASPECTS OF WHAT HOUSE TRENDS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE

FUTURE. >> OR THE ECONOMY.

>> OR THE ECONOMY BECAUSE WE LET PEOPLE KNOW WHEN WE ARE, BUT I THINK THAT WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THIS IS WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS IS 35 FEET AND WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REINTERPRET THAT 35-FOOT ENVELOPE.

>> THE ONLY CAVEAT I HAVE TO THIS IS CHIMNEYS.

ACCORDING TO THIS, CHIMNEYS, AREN'T THEY LISTED AS ROOFTOP

STRUCTURES. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

A PROBLEM. >> THEN WE.

>> BUT IT'S LIMITED IN BOTH MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES SO EVEN IF I PUT IT UP HERE IT WOULD STILL BE LIMITED WITHIN THAT AREA AND, I'M GUESSING THIS IS WHY ELEVATOR SHAFTS AND CHIMNEYS ENDED UP BEING ALL TIED TOGETHER THE WAY THEY ARE BECAUSE OF

RIGHT NOW. >> SO HOW DO WE ADDRESS CHIMNEYS WITHOUT OPENING UP PANDORA'S BOX.

>> AND WHY CAN'T WE ADD ROOFTOP, SORRY, THE ELEVATOR SHAFT UNLESS IT'S IN THERE AND I'M NOT SEEING IT.

>> IT'S UNDER MECHANICAL. >> SO WE CAN'T HAVE ELEVATOR SHAFTS WITH COMMERCIAL? EVEN IF IT HAS A RESIDENTIAL

COMPONENT PAST. >> LET'S.

STRUCTURE WITH RESIDENTIAL TO HAVE ALLOWED.

>> C3 IS NOT EFFECTIVE FOR THIS.

WE'VE NARROWED IT DOWN TO THAT. >> AGAIN, WE STILL HAVE AN ISSUE

WITH CHIMNEYS. >> YOU STILL HAVE AN ISSUE.

I'M GLAD THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW TO

ADDRESS IT. >> 35 FEET IS 35 FEET.

IF YOU HAVE A FLAT ROOF COME HERE AND HAVE A VENT THAT WILL POP UP.

IF IT'S GAS YOU CAN GO SIDEWAYS.

IF IT'S WORD BURNING YOU HAVE TO GO STRAIGHT UP.

WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU HAVE A SLOPED ROOF AND THE FIREPLACES IN THE CENTER OF THE HOUSE, THAT CHIMNEY IS POPPING UP ABOVE THE

RIDGE. >> YOU CAN GO HORIZONTAL.

>> SO YOU ARE RESTRICTING, THAT IS SOMETHING THROUGH THIS.

>> UNLESS YOU CAN PUT A LINE THAT CHIMNEYS ARE ALLOWED TO GO ABOVE BUT ALL THE SENATE WILL BE OCCUPIED BUT WITH PARTY SPACE.

>> I LIKE CHIMNEYS BECAUSE THEY LOOK HISTORIC.

>> I'VE SEEN SOME GOOD-LOOKING CHIMNEYS.

THEY DO ADD ON TEXTUAL TONE TO A HOUSE, BUT WE HAVE TO DEFINE IT.

>> LET'S THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE NARROWLY DEFINE A CHIMNEY.

>> I CAN LOOK AT THE BUILDING CODE TO SEE WHAT THEY CALL A

CHIMNEY. >> I WILL GET YOU A DEFINITION.

>> THE CHIMNEY COULD BE. THE BUILDING CODE SPECIFICATION FOR THIS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE CHIMNEY.

[01:40:08]

>> THEY WILL COME UP WITH SOME WORDS TO HELP DEFINE THE CHIMNEY. IT CAN NOT BE DEFINED TO INCORPORATE STAIRCASES, OUTDOOR KITCHENS, IT HAS TO SOLELY SERVE THE FUNCTION OF THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE FIREPLACE.

>> I WOULD USE ANY.

>> COULD YOU CALL IT A THERMAL VENTILATION SYSTEM.

>> JUST REFERRED TO YOU NEED BUILDING CODE.

SYSTEM, IF YOU HAVE GAS STOVE IT'S GONNA BE DEPENDENT UPON WHERE IT IS IN THE HOUSE AND IT WILL NEED TO BE VERTICAL, IT

WON'T BE GOING OUT THE SIDE. >> NORMAL PLUMBING FITS HAVE TO BE 12 INCHES ABOVE THE ROOF ON A FLAT ROOF SO YOU'VE GOT SOME OF

THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. >> IS THAT A PLACEHOLDER FOR KELLY TO WORK ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.

>> THAT WAY YOU'RE RELYING ON THE STATE RULES AND THE CITY IS

SORT OF OFF THE HOOK THERE. >> I'M ON BUILDING THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW, NOT A ROOFTOP DECK AT ALL AND IT'S INTERESTING TO GO THROUGH THIS AND HAVE IT CRUNCHED THIS AND THAT AND NOT

HAVE IT LOOK LIKE A BOX. >> BUT IT ALSO, IT DOES OFFER SOME, WHILE IT DOES OFFER SOME DEFINITION OF THE BOX, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO HAVE INTERESTING ROOF LINES THAT FALL WITHIN THIS. THAT I'VE SEEN THEM CREATED.

I'VE SOLD A FEW INTERESTING ROOF LINES.

>> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ARCHITECTS TO COME UP WITH THIS.

>> SO WE'RE GONNA WORK ON THAT DEFINITION.

>> LET'S TIGHTEN UP THAT CHIMNEY BIT.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU REALLY, WHAT A CHIMNEY MEANS.

WHAT DOES THE CHIMNEY MEAN? IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN COOK ON

IT. >> YOU CAN'T COOK IN A CHIMNEY.

>> YOU CAN'T COOK, YOU CAN HAVE A STAIRCASE THAT'S PART OF IT.

AND PUT SOMETHING IN THERE WITH CHIMNEYS.

SO ANYTHING ELSE AT ALL IN THAT LIST UNDER ROOFTOP ARCHITECTURAL -- THIS DAY, IN THE RAIN, THAT YOU WANT TO SEE? IF NOT, NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. THAT CUTE LITTLE HOUSE AT THE END OF NORTH FLETCHER, THAT WEATHERVANE IS GOING TO BE

HACKED. >> IT MIGHT NOT BE THAT HOUSE BUT THE LEE SOMETHING JUST AS CUTE THAT FITS.

>> IT'S ACUTE WEATHERVANE. IT'S COPPER, IT'S TURNED GREEN

NOW. >> MAYBE THEY CAN DO SOMETHING ON THE SIDE OR RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE IF THEY LOWER IT.

>> I GUARANTEE IF WE PUT A PICTURE OF THIS HOUSE, AND THEY COMPLAINED ABOUT THE PARAPET WALLS, THEY WOULD SAY THIS HOUSE LOOKS GOOD, THIS IS ACCEPTABLE. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE, I WILL

SAY. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> THERE IT ALL GOES. >> WELL I THINK WE DID SOME GOOD

WORK TODAY. >> WE TIGHTENED IT UP.

[01:45:03]

I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD BE HAPPY WITH THIS.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO SOLVE FOR, WHICH IS THE ELEVATOR SHAFTS, THE STAIRCASES, THE PARAPETS AND NOW WE'VE ADDED CHIMNEYS, WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE LOCATION, IS IT THE DISTRICT OR THE LOCATION SO IT WILL BE THE THOUSAND FEET HERE, AND IS IT CITYWIDE? WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO WITH THE CITY, WERE STRICTLY DEALING WITH OUR NORTH AND SOUTH FLETCHER, AND WE ARE DEALING SPECIFICALLY WITH RESIDENTIAL.

I THINK WE HAVE CHECKED ALL THOSE BOXES FOR TODAY.

I THINK WE DID OUR JOB. >> I DON'T THINK WE'VE DONE, WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING THAT IN ANY WAY DISTURBS HISTORICAL

DISTRICT. >> NO.

>> OKAY. >> IS ISN'T THE LOG CABIN

HISTORIC? >> THANK YOU SIR.

>> I THOUGHT THERE WAS A SQUARE AROUND THE LOG CABIN.

>> SO, IF WE GO BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING WHERE COMMISSIONER ROSS SPOKE ABOUT HIS POOR THINGS THAT HE WANTED TO HAVE DONE, THE FIRST ONE WAS STRENGTHENING WELDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION PROVISIONS IN ORDER TO CLOSE LOOPHOLES.

I THINK THAT WE'VE DONE THAT TODAY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL.

>> AND HE AGREED THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE REQUEST, SO WE ARE

SOLVING FOR THAT. >> SO IF SOMEBODY MENTIONS COMMERCIAL AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WE WILL SAY COMMERCIAL OR ROSS,

THAT WAS HIS DIRECTION. >> BASICALLY AGAIN, THE FOCUS WAS ALONG THE BEACHFRONT COURT ORDER IS WHERE THE ISSUE IS.

>> LET'S NOT FIX ANYTHING ELSE THAT ISN'T BROKEN.

>> RIGHT. WERE NOT GOING WITH COMMERCIAL, THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR OWN SET OF RULES.

>> KELLY, IS THE EIGHTH STREET, THE M YOU EIGHT, DOES IT HAVE A SPECIAL OVERLAY OR IS IT JUST BASED ON --

>> IT HAS ITS OWN OVERLAY.

THERE ARE SOME BETTER DIFFERENT STANDARDS.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL THROUGH, THERE'S NOTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THAT PARTICULAR.

>> THERE HAS BEEN GENERAL CONVERSATION MORE RECENTLY ABOUT PROVISIONS THAT REQUIRE FIRST FLOOR NONRESIDENTIAL 48TH STREET POTENTIALLY, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AS A BOARD AT THIS POINT IN TIME, BUT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO CONSIDER SO THAT YOU HAVE MORE ACTIVE SPACE SO THERE'S RESONANT RESIDENTIAL ABOVE OR RETAIL OR OFFICE FIRST FLOOR AS A REQUIREMENT IN THE FUTURE.

>> WE NEED MORE ROOFTOP DECKS DOWNTOWN.

>> ALL RIGHT. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING.

>> ALL THE PROJECT ON EIGHTH STREET SO FAR ARE PURELY RESIDENTIAL. AND NOT EVEN INCORPORATING

COMMERCIAL. >> SO IN TERMS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, YES, BUT YOU WILL NOTICE IN THE LAST 2 - 4 YEARS SINCE WE'VE HAD THIS PROVISION IN PLACE, A LOT OF IT IS CONVERTING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND IT SANG COMMERCIAL OR RETAIL. THERE IS A BALANCING EFFECT THAT SENDS NEW VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION OR WHERE DEMOLITION IS OCCURRING WE ARE SEEING SOME RESIDENTIAL AS A POSSIBILITY BUT WE'VE SEEN

A GOOD BIT OF COMMERCIAL REDO. >> DENY READ IN THE PAPER WHERE THE OLD TAYLOR RENTAL, THEY ARE LOOKING TO MAKE THOSE

RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES. >> THAT WILL BE NICE.

>> SO THERE WON'T BE ANY, I DIDN'T READ ANYTHING IN THEIR.

>> THEY PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR NONRESIDENTIAL.

>> EIGHTH STREET WAS CRAFTED IN A WAY TO BE VERY OPEN-ENDED INTENTIONALLY SO YOU CAN SORT OF SEE WHAT KIND OF INTEREST YOU WOULD GET AND WE PUT THOSE REGULATIONS IN PLACE IN 2016 AND HAVEN'T HAD ANY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES OUT THERE AND FOUR YEARS, SO IT HAS BEEN VERY SLOW MOVING.

[01:50:01]

>> OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE FOR DISCUSSION? FOR THE WORKSHOP? ANYTHING ELSE?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.