May 13, 2021 Planning and Zoning

[00:00:03]

>>> WELCOME EVERYBODY. TONIGHT IS MADE 13TH, A FEW

[1. Call to Order]

AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THANK YOU.

ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

>>MURRAY ZWEIGERG: WE HAVE ONE ITEM THIS EVENING.

ANY CHANGE TO THE AGENDA? OKAY.

[4. Comments from the Public on Non-Agenda Items]

>> AT EVENING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS.

I'M JACKIE, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND LIBRARY FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND. I WANTED TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT TONIGHT TO ASK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE ON OUR ADA SURVEY.

AS PART OF A TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS WE AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEED TO DO TO ENSURE WE HAVE APPROPRIATE ACCESSIBILITY FOR ANY OF OUR RESIDENTS AND VISITORS WHO HAVE DISABILITIES.

SO WE DESIGNATED AN ADA COORDINATOR.

WE POSTED A POLICY STATEMENT AND A GRIEVANCE POLICY.

BUT RIGHT NOW WHAT WE ARE DOING IS EVALUATING ALL OUR PROGRAMS AND FACILITIES AND MAKING SURE THEY ARE APPROPRIATELY ACCESSIBLE. SO ONE THING THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT ELEMENT IF THAT IS GETTING THE INPUT OF THE PUBLIC. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE AN ADA SURVEY LIVE ON THE MAIN PAGE OF OUR WEBSITE OR YOUR AND WE ARE JUST ASKING TONIGHT THAT NOT ONLY YOU COMPLETE THE SURVEY IF YOU HAVE A FEW MINUTES. IT'S A VERY SHORT EIGHT QUESTION SURVEY. BUT TO LET YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND NEIGHBORS KNOW ABOUT THE SURVEY AND ASK THEM TO COMPLETE IT TARGET IT WILL BE UP UNTIL THE END OF THIS MONTH, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR TRANSITION PLAN MOVING FORWARD. AND TAKING SOME STOCK OF THAT

INPUT. >>MURRAY ZWEIGERG: THANK YOU VERY MUCH! CITY MANAGER FOR THE RECORD.

AND TO ADD TO THAT, THE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OUR FACILITIES, THAT PLAN IS GOING TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD BEFORE IT IS ADOPTED TO THE COMMISSION.

SO YOU GUYS WILL GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THAT PLAN, BUT FOR NOW JACKIE IS JUST TALKING ON THESURVEY

FOR THE PUBLIC . >>MURRAY ZWEIGERG: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

[Additional Item]

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> EVERYBODY UNANIMOUS SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> EXCUSE ME?

>> I THINK WE HAVE THE MINUTES ARE AS SEVERELY BRIDGED VERSION OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WOULD REFLECT THE RECORD FOR A COMMISSIONER OR A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC READING IT TO SEE WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT. IN THAT REGARD I AM A NO VOTE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> MOTION CARRIES. THE VOTE IS APPROVED.

WILL MAKE A COMMENT AND A QUESTION ON THAT TOPIC, IF I MAY. THE FACT THE MEETINGS, OR MEETINGS ARE NOW DOCUMENTED FROM A REPORTING STANDPOINT, DOES THAT CHANGE THE MINUTES FOR THE PROCESS OR DOCUMENTATION OF THEM IN GENERAL?

[00:05:01]

WELL. >> MR. CHAIRMAN? I HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND I HAVE SEEN THE MINUTES IN ITS SUMMATION FORM.ND AT TIMES I FEEL LIKE DAVID DOES THERE ISN'T A FULLER EXPLANATION.UT THAT IS GOING TO BE SUBJECTED FROM PERSON TO PERSON ON THE BOARD FOR IT WHAT I DO IS, I BELIEVE THERE IS INTENSE CONVERSATION ABOUT A PARTICULAR ITEM I MAKE IT A POINT TO CONTACT MY COMMISSIONERS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO LISTEN TO THE AUDIO OR THE VIDEO OR WHATEVER IS AVAILABLE TO THEM BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT .

WHEN MICHELLE GOES IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION, SHE DOESN'T HAVE AN HOUR LONG CONVERSATION WITH THEM TO DISCUSS WHAT WE DISCUSSED. IT IS A SUMMATION.

WHEN I BELIEVE IT IS NECESSARY THAT IS WHAT I DO.

I CONTACT THE COMMISSION AND SAY YOU NEED TO LISTEN TO THIS AUDIO OF THIS MEETING IN ORDER TO GET A FULL FLAVOR OF WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU.

>> DAVID? >>DAVID OFSTEIN: I CERTAINLY

UNDERSTAND MANY CITIES DO. >> DAVID, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

>> CAN HEAR ME NOW?ERFECT. A LAYPERSON LOOKING AT THE MINUTES FOR THE WRITTEN COPY WOULDN'T KNOW THEY ARE A SUMMARY. THEY DON'T SAY SUMMARY.

IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A SUMMARY, THEY SHOULD SAY A BRIDGE FOR THE RECORD. EVERY BOARD MEMBER SPOKE AT LENGTH ABOUT THIS. IN SUMMARY THERE WAS ONE OR TWO. SOME PEOPLE WERE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR. AND IT IS NOT REALLY REFLECTIVE IN THEIR PARIS OF SOMEONE WHO WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE MINUTES WE HAVE MIGHT GET THE WRONG IDEA AND NOT KNOW THEY HAD BEEN SUMMARIZED AND WOULD NOT KNOW THEY WOULD BE GOING ONLINE.

SO I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE FORMAT OF OUR MINUTES IF WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SUMMARIZE THEM.

THEY SHOULD LOOK FOR A FULL VERSION.>> I THINK THAT IS A GOOD IDEA IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE INCORPORATING.

AND IT IS PROPER FROM A DOCUMENTATION STANDPOINT TO REFER IF YOU WERE, IF YOU WILL, TO MORE INFORMATION.

>> MICHELLE FOR THE RECORD. WE COULDCERTAINLY ADD THAT NOTE TO THE MINUTES . SUMMARY MINUTES.CAN GOODS OF THIS LOCATION AND WE WILL PROVIDE IT.

>> THANK YOU. YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR

[7.A. Ordinance 2021-005: Brewpub Ordinance]

CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND FLORIDA AMENDING APPENDIX B, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ARTICLE 5, DIVISION 35, DEFINITIONS TO PROVIDE FOR DEFINITIONS RELATED TO BREWPUBS AMENDING ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 45, SECTION 10 Ã 4505 USES PERMITTED TO INCLUDE BREWPUBS AS A PERMITTED USE BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE BE NUMB TO THE ZONING DISTRICT AND AMENDING ARTICLE 15, DETAILED USE REGULATIONS BY CREATING DEFICIENT 7, BREWPUBS TO PROVIDE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS FOR BREWPUBS, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE ORDINANCE. NUMBER 2021 Ã005.

BEFORE WE GET INTO YOUR PRESENTATION, I WANT TO FIND OUT IF THERE ARE ANY PRELIMINARY COMMENTS BY ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AT THIS TIME. WE WILL WAIT UNTIL YOUR PRESENTATION IS DONE. ANY PRELIMINARY GENERAL?

>> I MEAN, I GUESS. >> WE ARE STILL GOING TO HEAR

FROM THEM. >> I'M ASSUMING WAIT TO HEAR.

WE WERE ASKED TO SUBMIT COMMENTS OR PROVIDE.

I ASSUME WE WILL HAVE DIALOGUE AFTER THE FACT.

>> IF I CAN, MR. TEACHER, WE WORKED INTO THE PRESENTATION BACK AND FORTH ON HIGH-LEVEL TOPICS AND AREAS OF CONCERN THAT THE BACK AND THE PRESENTATION HOW DO WE PROVIDE

ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. >> THANKS.

>> GOOD EVENING MR. CHAIR, CAITLIN FOR THE RECORD.

MICHELLE WILL BE REMISS IF I DON'T ASK THE MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION OF WHETHER WE STILL WANT THE BREWPUBS BEFORE WE STILL GET INTO THIS CONVERSATION.

>> I VOTED NOTE LAST TIME. I AM IN THE KNOW CATEGORY.

[00:10:11]

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DETERMINE THAT WITHOUT HAVING A VOTE. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE YOUR PRESENTATION OR THE UPDATED DOCUMENTATION IN ORDER TO GET

TO THAT POINT. >> CAITLIN WILL DO A PRESENTATION. SHE SAID WE WILL GO THROUGH THE HIGH-LEVEL POLICY ISSUES WE NEVER GOT DIRECTION ON.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WILL REMIND THE BOARD IF YOU DETERMINE YOU AS A GROUP THE MAJORITY OF YOU OPPOSE, WE CAN TAKE THAT, BACK TO THE COMMISSION SO THAT IS STRICTLY UP TO YOU. YOU HAVE TO GIVE US A

DIRECTION. >> I HOPE TONIGHT WE CAN SEE THIS BECOME A RESTAURANT THAT SERVES CRAFT BEER.

THAT THEY CAN BREW IN THE BACK. WAS THE MAIN POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE AT THE LAST MEETING THAT THIS IS NOT A PLACE TO PARTY. WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE KEG PARTIES AND FOOD TRUCKS THE READERS WE HAVE A NICE RESTAURANT THAT CAN ALSO BREW BEER IN THE BACK AND HAVE A NICE LITTLE SPIN TO IT, LET'S IDEALLY FIND SOMETHING WE CAN COME UP WITH. SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES! LET'S GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THAT IS NOT HOW THE ORDINANCE READS. THEY CAN CARRY THEM OVER AFTER

CAITLIN PRESENTATION. >> JUST TO REITERATE ALL MICHELLE'S POINT IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WAS DIRECTED TO DO RESEARCH AND BRING THIS FORWARD AS A CONSIDERATION.UT WE ARE IMPARTIAL ON THIS.

WE ARE NOT PROMOTING THE CONCEPT OF THE BREWPUB TONIGHT.

>> I'M GOING TO LET THE RECORD REFLECT DANIEL ARRIVED.

IT IS 6:14. >> I HAVE TO SAY THE COUNTIES MAINTENANCE OF THE ROADS I HAD TO TRAVEL DOWN TONIGHT IS PARTICULARLY POOR. I AM TAKING THAT UP WITH FOLKS

AT WORK TOMORROW. >> YOU WILL HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS AT THE END OF THE MEETING. [LAUGHING]

>> JUST AS A REMINDER, THE REQUEST IS APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE FOR BREWPUBS BY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE BE NUMB TO ZONING SPECIFIC TO SPECIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. AGAIN, IT IS SUBJECT TO SPECIAL SECTION SO EACH TIME AN APPLICANT HAS WARNED IT WOULD BE ON ASSESSED ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.JUST TO COVER TONIGHT ON GENDER, JUST CLARIFY WHAT IS A BREWPUB.

IS THIS THE RIGHT LOCATION TO IT AGAIN CONCURRENTLY IT IS BEING PROPOSED AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND BY PROXY THAT WOULD ALLOW IT WITH OUR PCD DISTRICT BECAUSE PCD DEFAULTS TO CERTAIN OHER ESTABLISHED DISTRICTS TORRID WILL BE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITHIN B-2 AND A BCD PROPERTY.

WILL REVIEW JUST FOR CLARIFICATION THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA YOU'D BE ASSESSING A BREWPUB BASED UPON PARIS OF EACH OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA INCLUDED IN THIS POWERPOINT FOR YOU JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE REFRESHER.

GO OVER SOME OF THE EXISTING BREWPUB REGULATIONS FOR WHAT WE CALL BENCHMARK CITIES. CITIES AROUND US, CITIES THAT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO CHARACTER AS WELL AS SOME OTHER ONES THAT JUST HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE LESHED OUT ORDINANCE.

YOU WILL SEE IN THOSE REGULATIONS, I KNOW RIGHT NOW IF SEVERAL PAGES OF REGULATIONS, BUT WHEN YOU START LOOKING AROUND MOST CITIES TYPICALLY HAVE A FEW BULLET POINTS SPECIFIC TO THIS TYPE OF USE.

WE ARE ALREADY FAR AND BUT ON IF YOU JUST PICK THE SAMPLE ORDINANCE OUT OF A HAT WITH THOSE REGULATIONS WOULD INCLUDE THE INTENT IS TO NOT OVER REGULATE IN COMPARISON TO HOW YOU WOULD REGULATE ANY OTHER RESTAURANT OR COMMERCIAL USE.

YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF FAIRNESS AND HOW WE ASSESS AND TREAT AND REGULATE LIKE USES BEING COMMERCIAL USES.

FINALLY WE WILL WRAP UP BY HAVING A BACK AND FORTH DISCUSSION ABOUT THOSE PRIMARY AREAS OF CONCERN AND AND HOPEFULLY MAKE A MOTION FOR NEXT STEPS .

SO AT OUR LAST MEETING AT THE END OF APRIL THERE WAS GENERAL CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROPOSED USE.

PRIMARILY FOCUS ON WHETHER THE USE WAS CONSISTENT WITH PARKLAND VALUES AND VISION. IF THE DISTRICT WAS THE RIGHT DISTRICT FOR THE OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AREA AND PARTIALLY THE SEATING REQUIREMENTS FOR ALLOWANCES RATHER. THE RESTAURANT ASPECT AND

[00:15:03]

HOW WE ENSURE IT IS NOT A BAG OF POTATO CHIPS OR A PIZZA BEING DELIVERED TO THE RESTAURANT.

SO WE HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON NOT THAT WE WILL GO THROUGH PARIS OF THE DISTRIBUTIONS IN TERMS OF ALLOWING OR NOT ALLOWING GROWLERS IN THE OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION FOR A BREWPUB TO POTENTIALLY TILT TO PUBLIX OR ANOTHER GROCERY.T SEEMED LIKE WE WERE SPLIT ON BOTH OF THOSE ASPECTS WE WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION AND DISCUSSION ON THOSE TWO ITEMS. AND LASTLY REGULATIONS AND TONIGHT WE DO HAVE CODE ENFORCEMENT IT LOOKS LIKE WITH US SO THEY MAY BE ABLE TO CLARIFIES ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE IN REGARDS TO THAT SPECIFICALLY. AND SO WHAT ARE WE CONSIDERING? WHAT IS A BREWPUB. CURRENTLY IT IS DEFINED AS AN ESTABLISHMENT THAT INCLUDES A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WHERE FOOD, BEER AND MALT BEVERAGES ARE DULY LICENSED TO BE MADE ON PREMISE. AND GOING TO EMPHASIZE WE INCLUDE THE REQUIREMENT FOR FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT SO WHEN WE ARE REVIEWING A PROJECT WE ARE GOING TO OF COURSE LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF WHAT IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT.

A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT MEANS AN ESTABLISHMENT WHERE FOOD AND BEVERAGES ARE ORDERED FROM A MENU PREPARED, WHICH ARE GOING TO ADD EMPHASIS THERE IS A PAVED FOR PAY FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES PER THE DEFINITION ALREADY KINDA COVERS US. WE CAN CERTAINLY ADD THAT WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF CONDITIONS JUST EMPHASIZE OF THE PREPARATION OF THE FOOD NEEDS TO BE DONE ON SITE.YOU CAN'T BRING IN A PIZZA FROM OUTSIDE OR IN OUR INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS WERE TALKING ABOUT MCDONALD'S AND BURGERS BEING SERVED. IT HAS TO BE MADE ON SITE.

BUT AGAIN, JUST FOR EMPHASIS WE CAN PUT THAT INTO THE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS SO IT IS NICE AND CLEAR RIGHT THERE TIED TO THESE SPECIFICALLY.LSO, JUST ADD A NOTE, THERE IS A DISTINCTION WITHIN THE CODER WITH AN OTHER ORDINANCE AS WELL AS WITHIN THE BREWERS ASSOCIATION BETWEEN AND BREWPUB IN OTHER SIMILAR AND THAT IS ALL BASED ON THE LIMITATIONS THAT ARE APPLIED FROM A FEDERAL AND STATE ASPECT AND OTHER FEATURES THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY THOSE ENTITIES.

SO THE BREWERS ASSOCIATION IS A NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION BUT ONLY WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS PUT OUT A LIST.

THEY SAID THAT SOUTH FLORIDA HAD SEVEN BREWPUBS.UNTIL LOOK A LOOK AT THEIR WEBSITE. HAS BEEN A COUPLE ADDITIONS TO THAT JUST BECAUSE THE ARTICLE WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS OLD.

SO HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF THOSE BREWPUB TYPE ESTABLISHMENTS PERMIT AND YOU WILL SEE RIGHT THERE ON THE THIRD BULLET IS THE BIG BEAR BRINGING CORAL SPRINGS MOST PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH AND A HANDFUL OF OTHERS WITHIN THAT ARTICLE TO READ I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THEY WENT AHEAD AND GAVE US THE MAKEUP OF THEIR REVENUE STREAMS THAT WAS CONSTITUTED BY FOOD WRITTEN OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT REGULATIONS IN DIFFERENT CITIES AND WHATNOT BUT WE WERE DISCUSSING THE CONCEPT OF REQUIRING 50 PERCENT FOOD. IT'S NOT TOO FAR OFF TO SAY EVEN WITHOUT THOSE REGULATIONS THEY ARE ALREADY PRETTY CLOSE OR IN THE BALLPARK. THE TARPON RIVER BREWING IS AT 45 PERCENT. AND AGAIN, THIS IS A COUPLE YEARS OLD. I KNOW A LOT OF THE BREWERIES HAVE UPPED THEIR FOOD SERVICE AS PART OF THEIR EXPERIENCE IN MICHIGAN AVERY WAS AT 35 TO 40 PERCENT AS A BALLPARK.

MORE FOR REFERENCE TO SUGGEST IT IS DOABLE FOR A POTENTIAL APPLICANT. AND SO HERE IS THE EXTERIOR AND THE INTERIOR IN CORAL SPRINGS. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HERE IT IS A NICER INTERIOR RESTAURANT THAT HAPPENS TO HAVE THE, THEY CALL THEM SERVING VESSELS IT LOOKS LIKE.

BUT THE BREWING EQUIPMENT BACK THERE BEHIND GLASS STANDARD BOOTH TABLE RESTAURANT TYPE OF OPERATION HERE.

BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE YOU COULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THIS IS ALSO AN ESTABLISHMENT IN WEST PALM CLASSIFIED AS A BREWPUB AGAIN, DIFFERENT REGULATIONS AND WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE.

BUT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT AESTHETICS ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR. AND SO WHERE WOULD THE BREWPUB GO AND CURRENTLY WE ARE CONSIDERING TO ALLOW IT BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE DISTRICT PRINTERS OR ZONING MAP. YOU CAN SEE THE B2 IS LOCATED ALONG THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE CITY AND THEN AGAIN A REMINDER IT WOULD ALSO BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE PCD

[00:20:02]

SO WHAT ARE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA? WE'LL RUN THROUGH THIS QUICKLY BECAUSE SOME ARE LONG-WINDED.

THIS IS FOR REFERENCE AGAIN SO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AT EACH TIME AN APPLICANT CAME BEFORE YOU. SO THE FIRST ONE IS LARGELY TALKING ABOUT COMPATIBILITY OF THE USE AND THE SURROUNDNG PROPERTIES. THAT'S GOING TO BE IN REGARDS TO MANY DIFFERENT FACTORS, ALSO INCLUDING NOISE AND STORAGE, TRAFFIC, LIGHT ON THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND ANY POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE EFFECT IT MAY HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.

IS A VERY LONG-WINDED SLIDE. WE CAN COME BACK TO IT, BUT IS GENERALLY TALKING ABOUT COMPATIBILITY.

THE SECOND CRITERIA IS TALKING ABOUT AXIS, TRAFFIC GENERATION, ROADWAY CAPACITIES ETC. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC COMING TO AND FROM THE SITE.

THE THIRD AND FOURTH CRITERIA ARE THE AVAILABILITY AND IMPACTS OF UTILITIES, FACILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES. SERVICING THE SITE IN TERMS OF WATER, SEWER, POLICE, FIRE ETC. THE FOURTH IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.FOR THIS IN THE ADVERSE INFLUENCE ON LIVING CONDITIONS IN THE NEW RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SIMILAR TO THE FIRST CRITERION.

SIX IS ADVERSE EFFECTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES AND THE SEVENTH IS WHETHER THERE BE ANY DETERRENCE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO DEVELOP SHOULD THE USE COME INTO A SHOPPING CENTER OR WHEREVER IT MAY BE. ASTLY, ANY ADDITIONAL FACTORS WHICH MAY BE CALCULATED TO MATERIALLY AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE. T'S KIND OF A CATCH ALL AT THE END THERE. THE NEXT SECTION WE ARE GOING TO GET INTO HIS SIMILAR CITIES. E CALL THEM BENCHMARK CITIES IN THE AREA. AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER AS WE GO THROUGH YOU WILL SEE THERE IS REALLY NOT SEVERAL PAGES OF REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE USE AND IT IS LARGELY IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE TREATING IT SIMILARLY TO OTHER USES. YOU WILL SEE THAT HERE AS WE GO THROUGH. CORAL SPRINGS, THEY DON'T ACTUALLY USE THE TERMS BREWPUB. BIGBEAR ITSELF IS WITH IN THE B2 ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH DOESN'T APPEAR TO ACTUALLY MENTION BREWING FUNCTIONS, WHETHER IT'S ANCILLARY TO A RESTAURANT USE OR AS A PERMITTED USE ITSELF.

HOWEVER, WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN PMIXED-USE DISTRICT, THE MICROBREWERY, WHICH I WILL CLARIFY IS NOT WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE. IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN A BREWPUB. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THEY REGULATE A SIMILAR USE, THERE ARE THREE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FEDERAL AND STATE PERMITS AND LICENSES TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY EACH YEAR AND THAT IS TO DETERMINE THEY ARE COMPLYING WITH ALL THE MAXIMUMS AND MINIMUMS THAT WE ARE EXPLORING IN OUR ORDINANCES AS WILL PERMIT NO MORE THAN 50 PERCENT TO BE OCCUPIED BY BREWING OPERATIONS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IN THIS ORDINANCE FOR THE LAST ONE IS THAT THERE IS NO DISTILLATION BY COMMERCIAL VEHICLE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE INITIALLY PROPOSED AS PART OF OUR ORDINANCE AS WELL. SOME OTHER CITIES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, BOCA RATON DOESN'T USE THE TERM BREWPUB, DOESN'T TALK ABOUT MICROBREWERIES.

THEY DO TALK ABOUT BREWING AND THAT IS PERMITTED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. COCONUT CREEK IT AGAIN, SAME THING. PLANTATION, MICROBREWERIES AND BREWPUBS ARE PERMITTED WITHIN THEIR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT BUT ONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESTAURANT.

SO AGAIN, BY CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHEN ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESTAURANT.

AND SO THEY HAVE A COUPLE OF CONTINGENCIES THERE.

DEERFIELD BEACH, OUR CITY ATTORNEY HERE.

IS PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ONE.

AGAIN, JUST A HANDFUL OF REGULATIONS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THERE BE ONE DISTRICT. YOU CAN SEE THE DEFINITION THERE. THE REQUIRED THE REVENUE FROM FOOD SALES SHALL CONSTITUTE MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL GROSS SALES, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING IS TO ENSURE THERE IS SOME BALANCE BETWEEN FOOD PRODUCTION AND THE ALCOHOL SALES BUT AGAIN, AS ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBER SAID WE REALLY, IF WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW IT WE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE MORE IN THE SPIRIT OF A RESTAURANT THAT HAPPENS TO BREW BEER AS OPPOSED TO INQUIRY, WHICH IS A MORE INTENSE VERSION OF A BREWPUB BIRD SECOND CRITERIA IS THAT LIVE MUSIC AND ENTERTAINMENT IS ONLY PERMITTED AS AN ACCESSORY USE AND THEY TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE NOISE REGULATIONS AND THAT CRITERION.

[00:25:02]

THEY DID HAVE A COUPLE MORE BULLET POINTS OF REGULATIONS THAT THEY PERMIT FOR THE BREWPUB USED IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. FOOD SALES LIMITED FLOOR AREA LIMITED. THEY DO PERMIT GROWLERS PERMITTED BY THE STATE AD FEDERAL LICENSES.

A TALK ABOUT THE MAXIMUM PRODUCTION THE GO HEAD TO INDICATE ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS IN REGARDS TO MECHANICAL SCREENING. AND OUTDOOR STORAGE.

SAFETY HARBOR ON THE OTHER COAST, AGAIN, I THROUGH THIS ONE AND BECAUSE THEY HAD ADDITIONALREGULATIONS .

BUT AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT RATIOS OF THE MINIMUM 50 PERCENT OF THE BEER TO BE PRODUCED ON SITE MUST BE SOLD ON THE SITE.

SO THAT IT IS NOT JUST A DISTRIBUTION EXERCISE AND GET TO BE CONSUMING 50 PERCENT OF THE BEER ON SITE AT LEAST IT AND AGAIN, 50 PERCENT GROSS FLOOR AREA NOT TO EXCEED THAT 50 PERCENT FOR THE BREWING FUNCTION AND OUTDOOR STORAGE FOR HIM WANTING TO REMIND YOU IS WE DO HAVE SEVERAL AREAS OF REGULATIONSWITHIN THE CODE THAT TALK ABOUT ELEMENTS LIKE OUTDOOR DINING , LIGHTING, OUTDOOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT STORAGE AREAS, LANDSCAPING, THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMITS.

ALTHOUGH THAT ALREADY EXISTS AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO DUPLICATE THOSE REGULATIONS WITHIN THE STANDARDS BECAUSE OF COURSE WE ARE GOING TO DO A FULL REVIEW OF THE PLAN TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE HITTING ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS.ND SO WE DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY COPY AND PASTE INTO THE BREWPUB SECTION.

BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF THESE EXISTING REGULATIONS THAT TALK ABOUT LIGHTING, SCREENING ETC. THE PRIMARY AREAS OF CONCERN, AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE GOING TO GET INTO THE BACK AND FORTH IF WE CAN GET CONSENSUS BETWEEN THE BOARD MEMBERS TO REALLY HIGHLIGHT THE AREAS OF CONCERN.

FEEL FREE TO ADD IF WE MISSED ANY.

AND THEN WE TALK ABOUT SUGGESTIONS TO TWEAK WHAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE. I AM NOT SURE ANTHONY, HOW YOU THINK THIS WOULD BE BEST HANDLED IN TERMS OF TAKING A QUASI-VOTE ON EACH ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL ONES OR DO WE NEED TO MAKE VERY END?

>> I WILL COME UP SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A MICROPHONE OVER THERE. IT IS REALLY UP TO THE BOARD, BUT MY SUGGESTION IS WE GO OVER THE BIG TICKET REGULATORY ISSUES AND GET SOME CONSENSUS THAT WAY.ND WHETHER WE DO A VOTE ON EACH ONE OR WHETHER WE GET CONSENSUS WITH DISCUSSION IN A VOTE AT THE END,EITHER WAY WOULD WORK.

WHATEVER THE WORDS PLEASURE IN REGARD .

>> IS IT PRESENTED BEFORE US FOR THE ORDINANCE IN AND OF

ITSELF? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

ULTIMATELY WE WILL WANT TO VOTE ON DIRECTION, BUT WHETHER YOU DO THAT ON INDIVIDUAL ISSUE BASIS OR GIVE DIRECTION AND COMMENT ON INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND THEN WE VOTE AT THE END IS UP TO THE BORDER BUT BASED ON THE DISCUSSION LAST TIME, IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO TACKLE THE BIG TICKET ISSUES.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE WILL KNOW THAT UNTIL WE HAVE OUR BOARD DISCUSSION. I STAND CORRECTED.

WE WON'T KNOW WHAT ISSUES OR MAYBE UNTIL WE HAVE OUR

DISCUSSION. >> I'M GOING TO START SCROLLING THROUGH THESE. IF WE CAN STICK AN EFFORT TO GET US OUT HERE IN A TIMELY MANNER, STICK TO THE HEADING TOPIC AND IF WE MISS ANY WE WILL COME BACK TO THE SPECIFIC TOPICS INDIVIDUALLY. BUT IF WE JUST STAY ON TOPIC TO THE HEADER, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS WAY TO GET THROUGH THIS. CIRCLE BACK TO OUR CONVERSATION AT THE BEGINNING, THE RESTAURANT USE.

AND HOW WE REGULATE LITERATURE THIS TRULY IS A RESTAURANT.

WE TOUCHED ON THIS AT THE BEGINNING INDICATING THAT THE DEFINITION OF A BREWPUB REQUIRES A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT OR GO INTO THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT DEFINITION AND IT SAYS RIGHT THERE IN THE FOOD IS PREPARED AND SERVED ON SITE. WHAT WE CAN INCLUDE JUST AGAIN

[00:30:01]

AND SO I'M NOT SURE IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS AN ITEM ON CONSENSUS ON THE BOARD. HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE THIS

CONVERSATION? >> I THINK WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THE COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS AND THEN WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO ITEM THAT ARE IMPORTAN .

OR ONE HAS AN ADVERSARY COMMENT: ONE OF THE ITEMS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE BUT OTHERWISE WE ARE NOT ÃARE WE GONNA 10 VOTES OR VOTE ON EACH PARTICULAR ITEM? YOU MAY BE IN AGREEMENT WITH 80 PERCENT OF THEM AND THEN WE JUST HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE 20 PERCENT OF THEM DID THE ITEMS ON THE SCREEN OUR IN ORDER IS THAT ACCURATE?

>> TALKED ABOUT THE RESTAURANT USE, UNDER SITTING AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRIBUTION REGULATORY CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT. EACH OF THE UMBRELLA CATEGORIES ARE AND WHAT WE WANTED WAS SPECIFIC DIRECTION ON EACH OF THOSE CATEGORIES WE COULD COME BACK AND SEE IF THERE NEEDED TO BE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS. WE WANT TO AN INDIVIDUAL VOTES ON EACH OF THE HIGH LEVEL TOPICS AS WE HAVE A CLEAR IDEA GOING FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION ON WHETHER EVERYONE AGREES WE SHOULD ADD THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE INTO THE BREWPUB JUST

TO CLARIFY. >> I WILL TURN TO EACH BOARD MEMBER AND GET 1/32 STATEMENT SO WE KNOW WHAT THE MAJORITY DESIRES. AND WE WILL GO WITH THAT ROUTE.

IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU? THAT WOULD BE GREAT AND THEN WE

CAN GET THROUGH IT PROPERLY. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

SHOULD WE HAVE OUR DISCUSSION OR GO THROUGH ITEM BY ITEM?

>> THE FIRST ONE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS A RESTAURANT USE.

ON WHETHER YOU THINK WE SHOULD ADD ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE FOR EMPHASIS UNDER THE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS SECTION THREE JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT OUR CURRENT DEFINITION OF A FULL RESTAURANT SAYS, WHICH IS AT THE FOOD HAS TO BE PREPARED ON SITE READ AND THEN I WILL ZOOM THROUGH INJURY THE OTHER ONES WE GET THROUGH BUT OUTDOOR SEATING ENTERTAINMENT, DISTRIBUTION, REGULATORY CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT.

AFTER WE GET TO THESE ISSUES IF THIS ONCE WE LEFT OFF WE WILL HAVE A LARGER MORE OPEN ENDED DISCUSSION ON THOSE.

BUT IF WE COULD GET THROUGH THOSE WOULD GIVE US A MUCH CLEARER PICTURE OF HOW TO TWEAK THIS GOING FORWARD.

>> BEFORE WE DO THAT, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT? TO DO IT INDIVIDUALLY?SHE RELATING TO THIS ITEM? OKAY. ANTHONY?

>> SURE. EVERY FROM NOW ON THIS EVENING BOARD MEMBERS AND THE PEOPLE SPEAKING, SPEAK CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE SO THE RECORD CAN BE DOCUMENTED, PLEASE.

>> MY QUICK COMMENT IS I AM OKAY WITH THE DEFINITION AND ADDING IT TO THE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE EMPHASIS

WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE ASKING JUST ABOUT THIS ONE? WHAT CAN ASKING IN GENERAL ARE WE GOING TO DO IT INDIVIDUALLY OR HAVE CONVERSATION?

>> I'M FINE EITHER WAY. I DON'T HAVE A STRONG OPINION.

>> DAVID? >> I THINK I LOOKED AT THE SUMMARY WE MAY HAVE LENGTHY DISCUSSIONS.

I THINK TO GO THROUGH THE GENERAL TOPICS AND HIT WHATEVER DETAIL WE NEED IS PROBABLY A DECENT WAY TO GO.

>> ALEX? OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO TEST YOUR ORDINANCE WILL READ THE COMMENTS AND THEN WE MAKE A VOTE FOR EMOTION.

>> YOU'RE GONNA SPICE IT UP TONIGHT BUT WANT TO GO WITH THE FLOW BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE DOING IT OUT OF ORDER IN

ORDER. >> MR. CHAIRMAN? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CLEARLY, BUT I AGREE WE SHOULD BE GOINGTHROUGH THEM INDIVIDUALLY LIKE WE ARE .

>> ARE WE GOING TO ADD SOME POINT SEE A FINISHED DRAFT OF THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD BEFORE IT GOES

TO THE COMMISSION? >> THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE DISCUSSED AND VOTED ON BY THE BOARD.

WE CAN PUT IT IN THE. TO THE CITY COMMISSION OR

[00:35:01]

>> LET'S GO THROUGH THEM ONE BY ONE LET CAITLIN PRESENT THEM AND WE WILL DISCUSS THEM INDIVIDUALLY AND NARROW THEM

DOWN AND GO FROM THERE. >> PERFECT FOR THE FIRST ONE IS WHETHER TO ADD FOR EMPHASIS THE LANGUAGE DIRECTLY WITHIN THE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE BREWPUBS THAT THE FOOD HAS TO BE PRODUCED ON SITE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR DEFINITION FOR FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT! WE ARE NOT HAVING AN OFFICIAL VOTE ON EACH ITEM.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO SEE IF ANYONE HAS ANY OBJECTION TO

THAT OR COMMENT? >>NATHANIEL KLITSB: I DO AND THIS IS WHAT I WAS WANTING TO TALK ABOUT A MINUTE AGO RELATED

TO THIS IN GENERAL. >>MURRAY ZWEIGERG: SPEAK INTO

THE MICROPHONE. >>NATHANIEL KLITSB: IS THIS ALL RIGHT? ALSO WAS LOOKING MORE AT THIS ITEM IN THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AT OUR LAST MEETING, I THINK THE EXCEPTION OF, TONY AND I HAD MORE FUNDAMENTAL CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF BREWPUB.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAD THE SAME LEVEL OF FUNDAMENTAL CONCERN. BUT THE MORE I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT, I VIEW, AT LEAST THE CONSENSUS AT THE LAST MEETING AS TO WHAT WE WERE THINKING THIS WOULD BE AND WHAT WE WOULD WANT THIS TO BE IS THE RESTAURANT THAT HAS THE BRING FACILITY ON SITE AND THEN THERE IS SOME RELATIONSHIP ÃSORRY.

IS THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT THAT HAS A BRAIN FUNCTION AND THE DRAW FROM THAT. RATHER THAN THE OTHER WAY AROUND. THE BIG THEIR BREWING COMPANY IS MY PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT I THINK THAT ÃMAYBE EVEN, TONY, YOU WOULD AGREE THE BIG THEIR BREWING COMPANY IS SOMETHING THAT IS AN ATTRACTIVE COMMERCIAL ELEMENT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE CITY OF PARKLAND.

>> THAT WAS MY COMMENT WHEN WE STARTED.

CAN WE MAKE THIS A RESTAURANT TONIGHT.>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT I WAS TALKING WITH CITY ATTORNEY, WHICH IS RATHER THAN HAVING ITS OWN ORDINANCE, RATHER THAN HAVING ITS OWN SECTION, WHY DON'T WE THINK ABOUT ÃCAITLIN, HE POINTED THIS OUT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES. HAVE A BRAIN FUNCTION WHATEVER WE TALK ABOUT ORGAN WHATEVER THE COMMISSION LIKES TO DO.

THE A PERMITTED USE IN WHATEVER ZONING DISTRICTS ARE DETERMINED OR APPROPRIATE WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF RESTAURANTS.

SUBJECT TO ADHERE FIVE OR SIX THINGS THAT YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF REGULATIONS.

BECAUSE IT'S THAN HAVING ITS OWN THING AND THEN I DON'T KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A DEBATE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW ABOUT IS A TOP ROOM A BREWPUB, IS A MICROBREWERY WITH A RESTAURANT A BREWPUB SINCE ALL THOSE THINGS HAVE DIFFERENT MAGICALWORD MEANINGS . JUST GO WITH BREWING IN THE SURFACE OF THE BEER, MALT BEVERAGES.

IN A RESTAURANT CONCEPT. WE HAD TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS WE WANT TO HAVE ATTACHED ONLY TO THE ONES DOING THE BREWING. AND WE ENCOMPASS EVERYTHING WE REGULATE IN TERMS OF RESTAURANTS.

WE ALREADY HAVE REGULATIONS FOR OUTDOOR SITTING HERE BRD HAVE REGULATIONS FOR WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF WHAT ASSAULT FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT IS. AND SO WE ARE BASICALLY SAYING IT IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT.

AND IN THE B2 ZONING DISTRICTS, RING IS PERMITTED BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION SUBJECT TO THESE FOUR OR FIVE THINGS.

AND I KNOW I AM RUNNING A LITTLE FAR FUELED OF THIS, BUT THEN WE CAN PICK AND CHOOSE. OUTDOOR SEATING IS ALREADY ADDRESSED IN OUR RESTAURANT ORDINANCES.

WHY WOULD A RESTAURANT THAT ALSO HAS A BREWING ELEMENT HAVE A DIFFERENT OUTDOOR SEATING PIECE FOR.

OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT IS BY SPECIAL PERMIT MORE RESTAURANTS ARE. YOU ALREADY HAVE HOW DO RETAIL SALES WORK, HOW WITH DISTRIBUTION AND VEHICLES COMING ON SITE. ALL THOSE THINGS ARE ENCOMPASSED IN A RESTAURANT ORDINANCE.

[00:40:01]

THE BRING ON SITE. I THINK IT LOT OF ÃI REALLY APPRECIATE. I KNOW I WAS ASKING ABOUT WHAT ARE THE OTHER NEIGHBORING CITIES DOING.

THAT INFORMATION HERE WAS VERY GOOD BECAUSE IT HELPS CREATE FOR US OKAY, IS THIS A UNIQUE SCENARIO WHAT WE ARE COMING UP WITH AS A BREWPUB ORDINANCE. WHICH IT SORT OF SEEMS LIKE IT IS. I DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY ELSE WHO HAD A BREWPUB ORDINANCE ENCOMPASSING THE CONCEPT.

AND SO I GET OFF MY SOAPBOX ON THIS PARTICULAR THING.

I ALSO THINK IT WINDS UP BEING SIMPLER IN TERMS OF JUST WHAT IT IS WE ARE MAKING SPECIAL ABOUT THIS KIND OF RESTAURANT.

AS COMPARED TO EVERY OTHER RESTAURANT PERMITTED IN THE CITY PARK AND SUBJECT TO BE REGULATION THAT WE ARE TO HAVE.

AND THEN WE DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT IS FULL-SERVICE MEA . WE ALREADY HAVE A FULL-SERVICE

RESTAURANT. >> HOW DO WE THEN RECEIVE IT WITHOUT UNDOING EVERYTHING CAITLIN HAS DONE QUICK.

>> THAT IS THE INTERESTING QUESTION.

IN THE ORDINANCE WAS PREPARED AND PRESENTED IN RESPONSE TO, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, A REQUEST FOR ÃEVEN IF THIS IS A GENERAL ORDINANCE WE ARE REVIEWING ON HEARING.

AND IT WAS WRITTEN. IN RESPONSE TO SOMEBODY THAT CAME TO OUR CITY AND WANTED TO PUT IN A BREWPUB AND WE DON'T ALLOW IT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE AND HAVE A MECHANISM TO PERMIT IT. TO GET A PERMITTED SPECIAL USE.

TO DO. IT IS THE GENESIS.

AND NOTWITHSTANDING WHAT THEY NECESSARILY WANT TO DO.

AND I THINK PROBABLY SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD SAW THE SAME SOLICITATIONS THAT I GOT TO BECOME AN INVESTOR IN THIS PROPOSED VENTURE. ALL OF A SUDDEN WE TALK ABOUT BREWPUBS AND THE GHOST OF STEVE JOBS AND MARK ZUCKERBERG DECIDED I WOULD START GETTING FACEBOOK ADS TO POTENTIALLY

INVEST IN A LOCAL BREWPUB. >> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BREWPUB IS COMING SOON. I HAVE THREE PHOTOGRAPHS OF MY PHONE, PROBABLY SOMEONE YOU DO, THAT SAY WE ARE COMING SOON.

GUESS THISGENTLEMAN KNOW SOMETHING WE DON'T KNOW .

>> AGAIN, WE AREN'T DOING IT BECAUSE OF THAT, BUT I THINK THAT THE GOAL SHOULD BE WHAT IT IS THIS CITY WANTS TO HAVE.

AND WHETHER IT MEETS THIS PARTICULAR PERSON OR ANY PARTICULAR PERSONS DEFINITION OF BREWPUB IS NOT REALLY RELEVANT. I THINK THAT THERE IS CONSENSUS THERE SHOULD BE SOME BREWING ALLOWED IN RESTAURANT A SPAT ESTABLISHMENT SUBJECT TO A HANDFUL OF THINGS BUT WE DON'T WANT OVERREGULATED TO THE POINT THAT NOBODY WANTS TO RENT.

>> I'M GOING TO PAUSE YOU FOR A MINUTE TO ANTHONY.

>> WHICH ANTHONY. OH, THAT ANTHONY.

>> I'M HAPPY TO SHARE SOME TIME WITH ANOTHER ANTHONY LATER.

WHETHER IT WAS A COUPLE, THERE WERE A COUPLE POINTS BROUGHT U . I THINK ONE THING THAT COULD BE DONE. WE HAVE A PERMITTED USE TABLE GRID AND IT WILL SAY FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT IS PERMITTED AND LET'S SAY B2 PARIS ONE THING YOU COULD DO IS CREATE ANOTHER LINE IN B2 THAT SAYS FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH MARIE. AND THEN YOU COULD EITHER PUT IT AS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, AS AT FIRST PIECE IS CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW. YOU SEE THE ORDINANCE OR ANOTHER OPTION, LIKE I WAS JUST TALKING WITH MICHELLE ABOUT, THEY CAN MEET THESE FIVE CONDITIONS THEY ARE GOOD.

YOU CAN CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL USE WERE AS OPPOSED TO A SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE ALL THOSE FACTORS THAT CAITLIN RAISED BEFORE. BUT THAT IS REALLY UP TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. IS A GOOD ENOUGH TO HEY, IF THEY MEET THESE FIVE REQUIREMENTS THEY ARE GOOD, THEY GET THE ABILITY TO DO WERE REPRINTS OF CONDITIONAL USE MAY BE ONE OPTION AS WELL. IF YOU LIKE MORE THE CONSIDERATIONS YOU SAW BEFORE, MAYBE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS THE WAY TO GO. ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT WHERE ZONING CODE READS IS, MANY ZONING CODES READ, IS IF IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED IS PROHIBITED.

[00:45:06]

JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND. BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME OF THOSE PROVISIONS IN HERE NOW. PAS IF THAT IS NOT WHAT THE BOARD WANTS TO DO THAT IS NOT WHAT THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DO THEY DON'T NEED TO BE IN HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. AND IN TERMS OF PROCESS, BUT TO BE DUE AT THE END. BECAUSE WE HAD AN ORDINANCE BEFORE US. IT IS A MOTION TO AMEND AND YOU GIVE SOME CLEAR DIRECTION AND THAT COULD TO POTENTIALLY BE ENOUGH IF THE BOARD IS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

>> I THINK WE OWE IT TO THE COMMISSION AT OUR STAFF TO DO EXACTLY WHAT ANTHONY JUST SAID. PROVIDE AMENDMENT TO IT AND GIVE THEM SOME CLEAR DEFINITION.

BECAUSE I HAVE A FEELING THIS COULD GO BACK AND FORTH WITH THIS PARTICULAR BOARD, WHICH IS GOOD IN A WAY.

BUT IN MAKING THESE DECISIONS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND, AND I THINK WHAT CAITLIN PUT UP WITH SAFETY HARBOR IN LAKE PARK AND THE NEEDS OF THE MUNICIPALITIES, WE HAVE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE MUNICIPALITIES HAVE AND WE DON'T. ONE, BEING AN INDUSTRIAL AREA.

A LOT OF TAPROOM BREWERIES ARE IN THOSE AREAS.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT. LAKE PARK HAS FEDERAL HIGHWAY.

IT HAS AN OLD MALL.T HAS AREAS THAT ALREADY HAVE ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL BUSINESS.

RESTAURANTS, BURIED THEMSELVES ALREADY.ND SO TO HAVE THAT ALONG FEDERAL HIGHWAY. SAFETY HARBOR IS AN OLD-SCHOOL FLOOR, RIGHT? EXCEPT THE BREWERIES I JUST LOOKED AT HER INOLD GAS STATIONS AND OFF THE BEATEN PATH, RIGHT? SOME OF THEM ARE IN HOUSES IN OLD RESIDENTIAL AREAS .E DON'T HAVE THAT.

WE ARE NO COMMERCIAL. CAN WE BE IN THE FUTURE? POSSIBLY. BUT THERE IS ALSO GOING TO BE A SCHOOL COMPONENT TO THAT AND MORE RESIDENTIAL.

SO THE COMMERCIAL LAND IS LIMITED HERE IN A WHILE WE WOULD ALL LIKE A BIG MARIE, THERE IS ONLY A HANDFUL OF PLACES BUT NOT EVEN HIM WILL BRITTANY BE THREE, THAT A BIG BEAR CAN ACTUALLY GO TO HAVE SOMEONE TO SPEND THE MONEY THAT WILL TAKE TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE SPONSOR ALREADY EXISTING GAS STATIONS, WHICH IS GOING TO INCREASE THEIR COST.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE ÃI THINK WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT PART IT IS.

IS QUITE, OBVIOUSLY SMALL. WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET MASSIVE ÃMAYBE IF WE DO IT'S GREAT. BUT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET A MASSIVE MARIE IN HERE PRETTY FULLDISCLOSURE, I SPOKE WITH THE POTENTIAL APPLICANT .

THEY ARE LOOKING AT 200 SQUARE-FOOT APPARATUS.

THAT IS IT. IN THEIR 2200 SQUARE-FOOT THAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR FOR WHAT THE GENESIS OF THIS IS, IT IS 200 SQUARE FEET. THEY ARE ALREADY SUBMITTED A FULL MENU TO THE STATE THAT THEY HAD TO DO WITH HER LICENSE. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE, THE OF CRUNCH FITNESS WITH 16,000 SQUARE FEET, RIGHT? E GOING TO GET A BIG MARIE IN THEIR RESTAURANT? NOT LIKELY BECAUSE ALL THESE OTHER MODIFICATIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE. AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO NARROW IN AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT OVERREACHING AND DO EXACTLY AS ANTHONY SAID. OUTLINE THESE FIVE ITEMS AND STREAMLINE THIS GERMAN, AND GET WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO, BUT WE HAVE A MOTION THAT CARRIED AT THE LAST MEETING.

AND WE WERE ASKED YOUR THE MOTION WAS DO WE WANT BREWPUBS IN THE CITY GRID AND WE HAD A VOTE AND IT CARRIED.

BUT THIS BOARD SAYS WE WANT BREWPUBS IN THE CITY.

NOW, PERHAPS AFTER NATHANIEL'S COMMENTS WE DON'T WANT BREWPUBS . WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A RESTAURANT WITH A WHIRRING COMPONENT.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED TO CANCEL OUT OR HAVE A ANOTHER MOTION TO CANCEL OUR WE CARRIED BEFORE.

ANTHONY? >> I DON'T BELIEVE YOU DO.

DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU DO AT THE END OF THIS MEETING, I WILL CERTAINLY LET YOU KNOW IF I THINK THERE'S ADDITIONAL VOTES NEEDED. BUT I THINK IF YOU GIVE CLEAR DIRECTION AT THE END WITH AN AMENDMENT, THAT WILL BE WHAT CARRIES AND THAT WILL BE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR REVIEW DID TAKE A VOTE ON THAT PARTY ULTIMATELY DIDN'T VOTE ON THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT WILL GO TO THE COMMISSION, IS DOCUMENTED FOR THE RECORD THAT WILL GOTO THE COMMISSION IS A

[00:50:01]

>> WE COULD VOTE TO THE DENY IT.

IT WILL STILL GO TO THE COMMISSION.

>> THE DISCUSSION HAS TURNED INTO A RESTAURANT WITH A COMPONENT OFBREWING. WE ARE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT A

BREWPUB ANYMORE . >> BUT WE DIDN'T GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE BOARDS COMMENTS.

>> CAN I SAY ONE QUICK THING WITH REGARD TO THAT? THE ISSUE OF WHAT IS A BREWPUB, WE WERE DISCUSSING BREWPUB LAST TIME BUT THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT IS 50 PERCENT FOOD PLUS.

AND SO THE ISSUE NOW IS TALKING ABOUT THE SEMANTICS OF THE NAME OF WHAT IT IS WERE TALKING ABOUT LAST TIME.

WHAT IS A BREWPUB. BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF RESTAURANTS AND ALL THOSE OTHER LIMITING FACTORS.

REALLY WHAT WE VOTED ON WAS A FOOD-SERVICE PLAYSET OUTNUMBERING COMPONENT WRITTEN VERTEBRAE IN PLACE THAT HAD

EQUAL. >> OKAY.

I WILL PLAY ALONG. >> MR. CHAIR, MAY I MAKE ONE BRIEF COMMENTS? I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT ONE PARTICULAR APPLICANT FOR AND IN FAIRNESS TO THE FOLKS DISCUSSING IT, THAT APPLICANT HAS COME TO A MEETING IT IS KIND OF PUBLIC. AGAIN DRIVE BY, YOU CAN SEE WHAT IS GOING ON SO EVERYBODY KINDA KNOWS WHAT IS GOING ON.

BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE AND RECOMMEND TO THIS OR THAT REALLY ULTIMATELY IN YOUR DELIBERATIONS AND YOUR CONSIDERATION ULTIMATE VOTE THAT YOU REALLY FOCUS ON WHERE YOU WANT THIS AND WHAT YOU THINK THE APPROPRIATE PLACES.

WHAT YOU THINK THE APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS ARE AND NOT FOCUS ON ONE PARTICULAR POTENTIAL APPLICANT , ONE POTENTIAL LOCATION.ECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR APPLICATION BEFORE YOU. YOU HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT MAY

PERMIT BREWPUBS. >> YOU TOOK ALL MY COMMENTS.

>> I'M SORRY, CHAIR. >> LAWYERED!

>>TODD ROGERS : THANK YOU. SO YOU WERE GETTING COMMENT FROM THE GENERALLY? BOYKIN SEEMS TO BE GENERALLY.

BUT I WANTED TO STICK TO THE TOPIC.

YOUR INPUT ON YOUR GENERAL DESIRE TO REAFFIRM.

>> MY ORIGINAL VOTE. I AM FINE WITH A BREWPUB WITHIN THE CITY OF PARKLAND AS LONG AS WE AGREE WITH THE GUIDELINES WE COME UP WITH. THAT BEING SAID, IF IT MAKES SENSE TO NOT HAVE REDUNDANCY AND IT'S AN ADDITIONAL LINE ITEM WITHIN THE ORDINANCE RESTAURANT, THAT IS FINE WITH ME. AS LONG AS WE CLARIFY WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS ARE.

I DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL WE NEED TOHAVE A SEPARATE ORDINANCE . IF 50 TO 75 PERCENT OF ITEMS IN THE ORDINANCE ARECOVERED ELSEWHERE, THAT MAKES NO SENSE

. >> THANK YOU.

DAVID? >>DAVID OFSTEIN: I THINK WE ARE KIND OF.

OF ALL OVER THE PLACE WITH WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE.

I AM TRYING TO PAY ATTENTION. I 100 PERCENT AGREE.

I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT AT THE LAST MEETING.

AND ALEC STARTED OFF TONIGHT AND JOE PICKED IT UP AND NATHANIEL PICKED IT UP AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST WEEK. REVISION WOULD HAVE BEEN A NICE UPSCALE RESTAURANT BUT THAT HAS A BRING CAPACITY.

I SUBMITTED COMMIT ALL THE LENGTHY I'M SURE NO ONE IS SURPRISED, COMMENTS ON THE ORDINANCE.

THINGS I SUBMITTED ARE WE CALL WHATEVER THE GROUP HUB IS, IN MY COMMENTS I SUGGESTED WE ONLY ALLOW IT AS AN ACCESSORY TO THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT. THE REASON I DID THAT IS BECAUSE WE HAD TO CLOSE A NIGHTCLUB OPERATING IN MIAMI LAKES WITH THE HELP OF THE POLICE, BECAUSE THEY HAD LONG ABANDONED ITS RESTAURANT AND IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE THERE WAS A SHOOTING AND I WAS ABLE TO SEND CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH THE POLICE AND WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE PICTURES OF THE EMPTY REFRIGERATORS TO WHERE WE COULD SAY YOU ARE NOT OPERATING A RESTAURANT AND SO NOW WE PULLED THE ZONING CERTIFICATE, CASE CLOSED. IT WAS A PROBLEM WE HAVE FOR MANY YEARS. BEFORE I HAD GOTTEN THERE.

[00:55:03]

I SAID LET'S PULL THE ZONING THIS IS HOW WE DID IT.

BUT THE ONLY WAY THAT WE COULD DO IT WAS WE HAD ACCESS BECAUSE THE POLICE BECAUSE OF THE VIOLENCE.

WE WOULD'VE HAD ABILITY IF WE SAW SOMETHING THAT WAS HAPPENING WE DIDN'T LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PULL IT.

WHEN I LOOK AT THE DEFINITION, SOME OF MY NOTES WHERE THE FOOD HAS TO BE PAIRED ON SITE WHERE YOU CAN'T BRING IT IN.

A TRICK THAT THEY USED WAS THE HOLDER THERE IS INSIDE THE BUILDING WHERE THEY DON'T SERVE A FULL MENU WHERE THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO THIS DEFINITION IS BEVERAGES.

WITH THE ENTIRE MENU IS AVAILABLE.

YOU CAN'T BE HAVING ON CALL IN AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN'T GET THE MENU. SO YOU WILL END UP IN THEBACK ROOM THAT IS ONLY A BAR , THAT IS ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING A BAR THAT THEY ARE NOT SELLING ANY FOOD AT ALL AND IS

ANY INTENTION OF SELLING FOODS. >> YOUR DIRECTION IS TO KEEP THE BREWPUB ORDINANCE OR NOT? LET'S START WITH THAT IN THE

BIG PICTURE. >> I THINK WE ARE GETTING LOST WITH WHAT HE BREWPUB ORDINANCE IS.

WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE USE INSIDE OUR ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO ADMIT THE ORDINANCE. IT IS JUST AMENDING OUR ORDINANCE. IT'S GOING TO BE ONE USE.

>> YOU ARE SAYING THAT TO CREATE A NEW.

>> YOU CAN DO IT IN A NUMBER OF WAYS, WHICHEVER ENTITY IS HAPPIEST WITH. YOU COULD HAVE THE BREWING COMPONENT. THAT IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION BROKEN ACCESSORY TO A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT.

WERE YOU COULD HAVE A BREWPUB WITH A FULL-SERVICE.

WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT IS FINE FOR AS LONG AS IT ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME THING. I DON'T BELIEVE THEREARE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS . ON-SITE SEATING FOR A BREWPUB IS NOT ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL WITH A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT.

UNLESS IT IS PROPERLY REGULATED AND IT IS JUST A RESTAURANT WITH OUTSIDE SEATING. AND SO I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE IT AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND HAVE SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT THEY HAVE. AND AS LONG AS THEY CAN LOOK AT THAT BEFORE THEY SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IT IS GOING TO TAKE TO APPLY TO THE CITY, ONLY TO COME HERE AND FINDOUT THAT THE BOARD DOESN'T THINK THAT THEY MET THEIR STANDARDS . BECAUSE THE STANDARDS WE HAD FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS MAY NOT BE READILY AVAILABLE.

I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE CLEAR CRITERIA SO THEY CAN SEE IT.

GENERALLY I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE IT AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND ADDRESS THE USE AS IT SAYS READ USED TO A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT ONLY. AND IS A SPECIFIC THING IN THIS DEFINITION, I WOULD ADD ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CAN ONLY BE SERVED IN PLACES WITHIN THE ESTABLISHMENT WHERE THE FULL MENU IS AVAILABLE. NOT A PARTIAL MENU.IF THEY ARE NOT SERVING FOOD THEY ARE NOT SERVING OTHERS.

>> YOU. ALEX?

>> I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS AS AN AMENDMENT. I LIKE THE IDEA OF SIMPLICITY, BUT JUST FOR TRANSPARENCY TO THE BREWPUB COMING IN, TO REALLY LET THEM KNOW WE REALLY WANT THIS TO BE A RESTAURANT BUT HAVING THE SOLE ORDINANCE WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO AND NOT ALLOWED TO DO IT IF WE COULD DO IT, THEY BE LET'S LOOK AT IT. BUT I THINK THAT WILL DRIVE SOME THINGS OUT. I THINK WE ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE FINISH LINE WHERE WE ARE AT NOW IF WE CAN GET THROUGH ALL THESE ITEMS. REALLY KIND OF PIN THROUGH ABOUT DISTRIBUTION ON ALL OF THIS.

AND WE CAN REALLY FINALIZE THIS AND MAYBE TAKE IT BACK TO THE ATTORNEY TO LOOK AT THE BEST WAY TO IMPLEMENT IT.

BUT I REALLY THINK HAVING THIS AS A STANDALONE AMENDMENT REALLY SETS THE TONE OF ANYONE COMING INTO PARKLAND.

HEY, WE'RE SO STRICT ON THIS, THIS IS NOT A PARTY TOWN, WE DON'T WANT OUTSIDE ENTERTAINMENT AND KEG PARTIES OUTBACK MOTHER NEEDS TO BE A RESTAURANT.

AND MAYBE WE CAN DO IT THE WAY YOU MENTIONED, NATHANIEL.

BUT I THINK WE HAVE COME QUITE FAR WITH THIS.

AND SO IT WOULDN'T JUST ABANDON IT.

LET'S CONTINUE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE ITEMS. I DEFINITELY THINK ALL THE ITEMS ABOUT RESTAURANT USE IS A GREAT ADDITION AND DEFINITELY SHOULD BE ADDED.

AND I LIKE THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE ENTIRE MENU.

>> MICROPHONE TO DEREK, LEASE. WE HAVE GONE ROUND AND ROUND

[01:00:05]

DEFINITIONS? >> WE ARE SEEKING YOUR OPINION BASED ON CAITLIN AND MICHELLE'S INQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO.

>> I AM IN AGREEMENTS. >> INDIVIDUALLY SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD PLANNING AND ZONING BORN TO THE COMMISSION.

>> I'M IN AGREEMENTS IT SHOULD BE A RESTAURANT FIRST WITH THE GROUP OF OR THE BRING OPTION BASICALLY WHAT NATHANIEL SAID.

IT'S EASIER, IT IS A RESTAURANT AND HAS A BRING OPTION

IMPORTANT. >> LITTLE HEARING FROM THE BOARD IS WE DON'T WANT BREWPUB IN THE CODE FOR IT WE WANT IT STRICKEN AWAY AND START OFF WITH SOMETHING TO DO WITH A RESTAURANT WRITTEN AND SO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO TALK ABOUT BREWPUBS AND I DON'T THINK WE WANT A BREWPUB.

>> THAT WAS THE FIRST INITIAL INQUIRY.

>> WE WANT A RESTAURANT WITH A COMPONENT BOARD WHY DO WE NEED TO USE THIS WORD BREWPUB. WE ARE CONFUSED WITH THIS.

WE ARE TALK ABOUT BREWPUBS AND I SEE DEREK SHAKING THE SITE YES BUT I SEE NATHANIEL. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BREWPUBS AND I SEE THAT WE DON'T WANT BREWPUB.

I THINK THAT SHIP HAS SAILED. >> IS THERE A MOTION?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> GO AHEAD.

AGAIN, I THINK BEFORE I HAVE A QUESTION TO RESPOND TO TONY, WE CALL THINGS A BREWPUB WILL CALL IT WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT THE ROOT WE COULD CALL IT FRED FOR ALL I CARE BUT WE ALSO KNOW GENERALLY SPEAKING WHAT IT IS WE WANT.

I THINK BY CALLING IT BREWPUB IT KINDA SEPARATES IT FROM WHAT IT IS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BIRDSALL, I APOLOGIZE.

BEFORE WE GET TO THE MOTION, THERE WERE A COUPLE LEGAL TERMS USED IN THE DISCUSSION UP TO THIS POINT AND I THINK IT WOULD BENEFIT THE BOARD AND OTHERS IF THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THERE IS A REFERENCE TO THINGS BEATEN ACCESSORY TO A RESTAURANT. ANTHONY, YOU MENTIONED ADDITIONAL USE VERSUS SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

CAN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THOSE THREE THINGS ARE? I THINK IT WILL HELP GUIDE THE CONVERSATION OF HOW WE ARE GOING TO SORTA RECOMMEND FRAMING.

>> YES. WE WILL TALK TO THAT PARADE BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE GOING TO NEED A MOTION ON THE

ORDINANCE. >> IMOVIE DON'T CALL WHATEVER

IT IS WE ARE DOING A BREWPUB. >> HANG ON FOR AN.

>> YOU ARE SAYING THAT TONGUE AND CHEEK.

>> I WOULD IMAGINE IN SOME RESPECT, RIGHT? I HAVE A FEELING I'M GOING TO BE A MINORITY OPINION ON THIS NOW. WHAT IF I WANT, ANYBODY WANTS TO GO MOVE INTO A 1500 SQUARE-FOOT ESTABLISHMENT, I HAVE A 300 OR 400 SQUARE-FOOT BRING FACILITY IN THE BACK, WHICH IS LARGE COMPARED TO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

IN GENERAL.UST BE ABLE TO SELL GROWLERS CAN HAVE LIGHTS ARE, WHATEVER THEY ARE MAKING EVERY I AM NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFICS. I'M JUST SAYING IN THEORY.

DOING IN THIS TOWN IS EXPENSIVE REDOING IN THIS TOWN WILL BE DONE IN OUR BUILDING CODES AND ZONING CODES, IT WON'T BE LOW-END. OKAY? THERE'S PLENTY OF PEOPLE THE REFERENCE WAS MADE AT THE PARTY SPIRIT THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE STUMBLING OUT YOUR THEORY IS PEOPLE WILL GO TO THIS PLACE TO DRINK AND LEAVE DRUNK OR STUMBLING OUT OF THE PARTIES ARE GOING TO GET LARGE.

DEJA BLUE AS THREE OR FOUR SET UP ON A DOCK TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARTY MORE AND THEY SERVE FULL LIQUOR.

I THINK WE ARE BEING A LITTLE SHORTSIGHTED ABOUT WHAT WE THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN AT THESE FACILITIES BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY. IT'S GOING TO COST A LAW.

SO WILL YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, WOULD LOVE TO WALK TO A NEIGHBORHOOD BREWPUB, TAPROOM, RESTAURANT THAT HAS A BRING FACILITY. WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT.

BUT WE NEED TO NOT SHUT OUT THE SMALLER INNS THAT COULD GET IN

[01:05:02]

I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHAT WE THINK IS CAN HAPPEN TO WHAT ALREADY HAPPENS.

I HAVE SEEN PLENTY OF PEOPLE STUMBLE IN AND OUT OF RESTAURANTS IN THIS TOWN. NOT JUDGMENTAL.

IT IS JUST AND FEEL LIKE WE ARE GOING TO BE LIMITING PEOPLE WHO WANT TO COME INTO THIS TOWN PART ESPECIALLY WHAT MAY HAPPEN

WITH THE PROPERTY NOW. >> ANTHONY, DID YOU WANT TO? SAY A FEW WORDS? THE ANSWER NATHANIEL'S QUESTION

ON THE DEFINITIONS? >> I WILL START OFF WITH THE BASIC, BUT I THINK PROBABLY EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS OF SOMETHING IS A PERMITTED USE IT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THAT DISTRICT. IF THERE'S NO OTHER REGULATIONS I NEED TO MEET, THEY ARE ALLOWED IN.

OF SOMETHING IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION LIKE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT THE MORE I HEAR YOU THAT MAY BE THE WAY TO GO. THEY HAVE TO MEET THAT CRITERIA FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IF SOMETHING IS AN ACCESSORY USE MENTIONED, NORMALLY THE STANDARD IS ITS ACCESSORY.

IT IS AN INCIDENTAL USE PRIMARY USE.

YOU DON'T SEE TOO MANY REGULATIONS ON TOP OF AN ACCESSORY USE. NOTICE THAT YOU COULD IMPORTANT YOU MAY END UP AT THE SAME PLACE DURING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WROTE AND ADDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OR LIMITATIONS YOU ALL FEEL ARE IMPORTANT.I THINK YOU ARE ALL COALESCING AROUND THIS CONCEPT HERE DON'T BE SO FOCUSED ON THE FORM NECESSARILY.

AND JUST GIVE US THE SUBSTANCE .

TO GET A GOOD START BY SAYING LET'S START OFF WITH THE RESTAURANT. THEY CAN HAVE A BREWERY OPERATION, WHAT ARE THE KEY COMPONENTS YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT YOU WOULD LIKE TO REGULATE IF THEY DO HAVE THAT BURNING OPERATION PARIS YOU WANT TO SAY NO MORE THAN 20 PERCENT FOR AREA RATIO QUOTE? WHICH SEEMS TO BE MORE EASILY ENFORCEABLE.HINGS LIKE THAT. SPOKE AND SUGGESTED THAT BIRD MICHELLE TOLD ME WE DON'T DO THAT TOO OFTEN, BUT GENERALLY A CONDITIONAL USE MEANS IT IS PERMITTED IF YOU MEET CERTAIN CONDITIONS FOR THE ANALYSIS IS I'M TELLING YOU I WANT A BREWPUB, HERE IS THE 10 CONDITIONS AND YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO GIVE IT TO ME. IT'S NOT RIGHT PERMITTED BUT IT IS BY RIGHT IF THEY CAN HIT THOSE CONDITIONS AND DEMONSTRATE THEY MEET THOSE ALL.

NOTHING SPECIAL EXCEPTION TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN SPECIFIC CONDITIONS LIKE THE CHARACTER AND HOW THE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> ALL THESE ANCILLARY COMPONENTS IS WHAT IS PRESENTED BEFORE US IN THE ORDINANCE AS A BREWPUB COULD GO UNDER THE RESTAURANT CATEGORY USE. OR WHATEVER THE TERM MAY APPROPRIATELY BE USED. IF THE DESIRE TO INCORPORATE A MICROBREWERY BREWPUB MANUFACTURING A CALL IT BEVERAGE FACILITY IS WITHIN IT, ABC DEF GH I AND YOU KEEP GOING. IT WAS TO COME TO A SPECIFIC TOWN. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE NECESSARILY IN PARKLAND, BUT WHAT IS IT CALLED?

>> IS JUST THERE FOR A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME.

SPOKE WITHIN THE RULES ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC START AND END, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF RULES AND CRITERIA.

>> PERMIT CONDITIONS. SAME THING.

ACCESSORY USE TO A RESTAURANT WOULD BE A MANUFACTURING.

THAT IS WHEN YOUR GROWLERS COME IN AND YOUR ADDITIONAL OTHER THAN WHAT IS NORMALLY YOUR DELIVERY SUPPLIES AND SO FORTH.

ALL THE OTHER TECH CRITERI KICK IN INCLUDING WHETHER IT IS OUTDOORMUSIC, LIGHTING , OUTDOOR SEATING, ALL THOSE.

A LOT OF THOSE THINGS ARE ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCE.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE A DOABLE WAY TO GO TO MAKE IT

MECHANICALLY WORKED. >> ON THESE DEFINITIONS, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS HAS TO COME BEFORE A COMMISSION, CORRECT?

WHAT CORRECT. >> AND CONDITIONAL USE DOES

[01:10:02]

NOT, CORRECT? >> IT IS STILL GO BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION UNLIKELY THIS BOARD WHEN THEY COME IN.

IT IS JUST THAT. >> WE DON'T DO THAT HERE IT

SOUNDS LIKE? >> YES.

>> I'M SORRY. >> WE DON'T HAVE CONDITIONAL USES IN THE CODE. WE ONLY HAVE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. WHAT I HEARD THE ATTORNEY SAYING IS IT PROVIDES YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY.

YOU HAVE TO DETERMINE IF A GIVEN USE IS APPROPRIATE AT A GIVEN LOCATION PERMIT CASE-BY-CASE.

>> AN ACCESSORY. >> WHICH IS DEFINED IN THE

CODE. >> AND THE DISCUSSIONS HERE HAVE BEEN GENERALLY THAT IF IT IS A RESTAURANT AND THAT 50 PERCENT OF THE REVENUES IS COMINGFROM .

YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE BAR.

50 PERCENT COMING FROM THE FOOD AND 50 PERCENT COMING FROM BREWERY ACTIVITY. WHATEVER WE ARE GOING TO CALL THAT. 50 PERCENT IS NOT ACCESSORY.

IN MY VIEW. AND IF I'M WRONG ON THE CONCEPT OF WHAT WOULD CONSTITUTE ACCESSORY USE IF YOU ARE ALLOWING SOMETHING TO BE EQUAL USE TO THE PRIMARY THING, AGAIN, IF THE WILL OF THE BOARD AND THE COMMISSION IS WE WANT TO LOWER THE PERCENTAGES BELOW 50 PERCENT SO WOULD BE MORE ACCESSORY, GREAT. IT CONSTITUTES AN ACCESSORY

ALSO. >> YOU COULD CHANGE THE DEFINITION SPOKE WITH ACCESSORY USE AS A DEFINED TERM.

THE GOAL IS TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF NEW THINGS WE ARE CREATING IN THIS ONE PARTICULAR CONCEPT. IS IT 50 PERCENT USE.

COULD THAT EVER BE AN ACCESSORY.

>> LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION OF THE BOARD.

INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT IT AS AN ACCESSORY USE, WHY NOT JUST DO ÃOR RESTAURANT WITH A BRING CAPACITY OR A FACILITY YOU HAVE THESE FIVE EXTRA CONDITIONS. I DON'T KNOW, 50 PERCENT, 200 SQUARE FEET OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DETERMINE.

>> MY CONCERN IS WHENEVER YOU START USING ACCESSORY USE, IT IS SETTING THE IMPRESSION TO AN APPLICANT PREVENT OTHERS BECAUSE OF THE CONCEPT OF ACCESSORY USE.

>> IT DOES. THE TERM ACCESSORY IS DEFINED

AS SUBORDINATE TOO. >> RIGHT.

WE ARE NOT SAYING IT IS SUBORDINATE.

>> ONLY IN THIS CASE. IS DEFINED HERE IN ONLY THIS

CASE. >> THAT TAKES US BACK TO THE

SPECIAL EXTENSION. >> WHY HE HAD TO GET INTO

ACCESSORY NOR PERMIT IS ONLY. >> I APPRECIATE DAVID'S COMMENTS ON THE BOARD IS JUST WHAT HE SAID ACCESSORY USE IT GAVE ME, I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF ATTACHING ACCESSORY USE. BECAUSE I AM IN FAVOR OF IT

BEING AT LEAST 50 PERCENT. >> I'M GOING TO MAKE ONE STATEMENT AND THEN DAVID. I BELIEVE, WE ALL ÃI SHOULDN'T SAY THAT PART OF GOING TO RETRACT MY STATEMENT.

MANY OF US DO WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS FUNCTION OF AN ON-SITE BREW FACILITY AS A MATTER OF HOW IT IS REGULATED AND HOW IT IS CREATED SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING ABUSED.

FUNCTION HERE IS TO PROTECT OUR ZONING ORDINANCES AND WHAT WE ALLOW SO THAT THE FLOODGATES DON'T OPEN UP TO SOMETHING WE DIDN'T PICK UP OUR COVER. AND SO I COMMEND EVERYBODY.

EVERYBODY HAS A REAL PERTINENT FEELING TOWARD WHAT WE WANT TO END UP WITH. IT IS GOOD TO SEE.

>> IS IN THAT DIRECTION YOU ARE LOOKING FOR?

>> I THINK SO. I THINK THE DIRECTION WE ARE LOOKING FOR. DON'T KNOW SPEAK FOR MICHELLE OR CAITLIN BUT I'M SURE THEY WILL CORRECT ME IF I FEEL DIFFERENTLY.

MAY BE AGREEMENT. IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

YOU SEE THE VERY STANDARDS. OU AGREE WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTION RESTAURANT WITH DURING OPERATION, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. AND THEN HERE ARE THE REGULATIONS WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT IN THAT CASE.

>> AND THAT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGES THE ORDINANCE THAT IS

BEFORE US? >> YES.> DAVID.

TO NATHANIEL'S POINT, THE REASON I ADDRESSED ACCESSORY USES BECAUSE WITHOUT A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT IT IS NOT ALLOWED. I AM SUGGESTING THAT WE DON'T JUST SAY IT CAN BE AN ACCESSORY USE TO A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT. I AM SAYING IN ORDER TO BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A BRING FUNCTION ACCESSORY TO A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, WHICH IN HER ORDINANCE REQUIRED THAT FOOD SALES CONSTITUTE MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE SALES THAT

[01:15:04]

TO EXIST, TRENTON. >> WEIGHT, WE DON'T HEAR YOU.

>> THE LAST SENTENCE. [LAUGHING]

>> THEY ARE WEARING YOU DOWN, DAVID.

>> CERTAINLY NOT TRYING TO. I THINK WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED GETS YOU TO THE SAME PLACE. IF WE HAVE A LINE ITEM THAT IS A FULL SERVANT RESTAURANT IS PERMITTED AND WE ADD ANOTHER LINE ITEM TO THE CHART THAT SAYS FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH DURING OPERATION AS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, YOUR THE CONDITIONS. IF YOU STOP THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, WE DON'T ALLOW BREWING OPERATIONS BY ITSELF IT WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN MY OPINION UNDER A CODE.

>> CAITLIN OR MICHELLE? >> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> RIGHT. AND IT WOULD BE.

IF YOU HAVE A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT, YOU WILL FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A BRING COMPONENT IT IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A BRING COMPONENT IN THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT GOES AWAY, THERE IS NO USE CALLED WITH A BRING COMPONENT.

>> YOU START OUT WITH. >> SERVICE RESTAURANT.

>> THAT HAS THIS. >> MY ONLY QUIBBLE WITH USING THE TERM ACCESSORY IS THAT IT IS DEFINED ELSEWHERE IN OUR ORDINANCES. MY MIKE IS GONE.

BY CALLING IT AN ACCESSORY USE, WE MAY ALL AGREE.

WE ARE JUST DOING IT FOR EMPHASIS WE KNOW YOU ARE SAYING IT IS RESTAURANT FIRST EVEN THOUGH ORDINANCE SAYING IT IS A RESTAURANT PREDICATES AND OPTICS I THINK IS GOING TO DISSUADE PEOPLE FROM DIGGING FURTHER INTOKUWAIT, IS THE

ACCESSORY USE . >> IT IS LIKE HAWKEYES TENT.

>> IF I MAY TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN, WHICH IS A GOOD CONCERN, WE CAN PUT IT IN FOR EMPHASIS THAT SAYS IN THE EVENT THE RESTAURANT CEASES TO OPERATE THE BREWING FACILITY

GOES AWAY.>> WE HAVE DEFINED IT IN THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN ON LINE ITEM 74, 75 AS WELL AS 82 THROUGH 85.

EVERYTHING WE HAVE SPENT THE LAST 30 MINUTES TALKING ABOUT

IS DEFINED. >> I THINK WE NEED TO COME UP WITH WHAT ARE THE KEY THINGS FOR THE KEY THINGS FOR ME OR THE AREA THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO BREW, WHAT IS THE SALES.

IS IT 50-50, 6040. AND OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION AND CARRY OUT. THOSE ARE THE THREE MAIN THINGS THAT WE CAN LIMIT THOSE THAT WE COULD DO IT THE WAY WE ARE TALKING AND PUT IT UNDER A RESTAURANT.

RESTAURANT COVERS EVERYTHING ELSE.

WITH A 20 PERCENT COULD BE BREWING, ACTUAL BREWING EQUIPMENT. 50 PERCENT CAN BE SALES AND NO DISTRIBUTION, WE MAY HAVE A RESTAURANT ON OUR HANDS.

THE ONLY OTHER THING IS OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT.

WHICH I DON'T THINK IS COVERED EXPRESSLY AND OUR RESTAURANT ORDINANCE. WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE YOU NEED A SPECIAL PERMIT. THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT. RATHER THAN SAYING PUTTING

GENERALIZED CONDITIONS. >> ANTHONY, WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON THE BEST WAY TO MOVE THIS SINCE IT IS PRESENTED AT AN ORDINANCE AND IT DOESN'T APPEAR FROM WHAT I SEE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A MOTION ON THE ORDINANCE.

>> WOULD YOU ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO TABLE THIS? JUST DISPOSE OF THE SCHOOL ORDINANCE SINCE WE ARE STILL SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGING WHAT YOU HAVE HERE? BRING BACK SOMETHING THAT REFLECTS WHAT THE BOARD IS ASKING FOR, WHICH IS THE RESTAURANT WITH A BRING

COMPONENT? >> THAT WOULD BE A CODE

AMENDMENT, WOULD IT NOT? >> IN ORDER TO PERMIT A USE THAT ALLOWS FOR A BRING OPERATION, WE NEED AN ORDINANC . WE ARE HERE TO READ DISCUSS

[01:20:03]

WE ARE GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGING BEFORE YOU. I DON'T KNOW WE NEED TO TABLE IT OR IN IT THAT IS SIMPLY THE BOARD WANTS TO DO, WE CAN DO THAT.I DON'T THINK IT IS LEGALLY REQUIRED BUT I THINK YOU COULD GIVE THE DIRECTION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST PART, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONCEPT IF YOU GO THAT ROUTE IS COVERED, BUT WE'VE GOTTEN FURTHER DIRECTION OR HE MAY GET FOR THE DIRECTION WHENYOU MAKE A MOTION , IF YOU MAKE A MOTIO , POTENTIALLY THAT WE ARE GOING TO ADD A LINE ITEM AS I UNDERSTOOD IT. IF YOU GO THIS WAY.HE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH PARIS OPERATIONS, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR HIM RATHER THAN CALLING IT A BREWPUB. AND YOU COULD GIVE US THOSE AMENDMENTS AND WE COULD BRING IT FORWARD.

IN FACT, MANY TIMES FOR EARS THE UNDERSTANDING IS WE DO NOT ALWAYS HAVE THE WHOLE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU AND WE'VE BEEN STARTING A PRACTICE MORE RECENTLY TO MOVE IT FURTHER ALONG BEFORE IT COMES TO YOU EVEN.

MANY TIMES HE WOULD SEE THE REGULATIONS.

WHAT WE REALLY NEED DIRECTION ON HIS THOSE REGULATIONS YOU WANT TO SEE FOR THIS. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF YOU WHO ARE OKAY WITH THE BREWPUB CONCEPT, I THINK WE PASSED THE FIRST HURDLE ALTHOUGH YOU COULD ALWAYS

CHANGE YOUR MINDS. >> MY OPINION IS THAT THE TERM BREWPUB. ANYTIME ANYONE SAYS BREWPUB THEM AGAINST IT. OF NOT STAGING A COUP MARY, I APOLOGIZE. OR MAYBE I IN.

MAY BE WHAT MAKES SENSE IS A LOT OF THE REGULATION WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THEM THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE AT LEAST SOME PLURALITY OF AGREEMENT REGARDING ARE THINGS THAT ARE IN MANY WAYS IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO KIND OF RUN THROUGH THIS? WE ARE NOT TAKING NECESSARILY FORMAL VOTES, BUT ALLOWING STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO GET GET GENERALIZED CONSENSUS FROM US AS TO OKAY, YOUKNOW WHAT, IS THERE CONSENSUS THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT .

>> YES. >> JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS HAS BECOME THE WORKSHOP. AND I AM RESPONSIBLE.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY I'M ALLOWING IT.

MY IN AUTHORIZING ITBECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO END UP WITH A PRODUCT AT THE END, I HOPE . BUT WE DEFINITELY HAVE NOT BEEN EVALUATING AND DEBATING ON AN ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED.

AND THAT'S FINE BUT OUR DISCUSSION IS GONE FOR IT AS A CHAIR I HAVE ALLOWED IT. BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS

IS BECOME A WORKSHOP. >> IT IS NOT EASY TO CRAFT THE ZONING CODE, ESPECIALLY WITH SEVEN PEOPLE OPINING ABOT WHAT

THEY DO AND DON'TWANT . >> THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT

THAT. >> IN ORDER TO GIVE STAFF THE DIRECTION COMMIT LIKE IT OR NOT, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE THINGS AND GIVE THEM DIRECTION .

EITHER WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A 7/1.

SO BE IT. BUT THEY WILL GET DIRECTION ON EACH OF THE SPECIFIC THINGS WE THINK WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE AND THEN THEY CAN DRAFT AN ORDINANCE BUT I WOULD RECOGNIZE THE ORDINANCE COME BACK SO WE CAN SEE IT FINALLY.

I THINK WE SHOULD ALWAYS SEE THE FINAL ORDINANCE BEFORE IT GOES TOTHE COMMISSION. BUT THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE ARE GOING TO GET THROUGH IT. YOU'RE GONNA LIKE SON, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LIKE SOME. WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THEM. WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF PREAMBLE TO BE GETTING THAT WE STARTED WITH THIS DEFINITION AND I THINK WE FINISH THE DEFINITION. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE.

I THINK WHEN WE GET TO WHAT IS A CORE REQUIREMENT, IS IT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WE ARE GOING TO VOTE YES OR NO AND STAFF

WILL KNOW WHAT TO DO. >> CAITLIN, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH DIRECTION BASED ON OUR LAST DISCUSSION.

>> THAT'S A LOADED QUESTION. >> I'M ASKING.

>> SAY NO. [LAUGHING]

>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT OUR CONSENSUS IS? OR DO YOU NEED AN INFORMAL VOTE? INFORMAL. AMUSING VOTE LOOSELY.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE, AND WE WILL GET TO THE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT.

THAT THERE MAY BE A GENERAL CONSENSUS THIS SHOULD BE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM THAT READS FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH BREWING CAPACITY OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. AND THEN IN THE SPIRIT OF REVIEWING SOME OF THESE EXISTING REGULATIONS, AS WE

[01:25:06]

>> YOU MENTIONED FIVE OR SIX OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

>> NOT A CAP ON IT, BUT SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THESE SO THERE IS NOT THE REDUNDANCY THERE CURRENTLY IS WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, HOURS OF OPERATION, PARKING, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK AND I THINK WE HAVE SUFFICIENT DIRECTION.

>> PUT UP THE NEXT ONE AND THE .

>> CAN WE GO DOWN THE LIST? >> PUT UP THE NEXT ONE! LET'S GO DOWN THE ORDINANCE SPORT GOING ON THE ORDINANCE AND RUNNING THAT DOWN! I DON'T KNOW IFEACH PERSON WANTS TO GIVE ME THEIR TOP THREE OR FIVE OR WHATEVER IS

MOST IMPORTANT. >> WAS JUST GO THROUGH THE

ORDINANCE. >> ALTHOUGH BEFORE WE DO THAT , I THINK THE ISSUE HERE BEFORE WE EVEN GET INTO THE REGULATION IS, IS THERE CONSENSUS FROM THIS BOARD AS TO THE ZONING DISTRICTS? RESTAURANTS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AND BE MORE THAN THE NEED IN THE ZONING DISTRICTS.

>> THAT COMPLICATES THINGS. >> FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT AND BRING FACILITY, SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE ZONING

DISTRICTS. >> AND BINDING THEM.

THE EXTENT THERE NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSION ON THAT, MAYBE THERE SHOULD BE DISCUSSION WILL NOT. BUT MY OPINION IS THE LIMITED AREAS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH ARE YOUR B2 AND PCD ARE THE ONLY DOES IT ONLY ZONING DISTRICTS AS WE SIT HERE RIGHT NOW THAT I THINK SHOULD BE CONTEMPLATING THIS HAPPENING.

>> IF WE GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, WE WILL GET THROUGH EVERY BIT OF THAT. THAT COMES IN WHERE THEY PUT IT INTO THE, AT LEAST IN THE ONE AREA.

>> THE OF THE ORDINANCE OKAY. LET'S DO THAT.

LET'S RUN WITH IT AND WE ARE GOING TO GET THROUGH TO GIVE

HER COMMENTS ARE DIRECTION. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE COPIES OF

THE ORDINANCE? >> OKAY.

IF WE START ON PAGE 2, WE START WITH THE REVISION TO THE DEFINITIONS. AND WE WOULD ELIMINATE THE DEFINITION FOR BREWPUB. WE ARE NOT USING THAT TERM ANYMORE. INTERJECT IF I HIT A SPEAKING

POINT. >> MAYBE TAKE A VOTE ON EACH ONE. A QUICK VOTE AND THEN YOU WILL BE DONE. SPICATA ABOUT ANY OBJECTIONS TO

IT? >> PAGE 2, LINE 74.

>> ANY OBJECTIONS ELIMINATING THE BREWPUB.

>> I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO. >> RIGHT.

EXACTLY.>> IT IS RESTAURANT AND THEN IT IS GOING TO BE WITH

BREWING FACILITIES. >> CAN WE JUST SAY BREWPUB AT ALL?> WE ARE GOING TO GET THERE.

IT'S IN THE BACK OF THE ORDINANCE.

WE JUST HAVE TO GET RID OF BREWPUB KAREN.

>> IT'S IS DULY LICENSED TO BE MADE.

WE ARE SPLITTING HAIRS THERE. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS GROWLER AND THIS GETS INTO A LARGER CONVERSATION BECAUSE AS ANTHONY ALLUDED TO, WE DON'T PERMIT IT THEN IT IS PROHIBITED TO CARRY OUT AN DISTRIBUTION ARE SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED UNLESS THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED.

AND SO WE NEED CONSENSUS ON WHETHER GROWLER TAKE OUT AN OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION OR RETAILERS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS THE WILL OF THE BOARD FOR IT AGAIN, AND WE HAD DISCUSSION ABOUT NOT WANTING TO STIFLE LOCAL BUSINESSES SUCCESS IN THE OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION EFFORTS.

AND SO THAT IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AS WE TALK ABOUT THAT.

>> BY DEFINITION THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN ON 70 AND 79, DOES ANYBODY OBJECT TO THAT? NO, THE ITEM SAYS SHALL NOT BE CONSUMED ON THE PREMISES. THAT IS THE IDEA.

>> NO GROWLERS FOR YOU. >> I'M ANTI-GROWLER.

I AGREE WITH ALEX. >> YOU ARE LOOKING FOR THE DISPENSERS ON THIS.> WE NEED TO GET STUFF DIRECTION SPECIFICALLY AND CONCISELY. SO AS DEFINED IN WRITING ONLINE

[01:30:05]

IF NOT WE WILL READ IT. AND SO WE CAN GIVE STAFF SOME DIRECTION. OTHERWISE WE ARE BACK TO WHERE

YOU WORK. >> CHAIR, TO THE POINT THAT WAS MADE BEFORE, YOU DON'T NEED A DEFINITION IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO PERMIT IT. WHAT WE OF THE CONVERSATION AT THIS POINT ALL WE HAVE A CONVERSATION WHEN WE GET TO THE GROWLER REGULATION.EEP THAT IN MIND.> IS THE DEFINITION OF GROWLER AND THE USE OF GROWLERS BE ABLE TO BE TAKEN OFF-SITE?

>> WE ARE GOING DOWN LINE BY LINE FOR IT SO UNLESS YOU KNOW THE REST OF THE STORY WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE LINE ITEM IN FRONT OF US. AND SO TAKE IT OUT.

>> NO. AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE

DEFINITION. >> THAT IS WHY I THINK WE

SHOULD VOTE. >> ON WHETHER OR NOT TO KEEP

GROWLER IN AS A DEFINING TERM. >> IS A RACE THE HANDS.

DO A BOAT. >> WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THE

GROWLER. >> 78 AND 79 AS DEFINED.

OR AS WRITTEN. >> TO KEEP GROWLER IN.

TODD ROGERS? >> I'M FINE WITH KEEPING

GROWLERS IN. >> TONY AVELLO.

>> NO GROWLERS. >> NATHANIEL KLITSBERG? YES? JOE KAPLAN.

>> YES. >> DAVID.

>> YES. >> ALEX LAZOWICK.

>> NO. >> CHAIRMAN ZWEIG.

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON GROWLER TAKE OUT.

RESTAURANT FULL-SERVICE, THE DEFINITION ALREADY EXIST WITHIN OUR CODE. UNLESS YOU FEEL THERE NEEDS TO BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEFINITION .

>> YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?

>> YES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY IT TO SAY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CAN'T BE SERVED IN ANY SECTION OF THE RESTAURANT THAT DOESN'T SERVE THE FULL MENU.

>> I DON'T GET THAT. >> THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE THE

DEFINITION FOR EVERYONE. >> THEN WE CAN ADDRESS IT AS A

CONDITION. >> THAT'S EXACTLY IT.

>> WE ARE GOOD WITH LINE 82 THROUGH 85.>> WE CAN GO ALL THE WAY TO 118 BECAUSE WE ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT STANDARDS.

>> SECTION 15. >> NO, NO.

WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT 103. THAT IS THE SECTION YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT. THAT IS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT RESTAURANTS AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO ADD THE THING.

IN SEPARATE LINE RESTAURANTS WITH THE BRING FACILITY.

>> LINE 102 UNDER PERMITTED USE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SUBJECT TO PROCEDURES OF ARTICLE 6Q SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES AN PERMITTED USE AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO THE PRIMARY PERMITTED USE AND THEN CHANGING THE USE IS PROHIBITED.

>> WE ARE GOING TO GET RID OF BREWPUB.

AND THAT IS JUST GOING TO BE THE RESTAURANT.

>> FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH BUT IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH THE BREWING OPERATION OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

IT IS UP TO YOU. >> IT IS GOING TO BE DEFINED

LATER WITH RESPECT TOBREWING OPERATION .>> IT WOULD BE, WE WOULD REPLACE BREWPUBS WITH FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH BREWERY OPERATION IT WOULD BE PERMITTED AS A SPECIAL

EXCEPTION ONLY. >> WOULD WE ALSO REFER TO THE NEW SECTION 15 700? BECAUSE WE ARE NOW GETTING RID OF BREWPUB AND SAY SUBJECT TO SECTION 15 700 AND THE LINE

ITEM? >> EXCEPT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE

15 700 ANYMORE, RIGHT? >> IT MAY NOT BE BURIED IF YOU GUYS WANT TO GET INTO THE FORM OF WHERE EVERYTHING GOES, WE COULD. I SEE A LOT OF HEADSHAKING NO.

>> THAT WOULD BE PERHAPS A REASON TO MAYBE HELP US SEE IT

AGAIN? >> THAT IS UP TO THE BOARD.

[01:35:01]

>> I WANT TO SUGGEST THAT EARLIER.

I AGREE SEEING IT AGAIN. >> SCRAPPING THIS, GETTING A NEW ONE AND STARTING ALL OVER. WE ARE GOING TO KILL OURSELVES GOING LINE BY LINE . I SEE MICHELLE SHAKING HER HEAD OR DISPOSE OF THIS BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE DOING ISSUBSTANTIALLY CHANGING IT. AND STARTING WITH A NEW ORDINANCE AT THE NEXT MEETING LIKE WE ARE DOING NOW AND GET THIS DONE .> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING.

>> WE ARE NEVER GOING TO GET THROUGH WITH THIS.

THIS NEEDS TO BE DISPOSED OF AND GET A WHOLE NEW THING SENT US. THEY KNOW THE DIRECTION OF THE AND BRING IT BACK. WORKING FROM THIS IS JUST, WE

ARE GOING TO BE HERE ALL NIGHT. >> I THINK WE KNOW WHAT THE GENERAL DIRECTION IS PRETTY RESTAURANT THAT HAS A BREW AND WE WANT SOME CONTROL OVER IN TERMS OF WHAT DO YOU WANT TO LIMIT THE FLOOR AREA OF THE BREWING AREA.

>> THAT IS THE QUESTION SO WE CAN GET THROUGH IT PROPERLY, WHETHER WE GO THROUGH EACH LINE OR ONES WE NEED TO SPEND SOME TIME ON AS WE ARE TRYING TO DECIDE.

>> ONCE YOU NEED TO SPEND SOME TIME ON.

>> IF I CAN ASK MR. CHAIRMAN. AND KNOW THAT ONE MORE BOARD MEMBER ONE CODE ENFORCEMENT HERE, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S

NOT AN ISSUE FOR. >> THANKS A LOT FOR COMING.

ON THE ONE WHO ASKED FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT TO BE HERE.

MY APOLOGIES. WHAT I WANTED TO FIND OUT WAS WITH ALL THE REGULATIONS IN HERE, I WANTED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU GUYS THOUGHT ABOUT ENFORCING THEM.

SO PERHAPS MAYBE WE WILL COME AGAIN IF WE NEED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BUT I THINK YOU BECAUSE ON THE ONE WHO

REQUESTED YOU HERE TONIGHT. >> SUBMIT YOUR OVERTIME TO US.

>> NOT WITHOUT IT BEING FINALIZED.

THEY FOLLOW THE RULES. >> WE ARE GETTING WAY TOO IN.

BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IF GROWLER SALES EXCEED.

>> I KEEP WAITING FOR A MOTION SO WE CAN GET SOME DIRECTIVE.

ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. FAIR ENOUGH.

>> CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION. >> YES.

>> AS FAR AS ABOUT THE DIRECTION.

IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE IS SAYING IS WE WANT TO MAKE THIS A LINE ITEM IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH BREW CAPACITY. SO MY QUESTION IS WITH THE MOTION DATE FOR STAFF TO FORGET THIS ORDINANCE AND THEN WE CREATE THE FIVE, SIX, SEVEN SPECIAL ITEM.

AND THE QUESTION IS IS THAT WHAT IS IN THE POWERPOINT THE MAIN 527 SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS.

>> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DETERMINE.

>> WE ARE ON LINE 120. >> THIS IS UNNECESSARY, IN MY

OPINION. >> THE NEXT CONCEPT IS LIMITING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FACILITYITSELF, THE RESTAURANT, WHICH IS UNNECESSARY AT THIS POINT SINCE IT IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT. THE NEXT ITEM .

>> WAIT, WAS THAT BE? >> YEAH.

WE DON'T LIMIT FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS FOOD WE ARE NOT GOING TO LIMIT THEM IN THE SPACE BECAUSE THEY HAVE A

BURYING. >> WHY WOULDN'T WE?

>> HAVE OF WHAT OUR QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED.

>> I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE IT. >> YOU COULD GET A HUGE OPERATION GOING HERE THAT WOULD BE MASSIVE.

YOU CAN'T RULE IT OUT. WHAT WE HAVE SAID IS 5000 SQUARE FEET WOULD'VE BEEN BIG ENOUGH.

WE HAVE CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF BREWPUB FOR NOW WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS A RESTAURANT WITH A BRING FACILITY CAN'T BE MORE THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET. WE HAVE TO WONDER, WOULD WE ALLOW ONE TO BE 10,000 SQUARE FEET, WHICH WOULD BE BORDERING ON SOMETHING A LOT MORE INTENSE THAN WE WOULD WANT IN ANY OUT

OUR ZONINGS. >> WHERE WERE THAT EXACTLY GO

TO THIS TOWN? >> WHO KNOWS READ YOU COULD

REDEVELOP ANYTHING A RED. >> THAT IS TRUE.

>> HANG ON. BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE US TO GO SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO KNOCK DOWN MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ANDMODIFY THE SITE PLAN .

>> THEY COULD TAKE UP MULTIPLE BAYS IN ANY GIVEN CENTER THAT

WE HAVE. >> MY OPINION IS 5000 SQUARE FEET IT IS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE WE ARE GOING ÃLET THEM HAVE,

[01:40:02]

TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS NOT IMPORTANT TO ME.

IT'S THE OTHER ASPECTS. AND THE GOAL OF THIS METHOD HERE, SQUARE FOOTAGE IS THE LEAST IMPORTANT TO RESTRICTING

THE POTENTIAL NEEDS. >> VOTE ON IT.

>> AT SOME POINT IF WE'RE GONNA CALL IT A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WE COULD TREATED SIMILARLY.

AND REMEMBER, ALL THE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE SIMILAR ORDINANCES EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A BREWPUB, IT'S GETTING YOU TO THE SAME ENDPOINT PRORATED AT 3 TO 5 BULLET POINTS.

AS NATHANIEL SAID, THE SIZE IS NOT AS KEY AS SOME OF THESE OTHER ELEMENTS. I THINK IT IS EASIER TO ADD REGULATIONS DOWN THE LINE THAN IT IS TO RETRACT THEM.

>> IS THAT COMING OUT? >> I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE ON

IT. >> CALL FOR THE VOTE.

>> THIS IS ON 5000 SQUARE FEET. >> IF YOU VOTE YES THAT MEANS YOU WANT TO KEEP IT. IF YOU VOTE NO IT WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM THE PROPOSED REWRITE.

>> WHO WAS TO ELIMINATE THE 5000 SQUARE FEET.

TODD ROGERS. >> YES, ELIMINATED.

>> TONY AVELLO. >> NO.

>> NATHANIEL. >>.

>> DAVID. >> I WANT TO KEEP IT ALEX.

>> CHAIRMAN. >> KEEP IT.

>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I WANT TO KEEP THE CONDITION OF

THE 5000 SQUARE FEET. >> I WANT TO KEEP THE RESTRICTION ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. THE OTHERS WANTED TO ELIMINATE

IT. >> I WANTED TO KEEP IT.

ALEX WANTED TO KEEP IT, ANTHONY WANTED TO KEEP IT.

I THINK WE CAN JUST DO A SHOW OF HANDS.

>> WE HAVE TO RECORD IT. >> DAVID, YOU SAID YES.

OKAY, THAT IS A NO.THE QUESTION WAS DO YOU WANT TO ELIMINATE IT, THE 5000 SQUARE FEET.

>> I MAY HAVE SAID YES. IT WAS YES TO ELIMINATE.

SO I SHOULD'VE SAID NO. >> WHAT IS THE FINAL?

>> WHO WANTS TO ELIMINATE THE 5000 SQUARE FEET FROM THE ORDINANCE? TODD ROGERS.

>> YES, ELIMINATE IT. >> TONY?

>> KEEP THE 5000. >> NATHANIEL.

>> ELIMINATE. >> ALEX.

>> NO. >> CHAIRMAN.

>> KEEP IT. >> OKAY.

THREE NO. IT IS STILL IN MAJORITY TO

ELIMINATE. >> I'M SAYING WHAT MY BRAIN IS

SAYING.>> THE ONLY ONES WHO VOTED TO ELIMINATE IT WERE JOEL,

SIZE LIMITATION IN PLACE. >> NEXT ITEM.

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS THE PERCENTAGE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES PRODUCED ON-SITE TO BE CONSUMED ON SITE IS A MINIMUM OF 50 PERCENT SO ESSENTIALLY STATING THE MAJORITY THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES HAVE TO BE CONSUMED ON SITE. IS NOT GOING TO BE PRIMARILY A DISTRIBUTION EFFORT. THIS IS SOMETHING PRESENTED IN SOME OF THE OTHER BENCHMARK CITIES.

THIS IS A MORE STANDARD CONDITION.>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT?

>> GROWLERS OR OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION.

>> WERE THERE TO THE MODEL WITH A OF SIXPACKS TO COMBINE

TAKE-HOME WITH YOU. >> ANTHONY, WE CAN OVERRIDE OR

[01:45:11]

>> WE CERTAINLY CAN'T CONFLICT WITH IT.

BUT I THINK IF HE WANTED TO WE COULD BE MORE RESTRICTED.

THE SAME UNICA STATE LIQUOR LICENSE IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU COULD OPEN UP ANYWHERE. YOU TO FOLLOW THE REGULATIONS OR JUSTBECAUSE YOU HAVE A LICENSE .

>> I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE AWARE OF WHAT DIRECTION WE GET STUFF, EVEN THOUGH WE GO THROUGH YOUR REVIEW THAT WE DON'T PUT SOMETHING IN. CAN'T WITHSTAND THE EVALUATION

NECESSARY. >> CAITLIN.

WOULD LIKE TO HEAR CODE ENFORCEMENT EITHER AT THE NEXT MEETING OR IN WRITING HOW THEY IN PLAN TO ENFORCE WRITTEN WHAT THEY NEED FROM US FROM THE CITY IN ORDER TO EFFECTIVELY MONITOR AND ENFORCE. I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A WAY

TO DO IT. >> WE ARE GOING TO GET TO

MONITORING. >> I HAVE IT MARKED ON MY LIST MY QUESTIONS FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT.

I WANT TO KNOW HOW THEY ARE GOING TO ENFORCE THAT.

>> WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON G.

SO I WOULD WANT TO ENSURE THAT REVENUE FROM FOOD SALES OF FOOD PREPARED ON SITE CONSTITUTES MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL BUSINESSREVENUE . JUST CALLING IT A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT MEANS THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE EQUIPMENT.

THERE IS NOTHING THAT PREVENTS SOMEBODY FROM BRINGING IN STUFF FROM OFF-SITE THROUGH THE ONLY EXCEPTION HERE.

AND WHY I DIDN'T WANT TO GET TO GRANULAR IN TERMS OF THINGS ALONG THESE LINES. THE GOAL BEING ITS REVENUE FROM FOOD SALES, FOOD PREPARED ON SITE AND THEN AT THE DEAL WITH THE PLACES LIKE THE RESTAURANTS WE HAVE IN TOWN THAT DON'T PREPARE THINGS LIKE THEIR DESSERTS OR WHATNOT.

BUT AGAIN, THE GOAL BEING THAT MORE THAN HALF THE REVENUE HAS

TO BE FROM FOOD. >> AND ON HOW ELSE TO DESCRIBE

IT OTHER THAN PREPARING IT. >> IF PREPARED DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT FROM SCRATCH, THAT'S FINE.

BUT PREPARED FOOD ON SITE. >> ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUE OTHER THAN TO SAY TO STAFF TO INCORPORATE THE ADDITIONAL.

>> I SECOND IT EMPHATICALLY. >> WE ARE GOING TO GET TO THAT.

>> SEE IS DIFFERENT. SEE IS HOW MUCH OF THE ALCOHOL THEY MAKE THEIR CAN THEY SELL THEIR VERSUS CELL OFF-SITE.

IT IS IRRELEVANT. NO AIR DOWN TO 1/4.

AWAY FROM MIC] >> DE IS JUST TALKING ABOUT YOUR TOTAL REVENUE. FOOD BEVERAGE, WHATEVER YOU'RE SELLING COULD SAY IT IS $100,000 AND 50,000 OR MORE WOULD HAVE TO COME FROM FOOD IT OR ITS TALKING FAIRLY ABOUT YOUR PRODUCTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BUT IF YOU ARE PRODUCING 10,000 BARRELS, 5000 OF THE GIRLS HAVE TO BE CONSUMED ON SITE. AS CAN APPLES AND ORANGES.

>> THAT WOULD BE MY BOAT WOULD BE I WANT TO KEEP IT.

WITH THE ADDITION OF FOOD PREPARED.

>> ALSO I WOULD LIKE A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT WHEN THEIR ATTENDANCE AT THE NEXT MEETING TO SEE HOW THEY PLAN ON ENFORCING MATTER WHAT THEY NEED FROM US IN ORDER TO

ENFORCE IT. >> IF WE CAN GO BACK CAN WE GET A CONSENSUS ON EVERYONE WANTING TO KEEP SEE IT ARE THERE ANY NO

VOTES ON THAT? >> LET'S DO A VOTE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR. >> KEEP IT.

[01:50:01]

>> SAME WITH D WITH THE REVISION THAT NATHANIEL PROPOSED.> THE FOOD PREPARED ITEM.

>> KEEP IT. >> E IS 50 PERCENT OF THE AREA.

NO MORE THAN 50 PERCENT TO BE USED TO THE BRAIN FUNCTION THAT AGAIN IS SOMETHING COMMON IN ONE OF THE OTHER SIMILAR BENCHMARK CITIES. I THINK MAYBE YOU COULD ELIMINATE THAT OR REDUCE IT GIVEN THE FACT YOU ARE SIGNIFICANTLY EMPHASIZING THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT

ELEMENT.>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? BUT I DON'T WANT TO PROHIBIT A HOPPES OR BJ BURIED FROM COMING

IN. >> I THINK WITH THE OTHER LIMITATIONS, ALL THE OTHER LIMITATIONS TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES.> WHEN YOU LIMIT THE AMOUNT THAT YOU CAN PHYSICALLY PREPARE, YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO WIND UP IN A SITUATION WHERE IT'S A 50 PERCENT OF THE AREA BEING THAT UNLESS THEY WANT TO MAKE IT INTO YOUR LOOKING AT THE GOLDBERG TAPE MACHINE WITH A MAKING A BEER AND IT TAKES UP A LARGE PORTION. WERE THAT MIGHT BELIEVE IT IS

WRITTEN. >> ANYBODY ELSE BESIDES ALEX HAVE A DESIRE TO CHANGE IT? YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT, I

BELIEVE. >> F IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH STATE REGULATIONSFOR A BREWPUB LICENSE .

I DON'T THINK WE ARE USING THAT TERM WE ARE GONNA KEEP THE MAXIMUM PRODUCTION UNLESS OTHERWISE NEEDED.

>> HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. DO WE NEED TO SAY THAT THAT WON'T INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL PRODUCED THAT IS ALLOWED TO BE PRODUCED BY C MEANING THEY CAN'T PRODUCE FIVE TIMES WHAT THEY CAN SELL 50 PERCENT OF?

>> I WILL DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.

>> YOU ARE A LOT MORE TRUSTING. THEY ARE GOING TO PRODUCE IT AND THEY WILL SELL IT. THEY WILL DISTRIBUTE IT AND IT WILL BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT PROBLEM.

RATIO TO YOUR FOOD SALE BUT A LESSER FOOD SALE ARE DOING INSANELY WELL, YOU'RE LIMITED IN HOW MUCH ALCOHOL.

>> LET'S CRAFT THIS THING SO SOMEBODY ACTUALLY WANTS TO COM

. >> I KNOW YOU SAID THAT, BUT OF WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT IS PUT THE RULES OF THE GAME THERE BEFORE THEY APPLY. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO BUT IF IT WORKS FOR THEM WERE TO COME BACK IN.

I WANT EVERYBODY TO BE CLEAR SO THAT BY THE TIME THEY SPENT $5000 AND THERE IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD, THEY DON'T SAY YOU GUYS DIDN'T TELL ME YOU WERE GOING TO DO THAT.

I WANT THEM TO SEE WHAT THE INTENT WAS AND MAKE IT WORK.

I DON'T THINK WE ARE BEING OVERLY REGULATORY RIGHT NOW.

>> AS WITH THE OTHERS, CAITLIN, F WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT AT THE NEXT MEETING HOW THEY PLAN TO ENFORCE THAT.

>> THIS IS ONE THEY DO HAVE TO REPORT.

>> I WOULD LIKE A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT.

MAYBE A BLANKET REVIEW AND ANALYSIS BOOK I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW THEY WILL ENFORCE THI .

>> I THINK IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT THE TOOLS IN HERE TO GET THEM THINGS ARE IN.

>> WE CAN ASK THEM HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ENFORCE THIS OR WHAT WE CAN ARRANGE MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM AND TO ENFORCE.

THAT IS THE MESSAGE WE SHOULD USE.

>> AND WE HAVE A VOTE ON THAT ONE, PLEASE?

>> ITEM F. >> KEEP IT.

>> ANYBODY WANT TO ELIMINATE IT?

>> KEEP IT. WHICH IS THE ONE REGULATED BY

THE LICENSE. >> G IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE

[01:55:01]

AND SO THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE. >> WE VOTED TO KEEP THE DEFINITION. I DON'T THINK WE VOTED ON THE OPERATION. YOU COULD PROHIBIT A GROWLER

AND IT WOULD BE DEFINED. >> THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR LET'S

GET CLARIFICATION. >> WE ARE GOING TO DEFINE IT SO

WE CAN PROHIBIT IT? >> WE CAN WORK ON THE LANGUAGE AFTER, BUT I THINK THE CONCEPT HERE IS SELLING TO OTHER FACILITIES FOR REASONABLE DISTRIBUTION VERSUS THE GROWLER

CONCEPT. >> THIS IS NOT THE TAKE OUT

BEER. >> SO IS THE DEFINITION OF GROWLER STAYING IN OR BEING ELIMINATED? OKAY. GOT BEAT.

>> SO DO YOU WANT TO ALLOW FOR OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION.

NOT GROWLERS, BUT DISTRIBUTION TO OTHER LOCATIONS FROM THIS LOCATION FROM RESALE? OR NOT?

>> DO WE WANT TO LET THEM SELL IT AT PUBLIX?

>> WHY WOULD BE RESTRICTED IF THEY WERE ONLY ALLOWED TO PRODUCE A CERTAIN AMOUNT ANYWA .

>> IF YOU REMEMBER THE COMMENTS ON MY LAST MEETING, WE WERE INVITING AND ENTICING THE SUCCESS OF AN OPERATOR TO BE ABLE TO EMULATE OTHERS THAT WERE SUCCESSFUL AND GROW THE BUSINESS AND THAT WOULD BE THE WAY TO DO THAT.

>> I HOPE THEY GET SO SUCCESSFUL THAT THE OTHER RESTAURANTS IN TOWN WILL WANT TO HAVE WHATEVER THESE

BREWERIES. >> WE ARE ELIMINATING.

>> LET'S VOTE ON IT. >> THIS WOULD BE TOO ELIMINATE OR ALLOWING THEM TO DO IT YOU'D BE ELIMINATING.

>> THE BOAT IS WHETHER TO ELIMINATE THE PROHIBITION.

>> THIS IS TO ELIMINATE IT. TODD ROGERS?

>> ELIMINATED. >> TONY?

>> KEEP IT. >> NOT TO NATHANIEL?

>>ELIMINATE IT . >> JOEL.

>> ELIMINATE. >> DAVID.

>> KEEP IT. >> ZWEIG.

>> ELIMINATE. >> IT WILL BE ELIMINATED.

>> JUST CLARIFY NO OUTDOOR STORAGE IS PERMITTED THERE THAT IS ALREADY WITHIN THE CODE. TO MAKE THIS CONCISE WE CAN

ELIMINATE THIS. >> I WOULD RECOMMEND WE KEEP IT. THIS IS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION

CRITERIA.>> IS ALREADY IN THE CODE.

>> I DON'T THINK IT HURTS US TO KEEP IT IN HERE.

>> IF IT IS IN HERE AND THEY ARE VIOLATING IT, THEY ARE VIOLATING THE TERMS OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR GARBAGE IN THE BACK OF RESTAURANTS IN GROUP HOPES.

>> GARBAGE IS ALREADY PROHIBITED.

>> WECAN ENFORCE THAT REGARDLESS OF A SPECIAL

EXCEPTION. >> IS A PROBLEM IN THE

RESTAURANTS THAT DON'T . >> THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO OUR CODE THAT SAYS IF YOU CAN SHOW YOU ARE NOT GONNA CREATE THESE THINGS YOU CAN OPERATE.

THIS IS A CONDITION SPECIFICALLY SAYING YOU'RE NOT GOING OF OUTSIDE STORAGE. IF THIS BUILDING IS STORING THEIR APPETITE KINGS THAT WE KNOW ALLOWED THEM TO DISTRIBUTE FROM THE SITE, IT'S A PROBLEM. I WOULD WANT US BOTH HOLD A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR I WOULD RECOMMEND WE KEEP IT.

>> LET'S VOTE ON IT. >> I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP IT THERE AND WHEN SOMEBODY COMES HERE TO HAVE THIS BUSINESS, WE HAD THEM THE PIECE OF PAPER THAT OUTLINES ALL OF IT.

IT IS A ROADMAP TO THE SUCCESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE GOING TO GET A RESTAURANT WITH A BREWERY COMPONENT.

I AGREE WITH DAVID WESHOULD KEEP IT.

IT IS A FEW LINES IN REDUNDANCY, PLEASE.HERE'S PLENTY OF REDUNDANCY IN GOVERNMENT.

WE CAN DO WITH ONE SENTENCE . >> ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ELIMINATING IT? I MEAN WITH KEEPING IT?

>> I SAY WE KEEP H.> IS THERE ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T WANT

TO KEEP IT? >> WE ARE KEEPING IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> KEEPING IT ISPROPOSED .

[02:00:02]

>> MOVING ONTO I, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED AN EFFORT TO EMPHASIZE THE RESTAURANT USE.T IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS TYPICAL OF OTHER ORDINANCES IF WE ARE TRYING TO REDUCE SOMEBODY BULLET POINTS HERE. THIS IS ONE THAT MAY BE

CONSIDERED. >> THAT WOULD MEAN THAT BIGBEAR IS IN VIOLATION. BECAUSE THEY ARE A BEAUTIFUL DISPLAY OF OTHER GROOVYSTUFF IS IN THE FRONT .

AND SO MY OPINION IS THAT THEY SHOULD ABSOLUTELY GO.

IT SERVES NO PURPOSE. >> WHERE THEY PUT IT.

IT COULD BE ARTWORK. ANYBODY OBJECT TO HAVING IT

ELIMINATED. >> ELIMINATE.

>> ITEM J. >> SO J THERE IS CERTAIN CONDITIONS UNDER CERTAIN LICENSES THAT CAN BE OBTAINED.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER WHICH LICENSES THEY OBTAIN FROM THE COUNTY, STATE OR FEDERAL LAW THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THE GROWLER TAKE OUT ELEMENT. SO THERE WAS A VOTE TO KEEP THE DEFINITION, WHICH TO ME MEANT WE WERE KEEPING WITH GROWLER OPERATION, BUT I GUESS WE NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER VOTE ON THAT TO

CONFIRM THAT. >> AND IF THERE IS A VOTE TO

NOT ALLOW GROWLERS. >> WE NEED TO TAKE OUT THE DEFINITION FOR THIS NONSENSE AND KEEPING IT.

IF WE CAN CONFIRM WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE TO KEEP A GROWLER OPERATION IS AN OPTION PROVIDED THEY OBTAIN THE CORRECT

LICENSES. >> ARE YOU GOING TO PULL OUT A GROWLER?

>> YOU ARE RIGHT A DAY AGO. WAS DONE FOR EMERGENCY ORDER ALLOWING CERTAIN LICENSED RESTAURANTS AND BY THE WAY, THAT AT 54 PERCENT OF THE REVENUE COMING FROM FOOD FOR STATE LAW WOULD ALLOW THEM TO GO.

THERE IS A BILL PASSED IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR SIGNED IT YESTERDAY TO PERMIT SOME OF THEM TO DO THAT UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES. I REVIEWED THE BILL BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT APPLIES TO A BREWERY PUPPET TYPE.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS MORE OF A RESTAURANT WITH LIQUOR.

AS A SEPARATE CHAPTER BOARD NOT TO GET YOU TOO MUCH INTO THE WEEDS, BUT WE HAVE BEEN IN THE WEEDS A LITTLE BIT TONIGHT SO I THINK I AM OKAY. MOTHER IS A SECOND CHAPTER IN FLORIDA STATUTES THAT DEALS WITH LIQUOR IN A SEPARATE CHAPTER THAT DEALS WITH BEER AND WINE AND MALT BEVERAGES BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WOULD APPLY AUTOMATICALLY.

BUT I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. GOING FORWARD SOME OF THE RESTAURANTS AT LIQUOR LICENSES WILL BE ABLE TO.

YOU ARE RIGHT, THOUGH. >> BACK TO J.

>> A YES VOTE TO KEEP GROWLERS. >> PUT YOUR HANDS UP IF YOU WANT THE GROWLER. WE ALREADY HAVE MORE THAN 50

PERCENT. >> GROWLERS CARRY.

>> WHAT WAS THE VOTE? >> 4/3.

>> JUST AS AN FYI, BIGBEAR BREWING COMPANY PUT ME ON HOLD AND NEVER ANSWERED IT SO I'M NOT GOING BACK THERE.

>> ALPHABETICAL ITEM K. >> TALKING ABOUT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TOWARD REDUNDANT BECAUSE WE REQUIRE THAT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS SCREEN READ THIS IS AN EASY ONE TO ELIMINATE JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING IN THE CODE BILLION HAT IS APPLICABLE TO TH.

EVEN IF IT IS NOT SPECIFIC TO THE EXEMPTION.

>> ANYBODY HAVE A DISAGREEMENT? >> ITEM L.

>> L SLIGHTLY MODIFIES HOURS OF OPERATION FOR IN THIS CASE A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT THAT IS OF VIEWING FUNCTION.

OR CAN OPEN UNTIL A CERTAIN HOUR ANYWAY.

I AM NOT SURE WITH THE BOARDS THOUGHTS ARE ON PROVIDING SPECIFIC AND REVISED HOURS OF OPERATION COMPARED TO OTHER

COMMERCIAL USES. >> MY OPINION WOULD BE WE ALLOW OURS OPERATION FOR FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO OPERATE FOR THE HOURS THAT A RESTAURANT CAN OPERATE BUT WE COULD BASICALLY ELIMINATE L IN

THAT CASE. >> THAT WOULD BE MY RETREAT THEM SIMILAR TO EVERY OTHER RESTAURANT.

>> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION BUT I DON'T KNOW WHO IT WAS.

SOMEONE HAVE A CONCERN OF THEM BEING NEAR A DAYCARE.

[02:05:04]

>> SPECIAL EXCEPTION. >> THAT WOULD BE EVALUATED ON

AN UPPER SITE FOR AN. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS MENTIONED. MAYBE THE HOURS OPERATIONS THEY OVERLAPPED WITH THE DAYCARE MAY NOT BE SO GOOD.> THE QUESTION BECOMES IS THERE A RESTAURANT WITH A FULL LIQUOR LICENSE. THAT IS IN THE SAME PERCENT IN

THE. >>SO DEJA BLUE IS RIGHT ADJACENT .

>> HOW MANY PEOPLE GO TO DEJA BLUE FOR A COUPLE OF DRINKS? LET'S SAY AFTER A PLANNING AND ZONING.

>> SEVERAL TONIGHT.

>> IT CAN ELIMINATE L AND TREAT THEM SIMILARLY TO RESTAURANT.

>> AND? >> M IS JUST PROVIDING BECAUSE THERE WASN'T A PARKING STANDARD FOR BREWPUBS ANALYSIS IS FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WE CAN ELIMINATE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM REQUIREMENT FOR PARKING, ANTHONY.

OKAY. >> DID WE ALLOW DISTRIBUTION?

>> YES. >> SO THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT MORE TRUCKS. AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD ADD A LOADING SPACE FOR THE ÃFOR THEM.

DAY OF THE SHOW WE HAVEADEQUATE LOADING SPACE AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING DOWN AT THE OTHER END OF A CENTER .

>> ALL SITE PLANS, I CAN TELL THAT ALL SITE PLANS OF EVER GOTTEN APPROVED HAVE HAD TRUCK RADIUS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT

WHERE IS IT GOING TO PARK. >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS THEY ALWAYS HAD TO HAVE THEM AND BOTTOM LINE IS WHEN THE DORITOS CHART SHOWS UP IN THE COKE TRUCK SHOWS UP, THEY PARK

WHEREVER THEY WANT GORDON. >> AND THEY DO IT IN THE CITY

AS WE SPEAK. >> WHEREVER THEY WANT TO PART, THEY OFFLOAD THE MATERIAL AND GET OUT OF THERE.

>> BECAUSE IT IS WRONG EVERYWHERE ELSE, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE WRONG HERE. AND THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO HAVE YOUR TRUCKS COME AND HAVE A REGULAR ROUTE AND SELL UP TO 50 PERCENT, I THINK IT SHOULD BE EXTRA PAID

ATTENTION TO. >> IT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION ANALYSIS. IN TERMS OF COMPATIBILITY OF

USE. >> I THINK WE SHOULD PUT IN HERE THAT THEY OF THE SHOW THERE IS AN ADEQUATE LOADING

SPACE. >> IS NOT ALREADY A

REQUIREMENT. >> LOADING AND UNLOADING ZONES ARE TYPICALLY APPROVED ON A SITEWIDEBASIS.

YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE SHOPPING CENTER AS A WHOLE AS OPPOSED TO EACH INDIVIDUAL TENANT . JUST GIVEN HOW COMMERCIAL CENTERS OPERATE. AND SO THAT WOULD BE ALREADY SUFFICIENT FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER.

MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN IT COMES IN TO ENSURE THERE IS STILL ADEQUATE LOADING.

>> I THINK DAVID MIGHT BE READING ÃNOT READING INTO IT BUT ALLUDING TO THE FACT BECAUSE IT IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND IT'S GOING TO ADD TRUCKS.

>> THAT'S ALREADY A SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA.> I DON'T AGREE WITH HAVING THIS SPECIFIC FACILITY.

BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE WHAT IS IN BUT WAS.

I WOULDN'T SUPPORT THAT.

>> A COUPLE MORE COMMENTS AND THEN WE NEED TO HAVE A BOAT.

>> LOADS FROM THE FRONT. EVERY SINGLE ONE.

HAVE YOU SEEN THE WAY THE BACK LOOKS?

>> IF WE ONLY HAD REGULATION SAYING THEY HAD NO OUTSIDE

STORAGE. >> MY POINT EXACTLY!

WE CAN'T JUST GET OUR HANDS UP. >> THEY PLEADED THAT.

>> IMAGINE IF THEY WOULD A SPECIAL EXCEPTION BEING OVER THERE OPERATION IF THEY OF THE OUTSIDE STORAGE.

>> IT WOULD BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.

>> REGARDLESS BOARD WHETHER IT'S IN SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR

THE CODE. >> YOU STILL GO TO CODE

[02:10:04]

ENFORCEMENT. >> SO THERE IS NO SUPPORT FOR ENSURING THEY HAVE ADEQUATE LOADING?

>> WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A BOAT. >> JUST TO REITERATE.

>> MR. CHAPMAN? DON'T HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON WHERE THINGS CAN BE LOADED IN OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE CITY WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS? THAT IS NOT SOMETHING FROM MARS BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IT IN A PREVIOUS LIFE WE USED TO APPROVE ALL THINGS IN COCONUT CREEK WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITH A

SPECIFIC LOADING AREA. >> YOU HAVE A CRITERIA THAT HA YOU LOOK AT AXIS TRAFFIC GENERATION AND SO FORTH.

YOU'RE GOING OUT TO CONSIDER THAT ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.

> I THINK WE SHOULD SPECIFY WHERE THE LOADING AREAS FOR THIS BUSINESS READ IS THAT OUTRAGEOUS?

>> I HAVE A PROBLE WITH THAT, TONY, BECAUSE WHILE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW. I HATE TO KEEP SAYING THIS.

EVERYTHING THAT WEARE DOING ALL WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID IT BEING COLORED BY THE ONE POTENTIAL APPLICANT WE ALREADY KNOW, WE HAVE SEEN PICTURES, ALL THESE THINGS .

SO UGLY UNCOMFORTABLE AS AN ATTORNEY AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO SAY I WANTED TO BE IN A PARTICULAR TYPE OF LOCATION.

BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LOCATIONS MAY BE FOR FUTURE APPLICANTS ON THIS ROUTE AND PERSONALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT WE ARE GOING TO ACT AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION ANALYSIS, DETERMINE THINGS LIKE IS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS APPROPRIATE.

IF WE SAY IT ASKED TO BE IN THE BACK, THAT MEANS ANY FACILITY WERE THE ONLY ACCESS BECAUSE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ONLY

ALLOWS FRONT ACCESS. >> I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE TELL THEM WHERE TO PUT IT TOWARD HIM SUGGESTING AS PART OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THEY SHOW US HOW WE ARE GOING TO LOAD AND UNLOAD HOW THEY WILL DISTRIBUTE SO WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY THAT IS

A GOOD PLACE FOR IT. >> THEY DO THAT WITH THE SITE

PLAN APPROVAL. >> AS PART OF THE APPROVAL MICHELLE IS POINTING OUT. IT'S UP THERE BROKEN.

>> THAT BE A QUESTION WE ASK THEM DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS IS DEMONSTRATE YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT LOADING.

>> IT IS ALREADY THERE. I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED AN EXTRA, EXTRA CRITERIA WHEN IT IS ALREADY PART OF THE GENERIC

GENERAL. >> AND ASKING THE SHE WAS SPECIFICALLY HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO THE DISTRIBUTION.

WHICH IS THE ONLY THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT, WHICH WE WOULD NOT ALLOW A GENERAL DISTRIBUTION USE IN OUR ZONING

DISTRICT WILL GET. >> THEY WILL HAVE TO PUT THAT

ON THEIR APPLICATION,WHAT WE. >> NOT UNLESS THEY ASK FOR IT .

>> WE CAN ADDRESS EVERYONE'S CONCERN.

THE CONDITION OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE. IF THEY ARE DOING DISTRIBUTION, YES. NUMBER ONE.

AND THEN TO HAVE TO. [INAUDIBLE] THEY MIGHT WANT TO LOAD ON THE FRONT AND THEY MIGHT BE FINE IF THEY ARE DOING AT 5:00 A.M. OR WHATEVER IS ALLOWED FOR IT! WE DON'T WANT THEM STORING ALL THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.

>> IT DOESN'T REFER HER TO JUST REFERS TO PARKING.

AND SO IT IS WRITTEN. >> IT IS UNNECESSARY IS WHAT THEY ARE SAYING WE ARE ADDING A SEPARATE ITEM TALKING ABOUT LOADING ANDUNLOADING .

>> SURE. >> THAT SOUNDS GOOD.

ITEM AND ÃITEM 149. >> AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, GIVEN THE FACT THIS IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, THIS IS AGAIN REDUNDANT PRINT FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS CAN ALTER ENTERTAINMENT BY SPECIAL PERMIT ANYWAY.

I THINK WE CAN ELIMINATE THIS UNLESS THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE

BOAT. >> AND HOW IS THAT PERMIT ISSUED? IS THAT A STAFF DECISION WHETHER THEY GET A PERMIT. HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> SPECIAL USE PERMIT. >> IN THEORY IT WOULDN'T BE ANY

DIFFERENT. >> LET MICHELLE ANSWER SPOKE WITH WHOLE SECTION IN THE CODE ABOUT SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT IT AND IT WOULD BE GUIDED BY THAT. AND IF FOR SOME REASON, WE WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT IF IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE ST. PATRICK'S DAY PARTY OUTSIDEOR SOMETHING, OTHER RESTAURANTS MIGHT WANT TO DO IT TOO.

WE WILL LOOK AT THE SPECIAL EVENT PROCESS.

BUT THERE IS A WHOLE PROCESS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS .

>> IT DOESN'T COME BEFORE US. >> KNOW.

IS DONE MINISTER REALLY. >> I THINK THAT WAS ANTHONY'S

QUESTION. >> I WOULDN'T WANT THAT COMING.

>> I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE DO. I JUST WANT TO KNOW THE

PROCESS. >> WANTED ANTHONY TO GET AN

ANSWER TO HIS QUESTION. >> I JUST WANTED ON THE RECORD HOW IT'S DONE! THE APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED TO

[02:15:04]

>> TONY, IF YOU WOULD LIKE WE CAN ADD TO THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION A REQUIREMENT THAT IF THEY ARE HAVING 10 SAFELITE INTELLECTUAL.

I JUST WILL LET YOU KNOW. >> YES.

THAT IS FOR THE OLD BOARD MEMBERS TO READ THENEW ONES DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT MARIA AND .

>> ITEM OH THREE 150. >> THIS IS LIMITING THE HOURS OF BASICALLY LOADING AND UNLOADING.

WE DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE STANDARDS FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING HOURS! WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SERVICE TRUCK AND A DELIVERY TRUCK?

>> IT IS NOT A DEFINED TERM. >> SERVICE TRUCK WITH MEANS BOOK SERVICE TRUCK COULD MEAN. [INAUDIBLE]

>> WHAT IS IT FOR RESTAURANTS NOW?

WE HAVE NOTHING ABOUT THIS? >> THERE'S NOTHING THAT REGULATES THE HOURS OHER THAN IT HAS TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE

HOURS OF THEIR OPERATION. >> I THINK THEIR PRODUCE GUYS SHOW UP VERY EARLY.> WE ARE SAYING IT'S A RESTAURANT IN THIS PARTICULAR THING, LET IT OPERATE LIKE ARESTAURANT .

>> RIGHT.

>> IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION CONCEPT.

OF THIS IS GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT OFF-SITE CONTRIBUTION. TRUCKS COMING IN ALL HOURS OF

THE NIGHT. >> MAYBE WE CHANGE IT FROM SERVICE TRUCKS TO DELIVERY TRUCKS FOR DISTRIBUTION?

>> I KIND OF LIKE A HYBRID OF THAT.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SERVICE TRUCKS COMING JUST LIKE A REGULAR RESTAURANT, BUT THE CONCEPT OF THE DISTRIBUTION HAPPENING WHILE THE CLOSET IS OPEN.

DURING THE PEAK HOURS OF THE EVENING.

>> RESTAURANTS LIMIT THEIR DELIVERIES INTERNALLY BECAUSE THEY WANT FOOD TRUCKS HAVING TO DO WITH THEM TO WHERE IT.

>> IT IS DIFFERENT. >> BUT THEY WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO MEET, AGAIN IMAGINE BUSINESS IS GOING TO BE WANTING TO DO ITS DISTRIBUTION WHEN THEY ARE NOT HAVING PEOPLE WAITING OUTSIDE BUT I WOULD VOTE TO ELIMINATE THIS THERE LET IT OPERATE LIKE A RESTAURANT FOR IT AND IF WE DON'T HAVE

SOMETHING IN THE CODE. >> ISN'T NECESSARY TO MAKE A

VOTE ON THIS . >> DOES EVERYBODY AGREE TO ELIMINATE IT. ANYBODY DISAGREE? OKAY. I NEED YOU TO GET ON THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE IT WON'T BE RECORDED.

>> IF WE ELIMINATE IT JUST ON G WHEN HE SAID WE WANTED TO ADD DISTRIBUTION PLANS HOURS A DISTRIBUTION OPERATION SO THEY

SUBMIT THAT TO US. >> I THINK WE DID THAT ALREADY.

>> I'M GOOD TO REMOVE IT. WE KNOW WHEN THEY COME IN HOW THEY ARE PLANNING TO OPERATE PTHIS FACILITY SPOKE IT WAS ELIMINATED, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRIOR DISCUSSION WAS BASICALLY WE WANTED TO SEE WHETHER IT IS INJURY, WHATEVER THE SECTION I GOING TO BE THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE A DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS AS PART OF THE DISTRIBUTION PLAN WE WANT TO SEE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THAT COULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION ANNOUNCEMENT IS DONE .

>> WHEN HE SEIJI WAS ELIMINATED, I AM THINKING THE WORD PROHIBITED BUT WE ARE NOW SEEING OFF STREET DISTRIBUTION

IS PROHIBITED. >> OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION IS PERMITTED. NOT PROHIBITED.

>> ARE YOU GOING TO NEED TO WRITE THAT IN THERE THAT IT IS ALLOWED? BOOK I THINK WHAT I UNDERSTOOD WAS BASICALLY, WE WILL CREATE A NEW PROVISION THAT SAYS IF YOU ARE ALSO SEEKING OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION, AND OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION PLAN IS REQUIRED THAT INCLUDES HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THIS DISTRIBUTION.

>> CORRECT. >> WE WILL HAVE SOMETHING.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE G, BUT IT WILL BE AN HERE.

>> WE GOT IT HERE IN. >> ITEM P.

LINE ITEM 153. >> THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY GET YOU TO THE EFFECT OF WHAT WE SHOWED YOU IN THE BIG BEAR WHERE IT IS SEPARATED BEHIND GLASS WITH DOORS.

THERE WERE SOME SAFETY CONCERNS AND INITIAL CONVERSATIONS THAT PERHAPS KEEPING PATRONS AWAY FROM THE BREWING ELEMENTS ITSELF WOULD BE DESIRED, IS NOT SOMETHING FOUND IN THE OTHER BENCHMARK CITY ORDINANCES. IT IS SOMETHING WE PROACTIVELY

PUT IN THEIR. >> ANYBODY OF ANY QUESTION.

>> THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE. WITH AND THAT BE LIKE AN OSHA

STANDARD IN THE WAY? >> NOW IT IS.

[02:20:01]

>> IT'S GOING TO PROTECT IT. AND ALSO NOT WANT TO BE SUED OUT OF EXISTENCE THE FIRST TIME A FOUR-YEAR-OLD GOES AND RUNS INTO THE COPPER BREWER. OR WHATEVER IT IS.

I THINK IT CAN BE ELIMINATED. >> THIS ONE THAT WANTSTO

ELIMINATE IT FOR ANYBODY ELSE. >> I DON'T MIND LEAVING IT IN TO SET THE PRECEDENCE BEFORE THEY DO THEIR ARCHITECTURAL PLANS BUT WE CAN REMOVE IT, BUT I THINK WE ALL HERE AGREE THAT WE WANT THIS IN THE DESIGN . SO TELLING THE DESIGNER AT A TIME, THE DEVELOPER AHEAD OF TIME THAT WE WANT YOU TO PUT SOME SORT OF MEASURES TOGETHER, I THINK THEY WILL BE REPURCHASED MAKE SURE THEY DON'T WASTE THEIR MONEY.

MAKE SURE YOU DO THIS. AND SO YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR BATHROOM PASS THROUGH THE BREWERY AND HAVE TO STEP OVER.

I HAVE BEENTO SOME PRETTY SHADY BREWERIES AND THEY ARE WASHING STUFF OUT AND YOU'RE WALKING THROUGH WET FLOORS, THERE IS NO

RAILING . >> ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I AGREE WITH ALEX PARIS LET'S LEAVE IT IN.

IT SETS THE TABLE RIGHT OUT FRONT.

>> ANYBODY ELSE IT IS A VOTE NECESSARY.

>> I WOULD JUST GET RID OF TO AVOID POTENTIALLY UNNECESSARY REGULATION, I DON'T NEED THAT AT LEAST FOUR FEET.

I'M FINE LEAVING IT IN, BUT IF THEY ARE GOING OUT TO COME TO US WITH A DESIGN PLAN WE LOOK AT IT AND SAY WAIT A SECOND, YOU'RE GOING TO KILL THE KIDS AT THE DAYCARE NEXT DOOR, WE WILL PROBABLY REJECT THIS, I JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED THE AT

LEAST FOUR FEET. >> LEAVING IT WITH THE WORD

BARRIER. >> SERVICE AREA SHALL BE

PERMANENTLY SEPARATED . >> WITH THE DEADBOLT AND

AUTOMATIC DOOR. >> ELECTRIC SHOCK.

>> BIOMETRICS. >> OKAY.

LET'S GO ON. THE CHAIRMAN IS DOING JOKES NOW. I LIKE THAT.

>> WE ARE GETTING INTO LATE NIGHT COMEDY.

>> AGAIN IN THE SPIRIT THAT THIS IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A BREWPUB ELEMENT, I THINK THE OUTDOOR SEATING ENTERTAINMENT AREA WILL BE ELIMINATED BECAUSE WE STANDARDS FOR A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT AND ITS OUTDOOR SEATING. WE ALREADY SAID THE ENTERTAINMENT IS BY SPECIAL PERMIT.

I THINK IN AN EFFORT TO REDUCE REDUNDANCY WE CAN ELIMINATE

THAT. >> ITEM 8.

>> YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE OUTSIDE SEATING UNLESS YOU COME IN.S A WHOLE PROVISION IN THE CODE FOR IT.

>> THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WILL CREATE NOISE IN THE COMMUNITY. THIS WILL BE A ROWDY FACILITY.

>> THEY ALREADY HAVE TO COME IN AND MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OUTDOOR SEATING ARE JUST LIKE THERE IS THAT DEJA BLUE.

>> THEY CAN HAVE ENTERTAINMENT OR ANYTHING, BUT THEY IT CAN HAVE SEATING OUTSIDE BUT IT IS ALIMITED PERCENTAGE OF INDOOR AND WE LOOK AT IT AND DETERMINE .

>> BASED ON THIS ORDINANCE WERE WE WERE SAYING 50 PERCENT.

WHERE DOES THE CODE CURRENTLY SIT COMPARED TO THOSE IT IS

EVEN LESS. >> NUMBER LET ME CLARIFY THAT.

YOU CAN NO MORE THAN 25 PERCENT OUTSIDE, BUT THEN YOU NEED TO DO A PARKING STUDY AND DEMONSTRATE AS NOT PARKING BECAUSE HE HAVE TO PARK ALL OF THOSE OUTSIDE.

>> IT MAY EVEN BE MORE STRENUOUS CODE.

>> THE EASY WAY TO ADDRESS THE SEASON SAY IN THE EVENT ÃWHAT WOULD YOU TAKE AS A SUGGESTION. IT HAS TO BE.

OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THEY MAY DECIDE TO OPEN UP AND GET EXCEPTION APPROVAL FOR THE FACILITY.

THEY WON'T BE PLANNING AT THAT MOMENT OR THEY MAY CHANGE THEIR OUTDOOR PRINT THEY CAN COME IN TO GET APPROVAL FOR OUTDOOR SITTING IF IT IS A 25 PERCENT AND THEY START TO TRIGGER THINGS LIKE PARKING STUDY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND SOUNDS EQUALLY AS RESTRICTIVE EVEN IF THE NUMBERS DON'T NECESSARILY MATCH AND MAY WIND UP NEEDING LESS FOR SEATING CAPACITY, WHICH WOULD BE OFFSET BY THE SLIGHTLY LOUDER PEOPLE AND IT WILL WIND UP BEING THE EQUAL OF THIS.

>> THE ITEM THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME WAS THE AREA SHOULD BE ACCESSIBLE ONLY THROUGH THE END SITE OF THE POPE FACILITY.

YOU GO TO THE KITCHEN AND TAKE A LEFT AT THE DISHWASHER TO GO

OUT. >> I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU MAY WANT TO TAKE THE OUTSIDE SEATING OUTTA HERE. DON'T AGREE THAT THE OUTSIDE SEATING OF THIS TYPE OF FACILITY IS THE SAME AS THE OUTSIDE SEATING. IN THAT REGARD, THERE IS A

[02:25:02]

IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE THE MOST ONEROUS PART OF THE ENTIRE OPERATION. BUT THERE'S NO POINT IN GOING THROUGH THOSE AT THE BOARD DOESN'T WANT TO HAVE OUTSIDE SEATING, OTHER THAN AS REGULATED BY THE NORMAL OUTSIDE

SEATING. >> IT ALLOWS HIM TO HAVE A

SIDEWALK PERMIT CAFC). >> EXCUSE ME?

>> OUR CODE ALLOWS THEM TO APPLY FOR AN OUTDOOR SIDEWALK

CAFC) PERMIT. >> THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR EVERYTHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE.

WE KNOW THE NATURE OFWHAT THIS COULD BE AND WE NEED TO SET REGULATIONS TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT THAT IT IS NOT THE SAME AS A NORMAL OUTSIDE SEATING FOR A RESTAURANT BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO BE A BREWPUB. IF WE DON'T HAVE REGULATIONS THAT TALK ABOUT A FULL-SERVICE MENU OUTSIDE AND THAT OUTSIDE SEATING AREA, WE WILL HAVE ISSUES .

>> THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, WE HAVE TO WHETHER OR NOT INSIDE OR OUTSIDE OF THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS.

>> DOESN'T KREMLIN COFFEE CELL ALCOHOL? AND THEY HAVE AN OUTDOOR. THAT'S RIGHT BURDEN THEY HAVE A

SIDEWALK PERMIT. >> ARE THEY BURYING?

>> IT EITHER IS OR IS IT ISN'T. >> THAT'S JUST IT.

WE CAN'T SAY IT ASKED TO BE A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT AND THEN WHEN IT COMES TO OUTDOOR SEATING SAY.

>> THIS IS A DIFFERENT THING FOR THIS IS A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A BREWING FACILITY.

IT'S A DIFFERENT THING SPOKE WAS THE DIFFERENCE WITH A FULL

LIQUOR BAR? >> CAN WE, RIGHT NOW WE LIMITED BUT WE KEPT THE 5000 SQUARE FEET.

WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE AND WE ARE LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL THEY CAN PRODUCE AND OBSERVE WHETHER IT IS ON-SITE, OFF-SITE.

AND I WOULD BET YOU ALL THE MONEY IN MY POCKETS AGAINST ALL THE MONEY IN YOUR POCKETS THE AMOUNT OF ACTUAL ALCOHOL THAT WILL WIND UP GETTING DISTRIBUTED FROM THIS GIVEN ALL THESE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS IN SEVERAL OTHER RESTAURANT PARKING THAT HAVE A FULL LIQUOR LICENSE RIGHT NOW THROUGH THAT THE AMOUNT OF ACTUAL ALCOHOL GIVEN ALL THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IS GOING TO BE HALF OF DEJA BLUE.

>> IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER A LOT OF THESE TYPES OF USES SUPPLEMENT THEIR IN-HOUSE BEER WITH OTHER BEERS AND OTHER LIQUORS. AND SO THE PERCENTAGE THEY ARE PRODUCING ISN'T 100 PERCENT OF WHAT IS BEING FULL PER THEY WILL SUPPLEMENT IT WITH A FULL LIQUOR BAR, WINE, BEER FROM OTHER BREWERIES. THIS COULD ALREADY HAPPEN PRETTY EXCEPT THEY HAPPENED TO BE MAKING A LITTLE PORTION OF THE BEER AND HOUSE INSTEAD OF BRINGING IT IN.

THE AMOUNT THEY COULD SELL COULD BE A SMALL FRACTION COMPARED TO ANY OTHER EXISTING RESTAURANT THAT SELLS 10 TIMES THAT. IS JUST THAT THEY HAPPENED TO MAKE IT ON-SITE BUT IT'S THE MAKING OF THE BEER ON SITE

CHANGE THE OUTDOOR SEATING. >> RIGHT.GOES LIKE RIGHT NOW DEJA BLUE HAS NO RESTRICTION ON HOW MUCH THEY SELL AND FOOD VERSUS ALCOHOL. SOME NIGHTTIME SURE IS A LOT MORE ALCOHOL THAN FOOD. THAT MAY WIND UP IN THE SAME HERE. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY RESTRICTION ON THE COMPONENTS. AND SO FOR THIS AND SO MANY OTHER THINGS, GIVEN ALL THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS WE ARE PUTTING ON THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT BECAUSE THEY HAPPENED TO BE MAKING SOME OF THE ALCOHOLS THEY ARE SELLING ON-SITE PRITIKIN, JUST ONE OUTTA SEVEN ON THIS, BUT TREATED LIKE A RESTAURANT EVERYWHERE WE CAN LEGITIMATELY TREAT IT LIKE A RESTAURANT PRINT SECTION 2 FOR OUTDOOR SEATING AND ENTERTAINMENT AREA. HAVING THESE KINDS OF THINGS TREATED LIKE SOMETHING OTHER THAN A RESTAURANT SETS IT UP FOR FAILURE, SETS IT UP FOR THINGS THAT ARE UNNECESSARY.

AND AGAIN, GIVEN THAT ARE RESTRICTIONS ON OUTDOOR SEATING MAY WIND UP BEING EVEN MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THIS, I SEE NO NEED TO HAVE ANY OF TO AT ALL. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT IT OTHER THAN VOTING ON IT AT THIS POINT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE AN INFORMAL VOTE SO WE KNOW WHAT DIRECTION TO GET STUFF ON THE.

>> ONE OTHER COMMENT. I DON'T EVEN KNOW YOU ADDRESS THIS. I THINK IN REALITY WHAT MY FEAR IS GOING TO HAPPEN ON OUTDOOR SEATING.

AND I AM ALL FOR THE ITEM. IT IS A PLACE MAKING BEER.

IT IS ALCOHOL DRIVEN. I KNOW IT'S A RESTAURANT THAT HAPPENS TO HAVE DEAR. MY CONCERN IS THE SEATS GO AWAY COME THE TABLES GET PUSHED AWAY AND IT IS A CONCERT EVERY

FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHT. >> WHAT THEY CAN'T HAVE THAT UNLESS I GET A SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.

>> WHAT I AM SAYING IS IN THEORY VERSUS PRACTICE.

[02:30:18]

I DIDN'T WANT TO GO AWAY. >> YOU HAD ME AT HELLO, TODD.

>> ANYWAY,

>> YES, THE OUTSIDE IS POTENTIALLY GOING TO BE A ÃI WON'T EVEN SAY THAT WORD. I SHOW.

AND WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL. BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH THEORY BUT IN THE PRACTICE. WHATEVER WE WOULD JUST DECIDE AND THE COMMISSION RELATE DESIGNS PEOPLE HAVE TO LIVE WITH IN THE REAL WORLD. AND WHEN I WAS A COP PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ALL THESE RULES AND REGULATIONS THEY WOULD MAKE UP AND WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT AN EFFECTIVE WAY.

AND SO YOU HAVE 2 TO KEEP IN MIND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, WHAT WE ARE DOING AND WHAT THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY NEARBY AND WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR WE TALKED ABOUT GROWLERS AND ENTERTAINMENT. I THINK WE SAW A CORN HOLE MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS.

I SEE A FRAT PARTY GOING ON OUT BACK.

SO LET'S JUST BE REALLY CAREFUL ON THE OUTSIDE.

AS DAVID MENTIONED, IT CAN POTENTIALLY BLOW UP RIGHT NOW THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO COME HERE TO DO THAT.

SO LET'S BE CAREFUL ABOUT THE OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES OF THIS

PLACE. >> SO WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT, FORMALLY VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT BOARD MEMBERS SUPPORT ALL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, A THROUGH E. AND ONCE WE GET TO THAT BUT WE WILL DETERMINE IF THERE IS ANYTHING MORE SPECIFIC TO THIS TYPE OR WITH IN IT. CAN WE DO THAT, PLEASE.

YES MEANS KEEP IT ALL IN AND A NO VOTE WOULD MEAN WE WANT ALL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO TO BE ELIMINATED.

>> IS THERE SOME QUOTE THAT WILL INDICATE YOU WANT TO KEEP

IT IN A MODIFIED FORM? >> WE COULD DO THAT.

>> I THINK WE SAY ALL OUTDOOR SEATING.

>> WANT TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE? LET'S GO THROUGH EACH ONE.

IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR AND. A THROUGH E. KEEP IT OR ELIMINATE IT? A YES WOULD BE TOO KEEP IT.

THE OUTDOOR SEATING OR TAKE OUT.

>> A YES VOTE MEANS YOU WANT TO KEEP ITEM TO A THROUGH E IN.

>> KEEP IT IN. >> TONY.

>> KEEPIT . >> NATE.

>> KILL IT. >> JOEL.

>> KILL IT. >> DAVID.

>> KEEP IT. >> ALEC.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT.

>> BASED ON THE KNOWLEDGE YOU KNOW.>> LET HER FINISH.

>> FIVE YES, 2 NO. BOOK AND AGAIN JUST FOR THE RECORD, STAFF AND COUNSEL ARE GOING TO ADDRESS IT AS WELL.

DEVOTED TO KEEP IMPORTANT. AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE AND SEE IF THERE WAS A CHANGE WERE NOT.

[02:35:09]

>> NOW THAT IT IS STAYING WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH AND SEE EACH ONE. OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM.

>> SO 2 A TRICKLE WITH THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING PERMIT ANY

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT? >> KEEP IT.

>> OKAY. A IS GOING TO STAY.

ITEM BE? >> I WOULD RECOMMEND WE CHANGE IT FROM 50 PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE AREA TO 50 PERCENT OF THE CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA IN THE BREWPUB PROCEEDING.

AND THAT THE SEATING CAPACITY BE 50 PERCENT OF THE INDOOR.

>> TO THE QUICK CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

QUICK. >> AND INSIDE AREA WHERE THEY ARE SERVICING.S PRIMARILY IN INSIDE RESTAURANT.

>> I JUST WANT TOMAKE SURE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> THE SEATING IS 50 PERCENT OF THE INDOOR SEATING CAPACITY .

>> THEY'RE BASICALLY KEEPING THE DENSITY THE SAME.

THE OUTSIDE CAN ONLY BE 50 PERCENT OF THE OUTSIDE SEATING AREA, TO HAVE ROUGHLY THE SAME REDUCTION.

>> ONE IS A SIZE THING AND ONE IS A NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

>> IF YOU 100 PEOPLE WHO CAN SIT INSIDE AND YOU KNOW HAVE 50 YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE OUTSID , YOU SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE

50 PEOPLE OUTSIDE. >> CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA IS NOT

A STRAIGHT FUNCTION. >> IF YOU ARE INDOORS IS 100.

INDOOR SEATING CAPACITY IS 100. YOUR OUTDOOR SEATING CAPACITY

SHOULD BE HOW MANY?> 50. >> THERE FOR THE SIZE.

>> YOU ARE SAYING THAT BOTH OF THOSE COMPONENTS.

>> JUST THE WAY IT IS NOW ONLY 50 PERCENT OF THE CUSTOMER SERVICEAREA AND 50 AS OPPOSED TO 100 PERCENT OF THE SEATING

CAPACITY. >> THANK YOU GET FOR COMING TO

MY SATURDAY . >> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? BUT THE SPECIALTY QUESTION WILL REQUIRE THEM TO PROVIDE AN OUTDOOR SEATING PLAN.

AND IF IT MAKES SENSE TO STAFF AND THE BOARD WHEN IT'S PRESENTED TO US, WE ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE AND COMMENT ON.

WHEN WE GET IN THE 50 PERCENT, IT IS GOING TO GET TRICKY.

WE DID IT WITH THE BROOKLYN WATER BAGEL, WHICH IS NOW THE FIRST FRESH CATCH RESTAURANT FOR THE ONE OUTDOOR SEATING AND IT WAS A SIMPLE PROCESS AND THEY CAME AND SHOWED US WHAT THEY WANTED. IT MADE SENSE, WE HAD THE AREA.

HAS TO BE WELL THOUGHT OUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE SERVICE

THE AREA. >> 50 PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA BEING OUTSIDE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE?

>> IF YOU CAN GET THAT IN WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.

ALSO INCORPORATING PARKING RESTRICTIONS.

>> WE ARE THINKING WE SHOULD HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ALLOWED OUTSIDE IS INSIDE? THAT IS A PRIMARILY INDOOR

RESTAURANT? >> IS IT YOUR OPINION THIS

BOARD WOULD ALLOW THAT? >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

HAVE TO SUBMIT THAT WITH THE SITE PLAN.> THIS IS A SEPARATE REQUIREMENT. I DON'T THINK WE ARE HURT BY SAYING IT'S WHAT YOU MEAN BECAUSE IT'S AN EXCEPTION.

>> IT IS CONFUSING. >> MY THOUGHT WAS WHO WE ARE KEEPING THIS, THEY ARE NOT GOING THROUGH THE SIDEWALK CAFC

PROCESS. >> WHICH THEY HAVE TO DO NO

MATTER WHAT. >> BUT DO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SIDEWALK CAFC) PROCES AND HAVE A SPECIFIC PROVISION ON OUTDOOR SEATING AND ENTERTAINMENT.

DO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS TWICE?> THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT A PERMIT REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY CAP IT, BECAUSE IT AFTER THE PERMIT REGARDING HOW WE ARE REGULATING IT.

>> IT DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PROCESS? JUST WITH THESE CRITERIA? AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PROCESS CRITERIA CONFLICTS WITH IT.

>> THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT ONLY HAS REGULATIONS TO EXEMPT YOU FROM HAVING TO PARK THE FIRST 25 PERCENT.

IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT 100 SEATS INSIDE, YOU GET 25 FREE SEATS

OUTSIDE. >> AS THIS IS WRITTEN IT SAYS I

[02:40:09]

COULD HAVE 100 PERCENT. >> BUT YOU HAVE TO PART, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PARK IT AFTER THE FIRST 25 PERCENTDURING THE OUTDOOR CAFC) REQUIREMENTS DON' ADDRESS THE .> THE ONLY WAY IT WORKS IS IF WE ALLOW PARKING CONCURRENCY.

IF WE COULD SAY X NUMBER OF CARS SPONSOR USED DURING THE DAY FOR THE GYM OR WHATEVER IS IN THE FACILITY OR IN THE

SHOPPING CENTER. >> IF THERE WAS PARKING

PROVISION. >> THAT IS FUNDAMENTAL.

>> IF YOU DO A STUDY. >> OUR CODE PROVIDES FOR SHARED PARKING IF YOU DO A PARKING STUDY.

>> BY THE WAY, WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY DECIDE THEY ARE NOT DOING AN OUTDOOR SEATING COMPONENT AND THEY WANT TO DO IT LATER

ON? >> MAKE AN AMENDMENT WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY EVALUATING FORCARMEL FOR AN .

CARMEL IT IS A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE IS NOT AN ESCAPE SO THERE CHANGE OUT THE LANDSCAPE AREA FOR A HARDSCAPE AREA. IF IT CURRENTLY EXISTS LIKE YOUR FAVORITE PATIO AREA, THEY WOULD PULL THE PERMIT TO PUT IT AND DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS PARKING.

>> WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES TO THE DOOR A ZONING OR A BUILDING DEPARTMENT? THEY HAVE A CONVERSATION AND BASED ON WHAT IT IS THE APPLICANT DESIRES TO DO, BUILD 400 HOUSES ON A PIECE OF VACANT LAND HAVE TO CHANGE THE LAND USE. AND THE SITE PLAN.

AND SO IT DEPENDS ON WHAT AND WHERE IS GOING TO DICTATE AND DETERMINE WHAT IT IS EXACTLY ONE MAY NEED.

>> HOW MUCH MORE WORK IS IT IF THEY CAME IN, THEY GOT THEIR SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITHOUT AN OUTDOOR SEATING COMPONENT AND NOW THEY HAVE TO COME BACK IN AND GET A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ASKED OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THESE CRITERIA AND THEY HAVE TO GET THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT. HOW MUCH EXTRA TIME, MONEY AND

EFFORT IS ADDED ON TOP? >> I HAVE A COMMENT FIRST OF ALL. AND MY QUESTION IS, I HAVEN'T BEEN LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

IF THE OUTDOOR SEATING IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, I WOULD WONDER WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO INCLUDE THE OUTDOOR SEATING.

I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION RAISED IN MY MIND PARIS TO ANSWER HER QUESTION, HOW BIG A DEAL.

IT'S A BIG DEAL. IT IS A PAIN TO DO A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT PRETTY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE DRE PROCESS, BACK AND FORTH MAKE A DIVISION, COME IN, GET SCHEDULE FOR DNC.

IF TO GO TO COMMISSION. YOUARE LOOKING AT THREE, FOUR,

FIVE, SIX MONTHS . >> IT'S NOT FUN.

>> THAT'S ONE THAT I THINK WE ARESETTING THIS UP .

I UNDERSTAND HAVING TO DO THIS. LET ME REPHRASE THAT.

I DON'T NECESSARILY UNDERSTAND. SINCE THERE ARE OTHER FULL

SURFACES. >> TALK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

>> OTHER FULL RESTAURANTS AT A FULL LIQUOR LICENSES AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS WE DON'T MAKE THEM JUMP THROUGH THINGS.

THEY ARE MIXING COCKTAILS INSTEAD OF THE ALCOHOL FOR THE

COCKTAILS. >> BUT THE FACT NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HAVING TO COME IN RATHER THAN AFTER WE HAVE GOTTEN OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OUR BUSINESS AND YOU'RE ABLE TO BUILD THE BUSINESS AND NOW I WANT TO ADD SOMETHING.

IF THIS HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL, I DIDN'T NECESSARILY WANT TO DO AN OUTSIDE SEATING. I WANTED TO ADD OUTSIDE SEATING. ALREADY HAS A PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE SIDEWALK CAFC) REQUIREMENT THAT HAS THE PARKING ISSUES IF I'M GOING FOR MORE THAN 25 PERCENT FOR WHAT I HAVE INSIDE. TO NOW SAY THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH POTENTIALLY AMENDMENT TO THEIR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. AND I LOOKED ANTHONY ON THAT.

IF THEY HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN OPERATION THAT DIDN'T HAVE AN OUTDOOR SEATING COMPONENT AND NOW THEY WANT TO DO IT, DO THEY NEED TO COME BACK IN AND BASICALLY GO THROUGH THE FULL COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIAL.

>> JUST AS A REMINDER, IT IS TO READING.

>> UNLESS WE PROVIDE OTHERWISE, I WOULD SAY YES.

[02:45:09]

>> NOW THEY ARE GOING HAVE TO COME IN.

AND IF THEY WANT TO ADD SOME SEATS OUTSIDE.

MOTHER IT IS 10 SEATS OR WHATEVER PERCENTAGES WE HAVE DONE, THEY HAD TO COME IN AND GO THROUGH AND GET , THEY HAVE TO AMEND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WHICH MEANS THEY ARE COMING TO US IN GOING TO THE COMMISSION TWICE.

THEY ARE GETTING A SITE PLAN AMENDMENTFROM THAT SAME PROCESS . I UNDERSTAND BELT AND SUSPENDERS BUT YOU DON'T NEED A BELT AND SUSPENDERS, DUCT TAPE AND STAPLES TO HOLD YOUR PANTS UP.

WE ARE ADDING SO MANY UNNECESSARY THINGS ON TOP OF WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE. MAYBE THE ISSUE IS WE JUST SAY OKAY, FINE. IF YOU ARE A RESTAURANT WITH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE BURNING AND YOU WANT TO ADD THE SIDEWALK CAFC) LATER ON, JUST AMEND HOW YOU DO THE SIDEWALK CAFC) FOR THESE THINGS, RATHER THANHAVING TO GO IN AND WHAT SPEND MAY WHAT TO AMOUNT TO THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND ADD A HANDFUL OF CHAIRS OUTSIDE .

SO FINE.F YOU ARE A SIDEWALK CAFC) FOR THE FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT THAT WE ARE TREATING AS A SPECIAL UNICORN BECAUSE YOU ARE BRING SOME BEER AT IT, YOUR SIDEWALK CAFC) HAS TO MEET THESE OTHER THINGS. THIN THAT IS A SIMPLER PROCESS AND IT RESULTS IN THE SAME END RESULT HERE WITH WHATEVER THE AREA SHALL BE NO LARGER THAN ONLY ACCESSIBLE THROUGH FENCING AND LANDSCAPING. IF YOU WANT TO STICK THOSE THINGS ON THESIDEWALK CAFC) REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RESTAURANT , FINE. BUT WHY WOULD BE ADDING THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN THIS WE JUST INDICATED MANY MONTHS OF A PROCESS.

JUST LET THEM GET THEIR PERMIT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE WOULD NEED TO IN ESSENCE GIVE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION OR RECONSIDER POTENTIALLY, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO GET THESE THINGS THROUGH THE SIDEWALK CAFC) SIDEWALK THAT IS GOING TO MAKE IT LESS LIKELY THAT A BIG BEAR OR WHATEVER THE PLACES ARE WILL WANT TO COME AND DO BUSINESS IN THE CIT OF PARKLAND.

THAT IS OBVIOUSLY NOT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE.

BUT WE CAN ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULT WITH LESS RIGMAROLE.

>> WE COULD EASILY WRITE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT IN THE FUTURE WHICH IS TO EXPAND THE SIDEWALK CAFC) WE FOLLOW THIS PROCESS. JUST CLARIFY THAT.

IS ONE ISSUE THAT IS A CONCERN TO ME.AND SO I HOPE THE BOARD WOULD TALK ABOUT THIS. WE TALK ABOUT RESTAURANTS.

THIS WOULD APPLY TO ALL RESTAURNTS.

NOT JUST ONES BREWING BEER ON SITE.

THAT IS WITH THE OUTDOOR SEATING.

YOU ARE TALKING UNTIL MAYBE 11:00 AT NIGHT.

OLDER PEOPLE LIKE ME DON'T NECESSARILY STAY UP TO 11.

I WANT TO GO TO PNC MEETING BUT BEYOND THAT I DON'T.

>> I WAS ON IT MIGHT GAME. WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.

THERE MAY BE CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THE LOCATION OF THE OUTDOOR SEATING IN THAT YOU DON'T WANT IT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS. IT IS ONE THING TO HAVE CARMELLA COPY.EOPLE SIPPING COFFEE IN JULY OUTSIDE.

WHY? AT 11:00 IN THE MORNING.

BUT A DIFFERENT THING IF YOU PEOPLE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE ENJOYING BEER OR A BOTTLE OF WINE, LAUGHING AND HAVING A GOLDEN TIME APPROXIMATE TO RESIDENTIAL, THE SOUND.

THAT'S A CONCERN OVERALL FOR RESTAURANTS ACROSS THE CITY AND THE LOCATION OF OUTDOOR SEATIN .

>> TO THAT POINT TO ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULTS WITH LESS EXPENSE AND LESS PROCESSED, MAY BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED IS IN LIEU OF NUMBER TO BE IN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION ELEMENT THAT WE JUST ADVISE STAFF ABOUT WHAT KINDS OF RESTRICTIONS ON OUTDOOR SITTINGS DO WE WANT AS PART OF A SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT FOR FUL SERVICE RESTAURANTS WITH A

BREWING HOUSE. >> SAY THAT AGAIN.

>> THAT COULD BE ALL RESTAURANTS QUICK MOTION TO THE

TABLE. >> YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER IT FOR ALL RESTAURANTS. WITH REGARD TO LOCATION AND PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS A CONCERN I HAVE.

THIS PARTICULAR SITE WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING IS WHERE THE ANIMAL HOSPITAL WANTED TO GO IN. AND THAT GOT BLOWN OUT OF THE WATER BIG TIME.HE RESIDENCE BEHIND IT DIDN'T WANT TO YOUR

DOGS BARK. >> THAT'S THE POINT I BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING. I WROTE SOMETHING DOWN BEFORE THE MEETING.ND I HAVE SAID IT SO MANY TIMES IN GENERAL.

[02:50:01]

HAVE NOT YOUR STAPLES AND DUCT TAPE BUT YOUR BELT AND SUSPENDERS. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE ARE HERE TO KEEP PARKLAND PARKLAND. PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS FROM THINGS WE KNOW ARE CHANGING AND WE WANT TO ADAPT, YES.UT WE WON IT REGULATED NOT OVERREGULATED.

BUT CONTROL WAY, IN A CONTROLLED MANNER.

SO PEOPLE DON'T LINE UP AT COMMISSION MEETINGS AND TMC MEETINGS AT OUR DOOR COMPLAINING WANTED TO APPROVE, WHAT DID YOU DO. THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE.> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. AND TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S MEMORY, WHEN THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WANTS IT CAME TO THE COMMISSION DURING THE THREE MINUTE COMMENT, WE HAD EVERYONE LINED UP TO SPEAK ABOUT AND SAID THEY WOULD LIKE ALL VOTING ON THIS GUY. THIS IS HOW WE GOT TO WHERE

THEY ARE. >> SOMETHING THAT CONCERNS ME ON THE OUTSIDE AREA IS OUTSIDE SPEAKERS.

YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT OUT THERE.

BUT THE SPEAKERS, I KINDA SEE THAT BEING A PROBLEM.

AND THEN WANTING TO HAVE MUSIC OUTSIDE.>> TO THE STAFF, WHAT YOU DO ON A DAILY BASIS IN THE MUNICIPALITIES YOU SERVE, ARE YOU SEEING ANY SORT OF FOOD OR SPIRIT SERVING ESTABLISHMENT THAT DOESN'T WANT OUTDOOR SEATING? ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THE PANDEMIC? IN PEOPLES DESIRE TO BE OUTSIDE? ECONOMIC CLIMATE, ANYTHING THEY CAN DO TO GET BUSINESS IS WHAT

THEY WANT. >> AND THESE ESTABLISHMENTS DON'T TYPICALLY PAY RENT BUT I WOULDN'T THINK SMALL BACK IS PAYING FOR THEIR, IN FACT I KNOW THEY ARE NOT.

IT'S JUST NOT WRITTEN INTO THEIR LEASES THAT WAY.

SO I THINK THE OUTDOOR SEATING COMPRISED , COMPRISED OF THE NOSE NOISE FACTOR AND PROXIMITY IS WHAT THE BIGGEST ISSUE COULD BE HERE THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO HONE IN ON.

AND I AM ALL FOR IT. IN THE CERTAIN AREAS WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT, IT'S CLOSE. IS A SAID BEFORE, I SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT AND SAID YOU ARE PRETTY CLOSE.

AND IT IS A CONCERN FOR ME. >> THE QUESTION WITH COMMON I WAS MAKING WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO ACHIEVE THAT AS PART OF VERSUS ADJUSTMENT TO THE SIDEWALK CAFC).

AND ARE WE SETTING PEOPLE UP FOR SPENDING EXTRA THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN EXTRA MONTHS IF THEY DECIDE OKAY, LET'S SAY THEY DID COME IN FOR OUTDOOR SEATING. AND IT WAS FOR X DOLLARS.

WHEN THERE IS ALREADY A MECHANISM TO ADDRESS THAT, WE CAN FILL IN THE BLANKS WITH WHAT WE WANT WITH THE COMMISSION AND ALL THE SITES THEY WANT TO FILL IN.

MY CONCERN NOW IS THE VEHICLE AND WHETHER IT IS HARMFUL TO A BUSINESS, WHATEVER THAT IS. WHETHER IT IS WHEN THEY COME IN INITIALLY OR IF THEY WANT TO ADJUST BASED ON SUCCESS.

AND SO AGAIN, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE WE MAKE WHATEVER THE CRITERIA ARE GOING TO BE THAT WE WANT FOR A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH DURING TO BE PART OF THE SIDEWALKPERMIT .

>> OKAY. >> RATHER THAN A PURELY ÃTHEY CAN GET THE NIGHT THERE SIDEWALK PERMIT IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE PARKING ISSUE, IF THEY ARE DOING MORE THAN 25 PERCENT.

WHICH NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT HERE.

>> IN PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS WHERE I PRESENTED FOR MY CLIENTS ON PLANNING AND ZONING BOARDS FOR BUILDINGS, I HAVE HAD TO OUTLINE POSSIBLE OUTDOOR SEATING.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A TENANT GOING IN, BUT WE ARE ANGLING FOR A RESTAURANT AND WE KNEW THERE WOULD BE A COMPONENT OF OUTDOOR SEATING BUT I GOT MY SITE PLAN APPROVAL BY SAYING FUTURE OUTDOOR SEATING. THIS AREA.

X NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET. IN THE CITY, THE MUNICIPALITY SAID IT MUST BE THIS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A FENCE AROUND IT, THE FENCE HAD TO BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION ETC.

IS IT UNREALISTIC FOR THE BOARD TO ASK THE APPLICANT FROM THE RESTAURANT COMING IN TO PUT OUTDOOR SEATING CURRENTLY THEY ARE REQUESTING AND POSSIBLE EXPANSION ON THEIR SITE PLAN.

[02:55:03]

>> I COULDN'T AGREE MORE. WHEN THEY ARE COMING IN, THEY WILL SEE WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, WE WILL EVALUATE THEIR SPACE THEY ARE CHOOSING TO LOCATE BEFORE THEY NEGOTIATE A LEASE. CAN I FIT WHAT I WANT THERE.

>> HOW MANY TENANTS COME ÃHOW MANY TENANTS DON'T COME TO GET A PERMIT BEFORE THEY SIGN A LEASE.

>> A MILLION TIMES. >> THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.

THAT IS ON THEM. >> BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHATEVER WAY WE GET THERE, THE REGULATIONS NEED TO BE.

>> ANTHONY LIKES STRING LIGHTS WITH NO MOVING ALL OF THE SEATS SPOKE ABOUT THE CUSTOMERS ASK SOMEONE COMING AND THEY WAT TO

DO IT. >> RIGHT.

AND I THINK THAT CAN OFFSET ANY FUTURE BACK-AND-FORTH.

BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO SAY HE WOULD WANT TO EXERCISE THIS OPTION WILL COMPLAIN IF THEY ARE ABLE TO COME IN WITH THIS IS WHERE WE THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO DO IT AND HOW DO WE DO IT.

UNDER OUR SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMI, I'M GROSSLY IGNORANT.

THE FENCING OR LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR A SIDEWALK CAFC)? ANYBODY KNOW?

>> WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT IF THEY WERE TO COME IN AND DO A PROPOSED SEATING, THAT WOULD BE PART OF A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING AND WE WOULD HAVE ENGINEER LOOK AT IT.

WE NEED LANDSCAPING. ! THE QUESTION IS IS IT REQUIRED AND THE ANSWER IS NO.

>> THAT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW SO WE INCORPORATE THAT.

>> SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT WITH THE THINGS ARE.

MY FEELINGS I WANT TO AVOID THE EXTRA THINGS AND ONLY HAVE IN HERE THAT THEY CAN COME IN FOR TO GET THE OKAY ON THAT.

AND THEN THE ANSWER IS OKAY, YOU CAN HAVE YOUR OUTDOOR

SEATING IF YOU HAVE X, Y AND Z. >> THE STAFF AGREED WITH A STREAMLINED PROCESS? DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

>> IS A POLICY DECISION SO I'M GOING TO BOUNCE BACK ONE.

>> SO THAT IS A DODGE. >> THAT'S EIGHT DODGE.

>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WHAT NATHANIEL IS SAYING, BUT YOU ALL ARE THE PEOPLE ON THE GROUND FLOOR WITH ALL OF THIS WORK HERE IS THE ISSUE. WE CREATED THE ADMINISTRATIVE, WHAT WE CALL THE CALL OF. SOMETHING THAT IS SO MINOR IT STARTED TO GET IT ABUSED A LITTLE BIT.

COMMISSION DOESN'T REALLY LIKE IT.

WE AREN'T DOING ANYMORE CALL UP SPIRIT I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR COMMISSION WOULD BE REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE STREAMLINED PROCESS IN THIS JUNCTURE.

I MEAN, WE COULD ASK. IT DEPENDS.

YOU COULD DO AVARIATION OF STREAMLINED PROCESS .

IT IS A MONTH TO

[03:00:17]

THINK ABOUT IT. WE CAN REVIEW IT ALL AT ONCE. IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT KNOW THAT GOING IN AND TELL US. I'M NOT GONNA HAVE ANY OUTSIDE SEATING.

IT MIGHT OPEN UP FLEXIBILITY OF WHERE THEY CAN GO IN THE CITY. THEY GO IN BLINDLY AND THEN

THEY CHOOSE THAT THEY WANTED TO IT LATER. >> WHAT IS IT TAKE IF YOU CAN BRIEFLY ANSWER THIS QUESTION. IF ONE OF OUR ONE OF OUR SEVERAL SHOPPING CENTERS ON THE SIDE OF THE SHOPPING CENTER BLOCK WALL, EXTERIOR WALL TO ADD A GLASS ENTRY DOOR, A SWING DOOR . WHEN YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH B& LOOKS I WOULD DO THA AS IT ALL OFF.

THAT'S MINOR. UNLESS SOMEHOW IT IMPEDES TRAFFIC OR CIRCULATION.

>> EPIDAURUS ADDED I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A STRIP OF LANDSCAPING OR PARKING.

>> THERE'S NO PARKING THIS ARTICLE APPEAR. >> SO WHEN WE HAVE SOMETHING IN THE LINE ITEM THAT SAYS THE AREA SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE ONLY THROUGH THE INSIDE OF THE GROUP

OF THE FACILITY TO AN EXTERIOR OUTDOOR SEATING AREA. >> I THINK IT'S WRITTEN THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO WALK OUTSIDE TO A COURTYARD AREA THAT WOULD ALREADY BE ESTABLISHED.

>> IF YOU'RE ALREADY THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR OF THE QUOTE UNQUOTE RESTAURANT/ GROUP HUB ANSWERS ONLY BACK DOOR PASS THE CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA OR KITCHEN.

PICK ANY FOOD SERVICE FACILITY AND HOW DO YOU GET TO THE OUTDOOR SEATING THROUGH AN

INTERIOR? >> USUALLY YOU WALK IN HERE SEATED BY THE HOSTESS.

THEY'VE GOT SOME KIND OF BARRIER AROUND IT. TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T BOUNCE

OUTSIDE WITHOUT PAYING THE CHECK. >> BUT YOU HAVE TO GET THERE

THROUGH THE INSIDE. >> THAT'S A BIG BEAR IS SET UP. YOU SEE THE HOSTESS AND THEY WALK YOU AROUND. THE PARADE OF TABLES THAT ARE SEATED OUTSIDE.

>> IF THERE WASN'T A DOOR HOW DO YOU GET THERE? >> IS AS OPPOSED TO ALLOWING INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE OUTSIDE SEATING. SOMETIMES IF YOU GO TO POPULAR BRUNCH PLACE THE HUB TO HOSTESS ONE FOR INSIDE AND ONE FOR OUTSIDE.

YOU'D HAVE TO GO IN FIRST THEN GO OUTSIDE. >> YOU COULD MAKE IT CONTROLLED

ACCESS. THE HAVE TO SHOW YOU THAT. >> MURRAY, I APOLOGIZE YOU'RE NOT THINKING RIGHT NOW OVER TO MY FAVORITE RESTAURANTS IN THE AREA, RUNNY'S.

THE ONLY WAY TO GET IN IS THROUGH THEIR OUTDOOR SEATING. SO YOU KNOW THAT SEEMS TO BE

PROBLEMATIC GIVEN THAT SPIRIT. >> BUT CONTROLLED. >> I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH IT

BEING A GATE. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS SAYS. >> I THINK THERE'S A LOT I'M SENSING THAT WE WANT TALK ABOUT A LOT OF OUTDOOR ISSUES. THERE'S LOTS WE TALKED ABOUT.

>> I WANT TO POINT SOMETHING OUT. ON THE 16TH SIDEWALK SUBSECTION R 15 Ã550 FOR THE RECORD. ALL OUTDOOR SEATING AREA SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM ADJACENT VEHICULAR USE AREAS THROUGH DESIGN MEASURES ACCEPTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER SITE SPECIFIC CONTACT SHALL BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING THE REQUIRED ACCEPTED PROTECTION MEASURES.

YOU KNOW I THINK THE PROCESS ARE TO CONTEMPLATES AND GIVES A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF THE SITE SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT THOSE BE ONE LOOK AT. AND YOU KNOW I THINK ALSO THE DOOR MEASURE THAT WAS IN THERE WAS REALLY COME IN THE CONTEXT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME BARRIER THERE AND NOT JUST GONNA BE ABLE TO WALK RIGHT FROM THE STREET RIGHT INTO THE OUTDOOR AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU THANK YOU NEED MORE THAN NOT BUT I WANT

TO POINT OUT THAT'S EXISTING. >> THAT BEGS THE QUESTION THAT I'VE BEEN ASKING AND THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE. WERE SAYING THAT WHATEVER THESE THINGS ARE IS IN ADDITION TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE CYBERCAFE. IT SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT PLUS. BUT ANTHONY JUST READ, CITATION FROM WHICH I DON'T KNOW CITATION FOR WHICH I DON'T CARE.

WOULD CONFLICT WITH US. I HAVE TO HELP AGAIN, ASSUMING WE HAVE THESE THINGS HERE.

[03:05:03]

AN CYBERCAFE PIECE WHILE DOESN'T NECESSARILY JIVE WITHOUT.

JUST THINK WHAT WE SHOULD BE FEELING IN TERMS OF THE OUTDOOR AND SEATING ENTERTAINMENT BE I WAS APSLEY GREAT. I THINK THE 50/102 HI. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE 5050. 50 PERCENT OF THE SPACE AND 50 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE.

I'D RATHER NOT HAVE DOUBLE THE DENSITY.BUT, THE AREA BEING ACCESSIBLE ONLY TO THE INSIDE MAKES NO SENSE BECAUSE WE HAVE SOMETHING IN THE INSIDE. WHERE HE HAD THE DISCUSSION OF WHY THIS IN THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PROVISION RIGHT NOW WHICH REQUIRES, I'VE GOT ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS YOU JUST MENTIONED. IF WE SAY WE WANT TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF SPACE WE GOTTA GET THAT APPROVED UPFRONT.

WHEN YOU ACTUALLY DO IT YOU GOTTA GO GET YOUR CYBERCAFE PERMIT WHICH DOESN'T REQUIRE OF THE SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE ALONG THOSE LINES.

JUST REQUIRING GETTING THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT. MY FEELING B&.

>> VISCO A3 QUAKE. >> ONLY ADD ONE THING IS A CONCERN ABOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE PROCESS I THINK WHEN APPLICANTS COME IN FOR THIS WE WILL TELL HIM IT'S NOT MANDATORY BUT STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO SHOW EVERYTHING THEY MIGHT BE DOING IN THE FUTURE. IF THEY DON'T DO LIFE WILL BE MISERABLE.

>> RIGHT. THE QUESTION IS ONE OF THE KEY THINGS YOU WANT TO HAVE FOR THE OUTDOOR SEATING REQUIREMENT UPFRONT. WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE

GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT. >> VISCO A3 WE CAN HAVE STAFF HAVE SOME DIRECTION AND THEN MICHELLE AND CAITLIN WILL HAVE SOME GUIDANCE AS TO HOW TO

INCORPORATE MORE SWIFT PROCESS. >> MURRAY A THROUGH F JUST OTHER THINGS WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT. MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT IN PARTICULAR.

SO LET'S GO A3 AND START WITHOUT. >> PERFECT.

TO A, THE AREA MUST BE INTEGRAL WITH THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. >> THE QUESTION IS IS THAT PART OF SIDEWALK CAFC) NOW? SO WHICH IS LIMITING OURSELVES TO THE THINGS THAT ARE

IMPORTAN THAT ARE SPECIAL FOR THIS. >> IS THAT ADDRESSING THE

CYBERCAFE? >> THE FACT THAT IT'S INTEGRAL TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED BUT IF WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY INCIDENCES WERE OUTDOOR SEATING IS LARGELY SEPARATED FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT.

>> IF WE NEED TO WE COULD DO INFORMAL VOTE WHETHER OR NOT WE WILL MAKE IT PART OF THE

REQUIREMENT. >> I THINK INTEGRAL MAKES IT PART OF THE BUILDING WOULD OUT FRONT. I THINK WE WANT TO APPEAR AS IF IT'S PART OF THE UILDING.

>> ASSOCIATED?>> YEAH, QUICK SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE PART OF NOT.

>> THE NUMBER TO GET THAT SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT IF THEY D SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THE QUESTION IS IS AREA MUST BE ASSOCIATED WITH A PRINCIPAL BUILDING, THE SPECIAL CONDITION YOU WOULD ONLY WANT TO APPLY TO A COLD SERVICE RESTAURANT, IF THE ANSWER IS NO I SUGGEST YOU

DON'T PUT IT HERE AND THEN AT SOME POINT WE GO BACK. >> I SEE ATTACHED OUTING.

PWE GO BACK AND FIX SOME THINGS IN THE CAFC) SIDEWALK CAFC). >> I WOULD BE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT PUTTING ANOTHER THEME AND APPEARANCE OUTSIDE LIKE A BEER GARDEN.

>> WE ARE TO HAVE THE CAB REPORT APPROVE ANNA APPROVAL. >> WHO IS A CAB?

>> US AND THE COMMISSION. >> DAVID'S DOING ALL STAR WARS THEME OUTDOOR SEATING.

[LAUGHTER]. I WOULD SUGGEST WE GET RID OF A.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT? >> I SAY KEEP A.

>> HOW MANY WANT TO KEEP IT? X KEEP IT. >> OKAY 6 ÃONE.

>> B. >> THIS IS REVISED TO BE 50-50 RIGHT.

>> CORRECT. >> NO COMMENTS. FOLKS 50 PERCENT THE BREWPUB OF WHATEVER THE REST. THE CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA. THE 2 NUMBERS AND BE WILL BE 50

PERCENT AS IT'S RED. AS WITH WRITTEN. >> IT WILL BE WRITTEN TO GROSS

FLOOR TO CUSTOMER SEATING OF THE RESTAURANT. >> YOU HAVE THAT ADJUSTMENT?

[03:10:02]

>> YES. >> SEE, THE AREA SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE ONLY THROUGH THE INSIDE OF THE BREWPUB FACILITY. WASN'T LOOKING WHEN I MADE THE COMMENT EARLIER.

TO INCREASE THAT OR CHANGE IT. I WAS LOOKING MORE FOR IT FROM A DEFINITION STANDPOINT.

>> I THINK WE CHANGE IT TO CONTROL ACCESS. THEY HAVE TO CONTROL.

YOU CAN'T WALK UP FROM THE PARKING LOT. >> I THINK WE ELIMINATED BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY A PROVISION THAT TELLS WITHOUT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT ANTHONY WAS READY BEFORE. WE ARE TO HAVE THAT IN THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT.

IF WE NEED TO TWEAK IT YOU KNOW, IS A BREWERY ASPECT OF IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW YOU HAVE OUTDOOR SEATING ACCESS AS COMPARED TO ANY OTHER RESTAURANT WITH A FULL ON LIQUOR LICENSE? MY OPINION IS NO. IF WE NEED TO TWEAK THE

SIDEWALK CAFC) WE TWEAK THE CYBERCAFE. >> SO WE ELIMINATED.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT?

>> IT'S ALREADY PROHIBITED.

WE GO BACK WERE TWEAKING AS BEING POTENTIALLY SUGGESTED BY MICHELLE WE GO BACK AND TWEAK THE SIDEWALK CAFC) PERMIT WHICH COULD BE A CYBERCAFE WITH A FULL RESTAURANT AND FULL LIQUOR LICENSE. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE IN FAVOR BY SAYING THE OUTDOOR ACCESS, DIRECT ACCESS HAS TO BE CAN THROUGH CONTROLLED ACCESS POINT.

WE DON'T NEED TO EDIT THIS HERE. >> NATHANIEL ANTS TO ADD MORE

RELATIONS TO OTHER RESTAURANTS. >> AGAIN, AS WE SAID HERE ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS THIS EVENING. WE WANT AN APPLICANT TO KNOW WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE CODES ARE. WE AGAIN TO HAVE ONE APPLICATION COMES BEFORE US THE ABILITY TO SAY HEY, EVERYTHING YOU SHOW HERE HAS PATRONS COMING IN THROUGH THE PARKING LOT. THERE'S NO FENCE, THERE'S NO GATE, THERE'S NO CONTROLLED ACCESS. WE WOULD ADDRESS THAT UNTIL RECENT MAKING THE STATEMENT I'M MAKING, UNTIL SUCH TIME THE OTHER CODE GETS ADDRESS THAT WOULD BE AMENDED.

>>.

ELIMINATING SEE? NOW WANT TO D. THE AREA SHALL BE ENTIRELY ENCLOSED BY FENCING OR LANDSCAPING IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL LAWS RULES AND REGULATIONS. THAT AGAIN I THINK CAN BE ELIMINATED THAT'S WHAT ANTHONY JUST READ THAT'S RIGHT IN OUR SIDEWALK CAFC) ORDINANCE OR CODE.

SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE ADDRESSED. >> WE CAN DO WHEN WE DO THE OTHER ORDINANCES. [LAUGHTER].> LAST ARTEMIS E. THE LAST ITEM ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM NUMBER 2. THE AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ISSUANCE OF A CYBERCAFE PERMIT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY PERMIT CONDITIONS. SO THAT WILL HAVE TO BE

REWARDED. >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS TO BE REWARDED.

BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING AFTER THE CAFC) SIDEWALK PART PERMIT. >> OF SOME IS UNNECESSARY BUT

IT'S JUST ADDITIONAL PROBATION. >> ANTHONY AND DANIEL YOU CAN NEVER BE TO REDUNDANT.

>> APPARENTLY. I MET ANTHONY OUR BOARD MEMBER NOT ANTHONY OUR CITY ATTORNEY.

>> A CHEAP SHOT FOR THE CHAIRMAN FOR THE RECORD PLEASE. >> MOTION TO RECALL THE CHAIR.

. [LAUGHTER]. SO YOU HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED

ON THAT EM NUMBER 2 WITH A THROUGH E ON HER COMMENTS? >> I ASSUME ON THE PREVIOUS

VOTES WERE KEEPING E? >> YES. >> IS ANYTHING WE MISSED THAT THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS? I WILL LET YOU CONTINUE WITH THIS NEXT SECTION, 5. THE REST

OF IT IS JUST LEGAL USE. >> HERE'S THE QUESTION I HAVE. >> ANNUAL REPORTING MONITORING.

[03:15:08]

>> YOU WANT TO DOCUMENTED IN THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. ON FEDERAL ACCESS.

>> CAN YOU BE KIND ENOUGH TO REPEAT THAT SO WE CAN GET IT ALL.

THAT WAS MONITORING MIDYEAR. >> EVERY YEAR WHEN THE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT COMES IN THEY SHOULD GIVE US A COPY OF THEIR STATE LICENSES FOR ALCOHOL, WHATEVER THE PRODUCTION REPORTS ARE WHICH WILL SHOW WHAT THEY DID LAST YEAR. IT WILL SHOW THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE. IT'S NOT UP TO US TO POLICE IT. IF THE STATE WANTS TO GO AFTER IT THEN WE WILL SEE IT. IF WE GET AN IDEA THAT THEY CHUCK THE RESTAURANT DOWN WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO REQUEST FROM THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR. I MIDYEAR REQUEST THEY SHOULD GIVE IT TO US. WE SHOULD HAVE THE ZONING OFFICIAL DESIGNATED CODE

OFFICIAL CAN GO IN AND INSPECT WITHOUT BUSINESS HOURS. >> INSPECT WHAT?>> DON'T WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO INSPECT FOR OMPLIANCE? THEY WOULD NEED PROBABLE CAUSE

AND A WARRANT I WOULD ASSUME. >> THE HOTEL AND RESTAURANTS HAS WHATEVER THEIR LICENSES WRITTEN. THEY CAN WALK IN AND OPEN FOOD CONTAINERS AND WALK-IN

REFRIGERATORS. >> FACTS LICENSE FORM. >> I WOULD RECOMMEND AS A REQUIREMENT OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, JUST A GENERAL STATEMENT THEY HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING TO MONITOR ALL COMPLIANCE AT ALL TIMES. THAT MEANS SOMEONE'S COUNTY

PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUTSIDE. >> HOW DO WE ENFORCE THAT? IT'S AN INTERESTING RECOMMENDATION BUT, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD ENFORCE THEIR

STAFFING. >> PART APARTMENT DOES THAT. >> OF CODE ENFORCEMENT WENT OVER THERE BECAUSE THEY SAW HUGE CROWD OUTSIDE AND SAID LET ME TALK TO THE MANAGER.

AND THE MANAGER WOULD SAY, PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE? AND THE MANAGER SAYS I DON'T

KNOW. >> WOULD THAT BE PROOF IT'S OFTEN NOT THEM TELLING US HOW

MANY STAFF MEMBERS THEY HAVE. >> MICHELLE IS COMING UP WITH REALLY GOOD POLICY ARGUMENTS.

>> I WANTED MORE DIRECTION. >> I'M NOT BEING SARCASTIC ON THAT FROM MY STANDPOINT IF THE FIRE MARSHAL GOES OUT THEY SAY WAIT A SECOND THERE ARE 600 PEOPLE INSIDE THIS RESTAURANT OR WE SEE A LARGE CROWD THAT'S OUTSIDE. I COULD CARE LESS WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAD ONE STAFF PERSON OR 50 STAFF PEOPLE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARILY PREVALENT TO THE ANALYSIS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THEY HAVE 2 MANY PEOPLE. SIMILARLY IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THAT AS IT WAS FRAMED IF THE FIRE MARSHAL WENT OUT THERE WERE 6 PEOPLE THERE AND WENT TO THE MANAGER AND SAID HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE IN THE MANAGER SAYS I DON'T KNOW. IN THE OTHERWISE FULLY COMPLIANT I DON'T REALLY CARE EITHER. RATIO IS THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESTRICTION NOT WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE STAFFING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE

COMPLIANT WITH RESTRICTIONS. >> THE POINT WAS OVERALL THEY HAVE MEASURES TO MAKE SURE

THERE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL MEASURES. >> ISN'T THAT JUST AN

ASSUMPTION OF THE LAW AS IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW? >> THAT'S A WHOLE INTENT.

MAKE SURE ALL THAT IS IN PLACE. >> BY THE ISSUANCE AND THE GRANTING OF THE SPECIAL

EXCEPTION. >> GOT THE RESPONSIBILITY THEY TAKE ON.

>> ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH AN EFFECTIVE AVAILABILITY FOR US TO MONITOR AND NOT GO THROUGH HOOPS OURSELVES.NOT SIMILAR TO WHEN COVID WAS IN FULL FORCE.

THE BIG BOX STORES HOW TO MONITOR HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY HAD INSIDE.

NOTHING WRONG WITH THE HOSTESS OR SOMEONE AT A RESTAURANT KNOWING HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SEATED PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY AND THEY WILL MOVE ALL THE SEATS OUTSIDE AND IT BECOMES AN

OPEN BAR AREA. >> TO USE YOUR EXAMPLE, I WAS INVOLVED IN SOME OF THAT ENFORCEMENT DURING THE EARLY STAGES OF COVID IN TERMS OF POLICIES IN THE COUNTY.

THE ISSUE THERE WAS NOT WHETHER OR NOT BEST BUY HAD A PERSON THAT COULD TELL ME HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE INSIDE WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT WENT OUT TO SEE BECAUSE THE REPORT OF 2 MANY

[03:20:07]

THE ISSUE WAS ARE YOU COMPLIANT. SO, BY THE FACT THAT THEY ARE GETTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR THE FACT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THIS AND GOTTEN THEIR APPROVALS THEY ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY. IT'S NOT AN ISSUE OF DID THEY HAVE AN EXTRA PERSON TO BE ABLE TO TELL ME THEY HAD 37 PEOPLE WHEN THERE IS 40.

THERE ISSUE IS WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT GOES OUT BECAUSE THEY GOT A REPORT THAT THERE

ARE 45 PEOPLE. >> MY ADEQUATE STAFFING COMES INTO PLAY WHEN WE HAD THE NEW BRUCE ROOM UP IN MIAMI LAKES. THEY WERE MASSIVELY PARKED AND IT WAS THE ROWDY'S PLACE IN THE WORLD. THERE WERE FIGHTS INSIDE. THE REFINED SPILLING OVER OUTSIDE. WE HAD TO TELL THEM WHAT YOU HAVE OFF-DUTY POLICE.

YOU HAVE TO. IT'S YOUR RESPONSE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT BECOMING A NUISANCE WHICH IS PART OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION PROCESS. IT DOESN'T BECOME A NUISANCE AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE REQUIREMENT THEN IT'S BECOMING A NUISANCE.

YOU HAVE TO TELL THEM TO TAKE MEASURES. YOU HAVE TO SPOONFEED IT ALMOST. AFTER TAKE MEASURES TO HAVE ADEQUATE STAFF.

>> IN THE CITY RETAIL DJS GUESS IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE INSURANCE WHEN NECESSARY.

>> IN THE PAST THIS BOARD HAS DIRECTED PEOPLE AND DIRECT APPLICANTS BASED ON THE DIRECTION OF THE POLICE CHIEF THAT IN HIS OPINION IF A POLICE DETAIL IS NEEDED THAT THE STORE

WILL GO AHEAD AND PAY FOR THEIR DETAIL COMPS. >> WE'VE DONE THAT MANY TIMES.

>> THE CHARTER SCHOOL. >> ALSO STATE WERE NOT APPROVED IN CONCERT VENUE.

BUT YES. IN OUR CODE I BELIEVE CAUGHT NOT I BELIEVE.

>> THIS WAS A BRUCE ROOM. IT WAS BRUTAL. IT WAS S BRUTAL.

ANY INPUT FROM STAFF ON THAT EM? >> ARE WE GOOD WITH THE FIRST

COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT WE WERE ENTERING? >> LET'S LET'S CALL INFORMAL VOTE, YOU'VE GOT 2 ITEMS. LET'S TAKE THE SECOND ONE WHICH WE JUST GOT DONE AND HAVE DISCUSSED. WHICH IS THE ADDITIONAL, THE STAFFING.

YES, INTERNAL STAFFING/ENFORCEMENT OF THEIR ALREADY APPROVED SPECIAL

EXCEPTION. >> JUST LEAVE IT AT THE STAFFING LEVELS.

I'M SURE EVERYBODY IN THE BOARD THANKS THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO ADHERE TO THE

REQUIREMENTS. >> WHAT ARE WE TAKING A VOTE ON?

>> STAFFING SHOULD BE ADDED, IF STAFFING PER DAVID'S RECOMMENDATION AND SUGGESTION SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT IS GOING TO BE PRESENTED TO US.

WORKING TO GET THERE IN A MINUTE. SO STAFFING, IF YOU AGREED TO ADD STAFFING PER DAVID'S REQUEST OR SUGGESTION. SAY YES.

>> I BELIEVE THE REQUEST WAS THAT THEY HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR ADEQUATE STAFFING TO ENSURE

COMPLIANCE WITH THE PAST REQUIREMENTS AND WHATNOT. >> OKAY WERE GONNA VOTE ON WHO

WANTS TO ADEQUATE STAFFING. >> CORRECT. >> JUST TO CLARIFY LIGAMENT

TELL YOU WHAT THEIR STUFF IS GOOD TO BE? >> THE GOVERNMENT KNOW IT ON A DAILY, MINUTE BY MINUTE NOT MINUTE BY MINUTE. THE GONNA KNOW IT AT ANY TIME THERE ASKED IF THERE IN COMPLIANCE. ACCURATE STATEMENT?

>> BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT BECAUSE NO ENFORCEMENT IS BEEN AN ISSUE.

THE CODE OFFICER GOES OUT THERE WHO DETERMINES WHAT THAT NUMBER IS IN TERMS OF ADEQUATE STAFFING? I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT FOR THE BOARD.

IN TERMS OF PROCEEDING WITHIN ENFORCEMENT OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

THAT IS A VERY. >> IN OTHER WORDS IF WE IF WE PULL THEIR BUSINESS TAX

LICENSE. GREAT. >> YOU COULD SIGN THEM FOR NOT HAVING ADEQUATE STAFFING RIGHT? AND IT SAVES A GOES BEFORE THE MAGISTRATE WHO DETERMINES

WITHOUT STAFFING LEVEL IS ABOUT JUST A POTENTIAL SUGGESTION? >> DAVID SHOULD COMMENT ON THAT SO WE CAN KNOW HOW TO NARROW YOUR STONE WITH YOUR INPUT IS. NEXT I THINK IT'S MORE OF A PERFORMANCE GUIDELINE. AS A GENERAL STATEMENT YOU SHOULD HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING TO MONITOR THIS. AND YOU, YOU DON'T WANT GET THINGS TO LEAN AND THEN HE GOT A COOK AND A WAITRESS IN A HUGE BAR.

[03:25:02]

THEN IT'S DEFINED. IF YOU WANT TO FIND THAT PER SQUARE FOOTAGE B&.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE, STAFFING COMPONENT. >> NO, NO, WE ARE GOING TO VOTE. THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE GONNA PUT ON.

AND ANTHONY WANTS US TO KNOW WHAT WERE VOTING ON BECAUSE WE CAN'T ARBITRARILY SAY STAFF ADEQUATE. THAT'S ALL.

>> I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU VOTED. IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT IN THEN PUT IT IN. IN RAISING THE ISSUE OF WALKING THROUGH THE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS TO MY HEAD AND BEING AT A MAGISTRATE AND MAKING THE ARGUMENT THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING. ONE, IF WERE THERE RECITING THEM FOR OTHER VIOLATIONS.

>> RECITING THEM FOR BEING OVERCAPACITY. >> RECITING THE FORGET

OVERCAPACITY OR SOMETHING. >> I WOULD IMAGINE THEY ARE GREAT WOULD BEAT LOOK, WE SHOWED UP. THERE'S A MASSIVE CROWD OUTSIDE.

NOBODY ON STAFF IS OUTSIDE. NOBODY ON STAFF, BUT THE BACK OF THE KITCHEN.

>> SO AN OXIDANT STORY OF THE OVERCAPACITY RIGHT GREAT. >> IF THERE OVERCAPACITY THERE TO GET SHUT DOWN OR THE GONNA GET CITED FOR BEING OVERCAPACITY WHETHER OR NOT

THEY HAD 10 STAFF OR NOT. >> UNLESS THEY WERE UNDER CAPACITY BUT NOT A COMPLIANCE THAT ARE HAPPENING OUTSIDE. HERE'S A QUESTION, WHO CARES IF THERE 6 PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE A CAPACITY OF 100. WHEN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT CONSULTANT SAYS JAVID ADEQUATE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, TELL ME HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HAVE. AND THEY SAY, OKAY, YEAH.

HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU HAVE? I DON'T KNOW. >> COULD HAVE HER INFORMAL VOTE AND IF IT PASSES THEM WILL GET INTO THE DEFINITION OF HOW TO ASSESS WHAT THE PROPER DEFINITION IS. SO, CALL FOR THE VOTE. YES IS WERE GOING TO INCORPORATE THE STAFFING REQUIREMENT. QUICKSIVER FLOATING ON TO CITE

THEM? >> WERE VOTING ARE NOT THE LANGUAGE OF HAVING REQUIREMENT OF OF HAVING TERM OF ADEQUATE STAFFING WITHIN APPROVAL TO MONITOR AS PER DAVID JUST SAID.

^ ¦ >> OKAY WERE VOTING TO SEE FOR ADEQUATE STAFFING.

>> IF IT PASSES, IF IT PASSES WORKING TO GET INTO THE DEFINITION OF IT PER OUR CITY

ATTORNEY. >>. [VOTING]

>> FILE TOREALLY HAD TO. >> THEY SUBMIT.

>> WE GOT IT. ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT? DAVID WOULD YOU REPEAT IT.

>> I CAN SUMMARIZE A REALLY QUICKLY. EVERY YEAR WHEN THEY RENEW THEIR BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT WRAPPED OF ALL THE REPORTS FROM THE STATE.

IF WE FEEL THERE'S A PROBLEM THEY WILL MAKE REPORTS OR INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US MIDYEAR AND III THING IS THAT WE CAN GO AND UNANNOUNCED FOR INSPECTION.

THOSE 3 THINGS.

HT. IT'S A REPORTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTATION O TO DOCUMENT

THAT THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE. >> OTHERWISE KNOWN AS REPORTING.

>> YEP. ASK ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT ADDING THAT TO THE STAFF TO INCORPORATE INTO THE DOCUMENT? REX JUST A CLARIFICATION QUESTION.

SO THIS REQUIREMENT, WHAT ABOUT LIKE A DC)JC VU. WHAT'S YOUR REQUIREMENT?

[03:30:04]

>> DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FOOD VERSUS ALCOHOL?

>> NOT CITY LEVEL. >> THIS IS ONLY IF IT WILL BE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, TO THE

BREWPUB IN A RESTAURANT.>> OTHERS FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT DON'T HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT.

OF THE CIVIC LEVEL THERE MIGHT BE STATE REQUIREMENTS BUT WE DON'T ENFORCE STATE

REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S THE STATE. >> I'M OKAY WITH IT.

YES. >> ANYBODY OPPOSED? >> WERE NOT REQUIRING THEM TO DO IT IN THEIR SERVING TWICE ABOUT ALCOHOL AND IT'S NOT FAIR.

>> IT'S AN INFORMAL VOTE.

PROVIDE TO THE STATE. >> ANTHONY SHOWED A LOT OF DETAILED INFORMATION ON THAT I

RECALL. >> AGAIN I'M NOT ALCOHOL BEVERAGE OWNER.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT REALLY DEPENDS, THE TYPICAL LAWYER ANSWER.

IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF LICENSE TO GO FOR. WHICH I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW WHAT LICENSE THE APPLICANTS MAY GO FOR. I THINK WE GOT SOME INDICATION THAT A POTENTIAL APPLICANT HOWEVER THAT MAY BE MAY BE GOING FOR A MANUFACTURING LICENSE WITH RESPECT TO BREWPUBS. THERE ARE 2 OPTIONS AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT ALLOWS THEM TO GROUP GROWLERS AND THAT TENDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBLE. CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT IS BEING REPORTED.

IT DOES LOOK LIKE THEY DO HAVE TO REPORT PRODUCTION BUT I DON'T KNOW THEY HAVE TO REPORT

SALES. >> IN THE TENT FOR DISTRIBUTION IS IT FAIR TO SAY OR POSSIBLE DISTRIBUTION. THAT COULD CHANGE THE DYNAMIC LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

I THINK WERE ALL IN AGREEMENT. IS IT FAIR TO SAY APPLICANT OR PROPRIETOR SHALL MAINTAIN ACCURATE RUN OF FRACTURING RECORDS FOR POSSIBLE INSPECTION.

SHOULD IT BE NEEDED. >> OF A BIGGER QUESTION FOR ANTHONY.

ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH ADDING LANGUAGE TO ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION

THAT MAY BE OR MAY BE NOT CONFIDENTIAL OR PROPRIETARY? >> THAT WAS CONVEY MY CONCERN.

>> ARE WE ALLOWED OR IS IT OVERREACHING? I'M FOR IT BUT HAVING A DEBATE ON THIS. IS IT SOMETHING YOU CAN'T EVEN FEEL COMFORTABLE AS A CITY ATTORNEY INCORPORATING THAT INTO OUR RULES AND RIGS AND ORDINANCES AND WHATNOT AS A

SPECIAL EXCEPTION. >> SALT LAKE'S TRADE SECRETS. >> THEY CAN CLEAN THE TRADE SECRET WHICH I THINK PROBABLY THAT CASE BUT THE CITY COULD REVIEW IT BUT IT WOULDN'T BE AVAILABLE AS A PUBLIC RECORD IF THEY, FOR PURPOSES OF DOCUMENTING COMPLIANCE.

BUT, THIS IS GENERALLY A LOT MORE THAN WE CAN'T, THEN WE SEE IN A LOT OF PLACES.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT WRONG. BUT YEAH, IF YOU CAN HAVE A REQUIREMENT.

>> HERE'S A THING BECAUSE WE TAKE IN AND SAID NO MATTER WHAT IT'S A RESTAURANT.

RESTAURANT DOESN'T HAVE TO PROVIDE ANYTHING. >> BUT THE LICENSE SAYS THEY'RE A RESTAURANT. WERE SAYING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

>> WE HAVE THESE GALLONS AND SIZING HOW MUCH PRODUCTION. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A WAY TO ENFORCE IT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE BOOKS.

>> I WOULD TELL YOU EVERY YEAR I MAXED OUT. IT'S A HEAVY GONE MAXED OUT.

HERE'S MY REPORTING. YOU COULD JUST MAKE IT UP. WHAT'S A CITY GONNA SAY?

>> THAT'S WHY I WANTED CODE ENFORCEMENT. WHAT YOU SAY AND IT'S UNENFORCEABLE YOU CAN MAKE UP ANYTHING IN THE CITY WILL BELIEVE IT THEN WHY THE HECK OF

IT? I'M TALKING TO JOEL RIGHT NOW. >> YOU HAVE TO HAVE A WAY TO

ENFORCE IT. >> STATED FORTRESS FOR DISTRIBUTION ONLY.

SPECIFIC ESTABLISHMENT IS DISTRIBUTES AN EXIT DATE AT WHAT TIME IT IS AFTER THEY START. THEN YEAH, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO MONITOR IT.

FOR DISTRIBUTION PURPOSES ONLY. IF THERE COULD BE BREWPUB WE HAVE NO INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE

AND THEY DON'T THEY ARE A RESTAURANT. >> I'M SURPRISED THIS BOARD WOULD HAVE ISSUES WITH ENFORCEMENT. WE HAVE TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT TO GO IN THERE AND HOLD THESE PEOPLES ACCOUNTABLE TO THESE RULES OR

PSENDING OUT. >> THAT'S WHAT GOVERNMENT DOES. >> OKAY GUYS, HOLD ON.

[03:35:03]

>> IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. >> THE CUTTING OF DAVID. >> IS A SUDDEN PESCHEL EXCEPTION WITH LIMITATION WITH A CONSULTANT PRODUCES FORMS ALCOHOL.

WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE REPORT TO US. YOU CAN CHANGE LANGUAGES SAY THE SAME INFORMATION IS THERE REPORTING TO THE STATE OR OTHER INFORMATION IS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CITY. I COULD CARE LESS IF IT'S ONLY ANTHONY THAT LOOKS AT IT.

WE JUST NEED TO SEE OBJECTIVE NUMBERS TO SEE THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE.

OR WHAT ARE WE DOING. ALLOWING THEM TO DO ANYTHING THEY WANT.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE INSPECTION. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE MONITORING. GOT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVOKE OR SUSPEND.

IF WE DON'T, WE SHOULD EVEN HAVE A ZONING CODE. >> ECHOES THE QUESTION FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND NATHANIEL. RB OVERREACHING THEIR LICENSE. THE CITY OF PARKLAND IS SAYING YOU'RE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION RESTAURANT. THE STATE OF FLORIDA SAYING YOU ARE RESTAURANT. NEXT IT'S OKAY FOR SONY TO BE PDIFFERENT THAN THE STATE.

>> I AGREE. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. >> YOU'RE OFF AGAIN.

>> THE 50 PERCENT REVENUE IS IN MANY CODES AROUND THE STATE FOR DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT'S NOT JUST A BREWPUB, THERE ARE OTHER THINGS. WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT AND TO REPORT ON IT AND IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO AFFIRMATIVELY SHOW IT.

AS LONG AS HER STAY IN COMPLIANCE. >> I HAVE A SUGGESTION.

ANTHONY. WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND SO WE CAN HAVE THE APPROPRIATE REPORTING. IS THERE SOME LANGUAGE THAT WE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH AND GET WHAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT IS GRANTED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND IS IN COMPLIANCE. WOULD IT BE BASED ON A TO BE DETERMINED, BASED ON THE

APPLICANT? >> I THANK YOU COULD MAKE IT SUBJECT TO THE REASONABLE DOCUMENTATION REQUESTED BY THE CITY TO DOCUMENT THEY'VE ACTUALLY COMPLIED WITH THOSE PROVISIONS. I KNOW THAT'S VERY GENERAL. THE REALITY IS I STATED THIS 50 Ã51 PERCENT IS COMMON. IT'S IN STATE LAW IN VARIOUS PLACES.

THE NEW LAW I JUST MENTIONED ABOUT YOU KNOW NEXT DAY, TODAY OR THE BILL THAT WAS SIGNED LAST NIGHT'S HAS ONLY 4 FOLKS WERE 51 PERCENT OF SALES. I THINK THAT'S FOR LIQUOR LICENSE. IT'S ALL THERE. YOU MAY HAVE A TOUGH TIME.

IF YOU DON'T ASK FOR IT I'LL BE HONEST YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A TOUGH TIME AT HOW YOU GONNA KNOW IF IT'S 50 PERCENT OR NOT IF YOU DON'T ASK FOR IT. I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT POINT. MR. CLINCHBURG CAUGHT STATE REVISIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLIANCE. THEY DON'T SEND IT OUT AS A PUBLIC RECORD.

>> SO TO THAT POINT I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THE CITIES GETTING EVERYTHING THEY SUBMIT TO THE STATE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN WHATEVER THE PARTICULAR TYPE OF LICENSE, THE TOP RIM, THE MICROBREW, WHATEVER THE LICENSES. I WANT US TO HAVE IT TO GET AT LEAST AT LEAST THAT. WE NOW HAVE OTHER STATUTES THAT ARE TALKED ABOUT THE 51 PERCENT. OBVIOUSLY THIS IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT BUT THERE'S OBVIOUSLY SOME MECHANISM THAT STATUE WHEREBY WHATEVER THE REGULATOR AGENCY IS AS THE ABILITY TO VERIFY THAT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR LANGUAGE TRACKS ALONG WITH WHAT THE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE THE 50 PERCENT PLUS REQUIREMENTS ARE.

WHAT THE STATE IS DOING WITH HER DELIGHT WITH THESE KINDS OF THINGS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS IN TERMS OF THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE JUST TO ENSURE, I MEAN FOR ME THE MAIN THINGS WILL MAKE SURE WE CAN VERIFY ON A REGULAR BASIS.

PUBLIC CAN'T ALREADY VERIFY FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT GOING BY AND SEEN THAT THEY DON'T HAVE 3 AND A PEOPLE STANDING OUTSIDE. OUR EVERYTHING TO GIVING TO THE STATE, THEIR LICENSE.

THE INFORMATION ON REVENUE PERCENTAGES. IN THE INFORMATION ON THE RESTRICTION ON THE OFF-SITE DISTRIBUTION AS THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF THEIR ALCOHOL.

SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS A LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE STATE STATUTE THAT DEALT WITH THAT

SIMILAR CONCEPT SO WE CAN DUPLICATE IT HERE. >> INCLUDED BUT NOT LIMITED TO.

>> RIGHT. >> WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. WE WANT REPORTING INFORMATION TO PROVE YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AT ANY GIVEN TIME. AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE.

THEY ARE KNOWN TO MAINTAIN THE RECORD IN ANY GIVEN TIME TO SEE PARKLAND CAN ASK FOR AN UPDATE FOR THE CURRENT REVENUE VERSUS YOUR CELLS VERSUS REVENUE. YOU CAN LEAVE IT VAGUE BUT YOU

[03:40:05]

NOR IS THERE A NEED FOR US AT THAT CIRCUMSTANCE TO BE ABLE TO SAY YOU DON'T, YOU NEED TO DO SOMETHING. THE ISSUE IS THE ANNUAL NUMBERS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE COMPLIED.

>>. >> ANY OTHER TIME WOULD ASK FOR IS IF WE SEE IF YOU SEE 10 TRUCKS. EVERY DAY. LEAVING AND TO PEOPLE IT'S NOT FOR NOTHING GUYS. COULD I GET SOME INFORMATION OKAY.

JUST A LITTLE BIT. WHEN I COULD BE OUT THERE. >> WE CAN'T SAG THEM AT THAT

POINT RIGHT? >> DAVID WANTS THE ABILITY IF IT BECOMES A PROBLEM AND ANTHONY SAYS AND ETHEL HE SAYS I WISH I HAVE THE ABILITY TO CALL THESE PEOPLE AND SAY NEED SOME INFORMATION. NOW'S THE TIME TO PUT THEM IN. WE HOPE THEY COMPLY AND DO FANTASTIC. WE THINK WE PUT SOME GOOD REGULATIONS IN PLACE AND BE SUCCESSFUL IT'S WHEN IT'S A PROBLEM IT BECOMES WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO ASK.

>> HOLIDAY TIMES HAVE YOU BEEN A COMMISSION COMMITTEE WHEN YOU SAY WELL, THERE'S REALLY NOTHING WE CAN DEAL. YOU'VE HEARD THAT BEFORE. I DON'T WANT ONE OF THESE

THINGS. >> 100 PERCENT.> THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES LET'S SAY WERE IN JUNE. WERE SEEING THERE IS 10 TRUCKS A DAY 2 PEOPLE HAVING LUNCH TODAY. WE ASKED THEM FOR THE RECORDS AND THEY SAY WERE AT 90 9 MY MICROPHONE IS ON BY THE WAY. WORK AT 99 PERCENT. DAVID LET ME HAVE THE

MICROPHONE. >> KNOW IT WORKS. >> WERE AT 99 PERCENT ALCOHOL AND ONE PERCENT FOOD IN JUNE. CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. WE KNOW THEY WILL NEVER BRING THEMSELVES INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE END OF THE YEAR ON THIS BIZARRE HYPOTHETICAL THEY'VE

NOW COME UP WITH BECAUSE I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL. >> NEVER OVERRULED ITS

UNENFORCEABLE GO THIS UNENFORCEABLE? >> ROLE IS ON ANNUAL BASIS WE GOT TO BE ABLE TO SHOW US YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE. BECAUSE REALLY MEANS, ON ANY GIVEN DAY, I GUARANTEE YOU ON THE MONDAY AFTER SUPER BOWL THEY WILL BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE

FOR THE YEAR TO THAT POINT. >> CRAFT LANGUAGE. >> I'M CERTAINLY NOT LOOK TO BE ALL OVER THEM TO DO THAT. BLIZZARD THESE ARE STANDARD. IF YOU HIT SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER AND NOBODY'S THERE, SO BE IT. IT WAS GOING ON.

THE CITIES CAN HELP TO USE REASONABLE JUDGMENT. >> WARNOCK THE STATE THEY HAVE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE ON ALL DAYS. THE CAPACITY OF COURSE THEY HAVE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE AT ALL TIMES. THE SPACE ISSUE IS THEY HAVE TO BE IT COMPLIANCE ALL TIMES. THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE PERCENTAGES OR, YOU KNOW WHAT, PUBLIX ORDERED A WHOLE BUNCH MORE CASES FOR THE PUBLIC'S. OKAY WILL YOU KNOW THIS MONTH WE HAPPEN TO BE 55 PERCENT OR 60 PERCENT OF THE ALCOHOL THAT WAS ON SITE.

>> I THINK THE CITY WOULD BE RATIONAL ENOUGH TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, IT'S A BIGGER BUSINESS THAT THEY DID THIS MONTH, SO BE IT. WHAT HAPPENS IS IF THEY DON'T MAKE A BONA FIDE EFFORT TO RUN A RESTAURANT YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW IT.

YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IT. IT'S A, ONE OF US IS GOING TO GO IN AND GO TO HAVE LUNCH AND SAY, THE PREPACKAGED SANDWICH IS OVER THERE. AND YOU'RE GONNA KNOW

IMMEDIATELY. >> BUT WE DON'T NEED THEIR PAPERWORK TO KNOW THEY'RE NOT A COMPLIANCE LIKE THAT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF IT'S AN ANNUAL REPORTING ISSUE TO MAKE SURE THERE OF THE 50 PERCENT OR AN ANNUAL REPORTING THAT THEY HAVEN'T SOLD MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE ALCOHOL THEY PRODUCE ON SITE OFF-SITE OR WHICHEVER WAY IT WAS.

THAT'S AN ANNUAL. IT'S THE OTHER STUFF I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH EVERY SINGLE DAY WHICH IS THE ISSUE OF SAFETY, THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THE RUNNING A RESTAURANT OR JUST AGAIN RINGING AT DOMINOES THROUGH THE BACK DOOR.

>> WHEN IT BE HELPFUL FOR YOU IF WE HAVE ALL THIS OTHER CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THEY'RE NOT RUNNING A BONA FIDE RESTAURANT AND THEN YOU WERE ABLE TO REQUEST INFORMATION FOR THE PAST 5 MONTHS AND THEIR FOOD RECEIPTS WERE NOTHING. 15 PERCENT.

ZERO. >> RECOMMEND WE GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF AND ANTHONY EITHER BE

[03:45:08]

>> SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO SOME SUPPRESSION AND A REVOCATION. >> THAT SOMETHING EXACTLY WHAT WHATEVER THE GUIDELINE IS THAT AGAIN NOT OVERSTEPPING WITH LEGAL.

IF WE CAN HOLD THE APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

>> RECOMMEND TO TRACK WITH WHAT WE HAVE A STATE STATUTE THAT REQUIRES 51 PERCENT.

SEE WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DID. I'M SURE THEY'RE SMART. >> YEAH.

>> WE COULD KEEP DEBATING IT AND UNLESS WE SIT AND WRITE IT. >> WE ARE CLOSE TO 10 O'CLOCK AND WERE MOVING INTO CHARTER SCHOOL TERRITORY. I JUST WILL LET YOU KNOW.

>> WAIT TILL NEXT WEEK WILL BE START THE MARIJUANA DISPENSARY. >> HAD BEEN HERE FOR 15 HOURS.

>> THIS MEETING IS SO LONG THAT MICHELLE IS GETTING READY TO RETIRE.

OFF-TRACK. >> THE DAYS GETTING CLOSER. >> I THINK I GOT IT.

GIVE US SOME TIME WILL BRING IT BACK. I DON'T NEED TO BE WISHY-WASHY ON THIS BUT THE REALITY IS I DID RESEARCH THIS AND COMING IN HERE AND I COULD TELL YOU DEPENDING ON WHICH LICENSE YOU GET THERE'S A DIFFERENT REPORTING REQUIREMENT.

THAT'S WHY CAN'T JUST DEFINITIVELY TELL YOU CAN BANK ON THE STATE FOR THIS 50 PERCENT ENFORCEMENT. REGARDLESS OF LOOKING AT THE OTHER ORDINANCES THAT HAVE THIS IN THERE. I DON'T SEE THAT THEY ADDRESSED IT AT ALL.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S RIGHT OR WRONG. MY POINT IS THEY HAVE IT IN THERE, I DON'T SEE SEVERALLY THEY HAVE THESE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

UNDERSTAND WE WANT THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE OR GIVE US SOME TIME WILL BRING IT BACK IN THE NEXT MEETING IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD TONIGHT TO SEE EVERYTHING ONE MORE TIME BEFORE

IT GOES TO THE COMMISSIONER. >> CAITLIN, RECOMMENDATION ON HOW YOU WANT TO BE THE RECIPIENT OF EVERYTHING WE DISCUSSED TONIGHT AND HOW TO PROCEED WITH THE ORDINANCE

THAT'S IN FRONT OF US. >> I THINK WE HAVE COPIOUS NOTES.

IF YOU HAVE THINGS TO SEND WE WOULD WELCOME IT. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU NOT SEND IT THE DAY BEFORE THE MEETING. NOT MENTIONING SEVERAL NAMES HERE.

>> TOLD. YOU'RE NOT ALONE. IF MANY GOOD COMPANIES APPEAR.

WE HAVE RECORDED THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD WILL BRING SOMETHING BACK.

>> ARGUMENT TABLE THIS FOR DATE >> YOU WANT TO CONTINUE IT FOR THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING

BOARD MEETING? >> ALL MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM REWRITTEN BY STAFF AND CITY ATTORNEY TO THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING.

>> BEFORE THE VOTE FOR THE TECHNICALITY, JUST OPEN IT UP FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> OF THE ANNUAL FORCES GROWING.

TALKED ABOUT THAT BRIEFLY. NOWHERE IN HERE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANNUAL OR ROLLING AND WHETHER GONNA REPORT THOSE ON THE REVENUE SALES. I THINK WE SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT IF IT'S AN ANNUAL BASIS 50 PERCENT, 50 PERCENT OF ANNUAL OR ROLLING.

I WAS THINKING OF THIS AS A ROLLING THING. IF IT IS ANNUAL I'M OKAY WITH IT BUT LET'S PUT IT IN HERE THAT THIS IS GOOD TO BE AN ANNUAL THING RIGHT IN THE CODE.

>> ON RECOMMEND ANY BOARD MEMBER THAT HAS ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK, SUGGESTIONS, WRITTEN

THEM TO CITY STAFF WITHIN THE NEXT 5 BUSINESS DAYS. >> WILL YEAH WE COULD DO THAT.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THERE'S AN EPIPHANY YOU HAVE THAT WOULD CHANGE ANY DIRECTIONS OF THE BOARD HAS DECIDED ON. MARKETING INCORPORATE THOUGHT. THIS IS A GROUP BANK HERE.

>> GOT IT. >> OH I FORGOT TO SAY. AT THIS TIME IN A CLOSE DISCUSSION AND THIS TIME OPEN UP THE ITEM TO THE PUBLIC. SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE IT FOR THE PUBLIC. I'M GOOD TO MOVE THE GAVEL AND MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING AND ZONING

BOARD MEETING NEXT MONTH. >> SECONDED. >> SECONDED BY JOEL.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY I. >> THANK YOU.

[8. Comments from the Planning & Zoning Director]

>> COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTORS ITEM 9. >> THIS WILL BE COMING BACK AT YOUR NEXT MEETING. WE WILL MAKE EVERY ATTEMPT TO ALSO BRING BACK REVISED

[03:50:01]

I'M SURE IT WILL BE OUR BEST EFFORT. WE HAVE CARMELO'S COFFEE ON THE NEXT AGENDA IF THEY EVER RESUBMIT ON TIME. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO WORK WITH

HIM. >> BUT ARE THEY DOING THERE? >> THEY JUST RESUBMITTED.

>> WHAT ARE THEY DOING? CARMEL'S. >> IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

PROCEEDING OUTSIDE. THERE OUTDOOR CAFC). SO WERE WORKING WITH THEM ON THE. THERE IS THOUGHT TO BRING YOU UP-TO-DATE ON TUMBLE WHAT'S GOING ON WITHOUT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANYTHING YOU CAN SEE ANYTIME SOON.

THE CITY ATTORNEY AND MR. TUTTLE'S ATTORNEY ARE STILL WORKING ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WILL BE THE BACKBONE OF EVERYTHING. THEY'RE ALSO WORKING ON THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT WILL HAVE TO GO TO BROWARD COUNTY. THANKS SO THE CITY COULD TAKE ACTION ON DECATER ACRES PARCEL BY 4.8 ACRE PARCEL THAT'S NOT IN THE CITY BECAUSE THE INTENT IS TO INCORPORATE THAT 4.8 ACRE SITE CURRENTLY IN BROWARD COUNTY WITH THE OTHER 2 PARCELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN IN THE CITY. THEY WILL BE COMING IN WITH A PLAT AND SITE PLAN AND REZONING AND A BOATLOAD OF VARIANCES BUT, WE CAN'T TAKE ANY ACTION UNTIL WE HAVE A SIGNED, UNTIL WE HAVE AN IMPROVED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR BROADER COUNTY.

>> STOP LOOKING AT ME, I'M NOT WRITING IT. >> YOU PROBABLY WILL BE.

TAKE YOUR TIME. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE, EVEN THOUGH THEY RESUBMITTED THEIR SITE PLAN IT'S GOING TO BE SOME MONTHS BEFORE IT EVER GETS HERE.

WE HAVE TO GET THAT AGREEMENT FROM BROWARD. I'M CURIOUS.

>> EXPAND ON WHAT MICHELLE SAID. I DID GET A COPY OF THE LATEST COUNTY VERSION FROM THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENT.

OF THAT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. I HAVE SHARED THAT WITH MR. TUTTLE'S COUNSEL PRINT HE'S GIVEN ME SOME COMMENTS BACK ON NOW. I'M WAITING ON SOME COMMENTS

BACK ON THE DEVELOPMENT. >> BUT IT STILL NEEDS TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNTY BEFORE

WE EVER TAKE ACTION AT THE CITY LEVEL ON HIS DEVELOPMENT. >> THE COUNTY COMMISSION IS GOING ON SUMMER 3 CENTS.> ,DOES IT TAKE ON THE COUNTY COMMISSION AGENDA?

30 OR 60 DAYS. >> I COULD GET SOMETHING ON FOR NEXT WEEK.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT. >> IS TYPICALLY ABOUT 30 DAYS

OR MORE, IS IT NOT? ANYWAY. >> MY PEOPLE CALL YOUR PEOPLE.

THAT'S THE UPDATE EVERYTHING. I MAY HAVE MENTIONED THE LAST MANY BUT I'LL REITERATE.

BECAUSE WE HAD AN INTERNAL STAFF MEETING THAT THERE ARE NUMBER OF ITEMS OF THE CITY COMMISSION WOULD LIKE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO WEIGH IN ON AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IT AVERAGES FROM THE ADA PLAN TO THE CITY'S 60TH ANNIVERSARY IS COMING UP.

I STILL HAVE MY T-SHIRT FROM THE 50TH ONE. WHICH MEANS I SHOULD CLEAN MY CALLS MORE OFTEN. THEY WANT YOU TO WEIGH IN ON THAT. THINK OF ROADWAY PLAN.

THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN. ALL BECAUSE OF THINGS. YOU'LL BE LOOKING AT THAT AT

THE APPROPRIATE TIME AND THAT'S A LITTLE WAYS DOWN THE ROAD. >> SOUNDS LIKE LONG MEETINGS.

[9. Comments from the Board]

>> ARE RETIRING SO YOU COULD TALK TO CAITLIN OVER THERE. >> CAITLIN, GREAT JOB AS USUAL.

ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, SEE NONE. >> WAIT, WAIT.

I'M CURIOUS ABOUT LENNAR WORKSHOP IF THERE'S ANY UPDATE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT WAS DIRECTED BY THE MAYOR ABOUT SETTING UP THAT WORKSHOP. I WAS WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY UPDATE ON THAT? I'LL BE HAPPY TO TALK WITH THEM

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.