Board of Adjustment and Appeal

PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL REGULAR MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, APRIL 19, 2023 DUNEDIN CITY HALL- 542 MAIN STREET - 3:00 P.M. Chair Patricia Morea, Members Kathleen Sands Martin, Sheri Schne ider , Michael Costello , Lorne Schinbein , and alternate member Jack Greenfield Alternate Linda Boosinger Assistant City Attorney Hillary Ryan, Community Development Director George Kinney, Assistant Community Development Director Joseph DiPasqua, Community Development Bus iness Manager Joan McHale, Deputy City Clerk Michelle Wells and approximately thirty-two people. Chair Morea convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m. She advised the Board of Adjustment and Appeal (BAA) is a quasi-judicial body and certain procedures must be followed by the Board and persons appearing before it. The purpose of this meeting is to provide applicants the opportunity to present cases for review by the Board of Adjustment and Appeal. The BAA is responsible to determine if such applications comply with City regulations. This meeting is open to the public and all persons present for this hearing have the right to voice their views regarding the applications being considered by the Board. If the competent and substantial evidence before the Board does not meet the necessary standards set out in the Code , the BAA has no recourse but to deny the request. Decisions made by the Board are final and may only be appealed to a court. When the Board votes to approve or deny the application , the vote of the Board is the rendition of an order on the application. It is the responsibility of the parties to create and preserve a transcript of the proceedings. In the case of a full board not being present , the applicant has the opportunity of postponing the case until a full board is present. If the applicant wishes to proceed with an even-numbered board , a tie vote constitutes denial of the application. The format for this meeting is as follows : 1. The chair will inquire of the board as to any voting conflict or ex parte communication. At this time , the Board members indicated they had noting to report . 2. Any members of the audience desiring to testify (applicant , owner , repre senta tive , and staff) will be sworn in prior to each case being heard 3. The chair will introduce each item on the agenda . 4. The City representative will present the City 's case regarding each application. 5. Members of the board may inquire as to the City Representative 's presentation of each case . 6. The owner/applicant will be given an opportunity to make their presentation to the board and respond to the City representative 's presentation. 7. Anyone in the audience may come forward to testify regarding the application. 8. Any person who has testified may ask questions of a person who has testified. 9. The applicant will have an opportunity to rebut or respond to opponents' testimony . 10. The City will have an opportunity to summarize the City 's position . 11. The board will discuss the application and vote . 23-1

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal Deputy City Clerk Wells swore in Community Development Director George Kinney, Assistant Director of Community Development Joseph Di Pasqua, and all those members of the public wishing to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve Draft Minutes from March 15, 2023, BAA Meeting Chair Morea introduced the agenda item and inquired if anyone had any corrections, additions, or deletions to the minutes. Hearing no further comments , Chair Morea asked for a motion. MOTION: Motion was made by Mr. Costello and seconded by Ms. Schneider to approve the March 15, 2023, Board of Adjustment and Appeal minutes. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 1. BUSINESS 1.a. Application BAA 23-1 C - Request a modification to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for outdoor dining to have live entertainment or amplified sound in the outdoor dining area at 319 & 321 Main Street (Crown & Bull) Staff Presentation Chair Morea introduced the agenda item and asked for the City staff presentation. Community Development Director Kinney provided the staff report and referred to the aerial photograph provided to orient the Board and public to the property location and the site plan approved by the BAA in October 2021. I. APPLICATION INFORMATION Owner : Falzon Management Corp. Applicant: Crown & Bull Representative: Dion Falzon Property Location: 319 & 321 Main Street Petit ion/Request: The applicant is requesting a modification to his previously approved Cond itional Use Permit (CUP) for outdoor dining to allow music in the outdoor dining area. II. PROPERTY INFORMATION A. General: Street Address: 319 & 321 Main Street Tax Parcel : No. 27-28-15-44298-023-0062 & 27-28-15-44298-023-0051 Area (Acres) : 0.22 (MOL) Land Use Plan: Activity Center (AC) Zoning District: Downtown Core (DC) , Street Type A Existing Use: Restaurant (Crown & Bull) A. Surrounding Zoning & Uses: North Downtown Core (DC) Retail South Downtown Core (DC) Retail/Parking Lot East Downtown Core (DC) Bar West Downtown Core (DC) RestauranURetail 23-2

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Ill. BACKGROUND Board of Adjustment and Appeal Restaurants with outdoor dining have operated on the subjec t properties for many years. Permit records indicate that the building at 319 Main Street was originally converted from retail to a restaurant in 1985 with outside dining called The Frog Pond . A few years later, it became Kelly 's For Just About. ..Anything! In 2001, both buildings (319 Main Street and 321 Main Street) were combined as Kelly 's and The Chic a Boom Room , and in 2003 , the 48 ' x 48 ' patio canopy was installed at the rear of the two buildings over a portion of the existing outside dining area. The current owner acquired the properties in June 2017 and renamed the business to Crown & Bull shortly thereafter. PAST ACTIONS On March 11 , 2020, the BM denied Application BM 20-3C for an expansion to the ex isting grandfathered outdoor dining area . The minutes for the March 11 , 2020, meeting are included as EXHIBIT C. On October 20, 2021 , the BM approved Application BM 21-3C and granted a CUP for the expansion of the outdoor dining area with certain conditions. The minutes for the October 20 , 2021 , meeting are includ ed as EXHIBIT D. LAND USE ANALYSIS As mentioned above , the subject properties and the surrounding properties are located within the Activity Center (AC) land use plan category. The purpose of the AC land use classification is to promote mixed uses and higher densities to encourage redevelopment in the area compatible with surrounding residential and commercial uses. See FIGURE 1. ZONING DISTRICT ANALYSIS The subject properties are located within the Downtown Core (DC) zoning district as stated above. The purpose of the DC district is to create the opportunity to help revitalize the downtown economically , visually , and functionally to provide an aesthetically pleasing and efficient multiuse activity center. Restaurants are permitted uses by right in the DC zoning district. Outdoor dining is permissible for any restaurant and considered incidental and supplementary to the primary use as a restaurant. See FIGURE 2. APPROVAL CRITERIA Sec. 104-21 .9, LDC A conditional use is permitted if it can meet each of the eleven approval criteria listed below. Some criteria may require full infrastructure review by the Engineerin g Division. It will be the appl icant's choice to either pursue infrastructure approval before submitting the conditional use permit application or delay infrastructure approval until after the hearing and risk an approval with conditions or a denial from the Board of Adjustment & Appeal. Regardless of the act ion of the Board , a conditional use permit is not final and in effect until infrastructure approval is obtained from the Engineering Division (if applicable). Conditional use permit approval criteria are as follows: A) The requested use is compatible with the existing natural environment of the site , with properties in the neighborhood , and projected future development of the area. Analysis: Outdoor dining as a supplemental and incidental use to a restaurant is compatible with existing uses and properties in the downtown core as well as projected 23-3

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal future development of the area . The applicant is not requesting any change to the size or number of seats in the outdoor dining area . However, he is requesting a change to the conditions of approval of BAA 21-3C to permit music in the approved outdoor dining area. B) There is adequate provision for water supply and for sanitary sewers and sewerage treatment. Analysis: There are no impacts expected as a result of this request. C) There is adequate provision for public facilities , such as schools, parks, and utilities within the serv ic e areas involved , and the proposed use can be accommodated by existing and/or proposed facilities . Analysis: There are no impacts expected as a result of this request. D) There is adequate provision for traffic circulation, both vehicular and pedestrian, both internal to the use and in the area, which will serve the use and not be detrimental to the traffic circulation of the area. Analysis : There are no impacts expected as a result of this request. E) There are adequate provisions for drainage systems to service the use , with particular attention to the necessity for on-site retention systems to alleviate drainage and pollution problems. Analysis: There are no impacts expected as a result of this request . F) There are adequate setbacks , buffering , or other appropriate control measures to mitigate adverse effects of noise , light , dust , fumes, and other nuisances . Analysis: The entire outdoor dining area is surrounded by an existing 8-foot-tall wood fence , creating an adequate buffer around the outdoor dining area . Music up to the allowab le threshold within the outdoor dining area is not expected to impact the surrounding areas . The applicant has not received any noise violations at the property since March 2021. G) The land area for the proposed use is sufficient, appropriate and adequate for the use , and the reasonably anticipated operation and expansion thereof. Analysis: The subject properties are adequate in size to support the use . H) The use is compatible with the desired growth and land use patterns reflected in the City land use plan or other planning documents . Analysis: The entire downtown focuses on redevelopment activities which , by definition , means replacing existing activities with new activities . DC zoning both allows and encourages the proposed use . Music within outdoor dining areas is not at all uncommon within the downtown . I) The proposed use will comply with all appropriate regulations for the zoning district/land use category in which it is located and the policies of the comprehensive plan that apply to that district/category. Analysis: Outdoor dining as a supplemental and incidental use to a restaurant complies with the zoning district regu latio ns , land use plan category, and the comprehensive plan. The AC lan d use plan category and DC zoning both allows and encourages these types of uses . 23-4

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal J) The proposed use will not adversely affect the health , safety , and welfare of the publ ic in the area and will not be detrimental to the use or development of adjacent properties or of the general neighborhood. Analysis: The addition of music within the outdoor dining area is not expected to adversely impact the adjacent properties or the surrounding neighborhood as long as it does not exceed the volume thresholds set forth in the code . K) The proposed use will comply with other policies and special standards which are designated elsewhere in the City comprehensive plan and this chapter , which standards and policies will be supplemental to those set forth in this section . Analysis: Outdoo r dining as a supplemental and incidental use to a restaurant complies wi th other policies and special standards designated elsewhere in the comprehensive plan . Again , no change to the size or numbe r of seats in the previously approved outdoor dining area is being requested. The applicant is requesting a modification to one of the conditions of approval for the previously granted conditional use permit to allow music in the outdoor dining area . ADDITIONAL CRITERIA FOR OUTDOOR DINING Sec . 107-32 .3 - General Requirements (E) The seating capac ity of the outdoor dining area shall not exceed the lesser of twenty-four (24 ) seats or twenty-five percent (25 %) of the licensed indoor seating area , and it shall not exceed five hundred (500) square feet, with the exception that a conditional use permit may be granted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeal to allow additional seating and /or dining area . (F) In granting a cond itional use permit for add itional outdoor din ing seat ing capacity and/or area , the Board of Adjustment and Appeal may impose reasonable standards , condit ions , or requirements , in addition to or that supersede any standard specified in the LDC , as deemed necessary to protect the public interest and welfare ; and shall approve the cond itional use permit appl icat ion upon all of the following findings: 1. The establishment's economic viab ility cannot be reaso nably achieved without the proposed increase in seats and/or area. 2. The need for in creased ou tdoor dining will not negatively impact any noise sens itive adjoining commercial or res idential use . 3. The applicant has not operated an establishment which has been found in violation more than once with regard to alcohol , public safety , or nuisance codes or regulations. Analysis: No cha nge to the size or numbe r of seats in the previously approved outdoo r dining area is be ing requested and the applicant has not received any noise violations at the property since March 2021 . Pl ease refer to the applicant 's letter of justification included with their applicatio n. NOTICE OF HEARING Per Sec. 104-12 of the LDC , this petition was noticed as follows : 1. A Letter of Notice was mailed to abutt ing property owners within 250 feet of subject property at least 14 days pr ior to the publ ic hear ing . 2. An announcemen t was published in the Tampa Bay Times at least 14 days prior to the to the public hearing . 23-5

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal 3. An informational sign was posted on the subject property at least 14 days prior to the public hearing. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The following City areas have reviewed this petition and have no objection to the request. • City Manager • City Arborist • Economic & Housing Development • Engineering • Fire • Public Works & Utilities • Solid Waste • Stormwater Conditions of Approval by the BAA, October 2021 1. Outdoor dining expansion shall be no larger than 1300 square feet in area with up to 30 additional seats and shall be contiguous to the grandfathered outdoor dining area. With respect to this request, that remains unchanged. At the time, the request was for significantly more seats and area which the Board restricted primarily predicated on the parking available to the site. 2. Live entertainment or amplified sound, whether music or any other form of sound, shall be prohibited in the entire outdoor dining area. Mr . Kinney noted that is the area covered under the Conditional Use Perm it and this is the item being requested for removal. 3. The City Attorney shall draft a Restrictive Covenant that makes the additional 1300 square feet of outdoor dining area and 30 additional seats revocable should there be any noise ordinance violations at the property. Mr. Kinney noted that restriction is to reman in effect; that covenant was recorded on March 11, 2022, and is to remain in effect. He explained that should this request be granted and should there be a noise violation on the site, that would still potentially rescind; it would come back to the Board for consideration to rescind that conditional use the Board afforded through that application in 2021. 4. The applicant shall pay for 3 additional parking spaces into the parking bank. Mr. Kinney explained that is relevant to the space permitted by the Board and that condition was satisfied. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recomm endation is to approve the applicant's request to have live entertainment or amplified sound in th e outdoor dining area with the following conditions. 1. As previously approved on October 20, 2021 , by the BAA for case BAA 21-3C , the outdoor dining expansion shall be no larger than 1,3 00 square feet in area with up to thirty (30) add itional seats , and shall be contiguous to the grandfathered outdoor dining area. 2. The Conditional Use Restriction , as recorded on March 11 , 2022, in Pinellas County Official Records Book 21971, Pages 1482 through 1485 , shall rema in in full force and effect , making the additional 1,300 square feet of outdoor dining area and 30 additional seats revocable should there be any noise ordinance violations at the properties. LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT B. Application BAA 23-1C EXHIBIT C. 3/11/2020 BAA Meeting Minutes EXH IBIT D. 10/20/2021 BAA Meeting Minutes 23-6

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal EXHIBIT E. LDC Sec . 107-42 - Outdoor Dining Regulations EXHIBIT F. LDC Sec . 107-41.1 - Unlawful Noise Questions for Staff Ms. Sands verified with Mr. Kinney that if there is a noi se ordinance violation , the issue would come back to the Board and they may rescind the Conditional Use Perm it according to the Restrictive Covenant put in place. When she asked how many times there can be a violation , Mr. Kinney advised it is just once; however , it would be a decision of the Board. The Covenant suggests the applicant can be brought back before the Board for consideration of removing that conditional use. Mr. Costello asked for the definition of a violation, noting there are warnings and citations , and if it is the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office acting on behalf of the City to enforce the ordinance in place; Mr. Kinney acknowledged that was correct. When Ms . Schneide r inquired regarding the She riff's report provided and what constitutes a noise violation, Mr. Kinney explained it would be an actual citation. She noted the report was run in December and asked what has happened since , and Mr . Kinney deferred to the applicant. Ms. Schneider inquired if there was live music after the 8-foot fence was installed. Mr. Kinney deferred to the appl icant. Ms. Schneider asked when there was live music or recorded music last. Mr. Kinney advised that , to be clear , there is no music to be played in that area approved under the conditional use ; there was never a restriction to not allow for live music particularly under the awning area . Mr. Sch inbein asked for clarification of liv e music allowed in red area not sub ject to conditional use application; it is the two areas not shaded. Mr . Schinbein noted the nois e calls for service in the packet ; it does not say violation , but there were two incid ents subsequent to March 2021 from the Sher iff's office and Mr . Kinney deferred to the applicant. However, staff did not see anything that constituted a violation of the City Ordinance. Applicant Presentation Dion Falzon of 1931 Saddle Hill Road stated : The ir ask is simple : they would like to have a clean slate for their ability to have live mus ic and amplified sound in their outdoor dining area. His ask is for a fresh slate ; not one single violation or call sets them back. He did not think that was fair. They have not had a real violation in 4 years . When a new business comes , they get a fine of maybe $100 or $200. He wanted to be sure that it is not one call and they are back to square one ; that is his request. They are proud to have the full support of City staff , the Chamber of Commerce , and the Downtown Duned in Merchants Association . In addition , they have many prom in ent bus in ess owners , local Dunedin res idents , and personal staff who will speak on the behalf of Crown & Bull. This has really affected their bus iness in a negative way , which the Board would hear from everyone who works for him and the surrounding area. He pointed out the success of the Downtown Task Force , which City Manager Bramle y set up. It got the residents behind them , and it helped residents , local business owners , and City 23-7

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal staff have an open line of communication. He has had the chance to speak with the neighbors behind him , with City staff , and other business owners. He feels it has pulled the town closer. They have an open line of communication now with less division and more of talking things through . In addition with the BRC, he thin ks it is making positive strides so they can coexist. It has been brought to his attention that there is a video of Crown & Bull playing music in the outdoor dining area. He wanted to make clear that music is coming from the red area shown ; that is what they had to do. They have speakers under the awning that point out toward the outdoor dining area just to provide a little background noise when people are eating and it is not so quiet back there . He complete ly understands the residents ' reservations and concern about late night music and things that come with that. He has every intention to just have light background music , his father playing light music, background music, speakers , light jazz. How it stands now , they cannot have charity events and they cannot even have a microphone for a wedding or any of the events they did in the past. It is Crown & Bull's intention to coexist and have their music back , but light ; they are not a concert hall, they do not have a stage or anything like that. They are thinking of having solo musicians and background noise. Questions for the Applicant Ms. Schneider inquired if there was any amplified sound or live music since the 8-foot fence was installed. Mr . Falzon explained they had the fence when they took over ; the City paid for a portion of it to put a border between them and Blur. It is kind of open; the one that was denied was actually a sound wall to keep the music in. It has been at least a couple of years since they have had live music , approximately October 2020 . They can do it under the awning, but people want to be outside. In a post-COVID environment , their outdoor dining is the most coveted spot every day ; people want to sit outside and ask if there is live music . He also noted regarding the police report , it is the fence that is the violation; the last one was St. Patrick 's Day two years ago , and before that it was 2 years before that. Regarding the St. Patrick's Day situation , it has been 4 years . In response to Ms. Schneider asking if there has been nothing since this report has been publ ished , Mr. Falzon stated absolutely not. They don 't have speakers back there and have not had a single mus ician play inside or outside , nothing at all whatsoe ver . Ms. Sands commented Mr. Falzon stated the music would be soft, violin -type , background music and explained if that should change , her concern is regarding Rosie 's Tavern, which is very loud. They are right back there and asked how will that impact Crown & Bull with both establishments having loud music. Mr . Falzon stated Rosie 's has the building between; the concern would be Blur next door , wh ich has seven-piece bands and monster everything every weekend, so they would coexist. Crown & Bull has a different business model ; it is now higher end food , craft cocktai ls , ligh t jazz , etc. It is a completely different business model. They close two hours earlier than before ; they are not open late , and they have changed everything for the better. It is more sustainable. He has no desire to bring in big bands or anything like that. He lets his father play as well as some locals ; it is more important to be able to have the speakers and be able to host charity eve nts , weddings , and so forth , which used to rea lly help them financ ially . Business is getting more diff icult with wages going up and he is doing the best he can , but this would really help . 23-8

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adj ust men t and Appeal Mr. Costello noted in the previous application they had proposed to build a stage and sound walls and so forth. Mr. Falzon acknowledged that was no longer the request and explained the business model has changed. They just want to put the speakers up and have the ability to use a microphone at a charity event and musicians ; his father plays light jazz music , nothing over the top , which just does not fit their model. Cha ir Morea confirmed with Mr. Falzon they have had no violations since March 2021. Public He arin g Chair Morea opened the public hearing. Scott McLaren of 101 E Kennedy Blvd, Tampa, provided documents for the City Clerk and the Board members and advised he was speaking on behalf of 13 residents who believe very strongly that this application should be denied. He stated: The cit izens he represents , with their signatures and information , is behind Tab 2 of the documents. The application here has not and cannot meet the Code criteria that governs this approval. It is inconsistent with several things . First , it is inconsistent with the City staff findings from the pr ior hearing with respect to the application to expand the outdoor dining area that was submitted and ruled upon in October 2021. It is plainly incons istent with this Board 's findings at the hearing , where that application was approved with conditions. It is also inconsistent with the Restrictive Covenant that adopts the specific findings of this Board that is part of the Publ ic Records of Pinellas County. For these reasons , they would ask for denial. Respectfully , this bar and this owner have quite a history of code violations , police reports and incidents , and applications to expand and intensify its operations. This appl icant cont inues to push the boundaries of the regulations imposed upon it and has repeatedly asked for forgiveness instead of permission ; it has a pattern of going ahead and doing what it wants to do before it asks this Board for a perm it to do so . Tab 3 of the documents contains the original application of th is applicant to this Board in 2019 to expand the outdoor din ing area. It is asking for more than double square footage and basically a quadrupling of the number of seats permitted. This Board unanimously den ied that appl icat ion in 2020 and protected the residents of Duned in, i.e. those in attendance today and his clients. Before this application was even filed , the applicant was already using the area upon which it sought approval ; it was already using that area as an outdoor dining area and came in asking for forg iveness instead of permiss ion , and in large part for that reason , this Board denied the applicat ion. This bar has a huge history of noise complaints and violations , violent incidents , felonies , and all types of things going on at the bar. There is a list of many of them behind Tab 5. Th is list encompasses over 175 inc idents : 10 noise violations , 6 actual noise citations , and 4 others with warnings. These were in the past before the latest approval ; however , he will show a video , and there have been several complaints about noise and amplified noise emanating from the outdoor area this bar ma intains . The suggestion that it is okay to play the amplified noise under this outdoor area that has kind of a canopy over it because that somehow does not disturb the ne ighbors and then to proh ibit it in another outdoor area because that will disturb the neighbors defies common sense . If it is noise and it is outside , it is disturbing the neighbors ; it does not matter if it is under some little canopy or not. The Board will see and he will show in the notebook that the Board 's ruling , when granting the 23-9

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal application previously for expansion of this area, specifically prohibited any outdoor noise; however , this applicant cont inues to play the noise, the music, and then comes in asking for permission and forgiveness after the fact. Tab 6 is an incident in 2019 that is pertinent. It shows that the business was cited 6 times and warned an additional 4 times. The point here is that there is a tradition and history associated with this bar of pushing the envelope and disturbing the neighbors with noise that continues to this day. Tab 7, dating December 17, 2018 , contains information on an incident which rose to the level where the applicant actually threatened the complainer and said he was "going to have problems " if he did not move . That is the history of the bar they are dealing with. In Tab 8, there is a lawsuit concerning noise in Dunedin, and the deposition of Pinellas County Sheriff's Office Captain Jack Peterson was taken ; he was testifying about the noise ordinances and this applicant's attitude towards the noise ordinance. He is asked the question about Crown & Bull and it had been investigated by the State Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco , and Firearms . The question was whether he had discussed that with the City Manager, and he is speaking here about noise violations and the payments of the fines associated with noise violations. At that time, in 2021, Captain Peterson testified that the Sheriff personally got involved with Crown & Bull because they had mentioned at one time that it was the cost of doing business , and the Sheriff said if it was the cost of doing business they would put squad cars out there . This applicant has previously indicated that if he has to pay a noise violation of a certain amount , he is making more money selling tickets or food and beverages than in paying the fine , so it is "a cost of doing business ." That is the applicant and the bar we are dealing with. Despite all the violations and the continuing conduct , in October 2021 , the applicant again applied to the Board for an expansion of the outdoor area. The applicant sought to double the size of the outdoor area and triple the size of the number of seats . This Board listened to the evidence very carefully at that time , and this Board protected the neighbors and public by reducing the size and , very importantly , prohibiting any amplified noise or sound at all outside. The finding can be seen at that time on Page 5; the criteria and requested use is compatible with the existing natural environment of the site . The finding at the time was that the applicant rece ived 6 noise violations , and the bar has been operated in a way that would be inco mpatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The other criteria he would like the Board to look at is Section 104-21.9(0 , where City staff looked at these criter ia in 2021 , which analyzes if there are adequate setbacks , buffering , or other appropriate control measures to mitigate adverse effects of noise , light , dust , fumes , and other nuisances . The analysis talks about the 8-foot fence creating an adequate buffer , but then it says the applicant submitted an amendment to their application to preclude the playing of live music in the outdoor dining area for one year; in the event there are no violations of the City 's noise ordinance within that year , they would like the ability to play outdoor live music. This Board denied that request at that time because this Board understood that this propensity to violate and the potential negative impact on the neighborhood was more important than allowing the applicant that one year holding period. In 2021, City staff continues, saying that it is acknowledged by staff that the previous noise violations issued by the Sheriff's Office were related to the sound of live entertainment or amplified music outside and not sound normally produced by diners. Since outside noise is not noise on any particular area outs ide , that is causing the problem. The existing fencing 23-10

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal and lack of live entertainment and amplified music at the property would provide adequate buffering if utilized for outdoor dining only. In other words , no amplified sound. Staff also believed that by allowing reasonable outdoor dining area expansion, prohibiting live entertainment or music in the outdoor area both further the goals and objectives of the downtown district while protecting the citizens and residents from potential disturbance of excessive noise. That is what this Board chose to do. The next criteria he thinks is germane is on Page 7 - J -The proposed use will not adversely affect the health, safety , and welfare of the public in the area , and will not be detrimental to the use or development of adjacent properties or of the general neighborhood . The findings of staff at that time was that the proposed outdoor area expansion has in the past and is likely to continue to adversely affect the general welfare of adjacent properties or the surrounding neighborhood if the pattern of noise violations from loud music continues. Prohibit ing live entertainment and music outside , not under any potential area outside , but outside at the properties, is expected to protect the neighborhood. The applicant sought this sort of probationary period where if they did not do anything wrong for a year, they could automatically start playing music again. The Board denied that application and denied that portion of the application. Mr. McLaren provided the transcript from the hear ing in 2021 where both members of the Board and Mr. Di Pasqua spoke , and on Tab 10, Page 14 of the transcript is talking about the noise violations and this is what the prior ruling was based upon; it is not the people eating and drinking. It is the noise associated with the use that was causing the problem . Mr. Di Pasqua continues on Page 20 ; the outdoor dining has in the recent past had its issues ; it has had some adverse effects and we have received concerns with regard to the noise and we acknowledged that cannot continue . However, prohibiting live entertainment and music outside, not in any particular area outside , but outside at the property, is expected to protect the general neighborhood from adverse impacts while allowing the business to reasonably expand . Mr. McLaren stated the business should be allowed to operate and that is what is going on there. There is no indication there is a problem in this business that has been in business for 6 years, and there has been a bar there since 2011. There is no indication there is some economic crisis going on at the bar. Mr. DiPasqua continues , I think what we are talking about here are two separate issues; we are talking about outdoor dining , not outdoor entertainment, not live music , not a concert venue. We are talking about outdoor dining as a supplemental , incidental part of the restaurant that is benign nonconforming . Whether generating noise from chewing too loud or hav in g music playing , that is really the difference ; this is talking about outdoor dining and the use of outside entertainment or amplified music. Mr . McLaren stated that Ms. Bushnell, who he believed was a board member at that titne, indicated on Page 12 of the transcript "I would need to understand more clearly what you mean by live entertainment or ampl ified sound , music or any other form of sound. Would there be no sound other than dining and servers permitted? " Mr. DiPasqua says yes , that is the staff recommendation. The staff recommendation is no amplified sound at any time . Page 18 contains the actual motion subject to the conditions , and the relevant condition is that live entertainment or amplified sound of any kind , whether music or any form of sound , shall be prohibited in the entire outdoor dining area. To clarify , he noted there is to be no artificial sound; it would simply be the sound of diners dining and servers serving . 23-11

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal Tab 11 is the findings of fact of this board that the bar had been operated in a way that would be incompatible with the neighborhood. Finding number 6 indicates that staff believes allowing a reasonable outdoor dining area, but prohibiting live entertainment or music in the outdoor area, both further the goals of the district and the neighborhood . A finding of proposed expansion is likely to adversely effect the general welfare if the pattern of noise violations continues , and prohibited live entertainment is expected to protect the neighborhood . The order from this Board is that live entertainment or sound of any kind , whether music or any form of sound , shall be prohibited in the outdoor dining area. There shall be no artificial sound ; the only sounds will be diners dining and servers serving. The conditional use restriction recorded in the deed records specifically incorporates these stipulated conditions , and if there is a violation of those conditions, this could be revoked , so his cl ients could be here asking for a revocation of the entire permit. They are not asking for that; they are simply asking that the status quo be maintained. There needs to be no outdoor music. The other provisions behind Tab 13 detail an incident on August 2022 that was a situation where there was a complaint about noise. There was a kind of counter-complaint about the complainer about noise by the bar owner . Mr . McLaren showed a short video of the incident and noted it was another example of them playing the prohibited music in the outdoor area. The transcript of the proceedings , the staff report, and the findings of this Board speak for themselves . The prohibition was for the outdoor area , and to rule that that portion of the outdoor area is play ing loud mus ic , but not disturbing the neighborhood and the other portion , simply does not make sense . For these reasons , they respectfully submit that the application be denied . Candace Allaire of 243 Aberdeen Dr ive advised she is the Event Coordinator and Onl in e Marketer for Crown & Bull and made the following points : They no longer are able to host events , so it would be difficult to say they are not financially affected when she is now part -time and working online . She is asking the Board to allow amplified sound and mus ic for Crown & Bull to be able to host charity events for children and other charitable organizations like she used to do without amplified sound, music , or a mic rophone. They also hosted weddings , bridal and baby showers , etc. ; all events are taken off the table without be ing able to have music . She can have mus ic under the awning , but not everyone wants to be under that in the heat of summer . At their sister company next door , they can sit on their dining and hear their band , but Crown & Bull cannot. She wants to go back to being a full time event planner and work with the vendors and people she used to work with on the events . Michael Martini of 419 Roanoke Street, an employee of Crown & Bull who has worked in that build in g for 11 years , noted he was also speaking on behalf of his staff and made the following points : They have noticed a decline in their clientele once there was no music ; they had to reevaluate business plans and bring in clientele in different ways , but it is not the same. 23-12

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal Dunedin runs off of the restaurant business with staff members who make this town a memorable experience , and it is strange to see a restaurant, a pillar for many years before it was Crown & Bull, go from the heart of Dunedin to a place where people cannot go to enjoy an outdoor cocktail experience . Friends and neighbors are asking when the music is coming back and if they can have a wedding, a party, etc. Regarding the video shown, he was the manager on duty that day when he came to the property to complain and he had to counter-call the Sheriff because the man had come onto City property and was very abrasive and rude toward him right away as a staff member. They had just lowered the music and there was nothing concerning music at that moment. The music makes the place much more enjoyable and they have musicians who come from all over to play, not bands. Gregory Brady1 Chair of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce Board of 15 Sandpiper Drive joined by Katie Ducharme 1 Vice-Chair of the Chamber of Commerce of 630 Athens Street read a letter from their Board in relation to a business in the Downtown Core in a Business Distr ict: Dunedin Board of Adjustment and Appeals, The Dunedin Chamber of Commerce supports Crown & Bull 's restaurant request to resume amplified music. There was unanimous support from the Board of Directors that that position was reached. We believe , after hearing from the owners of the establishment , that they have complied with the restrictions put in place and intend to bring music back responsibly and within the City 's noise ordinance . It is our recommendation that this board approve the amplified music plan presented by Crown & Bull. President , CEO Pam Pravetz Gabrielle Molina of 1884 Brae Moor Drive 1 a 20+ year Duned in resident , made the following points: People are looking for food and drink , atmosphere, to feel safe and comfortable, and entertainment , i.e. music. They have not been able to provide that to their tables the past three years. She has been at Crown & Bull for 5 years and there is a difference even being able to pay her bills as full-time college student. They are missing the music and she has had customers note their disappointment. She would not be working in a place where she felt unsafe . The Dunedin community has worked with each other and built the City to what it is today. They play music that makes people feel comfortable and safe and want to stay longer, which equals customers coming back. In terms of protecting the neighborhood , she lives in Dunedin ; they do not have concerts. Denny Falzon (father of Dion) of Crystal Beach commented : What Dion is proposing is what he does for a living. He is a full-time musician and has played in locations like the Don Cesar , Bahama Breeze , lnnisbrook , etc . The music he plays is quiet , pleasant, and tropical , which brings people to Florida . 23-13

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal He was asked to direct the music at the restaurant and he tends to keep quality and sound . There are only about 5 people who have music now , and Crown & Bull provides employment for at least 10 musicians year-round 5 to 6 days a week . They have never played loud there ; walking around town , there is much louder music. The music stops at 10:00 p.m., so it is not really offending in the neighborhood . Bill We ldon of 656 Broadway commented : He is the gentleman in the video shown and did not plan on speaking. He is part of the Downtown Task Force and now the Business , Resident , City Council that is Chaired by the City Manager. It is his belief it is time to move into a new phase with Crown & Bull. They have been adversaries and he thinks now is the time to start building relationships. He is not against them having their music reinstated. Antoinette Ahedo of 1475 Michigan Ave , Palm Harbor, a Crown & Bull employee , made the following points: This is not just about Crown & Bull having music; it affects each employee. In the last year , they have had a dramatic difference in business without the great ambience and music on the patio. When people find out there is no music , they usually leave or ask where they can go with music . They also ask why the restaurant cannot play music . Dion buys from local businesses and supports local musicians . Andy Polee of 1942 Horse Shoe Bend Road commented : There were comments from the opposition about things that happened 4 or 5 years ago which are not relevant. Mr. Falzon has made mistakes and paid the price , and he is asking to be treated like everyone else. Every other business can do background music. They will be held to the same standard as everyone else with the 65-decibel limit , as well as the time frame with no amplified music past a certain time. They are already on a "t ight leash "; if they make a violation, they not only risk not being able to have music but they may lose the ir entire patio , which is something the other business do not have to consider. He would say not to let the less than 1% dictate policy just because they are the loudest. For clarification regarding the video , that sound emanated from an allowable place as interpreted by Dune din Municipal Code ; that was not technically a violat ion even though it was presented to the Board that they were flaunting the previous order of the Board . Jason Seibert of 1756 Ranchwood Dr S (owner of Flanagan 's and Rosie 's) He has owned some kind of business in downtown Dunedin for over 30 years. The neig hborhood is relian t on the entertainment district. He lived in the downtown core for 7 years , so he was very close to entertainment sources as well as all the festivals. He understands the trade-off of living downtown in the enterta inment district ; there is going to be at least some noise. It increases home values to be in the downtown district. When you own a bar and restaurant, people think you have to have the best food and drink , which is true; howe ver, the real product is atmosphere, and they cannot do bus iness without atmosphere. A back patio where it is silent is not where people want to be eating . 23-14

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal He believes even though some mistakes were made, a chance should be afforded Mr. Falzon in his business . Jack Bataoel, President of Downtown Dunedin Merchants Association, address of 1506 Florida Ave, Palm Harbor stated: On behalf of their entire board, they think Crown & Bull needs their music back. They have suffered and paid the consequences, and everyone has failures and can recover with another chance. Like what the opposition is saying today, he is trained to skew words and make things seem different from what they really are and what they really were , and he wants the Board to take that into consideration. If there are 36 ,000 to 38 ,000 residents in the City, thirteen residents are .00034211 % of the population. It is ridiculous for thirteen residents to be able to skew something and create that much disruption and waste the amount of time with this Board and the City over the years. The downtown is the heart of the City and community, and that culture has been grown for over 30 years with the many individuals and business owners in the audience; that needs to be there. Crown & Bull is part of the heart and culture of what the downtown has. He asked that the Board give that back so that the residents and guests of the other percentage can enjoy the downtown. Teresa Bryant of 679 Broadway commented : She and Bill Weldon have been singled out for making most of the reports for the noise problems. It is a small percentage because why would residents in other areas of the City make complaints ; her property is the closest to the back of Crown & Bull. She is pro-business and volunteers for many downtown events . The last letter submitted with the application says it is not fair; and she questioned that it is not fair because he is the one who violated the noise ordinance . It is also not fair because the neighbors have a personal vendetta with the previous owner ; she has lived in her house for nine years , and the first four years , when it was the previous owner , she never called and she never even knew there was a noise ordinance. To say you should be used to the noise living downtown , she is part of the noise part of the time; what she signed up for was people leaving the bars at 3:00 a.m., drunk people knocking on her door , being sick in her front yard , etc. , and she gets that that is part of living downtown. For someone who repeatedly violates the noise ordinances and then tries to apologize with no accountability but says it is not fair , it is not fair to her either. She expects the busin esses to abide by the rules , whoever calls. Kimberly Platt, owner of the Honu Restaurant at 516 Grant Street, commented : It is very important for businesses to have an entertainment district. The City is a hospitality hub with amazing spaces and different choices that keeps the hometown feel. Casa Tina 's, Blur , and Dunedin Brewery all started with a different entertainment type they had 30 years ago and it is always music and entertainment trying to bring people here. They have done that now and invested a lot of money and time ; all the business owners and residents talking have also invested their time and money, but that does not mean they can make all the rules. The City makes the rules and they believe in them to make the right rules. For her restaurant , they pipe their music in through Spotify and when that playlist stops , it is so qu iet. She went to Crown & Bull for lunch and realized this was not fair and she was 23-15

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal sitting inside for a long time because she could hear music and other things. She does not feel it is fair for where it is for her to be able to have music and them not. Maybe they did break the rules before ; she knows Dion Falzon and finds him to be fair. Bill Weldon, who was in the video, asked the Board to rule in Dion 's favor and she agrees. It is critical to the business to have the music for the servers, busboys , dishwashers , and everyone to be able to make the money they need to live. She agrees with all the staff from Crown & Bull. She is very concerned about this and about the precedent it will set , no matter which way it goes. Going the wrong way , ruling against the Crown & Bull, is opening it up to all the other businesses. She hopes it is never her someday . She noted Dion Falzon has been in the City for a long time, sits on many boards in the City , and is a very important person who works for the City and she does not find him to be the way he was portrayed . As she tells her staff, she hopes they make good decisions today . Linda Heifetz of 677 Broadway commented: She too has been greatly impacted; there is a whole part of her property she cannot live in at night. When the music is loud , the windows shatter; she can 't have family there or friends unless her master bedroom and bath is walled off. She cannot sleep at night. She agrees time and again about the violatio ns they have made. She patronizes all of the businesses downtown, and in 30 years or prior to that, never complained about any business. She is asking the Board to leave it at the status quo. Isaac Wasilefsky of 2180 Santa Paula Drive advised he is the business owner adjacent to Crown & Bull at 719 Broadway and commented: They are open late on Fridays and Saturdays, and Blur , which is adjacent to them , has amplified music and sound , which they cannot hear when doing their work. When everyone is gone and it is quiet , you can tell there is music playing, but never once have they had any windows shake. Andrew Pavalis of 417 S. Pinellas Ave., Tarpon Springs, advised he is the Architect who has been working with Mr . Falzon since the beginning of all these applications and commented: He thought it important to note for the second application , Mr . Falzon hired a sound engineer because that is what this is all about ; some people might think something is loud that others do not. They hired an expert to do the tests and he wished that had been included in the application, it was probably not in the packet and it is a different Board now. He did a lot of research and ran a lot of calculations with different music and different spaces , including the parking lot , and could not hear music from the outdoor dining . Kevin Benjamin of 200 Main Street , Victoria Place Condominiums , stated: He moved to Dunedin because he likes the lifestyle , energy , and everything about the town including the enterta inme nt. He lives close to where a lot of the issues happen. His choice was to get in volved with the City , and working on the Downtown Task Force as a resident , he has been able to hear a lot of different viewpoints. There is a basis to the viewpoints. He does agree with the residents that they want to be able to sleep at night ; that is the biggest thing. 23-16

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal The City 's residents and businesses did get disconnected for a while and this task force is helping to bring people back together . The irony is they find they have a lot of issues in common and have been working together to address them. Noise is one of the issues. He has gotten to know Dion Falzon through the Chamber and believes he has learned a lot through this experience , and he is making some changes to his business model to accommodate the needs of the residents and working to form relationships and to listen to the community around him. Hearing no one else wishing to speak , Chair Morea closed the public hearing . Applicant Response Mr. Falzon stated he wanted to reiterate about any kind of violation and resetting the whole thing. He did not think that is reasonable. When he first took over Crown & Bull , there was a three-strike system ; something like that could make it not so detrimental in case they are attacked unfairly. That would be his only request. Board Questions Mr. Costello asked what the hours of operation were . Mr. Falzon advised their hours are 10 :00 a.m. to Midnight; during the week , they do last call around 11 :00 p.m . and weekends at 12 :00 a.m. to 12 :30 a.m . based on the volume; they are no longer a late-night spot. Blur next door takes on the late-night element , so if they had music , they would stop within the allotted time and probably a little earlier. Ms . Sands recalled Mr . Falzon stated they stopped playing mus ic at 10:00 p.m. Mr . Falzon responded that was back in the day; they don't play music anymore . Ms . Sands asked when they stay open to midnight , when would he stop the music? Mr. Falzon stated he would like to have the same opportunity as everyone else ; the law is 11 :00 p.m. , so they will stop at 11 :00 p.m. They may or may not stop at 10 :00 p.m. or 9:00 p.m. given their different business model. Their neighbors want them to get music back so they can play off each other ; Blur has big bands , and Crown & Bull has nothing . Blur wants them to play music , so they just want to be treated like everyone else. Up to 11 :00 p.m. would be his request; that is what the rules are . City Closing Comments Commun ity Development Director Kin ney had noth ing further to add to the City 's presentation and summarized City staff thinks there are safeguards in place to allow for th is to happen and stand by their recommendation for approval. Ms . Schne ider verified with Mr . Kinney that by safeguards in place , he meant the revocation after one strike. She referred to the additional cr it er ia section ; it says one of the cr iteria is that the applicant has not operated an establ ishment that has had a violation more than once with regard to alcohol, public safety or nuisance codes or regulations. She asked for what period of time that would be in effect; would it be forever? Mr . Kinney noted that is included in Sec. 107-32.3 - General Requirements F - #3 and commented he did not recall the criteria they used ; however , for staff , that is irrelevant to this request because that assessment and application was made as part of the original approval. Th is is simply removing a condition from the approval already made. Commun ity Development Assistant Director DiPasqua commented on the cr iter ia he thought being referenced ; when he hears the comment that it is not relevant , that seems sort of abrupt. It is because that criteria have to do with asking for an expansion , which is not happening here ; 23-17

Regular Meeting April 19, 2023 Board of Adjustment and Appeal that happened in October. The position of staff was that the way the statement can be read , it does not say any time limit, so he supposed it could have been a noise violation in 1975. From a staff perspective, there was an outdoor dining request at that time to expand the number of seats in a certain area , and there had been clean hands for a certain period of time which predated that application. They just made that interpretation. He explained what is being considered today is not looking at any additional seats or area , so even though that criteria is there , it is about a condition today. Mr. Kinney added he thought an element is that through each of those steps , it was meant to create that timeline of "clean hands, " so regarding the idea in the discussion of the first application that talked about the applicant coming back in one year if they had clean hands to make this request , that was not intended to be a restriction approved or denied. The application itself is approved or denied; that was intended to advise the Board that the next step would be if they can go a year with clean hands (and they have gone since March 2021 ), then it seems that would be a reasonable ask as the next step . That was meant to take these steps and he thinks that is the current point and is part of the reason for the recommendation of approval. Mr. Costello verified with Mr . Kinney that the 48 x 48 covered space is not considered outdoor dining , which is what the request for conditional use is for ; it is basically considered indoor dining because of a covered roof . Board Discussion Ms. Sands commented she knows many restaurants within Dunedin have music . She realizes it can be loud , but she has to agree with some of the comments made that Dunedin is what it is because of the restaurants and the entertainment. She does not know that the Board could put a restriction on the time that the establishment has to stop playing music ; if the law is 12:00 or 11 :00 , does the Board say 10 :00 to accommodate those who feel the no ise is disrupting the ir lives? That is her concern. Chair Morea referred to the Noise Ord inance for the City of Dunedin , an established ordinance existing , and it is the compliance of that ordinance that must be made. Ms . Schneider asked if that would include the revocation after one violation. Chair Morea noted the ques tion is about the covenant and to what extent is there a revocation that is within the covenant ; what would cause a violation of that covenant? Ass ist ant City Atto rney Ryan noted it states "a violation. " For the record , she would like clar ifica tion if the request is for removal of all the conditional uses , and it was determined it was just the one; that is the amplified music in the outdoor dining area , but there was never a request for removal of the Restrictive Covenant in the application. Today before the board is the question of whether or not the one condition be removed ; that is the staff recommendation. The Board does have the ability to review the covenant and amend it; however , that has not been applied for and has not been considered by staff and has not been considered in the not ices for this hearing today . The Revocable Covenant reads : The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) granted as part of CUP application will be of no further force or effect if Owne r or any of the Owners duly authorized re present

1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL City Hall, 542 Main Street APRIL 19, 2023 3:00 PM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve Meeting Minutes A. March 15, 2023 BAA Meeting Staff recommends review and approval of the meeting minutes. EXHIBIT: A. 3/15/2023 BAA Draft Meeting Minutes 1. BUSINESS 1.a. Application BAA 23-1C - The applicant is requesting a modification to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for outdoor dining to have live entertainment or amplified sound in the outdoor dining area at 319 & 321 Main Street (Crown & Bull). Staff recommends approval of the request with conditions. EXHIBIT: A. Memorandum & Staff Report - Application BAA 23-1C EXHIBIT: B. Application BAA 23-1C - 319 & 321 Main St. EXHIBIT: C. 3/11/2020 BAA Meeting Minutes EXHIBIT: D. 10/20/2021 BAA Meeting Minutes EXHIBIT: E. LDC Sec. 107-32 - Outdoor Dining Regulations EXHIBIT: F. LDC Sec. 107-41.1 - Unlawful Noise EXHIBIT: G. Public Notice - Application BAA 23-1C ADJOURN Disability Provisions: It is the policy of the City of Dunedin not to discriminate against disabled persons in employment or the provisions of services. If you have a disability that requires accommodation, please notify the ADA Coordinator 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting at (727) 298-3043.

2 COPIES OF THIS AND ALL COMMISSION AGENDAS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, 737 LOUDEN AVENUE, ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATE. COPIES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE AT WWW.DUNEDINGOV.COM.