►
From YouTube: City Of Clearwater Community Development Board 1/17/23
Description
Comments are not monitored on this platform. To make a comment, please visit www.myclearwater.com/government/council-meeting-streaming-videos or one of our social media pages.
Agenda can be found here: http://bit.ly/ClearwaterCityCouncilMeetings
A
A
Remember
to
turn
off
your
cell
phone
so
that
they
do
not
become
a
distraction
during
the
meeting.
Please
also
refrain
from
having
conversations
in
this
room
so
that
we
might
hear
all
the
testimony
given
today
sure
a
complete
record
of
this
board's
actions.
We
ask
each
individual
wishing
to
speak,
including
speak
into
the
microphone
at
the
podium
in
front
of
us,
clearly
state
your
name
and
spell
your
last
name
for
the
clerk
now
I
will
ask
all
those
in
attendance
today
who
plan
to
speak
to
please
rise
and
be
sworn
in
by
the
book.
A
This
meeting
are
on
the
podium
to
your
left
near
the
entry
door,
also
on
this
Podium
or
a
roster
of
the
Community
Development
board,
the
list
of
City
staff
experts
and
their
resumes,
the
board's
rules
of
procedures
and
the
annual
schedule
of
the
sport.
Our
first
order
of
business
is
to
review
and
approve
the
minutes.
From
last
month's
meeting.
May
I
have
a
motion
for
approval
of
the
minutes.
A
Second,
all
in
favor
all
right
opposed
all
right.
Our
next
order
of
business
is
to
hear
from
citizens
who
wish
to
be
heard
on
any
item
that
is
not
on
today's
agenda.
Is
there
anyone
present
that
would
like
to
speak
about
anything,
that's
not
on
the
agenda,
all
right,
our
regular
agenda.
We
begin
with
the
level
three
item
that
was
continued
to
today's
meeting
from
prior
meetings
case.
A
D
A
All
level
three
cases,
such
as
a
plan,
Amendment
rezoning
or
development
agreement,
are
considered
legislative
hearings,
the
Community
Development
board
reviews
the
application,
the
staff
report
correspondence
and
all
evidence
presented
today
and
makes
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council
for
level
3
applications.
The
city
council
makes
the
final
decision
the
procedure
for
all
level.
3
cases
is
as
follows:
presentation
by
planning
staff,
10
minutes
maximum
presentation
by
the
applicant
10
minutes
maximum
comments
by
the
public
three
minutes
per
person,
closing
remarks
by
the
planning
and
development
staff.
A
F
All
right
good
afternoon,
Lauren
Matzke
with
Planning
and
Development.
Just
in
reading
the
request,
you
can
tell
that
there
are
a
wide
variety
of
topics
that
were
covered
within
this
text.
Amendment.
It's
proposed
ordinance,
9643-23.
F
So
to
cover
it
initially,
I
just
wanted
to
say,
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
things
that
are
proposed
in
there
that
are
a
little
bit
so
clarifications
and
kind
of
adding
some
citations
and
and
such
so
I'm
not
going
to
go
over
all
of
those
changes,
I
hope
to
make
it
through.
In
my
nine
and
a
half
minutes
left
as
noted
in
the
staff
report,
a
number
of
things
came
from
previous
direction
from
city
council,
so
I'll
make
sure
to
point
those
out.
F
Additionally,
there
were
some
changes
made
to
the
county-wide
rules
that
allow
us
to
enable
a
few
things
so
those
are
addressed.
We
had
some
an
objective
of
streamlining
certain
processes
and
then,
as
I
just
mentioned,
providing
Clarity
where,
where
possible,
the
bulk
of
the
amendments
were
in
the
US,
19
and
downtown
districts,
so
I'll
cut
through
the
early
ones,
quick
quickly,
Community
Gardens.
F
The
second
piece
is
to
change.
Oh
I
apologize
I
should
note
I'm
going
to
work
through
it
kind
of
in
order
that
things
generally
came
in
the
ordinance.
This
is
like
I
did
with
the
staff
report,
so
thank
you.
The
second
piece
is
the
medium
density.
Residential
district
staff
and
the
Community
Development
board
have
likely
noticed
that
we've
had
several
projects
come
through
in
the
past
year.
F
I
believe
most
of
them
were
affordable
housing
projects
that
needed
to
go
to
the
board,
specifically
for
setback,
flexibility
or
well
yeah,
primarily
for
front
setbacks,
flexibility
if
they
were
on
residential
or
Corner
Lots,
rather
so,
staff
is
proposing
to
allow
additional
front
setback,
flexibility
for
detached
dwellings
through
the
fls
process.
That
would
allow
them
to
a
more
streamlined
process
for
that
and
then,
additionally,
creating
the
residential
infill
projects
use
at
an
fls.
F
The
provisions
that
are
in
the
ordinance
are
consistent
with
that
which
is
already
written
for
for
the
low
medium
density,
residential
district,
so
same
same
rules
just
in
a
different
zoning
District.
So
for
some
reason
they
weren't
allowed
in
medium
density,
residential,
where
it
was
in
the
low
medium
density,
residential.
F
Another
big
piece
of
this
code
was
related
to
fences
and
walls.
Initially,
Council
had
directed
staff
to
look
at
corner
Lots
where,
as
you
all
know
there,
they
can
have
two
or
more
fronts
and
they
have
to
comply
with
the
front
setbacks.
As
a
result
and
city
council
wanted
to
allow
up
to
six
feet,
high
non-opaque
fence
on
the
what
would
be
kind
of
the
secondary
Frontage.
So
the
way
the
code
describes
it,
it's
the
the
addressed
front
and
then
all
other
non-addressed
front
property
lines
would
be
treated
as
sides.
F
So
that
was
our
initial
objective.
But
additionally,
staff
has
has
worked
a
lot
in
the
fence
code
and
it
had
some
some
proposed
changes
that
would
hopefully
make
it
easier
for
the
general
users
of
the
code,
including
calling
out
Special
Districts
and
plan
areas
like
beach
by
Design,
the
US
19
district
downtown
district.
So
people
were
aware
that
there
could
be
other
regulations
pertaining
defenses,
also
calling
out
site
visibility
triangles
because
we
find
sometimes
people
just
forget
that
that's
required.
F
The
landscape
requirement
is
proposed
to
be
moved
and
it's
actually
duplicated.
So
it
would
be
in
each
section
that
would
potentially
apply
again
looking
at
the
user
experience
and
if
it's
kind
of
tucked
in
it
sometimes
gets
missed.
So
this
hopefully
puts
a
more
clear
place
for
users
and
then
it
calls
out
entry
components.
We
often
find
that
we're
asked
about
Gates
trellises
other.
You
know,
structures
that
could
be
used
to
create
an
entryway.
F
Otherwise,
though,
incorporated
into
the
fence
in
the
set
some
Provisions
for
that
and
then
most
importantly,
adding
Graphics
throughout
I
realize
I
already
touched
on
this,
because
this
was
the
main
impetus
for
this.
This
particular
section
of
code-
and
this
was
where
the
non-opaque
or
open
style
fences
would
be
allowed.
F
This
is
an
example
of
the
graphic
that
go
along
with
that
so
again,
allowing
them
the
taller
fences
on
the
non-addressed
front
property
lines
and
maintaining
the
four
foot
Max
height
along
the
address
front
property
line,
and
then,
additionally,
where
I
mentioned
the
the
Landscaping
Provisions,
the
code
requires
that
if
a
fence
is
in
front
of
a
structure
and
that
fences
above
is
exceeds
three
feet
in
height,
then
the
three
foot
wide
Landscaping
strip
must
be
provided.
F
There
are
several
smaller
pieces
in
here,
but
in
order
that
they
come
in
the
code
for
mixed-use
districts,
the
county-wide
rules
allows
us
to
they
call
it
a
bonus
but
allows
for
vertical
misused
projects
to
not
have
to
utilize
the
proportionate
share,
mixed-use
calculation
for
it,
so
that
is
enabled,
through
this
proposed
ordinance
in
the
downtown
district.
That's
the
district
that
meets
all
of
the
other
requirements
in
the
county-wide
rules
to
be
able
to
apply
this
in
the
general
Landscaping
standards.
F
Council
had
directed
us
to
allow
for
artificial
turf
in
parks
and
on
athletic
fields.
These
are
somewhat
normal
applications
of
it,
but
our
code
was
silent,
so
this
provides
that
Clarity
parking
restrictions.
This
is
something
that
came
up
through
working
with
our
co-compliance
division
when
we
rezoned
downtown
to
certain
districts
to
be
all
one
unified
zoning
District
it
had
the
inadvertent
impact
to
to
those
residential
areas
are
existing
parking
restrictions
no
longer
applied
because
they
currently
apply
to
residentially
zoned
districts,
and
these
are
not
necessarily
residentially
zoned,
because
downtown
is
a
mixed-use
district.
F
So
we
looked
at
those
streets
that
are
intended
to
be
100
residential
through
the
code
and
created
a
new
definition,
residentially
designated
downtown
property
and
thus
the
new,
the
existing
residential
parking
restrictions
would
apply
on
those
streets
as
well
in
downtown.
Additionally,
and
looking
at
the
code,
we've
realized
that
boats
are
currently
allowed
to
be
parked
in
the
street
right
of
way
in
non-residential
areas,
so
that
provision
has
been
included.
So
that's
more
of
a
safety
issue,
not
parking
your
growth.
F
Industry
there's
a
few
different
Provisions
in
the
sign
code.
The
first
is
to
prohibit
the
use
of
LED
Road
lighting
around
windows
and
doors
sounds
like
an
odd
place
for
it
to
be
in
the
sign
code,
but
the
actual
provision
that
says
that
this
type
of
lighting
is
not
a
sign
is
within
there.
So
that
is
where
this
specific
prohibition
is
proposed
to
be
included.
F
Currently
we
do
prohibit
it
in
the
the
use
of
these
lights
in
downtown
specifically,
and
this
would
make
it
a
city-wide
prohibition
you'll
see
a
couple
of
places
where
assigned
permits
they
or
may
not
have
had
a
renewal
date,
so
those
are
added
in
including
in
this
area
for
sidewalk
sign
permits,
and
then
one
of
council's
directions
goes
to
address
the
ability
to
have
a
Marquee
in
downtown.
You
know
we
have
the
Capitol
Theater
here,
and
that
would
be
a
good
place
for
something
like
that.
F
So
this
does
set
some
standards
for
attached
electronic
changeable
message,
signage
in
downtown
specifically,
and
that
venue
would
have
to
be
750
or
more
seats.
It
has
to
be
integrated
into
the
sign
design
very
specifically,
and
it
sets
the
maximum
changing
of
the
design
every
15
seconds.
An
existing
code
was
changed
to
be
freestanding,
changeable,
Message,
Board
signs,
the
dog
friendly
dining
is
just
the
renewal
dates
again
pre-application
conferences.
F
This
would
require
all
projects
in
US,
19
and
downtown
districts
to
go
to
have
a
mandatory
pre-app
meeting
unless
the
Community
Development
coordinator
director
waves
that
these
are
more
complex
codes
and
we
find
that
having
that
pre-app
meeting,
many
people
do
Avail
themselves
of
it,
but
it's
not
required,
but
the
overall
project,
I
think
with
the
project
process,
will
go
smoother
if
we
make
sure
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page
at
the
beginning
and
then
last
on
this
page
development
agreements,
there's
two
pieces,
one
would
be
to
extend
the
duration
up
to
30
years.
F
This
is
consistent
with
Council
direction,
as
they
were.
Approving
the
both
projects
and
I
am
not
going
to
hit
10
minutes
and
also
allows
our
annual
reports
to
be
presented
to
council
only
if
there
are
issues
with
compliance
and
there's
a
few
changes
to
definitions
and
new
definitions
added
in
U.S
19
there's
a
variety
of
things.
I'll
touch
on
just
the
highlights.
F
A
D
A
F
Down
to
the
last
two
districts,
thank
you
very
much
so
so
that
was
the
bicycle
parking.
We
realized
that
we,
you
know
with
changes
of
use
or
as
people
are
incrementally
adapting
their
properties
and
and
maybe
expanding
them.
It
is
an
opportunity
to
start
integrating
in
more
bicycle
parking.
F
Oh
I
was
going
to
say
okay,
so
requiring
an
fls
for
projects
on
10
plus
acres.
You
may
recall
that
the
US
19
District
sets
different
standards
for
these
larger
properties.
This
is
where
our
goal
is
to
create
a
more
urban
form
and
there
are
certain
block
requirements,
so
the
sites
have
to
be
integrated
into
an
urban
form
with
primary
and
secondary
drives
and
that
setbacks
Etc.
F
So
coupling
a
mandatory
pre-application
meeting
with
the
ability
to
process
these
to
require
a
full
site
plan,
review
I
think,
would
make
for
a
stronger
project
and
ultimately
shorten
the
time.
I.
Think
for
our
applicants
what's
happening
now
is
if
they
come
in
and
they're
able
to,
they
can
come
for
a
building
permit
Direct
directly
and
those
changes
are
made
through
the
the
review
process.
F
And
talking
with
our
applicants
and
also
based
on
the
experience,
we're
noticing
that
the
winded
transparency
requirements
are
not
necessarily
being
met
at
the
time
of
construction,
so
the
code
is
intended
to
have
very
minimal
tinting,
but
it
based
on
everything.
It
seems
like
there's
a
difference
in
terminology.
So
so
we've
worked
with
some
Architects
and
come
up
with
proposed
language
changes,
but
ultimately
the
provision
is
the
same.
The
goal
is
still
to
have
clear,
transparent,
Windows,
not
mirrored
not
finished,
but
updating
to
utilize.
F
The
same
type
of
terminology
that
window
manufacturers,
use
and
Architects
are
familiar
with
the
site,
design
standards.
Cross
parcel
connections
are
currently
required,
but
it's
not,
but
it's
not
necessarily
to
all
a
budding
sites.
It
does
say
undeveloped.
So
this
proposes
to
change
that
to
all
about
insights
and
it
allows
for
stub
outs
for
those
properties
where
there
may
not
be
a
possible
connection
at
this
time.
But
the
goal
is
obviously
at
the
time
of
Redevelopment.
F
As
we
start
to
see
more
changes
in
the
corridor,
we
start
to
stick
to
the
properties
back
together
and
then
the
last
is
for
the
building
design
standards.
Establishing
a
requirement
for
upper
floors
to
have
windows.
Currently
the
code
focuses
on
the
ground
floor.
That
is
the
area
that
we're
most
concerned
about
from
that
pedestrian
and
walkability
perspective.
But
we
did
have
some
buildings
come
through
that
had
very
limited
to
no
windows
on
upper
floors
due
to
their
use,
and
this
is
something
to
address
that
and
then
mechanical
equipment
screening.
F
Flexibility
in
US
19
is
specifically
Limited
in
certain
ways.
So
for
those
areas
where
there,
if
there
isn't
flexibility,
spelled
out
it's
not
able
to
be
requested.
So
in
this
instance
there's
certain
things
that
are
proposed
just
for
reorganization
and
adding
figures
to
the
flexibility.
That's
specifically
for
flexibility
for
building
entries
and
transparency.
F
No
major
changes
there,
just
some
restructuring,
adding
flexibility
in
US
19
for
finished
floor
elevation
residential
uses
currently
have
to
provide
a
finish
floor,
elevation
between
18
inches
and
36,
inches
or
three
feet,
and
on
sloping
sites
we
found
that
that's
you
know
more
challenging
to
do
so.
The
proposal
is
to
allow
up
to
four
feet
on
sloping
sites
and
then
also
to
allow
Those
portions
of
a
residential
building
that
are
occupied.
F
I
got
a
non-residential
use
such
as
a
Lobby
the
entry,
those
could
have
lower
finish
floor
elevations
and
then,
where
I
talked
about
the
cross-parcel
connections,
you
know
making
them
required
for
all
a
budding
sites.
It
does
all.
The
flexibility
is
proposed
to
allow
Our
Community
Development
coordinator
to
waive
those
requirements.
If
the
applicant
is
shown
that
it
demonstrates
that
they've
exhausted
all
possible
options
and
then
easement
just
isn't
possible,
sometimes
that
might
happen,
and
this
allows
staff.
This
gives
the
direction
on
what
to
do
in
that
instance,
and
then.
F
Lastly,
in
this
section
it
there
is
special
special
project
types
defined
in
US
19
and
there's
flexibility
for
those.
These
are
kind
of
those.
You
can't
account
for
everything
in
a
code.
Sometimes
you
try
to,
but
you
can't
always,
and
some
products
are
going
to
have.
You
know
just
some
thing
that
it
provides
to
the
city
that
would
that
would
mean
that
we
might
want
to
provide
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
in
different
ways.
In
this
instance,
the
proposal
is
for
employment
intensive
projects.
F
This
is
currently
in
the
code,
but
the
acreage
threshold
is
five
acres.
In
order
to
qualify
for
this,
this
would
reduce
the
acreage
threshold
to
2.5
acres,
so
they
would
still
have
to
demonstrate
that
their
project
creates
those
jobs
that
are
in
order
at
the
higher
end
of
incomes.
Our
Economic,
Development
and
housing
group
would
need
to
certify
that
it
would
meet
that,
but
they
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
aggregate
five
acres.
They
could
aggregate
two
and
a
half
and
and
be
able
to
Avail
themselves
of
this
flexibility.
F
Downtown
is
very
similar,
so
I
bulleted
that
out,
but
I'll
try
to
keep
it
a
little
bit
shorter.
F
Sometimes
we
try
to
allow
some
flexibility,
but
we
want
to
coat
the
them
to
meet
the
standards
to
the
greatest
extent
practicable.
So
you
probably
saw
that
language
was
added
in
multiple
places.
The
regulating
plan
maps
are
updated
where
a
few
streets
did
not
have
the
street
type
designations.
We
inadvertently
left
those
off,
so
those
are
proposed
to
be
added
on
the
maps
and
then
also
there
are
a
couple
of
land
blocked,
Parcels
in
downtown
and
the
the
way
the
code
works,
the
setbacks
and
certain
other
Provisions
are
assigned
by
Street
type.
F
So
these
would
not
be
on
a
street.
Therefore
they
wouldn't
have
had
a
street
type
assigned
and
we
needed
to
come
up
with
a
way
to
to
establish
what
setbacks
they
would
have
to
meet.
So
this
would
allow
us
to
work
with
the
applicant
and
all
also
let
the
Community
Development
coordinator
be
part
of
that
in
the
character
districts
there.
A
lot
of
this
is
carrying
forward
stuff
like
the
vertical
mixed
use,
the
use
in
off-street
parking
table.
F
There's
a
couple
of
different
things:
adding
Community
Gardens,
which
is
part
of
the
broader
ordinance
correcting
overnight
accommodations
in
the
South
Gateway,
the
the
table
accidentally
or
inadvertently
said
that
they
were
allowed
and
they're
not
so
this
fixes
that
and
that's
consistent
with
the
maps
and
everything
that
establishes
the
density
in
the
Clearwater
downtown
Redevelopment
plan.
So
it
was
already
established
that
it
was
prohibited.
It
just
wasn't
correct
in
the
table.
F
Additionally,
this
proposes
to
allow
self
storage
facilities
in
the
downtown
Gateway
character
district,
and
it
revises
you
specific
criteria
that
would
apply
to
all
Healthcare
facilities.
They're
currently
allowed,
as
you
know,
as
an
accessory
used
to
a
broader
use.
So
they
are,
you
know,
accommodated
for
in
downtown
that
this
would
expand
to
allow
them
also
in
the
downtown
Gateway
and
then.
Similarly,
there
are
some
changes
to
bike
parking,
primarily
in
downtown.
F
It's
to
provide
reference
to
the
broader
bike,
parking
standards
for
the
city,
not
changes
to
how
much
parking
is
required,
but
if
short-term
parking
is
provided,
what
it
needs
to
look
like
in
the
frontage
standards.
There's
similar
clarifications,
some
other
changes
to
the
window,
transparency
terminology.
F
We
have
had
the
experience
now
with
u-shaped
buildings
in
downtown,
so
that
was
something
that
the
code
didn't
necessarily
readily
accommodate
it
was
it
wasn't
intentionally
left
out?
It's
just
that
we're
thinking
more,
you
know
buildings
all
across
the
front,
but
u-shaped
buildings
are
not
uncommon
and
you
know
can
be,
can
help
meet
our
overall
objectives
for
downtown.
So
this
this
addresses
that
if
you
were
to
have
a
U-shaped
building
those
two
legs
of
your
building,
how
far
apart,
could
they
be
spaced,
because
the
code
does
have
buildings
facing
requirements?
F
So
this
helps
to
find
that
for
everyone.
Lastly,
where
the
neighborhood
conservation
Frontage
is
located
on
a
collector
Street.
This
would
allow
three
units
where
currently
only
two
would
be
allowed.
F
F
Of
course,
our
goal
is
always
to
make
both
codes
consistent
on
those
Provisions
that
are
intended
to
meet
the
same
things
since
US
19
does
not
allow
detached
dwellings
or
duplexes,
but
well
detached
dwellings,
but
downtown
does
there
is
a
provision
that
requires
vehicular
connectivity
and
additional
pedestrian
walkways,
and
so
this
provides
an
exemption
for
detached
Rollings
and
duplexes
on
internal
Lots,
where
it
you
would
not
normally
have
that
kind
of
connection,
it's
a
different
function,
but
it's
this
would
not
exempt
them
for
providing
reconstructed
sidewalks,
for
example,
and
swimming
pools.
F
We
also
now
have
enough
experience
working
with
that.
This
would
set
a
new
standard
for
swimming
pools
to
set
the
the
default
or
the
base.
Provision
would
be
that
they
should
be
on.
They
would
have
to
be
on
the
roof
of
a
building
or
a
fully
enclosed
Courtyard.
So
all
four
sides
building
and
then
you'll
see
in
a
few
minutes
when
I
click
through
the
flexibility
that
we
created
new
flexibility
to
allow
for
the
u-shaped
buildings
or
L-shaped
buildings.
F
Oh
there's
the
buildings
thanks
Andrew,
sorry
about
that
inflexibility.
There
were
a
few
things
that
have
come
up
over
over
time
with
new
buildings.
One
is
related
to
building
step
backs.
The
this
is
to
you
know,
provide
some
relief
for
people
along
the
street
where
you
you
want
to
have
interest
and
a
little
bit
of
more
space-
and
you
know
other
design
features
like
that.
But
currently
the
step
backs
would
be
required
on
all
sides
of
a
building
that
are
on
a
public,
right-of-way
or
Street.
F
This
would
change
that
to
where
the
step
backs
would
they
would
be
required,
but
they
could
provide
alternative
designs
and
then
parking
garages-
it's
not
very
feasible
to
have
a
step
back
integrated
into
the
parking
garage,
so
this
would
be
either
freestanding
or
integrated
parking
garages,
giving
some
flexibility
regarding
where
I
step
back
or
where
that
additional
relief
is
required.
I've
mentioned
the
u-shaped
buildings,
also
allowing
some
some
flexibility.
They
could
request
additional
building
spacing
for
that
same
changes
for
finished
floor
elevations
and
then
on
this
page,
something
that
would
be
relevant.
F
That
is
only
in
Downtown
parking,
limited
surface
parking.
This
would
allow
limited
surface
parking
expansion
for
existing
offices
offices
or
uses
that
we
need
to
support
in
downtown,
and
there
are
some
that
exist
that
may
need
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
additional.
They
may
need
to
provide
more,
but
you
know
to
still
meet
the
overall
goals
and
objectives
in
urban
form
requirements
for
a
downtown.
This
would
provide
a
little
bit
of
relief
to
them
if
they
had
the
ability
to
add
add
to
it
within
the
same
block
and
abutting
the
property.
F
I
mentioned
the
new
swimming
pool
standards,
flexibility
and
we
do
have
very
few,
but
a
couple
of
buildings
that
could
be
within
a
flood
zone.
So
this
would
allow
some
flexibility
for
for
buildings
and
flood
zones
and
then,
of
course,
for
historic
properties.
F
When
we've
reviewed
these,
we
review
to
make
sure
that
any
of
the
code
amendments
are
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
They
must
also
further
the
purposes
of
the
Community
Development
code
and
the
staff
report
that
was
attached
gives
a
much
more
detailed
explanation
of
how
this
proposed
amendment
meets
both,
and
so
with
that.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
additional
time.
A
K
F
Not
for
this
one
in
the
past,
we
do
try
to
do
that.
We've
had
very
topic
specific
code,
Amendments
of
Blade
and
we've
also
taken
a
short
break
from
some
of
the
code
amendments
that
are
like
this,
where
they
come
from
a
variety
of
sources.
So
the
city
council,
Direction,
came
over
the
course
of
a
couple
of
years,
different
meetings
that
they
had,
and
we
just
you
know
finally
got
it
all
integrated
in
to
one
the
US,
19
and
downtown
district.
B
G
G
Think
the
goal
really
was
to
address
our
Capitol
Theater
and
that
we
didn't
want
to
allow
the
pro
per.
C
G
You
thank
you
on
every
kind
of
business
in
downtown,
and
so
we
looked
at
downtown.
It
is
an
Entertainment
District
and
you
find
theaters
throughout
the
country
that
have
you
know
Marquees
and
that's
how
we
decide.
B
G
It's
that
you
can
only
ask
for
an
electronic
changeable
Marquee
if
you
are
a
venue
of
some
kind
that
has
at
least
750
seats
so,
for
example,
the
L
Ron
Hubbard
Hall.
If
that
gets
built,
it
would
be
able
to
Avail
themselves
to
that
Capitol
Theater
could.
But
really
we
want
to
limit
electronic
changeable
messages,
and
that's
been
pretty
clear
in
our
sign
code
for
years
like
right
now,
the
only
places
that
can
have
it
are
venues
that
are
2000
seats
and
more
and
those
are
for
freestanding
signs.
G
J
Oh
good
yeah
I
have
a
number
of
specific
science
as
they
go
through
them.
How
they
actually
specific
to
apply
to
things
that
I
know
of
one
of
them
is
thank
you
for
the
work
on
the
community
garden.
You
know
my
long-term
interesting,
Community
Gardens.
J
One
of
them
is
the
six
foot
fence,
a
four
foot
versus
six
foot
and
at
our
one
at
the
one
that
we
have
on
Grove
Street.
We
need
a
six
foot
fence,
because
what
essentially
is
a
four
foot
fence
would
be
developing
an
attractive
nuisance
to
me,
people
there's
some
Tomatoes.
Let's
go
over
and
jump
this
fence
and
get
it
and
there's
nobody
there.
Much
of
the
time
is
it
already.
J
We
have
people
taking
other
things
out
of
the
garden
and
the
same
parallel
runs
at
the
killer,
Water
Garden
Club,
where
they
have
a
six
foot
both
places.
We
already
have
a
six
foot
fence,
but
but
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
I
I,
yes
I,
would
prefer
if
you
didn't
need
a
fence
like
it
was
part
of
a
church
or
something
that
there's
no
reason
to
put
up
a
fence.
I've
seen
I've
done,
Eden
doesn't
have
a
big
fence,
but
they're
next
to
the
fire
station.
J
But
if
there's
Gardens
in
the
middle
of
nowhere
like
some
of
these
are
where
Nobody's
around
to
watch
them
of
a
six
foot
fence
keeps
people
from
wanting
to
jump
over
and
grab
the
vegetables
and
take
the
food
off
of
there.
Sure
so
I
think
that's
if
that
could
be
made
to
move
back
to
a
six
foot
fence
in
those
locations.
Maybe
some
wording
where
it
is
of
shown
that
it
can
can
reduce.
J
F
That's
on
page
19
for
anyone
following
along
in
the
ordinance,
so
I
I
was
just
letting
anyone
following
along
in
the
actual
ordinance,
that's
on
page
19
of
the
ordinance
where
it
talks
about
the
operational
requirements
for
Community
Gardens.
So
we
could
look
to
see
how
to
incorporate
a
potential
allowance
up
to
six
feet
in
certain
because
yeah,
it's.
F
J
J
J
We
have
always
teamed
together
on
that
I
don't
know
historically,
if
there's
a
contract
or
not,
but
we've
we're
two
organizations
that
have
been
developed
and
and
cited
by
the
city
in
years
ago,
and
we
work
together
as
Community
agencies
and
we'd
like
to
we
have
to
sign
existing
and
I
figured.
We
could
probably
keep
that,
but
we
have
been
looking
at
having
a
lighted
sign
there
that
could
go
for
fifth.
J
You
know
some
period
of
time
for
the
club
latest
presentation
they're
making
at
the
at
the
at
the
Francis,
Wilson
Playhouse
and
then
flip,
maybe
to
the
other
one
that
has
to
do
with
the
the
Garden
Club,
because
we
have
events
and
things
that
we
do
there
and
it'd
be
nice.
If
we
could,
if
we
could
do
work
that
that's
one
of
our
goals,
if
that
can
be
made
to
work,
I
mean
it's
not
a
deal
breaker
for
everything,
but
I
understand
it
gets
out
of
it
can
get
out
of
hand.
G
Well,
I
think
part
of
the
issue
is
that
that
would
be
an
off-premise
sign
which
our
code
does
not
support
so
right
there.
It
presents
an
issue
to
us.
I
think
I
know
that
the
Francis
Wilson
Playhouse
has
a
changeable
copy
sign
at
their
building.
I
think
they
do,
but
having
you
know
something
offside
is
not
going
to
be
allowed
and
I
would
not
be
supportive
of
trying
to
open
up
the
code
for
off-premise
signs.
G
G
Again,
I
think
it's
more
like
it's
like
a
billboard,
which
we
don't
allow
that
it's
prohibited.
You
know
that
it's
off-site
advertising
for
use
that
isn't
on
the
same
property,
but
that's
really
I
think
the
issue
that
actually
I
just
would
like
to
get
clarification
too
on
defense
matter
being
a
potential
six
feet:
height,
you're
talking
about
on
the
front
property
line,
because
the
side
in
the
rear
is
at
six,
the.
Actually
it's
it's
on
the
front
property
line.
The
address.
J
G
It's
yeah
the
change
you're
asking
the
board
to
support
us
making
would
be
to
have
a
six
foot
high
fence.
J
G
J
J
Get
around
that
one.
If
you
look
at
that,
one
that
would
be
appreciated.
I
do
have
a
couple
of
other
questions.
It
talks
about
the
the
pre-construction
conference.
Oh
the
one
of
them
is
that
the
the
the
development
coordinator
seems
to
have.
What
is
the
our
options
for
if
somebody
does
not
agree
with
what
the
development
coordinator
agrees
says
can
be
allowed,
is
there
a
way
out?
Is
there
a
petition
way?
It's
probably
on
the
code
someplace,
but
I
just
didn't
find
it
are.
D
F
It
would
be
providing
feedback.
The
idea
was
instead
of
trying
to
set
a
threshold
for
a
meeting.
You
know
if
it's
a
change
of
use
and
it's
very
simple,
no
changes.
It's
unlikely
that
a
free
application
meeting
would
be
needed,
and
this
would
allow
the
the
director
of
the
department
to
to
give
that
ability
to
say
we
don't
need
one.
J
But
a
final
one
here
is
pre-construction
conference.
Is
that
one
that
the
public
can
join
in
or
at
which
point
at
which
point
in
the
process?
Does
this
change?
Where
a
concerned
citizen
might
be
raising
interest
and
that's
been
a
store
point
with
me
in
a
way
that
just
because
the
way,
not
us,
not
our
staff,
but
the
way
that
things
are
organized
that
by
the
time
it's
all
canned,
the
citizens
don't
have
a
chance.
They
may
be
living
by.
Don't
have
a
chance
to
say
anything
about
it.
Can
they
come
to
this
pre-construction.
F
Meeting
or
or
what
they're
they're
all
online
they're,
not
noticed,
meetings
they're,
you
know
held
every
week
and
some
people
have
requested
and
are
on
the
agendas
every
week
by
choice.
These.
G
Are
I
would
say
these
are
not
public
meetings.
These
are
meetings
with
the
applicant
to
understand
what
it
is
they're
trying
to
propose
make
them
aware
of
any
code
section.
It
is
not
an
official
approval
process.
It's
not
so
the
public
would
be
able
to
be
involved
through
the
DRC
meeting.
If
there
was
one
needed
or
the
cdb
process
I
just.
J
J
Okay,
also
I
think
we
were
given
a
piece
of
a
discussion
here.
Point
from
I
was
prepared
by
Mr
Johnson.
Is
there
a
chance
that
he
can
talk
about
that
or
we.
A
Can
I
don't
know
how
that
comes
in
here
at
all
I'm
advised.
This
is
relates
to
item
two
on
the
staff
report
and
it's
just
a
series
of
questions
and
it's
up
to
the
board.
If
we
want
to
ask
those
questions,
some
other
questions
after
everybody's
not
asking
their
questions,
but
my
understanding
is
if
the
board
agrees
that
we
should
ask
the
questions.
I
can
ask
some
of
this
Masky
and
not
take
any
of
Mr
Johnson's
time
and
Miss
Masky
it's
in
her
discretion.
Whether
she
wants
to
answer
one
all
right.
H
Just
have
a
first
appreciate
all
the
time
and
effort
page
nine,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
clarification
for
me
on
the
fences
there
as
we
get
down
to
C
Corner
multi-frontage,
Lots,
okay,
I
just
want
to
if
I'm
understanding
it,
we
got
a
lot
of
crossed
out
and
things
and
referencing
back
other
sections
and
limited
time
to
review
Car
Lot
monthly,
Frontage
Lots
and
designating
obviously
we're
taking
into
we're
identifying.
Now
what
is
the
lot
Frontage
and
what
we've
done
here
and
are
the
side
such
as
what
you
have
here?
H
H
F
They
could
have
it
on
their
side
behind
the
principal
structure,
so
any
portion
of
the
fence
that
would
be
in
front
of
the
property
would
be
required
to
be
open
style.
That
was
if
it's
expected,
if
it's
six
feet,
So
currently
I'm
using
using
the
the
graphic
and
I
pulled
it
back
up
the
slide.
This
is
one
of
the
few
Graphics
I
pasted
in
currently
anything
in
this
area
between
the
principal
structure
and
the
front
property
line.
F
So
in
the
sense
it's
just
any
of
this
area
would
have
been
limited
to
a
four
foot
fence
recognizing
that
you
know
it
and
and
same
on
this
side.
So
what
would
what
most
people
consider
to
be
a
side
of
their
building?
It
just
happens
to
be
on
a
corner
lot,
so
it's
two
front
property
lines.
F
F
F
H
What
you're
saying,
if
I'm
understanding
this
correctly
looking
at
that,
photo
that
you
have
there
the
top
property
line
and
you're
taking
us,
as
so,
if
that's
like
the
garage,
that's
sticking
out
on
the
bottom
or
whatever
the
case
is
so
that
top
property
line
you
bring
your
fence,
we're
looking
at
two
different
pictures:
I'm,
not
looking
at
the
same
one.
H
F
H
Okay,
so
you
could
have
a
you:
could
have
a
privacy
fence
on
the
as
I'm
looking
at
the
photo
there.
My
left
property
line
side,
which
is
the
back
the
opposite
of
where
your
address
property
is
right.
That's
a
privacy
fed
six
foot
tall
to
that
corner
where
you've
got
the
cross
hatch
on
the
bottom,
which
right
there
yep
and
that
could
be
a
privacy
fence
where
you're
going
right
there,
too.
Six
foot
tall,
opaque,
yes,
yes,
and
on
the
other
property
line,
the
same
thing,
so
you
could
have
a
three
up
on
the
top.
F
H
F
And
some
people
would,
like
you
know
higher
than
forefoot
fences
in
front
of
their
houses
and
so
and
the
the
Landscaping
requirement
would
still
apply
in
this
instance.
So
they
you
know
there
is
the
ability
to
provide
privacy
through
Landscapes.
Thank.
H
H
H
The
following
parking
restrictions
still
apply,
except
it's
provided
in
paragraph
B
of
this
section
within
Street
right-of-ways,
the
following
Vehicles
shall
not
be
parked
or
stored
in
any
public
right-of-way
in
a
residential,
Zone
district
and
so
on
so
I
understand
about
the
store.
But
when
we
get
into
park-
and
we
say
boat
or
trailer-
and
basically
those
things
are,
you
know
not
attached
to
a
vehicle
or
a
car
if
somebody
were
to
pull
up
or
whatever
hauling
trailers
and
such.
H
But
the
one
question
see
above
any
of
the
following:
recreational
vehicles:
travel
trailers,
motor
homes,
camping
and
trailers.
Motorhomes
they're
not
attached
to
anything
they're,
just
individual
motorhomes.
So
can
a
vehicle
come
and
park
on
the
street
and
when
we
say
parking,
I
mean
parking
is
what
What's
the
diff
is
it
an
hour?
Is
it
two
hours?
Is
it
four
hours
or
is
it
five
minutes
or
a
minute?
H
You
know
I
know
we're
getting
into
it's
not
being
extended
to
stay,
but
we
have
neighbors
and
they're
going
to
call
and
they're
going
to
complain
about
certain
things
that
are
on
there.
So
it's
just
kidding
I
understand.
As
we've
looked
at
it
before
travel
trailers
and
things
and
people
put
work
Vehicles
out
there,
that
put
the
trailers
and
they
detach
them
from
the
the
hitch
and
it's
just
sitting
out
on
the
street
or
a
motor
home,
also
detached.
H
F
There's
no
duration
within
this
provision.
H
H
I
mean
these
are
motorhomes.
These
aren't
attached
to
your
car.
This
is
actually
the
big
motorhome.
No,
no!
That's
right!
There's
this
isn't
trailer
and
I
understand
that
on
this
action,
actual
motorhomes,
so
you're
driving
in
your
motorhome
and
you
go
visit
somebody
and
you
park
in
front
of
their
house.
You
can't
do
that.
You
understand
it.
If
you
and.
H
G
C
C
G
C
G
A
B
F
K
And
The
Roots
I
know
a
situation
where
a
motorhome,
a
large
one,
was
parked
on
the
person's
property,
but
it
was
right
next
to
the
fence
of
the
other
person's
property
and
there's
this
massive
motorhome
seeing
she
could
see
in
the
windows
they
can
see.
Obviously,
over
her
fence
I
mean
it
was
right
there.
So
you're
saying
that's
still
allowed
I.
G
K
G
B
B
Does
okay
yeah?
So
it's
not
what
you
said.
No,
this
is
literally
all
this
is
butter,
and
that
just
happened
in
my
neighborhood
just
now,
where
someone
just
did
a
trailer
just
did
that
there's
a
conversation
called
me
up
and
I
said
it's
gonna
be
5p
and
they
you
know
again
agreeability
and
they
moved
it.
Yeah.
F
F
The
way
the
two
coats
are
organized,
there's
exemptions
that
you
know
layout
specific
situations
where
here
you
wouldn't
necessarily
need
to
comply
with
the
standards
in
the
code.
So
a
change
of
use
you
know,
does
not
necessarily
kick
in
all
the
standards,
but
the
more
you
invest
in
the
property.
The
more
standards
apply
so.
A
A
What
say
you
board
members?
Should
we
go
ahead
and
ask
these
questions?
Is
everybody?
Okay,
with
that
all
right,
I'm,
Miss,
Masky
again
in
your
discretion,
whether
to
what
extent
you
answer
these
all
right?
The
first
question
is:
what
does
the
wording
of
the
fls
MDR
infill
provision,
D
0.2
point
on
page
five
of
the
proposed
ordinance
me.
F
F
That's
used
for
residential
infill
in
numerous
zoning
districts
and
one
of
the
things
that
we've
discussed
is
in
a
in
you
know
in
the
for
the
purposes
of
this,
we
utilize
the
exact
same
language
again,
I
think
I
stated
already
it's
it's
what's
allowed
in
the
low
medium
density
residential
district,
which
you
know
is
less
Urban
than
the
medium
density
residential
district.
F
That
being
said,
I
think
we
always
you
know,
find
Opportunities
where
you
know
language
could
be
refined
and
we've
discussed
looking
at
the
residential
infill
Provisions
for
all
of
the
zoning
districts
in
our
next
code,
amendments
that
we
would
bring
forward.
So
that
doesn't
answer
his
question
specifically,
but
I
did
want
to
let
the
board
know
that.
F
So
you
know
in
terms
of
the
specifics
for
residential
infill
and
how
we
determine
something
to
be
compatible.
Our
development
review
team
looks
at
you
know.
Sites
in
the
vicinity
looks
at
past
approvals
and
things
of
that
nature
and
makes
a
recommendation
to
edit
fls.
It
would
be
to
the
Community
Development
coordinator.
F
F
When
you
have
a
corner
a
lot,
you
have
multiple
front
setbacks
and-
and
those
did
just
happen
to
be
for
affordable
housing,
but
this
would
not
be
restricted
to
affordable
housing,
but
otherwise
I
don't
have
the
exact
numbers
of
those
applications.
It's
that.
G
I
just
add
one
thing:
currently:
residential
infill
does
not
exist
in
the
MDR
District.
That
is
the
situation.
We're
trying
to
rectify,
to
be
consistent
with
the
lmdr
ldr
district.
So
that's
it
so
that
a
lot
of
these
projects
that
in
other
districts,
can
be
approved
by
the
staff
of
the
DRC
level
and
the
MDR
District
they've
had
to
come
to
the
board.
So
that's
the
situation
right
now.
We're
trying
to
resolve
with
these
amendments.
A
All
right,
the
next
question
is
how
is
this
amendment
has
currently
written
consistent
with
Section
1-1,
03
CDC
general
purposes.
The
sorry,
the
eyes
aren't
working
B
point
two
point:
ensuring
that
development
and
Redevelopment
will
not
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
value
of
surrounding
properties
and
D,
make
beautification
of
the
city
a
matter
of
the
highest
priority
and
to
require
that
existing
and
future
uses
and
structures
in
the
city
are
attractive.
G
I
mean
clearly
that's
our
goal.
It's
upon
the
applicant,
but
in
many
cases
homeowners
that
may
Avail
themselves
are
sometimes
challenged
and
our
staff
provides
a
lot
of
assistance.
Always
our
goal
that
the
applicant
provide
us.
What
what
we're
asking
for
so
that
I
can
make
a
decision
or
you
can
make
a
decision
in
Your
Capacity.
If
you
are
reviewing
flexibility.
E
Thank
you.
Members
of
the
board.
I
am
Bill
Jones
in
2694
Redford,
Court
speaking
to
section
two
of
the
ordinance
on
page
three
relating
to
MDR
infill,
one
of
the
purposes
of
the
Clearwater
development
code.
As
stated
in
Section
1
103
B2
is
to
ensure
that
development
Redevelopment
will
not
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
value
of
surrounding
properties
and
to
our
citizens.
The
biggest
investment
they
make
is
in
their
home.
They
need
to
have
confidence
that
the
character
and
integrity
of
their
neighborhood
will
be
here
for
years
to
come.
E
The
new
code
that
was
came
out
in
99
made
promises
to
the
residents
that
they
were
make
going
to
be
making
some
changes,
but
it
would
still
enforce
the
Integrity
of
the
code,
and
so
the
two
boards
were
collapsed.
The
Community
Development
board
became
both
the
variance
board
and
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Board,
and
a
commitment
was
made
to
the
residents
trust
us.
This
this
will
work.
E
They
created
the
two
additional
levels
of
flexibility
standards,
the
flexible
standard
and
then
the
flexible
development,
and
they
said
that
they
were
not
allowing
any
more
variances,
but
actually
they
created
something
called
the
infill
residential
infill
for
those
unique
conditions
or
historic
patterns
that
could
not
otherwise
be
developed,
and
so
they
initially
gave
the
cdb
limited
additional
flexibility
for
those
conditions.
E
But
then
the
code
was
watered
down
to
allow
within
guidelines
instead
of
a
specific
variance
maximum.
It
could
be
any
variance
that
could
be
granted
by
the
Community
Development
board,
then
that
change
to
allow
the
staff
level
to
give
that
any
very
level
of
variance
without
coming
to
the
Community
Development
board
in
the
ldr
and
the
lmdr.
E
That's
the
area
of
concern
that
I
think
we
have
as
far
as
the
medium
density
residential,
putting
that
in
the
same
place,
to
give
staff
unrestricted
variance
approval
without
supervision
of
the
Community
Development
board
is
bad
and
I
think
the
decision
should
be
made
if
the
community
of
development
board,
where
public
comment
can
be
made,
and
thank
you
thank
you.
A
Thank
you
all
right,
closing
remarks
by
the
planning.
A
I
J
I
have
two:
one
of
them
is
a
sort
of
short
I.
Don't
want
to
hold
up
the
whole
process.
I've
been
working
on,
because
some
of
this
is
important.
It's
not
my
goal
at
all.
The
all
that
and
I
I
think
our
approval
still
has
to
go
to
the
council,
so.
J
J
We
try
to
make
our
decisions
based
upon
what
works
and
what
we're
used
to
and
I
think
it's
important
to
have
to
not
give
too
much
of
that
away.
So
Mr
Johnson's
comments
are,
should
should
be
listened
to
and
I'd
like
more
time
to
to
just
digest
them,
or
at
least
put
in
the
notice,
a
note
that
this
should
be
considered
by
the
the
council
whether
they
want
to
give
this
away
or
not.
J
As
a
note,
the
second
one
is
if,
if
has
to
do
with
the
six
foot
fence,
that
little
technicality
on
that
one
is
whether
that
can
be
held
up,
whether
it
can
be
changed
or
how
that
can
be
put
in,
because
I
think
that
really
is
a
trying
to
point
out
with
a
six
foot
fence,
not
my
favorite
project,
not
because
I
I
like
something
there.
J
It's
just
that
on
this
one
I
I
feel
it's
that's
a
gonna
be
a
hazard
to
the
to
any
community
garden
if
they
allow
people
to
jump
over
forfeit
fence.
There's
a
way
around
that
I
think
I
was
so.
If,
for
those
two
are
my
concerns,
how
do
I
put
that
into
a
motion
or
do
I?
Can
it
just
be
attached
and
I'm,
not
very
good,
at
making
motions?
So
that's
I'm
really
hesitant
at
doing
emotion
on
that
thing,
but
one.
B
Of
my
two
concerns,
my
question
to
Adam
is
is
what
is
it
that
we're
giving
away
what
I
guess
my
question
is:
I
would
love
an
example,
especially
in
this
area.
Is
that
because
I'm
wondering
we're
now
limiting
staff
to
be
able
to
do
their
job
is?
Is
there
something
that
maybe
I
can
ask
Mr
Johnson
to
say?
Is
there
an
example
of
how
flexibility
or
not
us
having
to
be
able
to
vote
on
that,
could
cause
a
concern?
B
If
you
know
what
I
mean
I'm,
not
sure
you
know
what
egregious
nature
could
happen
without
being
able
to
come
to
this
board,
but
if,
if
this
openness
to
be
able
to
staff
to
be
able
to
do
something
that
maybe
it's
just
streamlining
the
process,
so
I'm
wondering
I,
guess
Mr
Johnson,
like
is
there
an
example?
You
can
give
me
on
this
flexibility
in
this
non.
You
know
ability
of
ours
to
be
able
to
be
involved
in
it.
What
would
be
the
concern
specifically,
to
maybe
an
example,
is
my
question.
E
We
had
an
example
that
came
before
the
board:
I,
don't
think
you
were
here
for
the
that
meeting.
It
was
an
example
where
the
homes
were
mostly
sent
back
25
feet
in
the
area.
The
there
was
one
home
that
was
had
oops
Yeah
there
you
go
thanks.
E
I
think
I
think
I
had
my
numbers
right,
and
so
then
they
came
back
and
they
put
in
a
porch
structure
even
forward
of
that,
and
they
were
asking
for
an
eight
foot
front
setback
instead
of
a
25
foot
step
back-
and
this
was
something
that
that
the
staff
had
said
was
okay,
I
know,
I
had
a
friend
that
lives
in
the
neighborhood
and
he
said
well,
they
didn't
ask
me
I,
don't
think
that
was
that
was
appropriate,
and
so
the
does
does
that
answer.
Your
question
on
it
example.
H
I'm,
a
recollection
on
that
specific
case,
I
think
the
homeowner
even
had
some
neighborhood
support
on
that
as
well,
so
I
mean
I.
Think
with
all
applicants
that
come
in
front
of
here
I
mean
it's
nice
when
we
get
100
support
from
neighborhoods
one
way
or
the
other.
It
makes
our
job
a
little
bit
easier
on
that.
But
the
majority
of
the
stuff
that
we
saw
in
this
last
year
did
not
have
100
support
one
way
or
another.
H
H
I
have
some
concerns
at
times
like
this,
but
for
the
items
that
what
we're
looking
at
here
I
think
that
they're
they're
they're
in
a
box
somewhat
too,
and
all
the
decisions
that
can
be
made
I
mean
there's
flexible
levels
that
they
can
go
to,
but
that's
it
and
and
I
know
that
my
voice
on
this
right
now,
I
I
mean
I.
Looked
at
this
pretty
hard
and
I
didn't
have
much
consternation
of
what
they're
asking
for
on
here
and.
A
But
I
found
persuasive
was
you
used
the
example
of
affordable
housing
and
your
goal
to
streamline
the
process
somewhat
for
those
kinds
of
projects
and
I
realized
that
the
ordinance
would
have
a
broader
application,
but
I'm
persuaded
in
leaning
in
the
direction
that
anything
that
can
be
done
to
streamline
the
process
for
those
individual
homeowners
that
want
to
build
or
rebuild
their
properties.
A
B
The
only
I'll
add,
though,
is
I,
do
believe
even
Alex
Junior
who's
come
here
said
that
he
believes
that
they're
too
easy.
Sometimes
there's
there's
just
needs
to
be
a
line,
because
what
happens
with
flexibility
is
well.
You
gave
it
to
these
guys.
So
now
you
have
to
give
it
to
me.
There's
you
know
already
five
homes
that
had
been
given
eight
feet
so
I
I
do
believe
there
should
be
a
hard
line
and
then
where
that
line
is
drawn,
and
then
here
are
the
things
to
be
able
to
cross
over
that
line.
B
I
do
believe
in
that
with
flexibility.
Sometimes
it
is
a
little
bit
flexible
to
the
level
of
well.
We
can't
because
we
already
gave
this
announce
that
and
now
everyone's
going
to
get
18.
so
I
do
believe.
Where
flexibility
is
concerned,
there
needs
to
be
a
little
bit
harder
to
learn
how
the
after
we
get
to
that.
You
know
and,
however,
that
may
be
and
on
certain
things
I
don't
know,
but
I
have
seen
that
right
through
the
time
in
history
that
once
we
give
it
to
one,
that's
it
that's
the
law.
B
G
I
mean
I
think
we
we
have
to
look
at
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
which
I
think
that
in
itself
sometimes
is
not
clear
enough,
because
I
think
staff
has
taken
a
position
that
it's
a
much
smaller
area
and
then
the
board
had
a
case
on
the
beach
where
a
case
was
made
that
the
whole
North
Beach
should
be
considered
the
neighborhood
which
I
didn't
agree
with,
but
that
was
the
board's
decision.
So
you
know.
G
Maybe
when
we
come
back
and
do
these
amendments,
we
can
provide
a
little
more
clarity
about
what
what
area
is
involved
when
we're
making
these
decisions.
I
think
that
would
be
helpful.
I
also
would
just
point
out
the
case
in
point.
You
all
made
the
decision
step
to
make
the
decision
on
that
particular
case.
But,
as
Lauren
said,
you
know
it's
something
that
she
and
I
have
talked
about,
adding
this
into
the
next
round
of
code
amendments
that
we're
going
to
be
doing
this
year.
I
do
think
some
improvements
could
be
made.
G
There
is
a
footnote
at
the
bottom
of
the
chart.
That
I
feel
like
is
unnecessary
and
I
personally
would
like
to
propose
to
Leading
it.
It
says
that
these
are
just
guidelines,
and
that
makes
me
a
little
uncomfortable
so
I,
you
know,
don't
have
an
issue
of
deleting
that
I
think
there's
plenty
of
flexibility
to
be
had
either
at
the
staff
level
or
go
to
the
board,
so
I
think
there's
some
things
to
do
that
we
can
do
to
improve.
You
know
residential
info
completely.
A
D
Do
you
have
options
as
you
always
do?
Your
options
are
to
send
this
to
the
board
of
recommendation
of
the
reality
in
case
I
suspect,
Bill
they'll,
take
your
recommendation
and
have
them
start
over
four.
You
can
condition
your
recommendation
on
anything
that
you
wish
to
condition
in
the
cloud.
Changing
sin
you
don't
need
to
I.
D
Don't
think
you
need
to
provide
certain
language
to
the
staff
to
say,
X
and
such
to
give
them
the
general
idea
and
if
that's
the
direction
for
the
council
when
it
moves
to
that
level,
if
they
agree,
the
city
council
will
convey
that
direction.
Really.
All
you
need
now
is
emotion
after
that,
wherever
whoever
wishes
to
the
first
guy
with
the
motion,
it's
going
to
drive
the
bus
here
and
the
staff.
G
G
B
G
A
I
96432-3
as
presented
with
the
modification
of
allowing
for
a
six
foot
fence
around
the
entire
perimeter
of
an
a
community
garden
and
also
with
the
understanding
that
the
staff
will
be
presenting
to
us
additional
recommendations
on
modifications,
potential
modifications
of
the
code
to
address
and
field
development
in
medium
density,
residential
areas.
Oh.
C
A
And
again,
thank
you
all
for
tale
provided
on
it
on
a
lot
to
digest.
You've
been
very
helpful.
It
was
a
lot
of
years
and
a
lot
of
good
work.
Thank
you.
All
right,
well,
you've
been
wonderful.
The
next
item
on
our
agenda
is
simpler.
We
have
two
related
level
three
applications
and
a
request
to
postpone
those
to
an
uncertain
date
in
the
future
which
will
trigger
trigger
additional
notice
requirements
so
forth.
You
want
to
speak
to
that.
No.
F
A
The
record,
let
me
just
read
these
cases
the
first
one
is
case.
A
Cpa2022-10002
amendments
to
the
comprehensive
plan
related
to
The,
Parks
and
Recreation
impact
fee.
The
board's
reviewing
a
request
to
amend
the
city
of
Clearwater's
comprehensive
plan
to
address
the
creation
of
a
new
parks
and
recreation
impact
fee
system
and
making
a
recommendation
to
city
council.
The
related
cases
case.
A
Ta2022-10002
amendments
to
the
Community
Development
code,
the
Parks
and
Recreation
impact
fee
Ford
is
reviewing
a
request
to
amend
the
city
of
Clearwater's
Community
Development
code
to
replace
chapter
54
in
its
entirety,
with
a
revised
chapter
54,
creating
a
new
parks
and
recreation
impact
fee
system
in
making
a
recommendation
to
city
council.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
regarding
the
request
to
continue
these
two
items?