![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/gFi0AvbuKj8/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Board May 18, 2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
B
B
B
D
B
E
B
G
J
I
All
of
the
agenda
items
this
evening
or
a
legislative
in
nature
and
not
quasi-judicial.
There
will
be
no
quasi-judicial
announcement
or
swearing-in
of
speakers
as
there
will
be
no
testimony
given
this
evening.
Anyone
who
wishing
to
speak
this
evening
will
be
a
member
of
the
public
and
they
will
be
allotted
four
minutes
in
order
to
speak
on
any
of
the
items.
I
know
usually
the
annexation
czar
quasi-judicial.
However,
this
is
not
an
application
for
annexation.
As
far
as
application
18
50,
it's
actually
an
application
for
requesting
of
a
change
of
effective
date
of
an
ordinance.
I
B
B
J
The
annexation
was
adopted
by
the
board.
The
annexation
ordinance
on
December
10th
and
the
applicant
has
subsequently
requested
that
the
effective
date
be
changed.
The
current
annexation
ordinance
makes
the
annexation
effective
when
the
land-use
and
the
zoning
become
effective.
The
second
readings
on
the
land,
use
and
Zoning
have
not
yet
occurred.
The
applicant
would
like
the
annexation
to
be
effective
immediately,
not
and
not
wait
for
the
second
reading
on
the
land-use
items.
J
The
city
has
the
ability
to
do
this
and
the
ordinance
before
you,
which
is
actually
the
last
page
of
this
item.
We
have
a
staff
cover
memo
and
then
there's
the
BOC
adoption
package.
That's
in
your
packet
and
in
the
very
last
page,
is
ordinance
20
2013,
which
would
change
the
effective
date
of
the
adopted
annexation
ordinance.
So
that
is
the
first
item.
J
The
second
item
in
the
same
request
letter
that
the
applicant
provided.
They
have
also
requested
a
change
to
the
development
agreement
that
the
Board
of
Commissioners
adopted
for
this
project
on
December
3rd
2019,
and
that
change
is
to
really
to
clean
up
the
development
agreement
to
reflect
the
most
up-to-date
exhibit
in
the
agreement.
The
applicant
adjusted
the
site
layout
slightly
to
avoid
the
preservation
area
on
the
property.
That
is
some
designated
preservation
on
the
future
land
use
map,
and
they
would
like
to
amend
the
agreement
to
include
that
updated
plan
to
reflect
that
change.
J
J
The
exhibits
show
the
development
agreement
has
the
original
exhibits
in
it
and
also
the
revised
exhibits.
The
show
the
raid
jogging
slightly
to
the
south,
that
is
to
avoid
the
preservation,
and
that
is
what
the
applicant
is
asking
for
to
have
included
in
the
pack.
I'm.
Sorry
in
the
development
agreement.
B
E
J
I
K
Hi
this
is
Katie
Cole.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes?
Yes,
thank
you.
I
was
under
the
impression
as
the
applicant
since
we're
participating
in
this
meeting
as
an
actual
participant
that
we
would
be
presenting,
so
we
were
invited
to
join
the
meeting
as
a
participant
to
do
that,
and
we
also
had
a
couple
wanted
to
show
you
on
the
screen.
Some
of
the
exhibits,
but
just
a
couple
things.
K
As
Miss
McNeese
indicated
the
Board
of
Commissioners
approved
this
annexation
in
December
and
the
city
and
the
owner
had
contemplated
the
annexation
being
effective
upon
the
completion
of
the
land
use
and
zoning
processes.
There
have
been
a
number
of
delays
in
those
processes.
Specifically,
there
was
a
advertising
issue
in
the
spring
and
then,
when
public
hearings
were
stopped
based
on
the
code,
19
emergency
orders,
the
applicant
sought
to
finalize
everything,
irrespective
of
the
land
use
and
zoning,
so
they
in
February.
K
We
started
talking
to
the
staff
about
this
and
made
this
request,
and
it
just
became
more
apparent
with
all
the
delays
going
on.
The
intention
is
for
this
property,
regardless
to
be
part
of
the
city
of
Turpan
Springs
and
by
changing
the
effective
date
it
uncouples
the
annexation
from
the
land
Jason
zoning
process,
which
is
normally
what
happens.
K
So
again,
these
are
to
clean
up
items
that
are
not
necessarily
significant
changes,
but
certainly
help
clean
things
up
to
move
forward
to
the
Commission
next
week
and
in
June.
So
we
appreciate
your
time
to
hear
this
application
again
and
to
see
this
project
again
and
look
forward
to
moving
this
forward.
Thank
you
very
much.
L
Hello,
yes,
hi
sorry,
my
name
is
Christopher
Pennock
and
I
live
at
366
North
Highland
Avenue
in
Tarpon
Springs
with
my
wife
and
two
children.
I
am
an
unincorporated
Pinellas
County.
In
my
opinion,
as
you
know
that
this
has
been
a
very
heated
argument
and
discussion,
that's
been
going
on
that
the
developer
is
using
this
committee
to
support
you
know
current
legal
proceedings
to
push
through
changes
that
can't
be
undone.
Should
they
lose.
L
L
Outside
of
the
argument
to
move,
we
won't
rehash
the
fact
that
we're
against
this
of
changing
our
environment
that
we
live
in
and
that
we
chose
to
be
here
substantially.
It's
not
a
minor
change.
It's
a
substantial
change.
We
are
adding
traffic
in
your
and
resources
that
are
going
to
be
taken
away
from
other
avenues
to
to
fix
problems
that
this
project
is
going
to
cause
I,
either
Road
conditions.
The
developer
hasn't
outlined
what
their
traffic
is
going
to
do
to
the
roads
at
Pinellas.
L
E
L
K
Thank
You
mr.
chairperson,
just
to
respond
and
to
request
at
the
Commission
meeting
when
the
development
agreement
was
approved,
Mr
Penix
correct
that
the
Commission
asked
for
there
not
to
be
a
waiver
and
did
not
approve
a
waiver
to
the
sidewalks.
The
revised
exhibit
still
shows
that,
and
so
I
appreciate
him
highlighting
that.
K
But
certainly
those
are
things
that
are
all
resolved
at
site
plan
approval,
and
so
this
project
will
come
back
to
the
city
for
final
site
plan
approval,
consistent
with
the
conditions
that
the
Commissioner
previously
said
on
the
devel,
the
development
and
the
RPD
so
happy
to
answer
any
other
questions.
The
board
may
have.
K
Certainly,
that's
also
a
site
plan
issue,
I.
Think
mr.
Penix
referencing
a
TDC
comment
from
about
two
years
ago,
we've
been
working
with
staff
on
this
project.
For
some
time
it
was
initially
a
comment
since
then,
the
applicant
and
the
staff
have
been
working
together
with
the
fire,
and
so
whether
that
is
something
that
will
eventually
be
required
is
still
to
be
determined.
But
that's
why
attached
to
the
development
and
agreement
is
a
conceptual
site
plan
which
is
what
was
previously
approved
in
this
agreement.
K
H
B
H
If
I,
if
I
understand
correctly,
is
it
miss
Cole?
Yes,
sir
I
miss
cool
if
I
understand
correctly,
if
I
heard
that
right
in
regards
to
the
sidewalk
issue,
one
versus
Q,
does
that
mean
that
we
rap
reading
a
document
within
this
application?
That
is
in
fact
incorrect
and
should
not
be
part
of
this
application
at
this
time,.
K
No
that
that's
in
that's
not
the
case,
I
think
that
when
this
comes
back
for
final
Siteman
you're
not
reviewing
the
final
site
plan,
this
is
a
conceptual
plan
to
show
the
lot
layout
and
and
not
to
extent
of
this.
This
will
come
back
for
site
plan
approval
for
the
staff
to
review
consistent
with
the
conditions
placed
on
this
by
the
city.
K
H
K
I'm,
not
renewing
that
request
by
any
means,
okay,
and
we
can
certainly
believe
all
those
waiver
requests
off
of
off
of
this
plan.
If
that
would
because
it
was
simply
an
oversight.
The
same
plan
was
used
in
the
only
change
that
was
made
was
with
respect
to
the
preservation
area.
So
the
fact
that
the
waivers
were
still
listed
on
it
based
on
the
original
development
agreement,
we
can
delete
those
before
it
moves
forward
to
the
Commission.
H
But
I'll,
let
that
go
I
do
have
another
question:
is
there
in
regards
to
the
other
public
comment?
I
believe
that
was
the
attorney
representing
for
I?
Guess
it's
a
civil
suit?
H
A
K
I
M
I
If
I
might
mr.
chairman,
at
this
point,
you
all
are-
and
forgive
me
if
I'm
making
this
a
little
bit
general
but
I,
think
the
questions
that
you
guys
are
getting
into
right
now
have
to
do
with
specific
things
on
the
plans
as
far
as
the
site
plan
is
concerned,
and
not
necessarily
the
two
applications
before
you,
which
are
the
change
in
effective
date
for
the
annexation
ordinance
and
the
changes
to
the
development
agreement.
I
If,
if
you
do
have
concerns
with
the
conceptual
agreement
as
they
relate
to
the
development
agreement,
then
I
think
those
questions
are
posed
either
to
staff
or
to
miss
Cole.
However,
if
you're
going
to
go
back
and
forth
and
keep
saying
you
know,
these
are
I
think
the
questions
are
getting
more
into
the
site
plan
review,
which
is
not
yet
for
you
guys
it
will
be,
but
it's
not
yet
at
this
time
well,.
M
This
is
my.
My
question
is
I'm,
looking
at
the
the
actual
site
data
table
and
everyone's
telling
me
that
well
I'm,
sorry,
let
me
rephrase
that
what
I'm
hearing
in
this
conversation
is
that
it
they've
trying
to
preserve
more
wetland
area
and
I'm
looking
at
the
site
data
table,
and
it's
telling
me
that
there's
0.72
acres
that
have
increased
in
the
upland
area,
there's
up.
M
Where
is
the
other
one?
It's
0.78
acres
that
are
actually
ponds
of
increase
in
acreage
and
then
there's
the
total
wetlands
have
actually
gone
down
0.06.
So
that's
just
a
fraction,
so
I
don't
see
anything,
that's
conserving
the
wetlands,
so
I'm.
Just
that's
the
reason.
I'm
saying
I'm,
just
a
bit
confused
with
what
I'm
reading
and
what
I'm
hearing.
K
Mr.
chairman,
if
I
may,
in
Les,
Mis
McNeese
with
once
responds
this
is
Katie
Colvin.
This
has
very
minor
changes
to
the
wetlands.
As
you
highlighted.
This
is
truly.
If
you
look
at
the
revised
Exhibit
C
as
opposed
to
revised
Exhibit
B,
it's
the
change
to
the
preservation
land
use
designation.
It's
truly.
The
change
in
this
agreement
is
a
color
on
the
map.
It's
not
substantively
the
plan.
I
can't.
B
J
The
applicant
requested
that
the
annexation
date
be
effective
immediately,
so
we
are
bringing
that
request
before
you.
The
applicant
is
correct
and
that
annexations
are
done
with
that.
I
can
think
of
one
near
this
project
without
the
change
of
Zoning.
Sometimes
without
the
change
of
future
land-use
state
law
lets,
you
do
that,
and
obviously
property
operates
under
whatever
land
use
and
Zoning
is
in
place
under
the
other
jurisdiction
until
you
adopt
Martin,
so
it's
possible
to
do.
The
applicant
has
requested
it.
So
we
brought
it
before
you.
B
B
J
Maybe
Erica
you
can
chime
in,
but
the
property,
if
it
were
to
be
developed
in
the
future,
would
have
to
conform
to
whatever
code
is
nice?
When
you
say
are
there
any?
Is
there
any
downside,
yeah.
I
Even
if
you
don't,
the
only
difference
now
is
changing
the
effective
date
to
make
it
sooner.
The
annexation
has
been
approved
and
will
be
moving
forward
either
way.
So,
regardless
of
if
the
other
pieces
of
the
puzzle
are
approved
or
not,
the
annexation
is
moving
forward.
It's
just
it's
a
recommendation
to
the
Board
of
Commissioners
if
you're,
okay,
with
it
moving
forward
at
an
earlier
date
than
the
date
that
it's
already
set
to
move
forward.
Okay,.
I
J
H
I
I
H
H
If
anyone
is
curious,
I
would
just
say
that
I
think
that
the
this
is
such
an
important
issue
that
there
certainly
can
be
no
harm
done
by
letting
the
process
as
we've
already
agreed.
You
or
the
commissioners
I've
already
agreed
you
just
let
the
plate,
let
that
play
out
any
in
a
normal
fashion.
Thank
you.
I
H
B
B
N
F
A
B
O
Yes,
mr.
chairman,
the
researcher
presented
staff
comments,
we've
attached
for
your
consideration
and
orders
an
ordinance
regulating
wireless
telecommunication
facilities
within
the
city
rights
away.
The
Board
of
Commissioners
discussed
this
item
on
April
21st,
and
we
have
standards
were
presented
to
them
on
April
28th,
we
covered
quite
a
bit
of
ground
in
those
two
meetings:
we've
attached
for
your
reference
to
memorandum
from
those
meetings,
I'll
briefly
summarize
some
of
their
discussion,
and
then
we
can
move
into
the
ordinance
on
April
21st.
The
city
just
wanted
to
general
information
on
these
facilities.
O
So
we
discussed
quite
a
bit
of
what
about
what
the
state
and
federal
regulations
allow
the
city
to
regulate
and
what
the
what
they
do
not
allow
the
city
to
regulate.
Basically,
the
city
does
not
have
a
lot
of
power
when
it
comes
to
the
timing
and
processing
of
these
applications.
The
city
cannot
regulate
the
electric
electric
and
magnetic
health
effects
of
these
these
facilities.
These
are
regulated
by
the
Federal
Communications
Commission.
The
city
cannot
prohibit
these
facilities
and
the
city
cannot
establish
districts
where
they
are
prohibited.
O
Staff
with
the
direction
of
the
board
came
up
with
some
standards,
which
were
discussed
on
April
28th
with
the
board.
These
standards
are
on
in
sections,
264
and
265
of
the
attached
draft
ordinance
basically
begin
beginning
on
page
9,
where
we,
where
we've
added
standards,
were
regulating
these
facilities.
O
So,
basically,
we
came
up
with
some
standards
with
the
direction
of
the
board
that
basically
try
to
say
that
they
can't
be
located
on
street
signs,
street
lights,
lamppost
sign,
poles,
etc
and
also
trying
to
locate
them
where
they're
not
directly
in
front
of
a
home
or
a
business.
So,
within
the
bounds
of
the
law,
we've
established
some
location
criteria
and
then
section
265
as
beta
develops
a
design
standards.
And
if
you
look
on
page
30,
really
on
page
12
with
paragraphs
L
and
O,
we
talked
about
some
design
standards
for
these.
O
Basically
paragraph
L
states
that
a
new
utility
pole
that
replaces
an
existing
utility
all
shall
be
substantially
similar
in
design
material
in
color
unless
they
want
to
go
beyond
and
meet
the
design
standards
discussed
in
M
and
n
M.
Basically
deals
with
the
requirements
for
new
poles
in
the
rights-of-way
and
Bay
underestimate
establish
how
they
should
appear
powder-coated,
either
black
dark
brown
or
green
poles,
either
round
or
fluted
in
shape.
They
shall
have
a
decorative
base
and
then
also
at
the
direction
of
the
board.
O
Within
the
city's
historic
district,
the
special
area
plan,
zoning
district
or
the
Community
Redevelopment
area.
The
pole
shall
include
direct
Duquette
decorative
street
lighting
meeting
the
city's
design
standards
for
such
lighting
within
the
CRA
paragraph
end
states
that
a
new
pole
that
is
not
replacing
an
existing
pole
up
in
the
right-of-way
within
a
designated
scenic
corridor
shall
be
camouflaged
to
resemble
a
non-evasive
tree
species
that
is
common
in
Pinellas
County.
O
So,
basically,
if
you're
on
a
scenic
corridor,
which
there's
really
only
one
corridor
along
portions
of
TARP,
East,
harpin,
Avenue
and
Keystone
Road,
then
it
shall
be.
These
facilities
shall
be
camouflaged
to
resemble
a
tree.
And
then
oh
just
talks
about
the
heights
of
these
small
wireless
facilities
shall
be
limited
to
ten
feet
above
the
utility
pole.
So
in
essence,
these
are
the
standards
that
we
discussed
with
the
board
again
we're
limited
by
state
and
federal
law.
O
As
far
as
how
much
regulation
of
the
city
can
put
on
these
and
where
they
can
be
located
and
Robeson
Felder
with
the
City
Attorney's
Office.
Also,
he
helped
draft
this.
This
ordinance.
He
can
help
answer
any
of
your
questions.
But
staff
is
also
available
to
answer
your
questions
of
what's
in
the
ordinance
and
we'd,
be
glad
to
do
so
at
the
sound.
N
O
I
just
I'm
sorry
I
was
gonna
say
that
there's
there
still
will
be
the
regular
application
fees
for
reviewing
these.
The
city
is
limited
on
the
registration
fees
of
these.
They
cannot
be
there's
limitations
on
the
amount
of
registration
fees
for
these
sorts
of
facilities.
So
I
hope
that
that
answers
your
questions,
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
there's
a
conflict,
it's
just
perhaps
some
some
of
the
wordy
and
I
guess
the
type
of
fees
or
that's
being
addressed.
Okay,.
J
I
And
I
hate
to
interrupt,
but
I
did
notice
in
the
attendees
that
Vice
Chair
couscous
as
president
I
didn't
know
if
we
wanted
to
bring
him
in
on
the
panelists
since
he's
now
present,
since
this
is
late
legislative,
if
he
wants
to
ask
any
questions
or
anything
he's
welcome
to
do
so
and
participate.
Yes,.
F
O
M
O
No,
not
exactly
we,
we
would
then
what's
allowed
by
law.
We
we
tried
to
get
them
located
where
the
property
line
intersects
the
right-of-way.
So
when
I
say
not
in
front
of,
we
tried
to
arrange
it
where
they
would
be
located
near
the
where
the
property
line
is
the
side.
Property
line
is
so
it's
not
directly
in
front
I
mean
it
still
can
be
in
in
the
front
of
the
business,
but
hopefully
it
won't
be
directly
in
front
it'll,
be
more
towards
a
side
property
line
between
mm.
O
M
Thank
you,
but
I
just
have
just
a
minor
question
in
conjunction
to
that,
there
was
I
believe
that
type
of
a
pole
located
on
golf
road.
Basically
on
I,
don't
know
the
side
street,
but
it's
basically
right
in
front
of
the
high
school
parking
lot
and
it's
directly
like
in
front
of
a
home
and
are
those
those
columns
that
are
concrete
and
have
holes
in
them.
Is
that
what
these
are
yeah.
O
M
H
O
Was
in
the
right-of-way,
so
it
was
not
installed
by
the
homeowner
so
yeah
it
was.
It
was
done
under
the
current
regulations,
not
that
not
the
proposed
so
yeah,
and
that's
really
what
we're
sort
of
reacting
to
some
of
those
that
have
you're
starting
to
see
more
of
them
now,
and
you
will
see
more
so
yeah.
This
is
sort
of
in
response
to
the
growth
of
those.
A
G
N
P
B
B
O
The
most
recent
meetings.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion
on
whether
what
the
level
of
input
from
the
business
community
was
on
this
and
we've
indicated
in
the
report
that,
in
addition
to
the
regular
meeting
notices,
there
was
an
email
group
that
went
out
to
over
800
recipients
for
each
one
of
the
medians
involved.
So
there
has
been
a
lot
quite
have
a
lot
of
bit
of
notification,
not
a
lot
of
turnout,
except
when
we
get
to
the
final
state
and
even
then,
a
lot
of
most
of
the
comments
at
that
point
were
written.
O
The
the
current
draft
ordinance
does
reflect
the
direction
of
the
Board
of
Commissioners
that
we
were
given
beginning
back
in
last
January.
There
were
three
sticking
points
that
I'd
mentioned
in
the
memo
and
I'd
like
to
just
discuss
those
briefly
and
just
for
your
reference
for
reminder
again,
the
the
ordinance
shows
blue
and
green
color,
a
red
and
green
colors
I'm.
Sorry,
the
red
indicates
what
the
proposed
changes
are
from
the
existing
regulations.
O
It's
strike
doing
underline,
and
then
the
blue
or
green
colors
is
more
of
a
oh
well
changes
that
were
made
after
the
subsequent.
After
the
initial
or
drafting
of
the
ordinance.
The
three
I
guess
potentially
controversial
issues
that
we
wanted
to
get
some
direction
on.
First
deals
with
the
a-frame
sandwich
board
sign
design
requirements.
That's
in
Section,
190
1.09,
a
of
the
ordinance
which
is
on
page
64.
O
O
So
that's
something
that
we're
looking
for
direction
off
on
we've.
All
sir
we've
offered
some
alternate
language.
Really,
the
primary
concern
with
those
a-frame
signs
is
things
being
taped
to
them.
You
know
pieces
menus
pieces
of
paper
being
taped
to
them,
they're
not
being
kept
up
as
they
should
be,
so
we've
all
offered
some
alternate
language
just
stating
that
they
must
be
of
professional
quality
and
what
professional
quality
means.
So
we've
we've
offered
that
up.
You
can
either
you
know
just
keep
it
the
way.
O
It
is
where
they're
required
to
be
chalkboard
material
or
take
that
language
out
altogether
or
or
address
the
alternate
language
or
come
up
with
your
own
language.
But
again,
that's
probably
one
of
the
the
things
that
we
got.
The
most
comments
on
the
second
issue
that
we
discuss
is
window
or
door
sign
requirements.
That's
in
section
1a,
b,
1.0
1g
on
page
42
right
now
the
code
does
not
address
window
or
door
signs,
but
this
is
a
safety
issue.
O
We've
had
discussions
with
the
police
department
about
window
coverage,
so
we
did
offer
as
proposed
they're
limited
to
60%
of
the
window
or
door
sign
area.
There
was
some
concern
about
that.
We
offer
some
options
for
your
consideration.
First,
you
could
keep
these
signs
as
exempt
as
they
are
on
under
the
current
regulations.
The
current
regulations
do
not
address
window
or
door
signs.
You
could
keep
it
as
is
or
keep
it
as
proposed
60%
or
provide
an
alternate,
an
alternate
to
the
60%
requirement.
O
We've
noted
that,
because
this
issue
involves
Public
Safety,
we
could
defer
this
issue
to
allow
additional
research,
including
input
from
the
police
department,
input
from
businesses
and
information
on
how
other
communities
regulate
these
signs.
So
we've
done
some
of
that.
But
again
the
current
ordinance
says
state
60%,
that's
the
current
proposal.
The
third
item-
I
guess
that
was
probably
the
most
controversial-
is
umbrella
signs.
The
existing
regulations
do
not
address
these
currently.
On
page
42,
section
8
180
1.03
they're
listed
as
prohibited
signs.
So
that's
one,
you
know
an
item
for
you
to
consider.
O
You
can
either
remove
the
these
signs
from
the
list
of
prohibited
signs,
so
you'd
be
keeping
these
as
the
existing
sign,
regulation,
states
or
just
not
addressed,
or
you
could
keep
them
as
prohibited
as
proposed,
or
you
could
keep
signs
these
umbrella
signs
as
prohibited
and
allow
a
phase-out
period
of
these
signs
from
of
12
to
18
months.
So
again
we
just
wanted
to
bring
the
three
items
that
were
probably
the
most
controversial.
O
We
know
you
probably
have
other
comments
on
the
ordinance
as
a
whole,
so
we're
here
to
answer
these
questions
or
any
other
questions
you
may
have
in
regard
to
the
ordinance,
but
because
this
is
just
to
remind
you,
this
is
the
purpose
of
these
regulations
is
to
address
a
Supreme
Court
decision
from
2015.
So
there
is,
there
is
a
time
consideration
that
we
do
want
to
get
the
ordinance
updated,
but
we
do
want
to
get
past
any
sticking
points,
so
we're
recommending
approval
of
the
ordinance
as
drafted
we
would
take.
G
Do
I
have
a
question
about
the
differences
between
an
electronic
changeable
copy
message
sign
and
an
electronic
reader
board,
specifically
that
one
is
the
first
one
is
in
180
1.0
through.
Oh
three,
the
second
electronic
reader
board
is
191
point
zero.
Eight
I
was
looking
in
the
definitions
and
they
weren't
really
clear
either,
and
my
second
part
of
that
is
our
schools
part
of
this
ordinance
or
are
they
kind
of
separated
out
because
they
are
a
county
building.
G
O
G
O
H
B
I've
got
a
couple
questions
if,
if
it's
a
good
time
for
them,
one
thing
that
came
up
at
our
previous
meeting
were
there
was
some
discussion
of
this.
We
we
talked
about
the
abandoned
signs
and
there
was
a
pretty
short
window
to
remove
those
after
they
became
abandoned.
That
could
be
a
concern
for
for,
like
landlords
that
lose
a
tenant
and
have
to
move
another
tenant
into
the
building.
B
O
O
Q
This
is
a
row
ration
about
er.
I.
Think
that
you
need
to
understand
the
60
days
just
goes
as
to
the
definition
of
whether
the
sign
has
become
abandoned.
That
isn't
also
the
amount
of
time
you
have
to
remove
it,
and
so
in
a
scenario
that
you're
talking
about
number
one,
the
the
prior
tenant
would
have
had
to
been
gone
and
the
city
would
have
had
to
know
that
the
tenant
was
gone
for
up
to
60
days,
and
then
that
starts
the
180
day.
Q
Clock
ticking
for
that
for
the
them
to
actually
that
the
landlords
actually
removed
the
sign
so
effectively
before
a
sign
is
going
to
be
forced
to
remove
it's
180
days,
plus
the
60
days,
and
so
certainly
by
then.
The
the
landlord
and
the
city
will
figure
out.
If
a
new
10
it's
going
to
become
an
end,
but
I.
B
Q
It's
a
it's
a
it's
allowed.
The
city
has
authority
to
declare
it
abandoned,
but
as
with
all
of
the
codes
that
city
staff
enforce
there's
a
reasonableness
component,
you
know
if
the
landlord
goes
to
the
city's
code
enforcement
folks
and
says:
look
you
know
I'm
working
on
getting
a
new
lease
that
okay,
you
know
I'm
certain
the
city's
not
gonna,
come
in
and
say:
no,
no,
you
know
remove
it
right
now,
because
that's
just
not
how
the
city
operates.
B
I
mean
personally
I
think
I
would
I'd
feel
better
about
it.
If
it
wasn't,
if
we
weren't
relying
on
that's,
not
the
way
the
city
does
things
and
said
a
reasonable
number,
so
we're
sure
that
that
nobody
has
to
remove
money.
I
mean
I'd
rather
see
I'd
rather
see
the
hundred
eighty
degree
or
hundred
eighty
days
on
the
front
end
in
a
shorter
time,
then,
to
remove
it.
Q
B
O
No
changes
to
the
murals
has
been
made
and
again
we
there's
not
a
size
limit
on
those.
So
you
know
we.
We
looked
at
the
ones
that
are
out
there
and
some
that
were
are
being
proposed
and
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
these
regulations
would
not
prohibit
those.
So
I
think
we
feel
comfortable
with
what
the
regulation
states
on
artwork
will
not
adversely
affect
any
of
those
murals.
B
Q
P
Just
have
a
quick
clarification
on
here.
I
may
be
just
stuck
on
the
word,
but
it
may
it
says
it
may
consist
a
frame,
chalk
or
tech
board
or
changeable
copy
signs
when
it's
saying
that,
is
it
like
any
changeable
sign
like
a
whiteboard
with
markers
or
a
magnet
board.
Anything
like
that
or
does
it
just
those
are
the
only
three
that
you
get
and
that's
it
for
an
a-frame.
O
G
Had
the
same
question
as
well,
it
does
say
it
may
consist
of
so
it
doesn't
say
it
has
to
consist.
Oh,
but
I
would
like
that
changed
a
little
bit
as
well.
I
mean
I
like
the
professional
quality.
You
could
have
a
fully
printed.
You
know
professionally
created,
that's
not
a
tack
board
or
copy
something.
You
know
kind
of
a
thing
so
I'd
like
to
have
I
mean
I
like
the
professional
quality,
and
you
know
maybe
just
strike
that
part
with
the
frame
chalkboard
and
tack
board.
O
G
One
ninety
one
point:
zero
three,
five
I
think
it
is
it's
the
political
campaign
advertisement
signs
I
think
that
there
should
be
a
date
of
prior
to
Alexa
election
date.
So
if
there's
special
events,
they
can
only
post
their
signs
up
to
14
days
prior
to
the
event,
but
there
is
no
sign
so
there's
nothing
that
says
the
shout
you
know
the
sign
should
not
be
erected
until
more
than
60
days
prior
to
the
election
date
or
whatever.
G
That
timeframe
is
that
we
determined,
but
I,
think
that
there
should
be
a
sign
that
something
that
you
know
we
we're
not
seeing
political
signs
put
up
in
January
for
an
election
in
November.
You
know
I
mean
it's.
There
should
be
something
written
in
there
for
the
political
sign
to
campaign
advertising
signs.
B
Q
I
think
I,
think
there's
a
80
or
so,
and
it's
going
to
go
down
to
45
or
50,
and
there
will
be
some
certain
amount
of
years
that
they'll
be
allowed
to
continue
to
exist
and
then,
at
the
end
of
that
period,
they're
going
to
be
required
to
go
away.
The
Commission
can
always
choose
to
do
a
fresh
agreement
with
them
and
let
them
stay
or
come
back
in
some
other
capacity,
but
but
the
Commission
will
reserve
the
right
to
end
bus
bus
bench
signs
at
that
time
totally.
Q
So
it's
a
compromise
between
the
assertion
of
the
the
current
company
that
owns
the
benches,
that
they
have
a
property
right
and
a
contract
in
to
keep
them
there
forever
and
the
city's
position
that
you
know
we're
in
charge
of
are
right
away
and
we
can
tell
you
to
leave
if
we
want.
The
law
is
not
a
hundred
percent
crystal
clear
either
way,
and
so
that's
why
the
settlement
agreement
was
reached.
The
commissioners
I
don't
know
that
they've
approved
it
yet
I
think
that
still
has
to
be
formally
done
at
the
Commission
meeting.
Q
But
it's
our
expectation
that
that
that
will
be
done,
that
the
Commission
supports
that,
and
so
with
that
that
the
terms
of
that
agreement
will
drive
what
happens
to
those
existing
benches,
but
the
code,
as
is
recommended
to
you
and
else
you'll,
be
recommending
to
the
Commission.
The
current
draft
does
contain
bus
bench
signs
as
a
prohibited
sign.
So
no
new
company.
Q
O
O
O
B
O
R
O
R
Q
R
R
Q
E
R
R
O
O
O
I
If
I
could
just
quickly
address
Vice,
Chair
couscous-
and
you
know,
you're
asking
for
something-
that's
very
specific:
murals
in
general
are
going
to
be
allowed
because
they're
considered
art
and,
as
you
well
know,
they
fall
under
the
First
Amendment.
Now,
if
there
is
something
that
is
put
on
a
building
that
somebody
complains
about
that,
they
think
is
advertising.
That's
going
to
be
handled
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
there's
gonna
be
at
the
discretion
of
the
city
and
then
maybe,
ultimately
the
courts.
Whether
or
not
that's
going
to
be.
R
R
R
Let
me
finish:
okay,
it's
somebody
that
that
that
worked
through
the
city
who
sits
there.
It
makes
decisions
with
regard
to,
and
that
goes
back
to
when
we
talk
about
when
somebody
issues
a
request,
a
permit
for
a
sign.
It
went
private
from
45
days
to
20
days.
It
says
if
the
permit
is
not
approved
its
deemed
denied
and
you
have
to
appeal
and
the
person
makes
that
decision
is
Marc.
Okay,.
R
Going
it's
going
back,
no,
it's
going
back
to
where
some
at
City
Hall
sits
on
a
you
know
on
the
lack
of
a
better
term
pedestal,
it
makes
decisions
who
are
not
appointed
by
any
anybody
from
the
city.
You
know
when
you've
got
a
city
manager
who
you've
taxed
it
with
the
ability
to
deny
a
permit
for
a
sign
and
there's
no
criteria
with
regard
to
it's
a
it's
an
automatic
denial.
If
nobody
is
the
permit
to
sit
for
20
days
and.
I
S
I
R
And
the
Pritikin,
and
so
if
so,
if
it's,
that
the
application
sits
on
somebody's
death
for
20
days,
they
did
nothing
wrong.
Okay,
but
submit
a
permit
to
submit
an
application
and
all
of
a
sudden
they
get
a
notice
that
it's
denied,
because
nobody,
because
somebody
at
City
Hall,
failed
to
act
and
then
their
only
recourse
is
to
a
file.
An
appeal
and
their
appeal
is
to
the
city
manager.
Q
R
Q
P
Q
Sure
how
how
that's
in
there
but
I,
appreciate
your
your
pointing
that
out,
because
it
definitely
needs
to
say
that
it's
deemed
to
be
approved.
With
respect
to
your
other
question,
though,
so
the
because
this
topic,
it
is
infused
with
a
federal
right,
what
the
federal
courts
have
have
ruled
many
cases
that,
if
you're
going
to
require
a
permit
for
something
you
have
to
provide
due
process
as
to
when
that
permit.
Q
S
Q
Department
of
Building
Department
who's
going
to
look
at
the
application
and
see
if
it
fits
the
code
and
say
yes
or
no.
The
your
appeal
from
a
denial
is
to
the
city
manager,
I,
underst
and
you're,
saying
that
that
the
city
manager
can't
possibly
be
fair,
neutral
because
he's
still
an
employee
of
the
city.
But
the
federal
courts
have
ruled
no
that
that
type
of
review
satisfies
due
process.
R
Q
Is
a
time
issue
because
the
if
the
city
is
not
reliably
able
to
provide
the
due
process
review
in
a
timely
manner,
then
we're
going
to
be
in
violation
of
the
First
Amendment.
The
other
issue
is
that
that,
in
our
experience,
whenever
a
citizen
board
is
looking
at
something
like
a
signed
application,
there's
going
to
be
a
much
larger
temptation
to
consider
things
that
shouldn't
be
being
considered.
In
other
words,
the
content
of
the
sign.
So.
S
Q
R
Okay,
I'm
not
worried
about
what
the
sign
says:
I'm
already
about
the
process:
okay,
I,
don't
I,
don't
understand
how
you
you
know
aboard
a
Board
of
Adjustment
has
any
more
or
less
right
to
here
an
issue
concerning
something
like
this.
O
I
I
So
then,
if
you
lose
as
a
board
and
remember,
the
board
has
to
determine
as
a
whole
if
they
want
to
make
these
recommendations
to
the
Board
of
Commissioners.
If
you
would
prefer
to
make
the
recommendation
to
the
Board
of
Commissioners
that
the
appeal
be
heard
by
the
Board
of
Adjustment,
which
doesn't
always
meet
every
months,
though
that
goes
back
to
mr.
eshton
holders,
point
about
the
appeals
process
and
the
timeliness
or
perhaps
to
the
Board
of
Commissioners.
I
R
I
That's
fine
sure
I,
don't
have
a
problem.
You
know
and
like
I
said,
that's
your
opinion.
If
the
board
as
a
whole
would
like
to
make
that
recommendation
to
the
Board
of
Commissioners
to
make
that
change
within
the
code,
you
can
certainly
do
so
I
think
from
a
practical
standpoint.
It's
just
not
something
that
you
can
make
the
recommendation
of.
If
the
board
so
chooses.
H
Q
Q
What
the
what
the
plaintiff
is
going
to
say
that
the
applicant
is
going
to
say
is
you
all,
are
delaying
and
delaying
and
delaying
acting
on,
my
sign
permit
and
because
I
own,
a
strip
club-
or
you
know
some
undesirable
business
that
you
want
to
harass
and
don't
want
in
this
town,
you're,
making
my
life
miserable
and
you're
waiting
to
that
to
get
that
Board
of
Adjustment
to
be
convened
for
four
months
and
all
that
time,
I'm
not
going
to
be
able
to
put
up
my
sign
and
that.
So
that's
that's
the
issue.
Yeah.
R
I
think
a
constitutional
delay
is
not
listening
to
it
at
all.
Waiting
for
the
next
board
of
a
board
meeting
is
not
I,
don't
think
I,
don't
think
the
courts
deem
that
as
a
as
a
violation
of
somebody's
First
Amendment
right,
if
they're
waiting
for
the
next
time
aboard
is
to
me
to
rule
or
to
me
on
something
the
courts.
Do
it
all
the
time.
If
somebody
has
an
issue
in
front
of
the
court,
the
court
may
not
meet
for
six
months
or
eight
months
to
rule
on
that
issue.
Does
it
you
know?
I
Other
key
mysteries,
because
the
other
issue
that
we
have,
if
you're,
if
you're,
specifically
recommending
the
Board
of
Adjustment,
that
is
going
to
be
two
legislative
changes.
One,
the
sine
code,
will
have
to
determine
that
the
Board
of
Adjustment
has
that
Duty
and
two
now
we
have
to
go
into
either
the
land,
development
code
or
I.
Believe
it's
in
the
LDC
to
the
section
on
the
Board
of
Adjustment
and
adjust
the
board
of
adjustments,
powers
and
duties.
Who
also
include
the
ability
to
hear
appeal
from
the
denial
of
sign
permits
right.
I
That
they
have
the
power
to
hear
are
interpretations
of
the
code
where
they
disagree
with
the
building
officials,
interpretation
of
the
code
or
an
administrative
decision
from
the
building
departments.
So,
while
you
can
certainly
make
that
recommendation,
just
keep
in
mind
that
that's
going
to
require
a
different
legislative
act
in
order
to
enact
that.
S
R
The
Commission
I
mean
I
I,
don't
I
don't
want
to
get
the
Commission
involved.
The
stuff
first
of
all,
I'm,
not
arguing
First
Amendment
issues.
First
Amendment
has
to
do
what's
on
the
side,
not
necessarily
that
the
dimensions
of
the
sine
I
suspect
that
I'm
correct
that
I,
just
I
guess
for
me,
I've
always
find
problematic,
is
when
you
go
to
the
same
source
that
that
denies
your
application
and
I
understand.
R
R
Well,
I,
don't
want
it.
I,
don't
want
to
dwell
on
it
much
longer
than
that.
Unless
anybody
else
has
comments,
but
so
the
other
thing
that
that
and
I'm
sorry
to
backtrack,
because
it
seemed
like
I'm
all
over
the
place.
But
one
of
the
things
that
you
had
mentioned
is
reducing
to
be
the.
We
talked
about
the
because
I
had
an
issue
that,
after
20
days,
the
diese
the
permit
was
deep,
deny
for
the
city's
sake.
R
Q
Vice-Chair
just
to
tell
you
about
that,
and
you
see
that
edit
there
we
had
a
workshop
with
the
commissioners
in
the
workshop
room,
I
I,
don't
know
four
months
ago
or
so,
and
Commissioner
Khare
expressed
the
desire
that
the
45
be
changed
to
20.
When
the
commissioners
discussed
the
matter,
all
of
them
felt
that
it
should
not
take
very
long
to
to
have
staff
review
a
signed
application
staff
was
present
in
the
room
and
indicated
to
the
commissioners.
Yes,
they
saw
no
problems
or
issues
with
being
able
to
get
the
review
done
within
20
days.
R
I
R
But
I
I
know
and
I'm
not
I'm,
just
trying
to
clean
this
up
a
little
bit
to
the
extent
that
I
I've
had
dealings
with
the
Heritage
Preservation
Board
and
my
concern
is
they're.
Gonna
want
to
see
plans
if
I'm
opening
up
a
business
and
I
get
my
my
occupational
license
open
up
a
business.
I
may
not
be
thinking
of
a
sign
at
the
same
time.
You
know
the
sign
a
sign.
A
sign
designer
may
take
a
while
right.
I
R
Q
I
I
R
Q
R
Because
I
have
stuff
this
red
line,
green
lined
and
blue
lined
and
I'm
trying
to
make
the
blue
line
was
stuff
that
was
change
was
added.
Q
Red
well,
first
of
all,
all
you
really
need
to
consider
is
looking
at
what
is
struck
through
and
what
is
underlined
and
what
is
neither
if
it's
right
there,
it's
existing.
If
it's
struck
through
it's
in
the
current
code
and
it's
going
away
and
if
it's
not
if
it's
underlined
its
new
language
and
so
with
respect
to
the
changing
of
colors.
That's
just
different
time.
R
Q
R
R
Q
Q
You
would
wrap
it
to
drive
it
around,
so
people
could
be
you.
You
know
a
lot
of
companies
do
that
that
even
the
county
buses
do
that,
but
what
you're
trying
to
what
we're
trying
to
get
the
codes
trying
to
deal
with
respect
to
the
car
sign
prohibition?
It
is
a
business
that
has
no
other
purpose
for
that
vehicle,
but
to
stick
it
out
front
as
a
sign
gotcha.
Q
There
is
there
we
had
talked
about
this.
I
can't
remember
is
that
the
last
PZ
meeting
or
at
a
workshop
I'll
try
to
find
it
right
away,
but
but
it's
very
clear
that
if
this
is
just
your
business's
vehicle
and
you've
wrapped
it
as
an
air
conditioning
company
or
whatever-
and
you
park
it
at
your
business
overnight,
when
your
day
is
done,
that
is
not
what
we
get
being
gotten
out
here
and
you've
seen
them.
You
know
you've
seen
certain
businesses
where
they
just
put
a
jalopy
out
there.
That
might
not
even
be
operable
correct.
R
B
We
talked
briefly
about
the
the
window
signs
and
some
options
that
they
gave
us
in
terms
of
recommending
either
well
well.
Their
recommendation
was
60%
of
the
window.
Space
I
think
they
also
offered
us
the
option
to
weigh
in
on
just
leaving
those
exempt
or
deferring
those
course
and
further
input
from
law
enforcement
and
life
safety
people,
because
it
does
become
involved
with
some
of
that.
Well,.
R
R
S
R
G
A
Q
Is
I'm
glad
you
went
back
to
that
because,
for
while
that's
broken
out
and
some
other
temporary
signs
are
broken
out,
it's
for
special
treatment
because
of
kind
of
what
they
are
they're,
all
still
temporary
signs
and
so
they're
all
going
to
be
controlled
by
the
temper.
The
general
temporary
sign
regulation
before
them,
which
which
says
14
days
before
so.
Q
And
we
did
talk
in
the
workshop
about
that.
You
know,
obviously
that
in
some
other
jurisdictions
that
we've
done
this
ordinance
already
in
the
elected
folks
had
to
have
long
heart-to-heart
about
that
and
I
guess.
From
from
legal
counsel
perspective.
You
know
our
office
is
simply
going
to
tell
the
Commission
that
you've
got
to
treat
all
temporary
signs
in
a
similar
manner,
or
else
you're
going
to
get
yourself
open
to
an
argument
that
you're
treating
them
separately
because
of
their
content,
because
you're
not
allowed
to
regulate.
Q
Based
on
what
the
sign
says,
and
so
you
know,
some
of
our
other
clients
have
have
adjusted
that
14
days
to
go
out
to
30
days
or
whatever.
But
you
know
it's
14
days
is
what
the
plug
is
right
now
for
all
temporary
signs,
including
campaign
signs,
and
ultimately
it's
going
to
be
up
to
our
elected
commissioners
as
to
what
they
want
to
do
and.
Q
You're
not
allowed
to
put
any
sign
on
public
property,
that's
because
that
belongs
to
the
city
right
you're
not
allowed
to,
but
but
in
terms
of,
if
you
want
to
put
a
campaign
sign
out
in
front
of
your
house,
that's
a
temporary
sign
and
under
the
code,
residential
area,
residential
properties
have
so
many
and
they
have
to
be
some
size.
You've
read
that
and
one
or
all
of
the
your
allotment
can
be
campaign
signs.
R
R
You
know
if
somebody
wanted
to
fly
the
state
flag
and
the
in
the
US
flag
and
the
POWs
lag.
You
know
and
it
I've
seen
people
trying
to
do.
I
don't
want
to
I,
don't
want
to
impact
somebody's
patriotism,
because
if
you
ever
see
something
on
on
the
news,
it's
they
won't.
Let
you
fly
a
patriotic
flag
and
and
I'd
hate
to
see
you
know
it.
You
know
dude,
you
can
you
limit
it
to
you
know.
You
know
that
that
Flags
that
that,
whether
they
honor
you
know.
P
G
R
Not
a
bad,
that's,
not
a
bad
compromise
right
there,
cuz
I,
you
don't
like
I,
said:
I
know.
People
who
are
who
have
you
know:
they're
they're
very
patriotic
they'll
fly
their
service
flag.
If
they
were
a
Marine,
they
want
to
fly
the
American
flag.
They
want
to
fly
a
POWs
lag
and,
if
I
think
I
would
I
would
imagine
that
commission
would
be
comfortable,
excluding
US
flag
as
a
countable
flag.
B
R
We've
got
I've
got
people
of
my
neighborhood
who
fly
multiple
flags,
one's
a
u.s.
Marine
and
the
US
flag,
and-
and
you
know
right
now-
he
would
not
be
able
to
do
that
under
the
if
she
would
based
on
what
what
chairman
said,
but
that
was
adopted
that
way,
so
I
would
be
in
all
favor
of
not
a
US
flag
would
not
be
deemed
a
accountable
flag
for
the
coordinates.
Q
Q
An
opportunity
to
agree,
recommend
it
and
then
proceed
really.
Mister
Serna
and
miss
McNabb
would
get
together
with
the
city
manager.
Whoever
else
needs
to
sort
of,
because
the
ordinance
ultimately
is
a
recommendation
from
the
administration,
and
so,
if
they
very
much
like
any
of
your
recommendations,
they
can
decide.
Okay,
well,
we
agree
with
this
and
so
we're
going
to
actually
change
the
draft
ordinance
to
go
to
the
Commission
and
just
put
it
right
in
there
for
the
commissioners
to
consider
if
they
say
well,
you
know
there's
this
debate
to
be
had
on
either
side.
Q
Then
they
would
simply
put
the
report
together
and
say.
The
ordinance
draft,
as
currently
drafted,
says
this,
but
your
your
PZ
board
has
recommended
this
and
here's.
Why?
What
do
you
all
want
to
do
and
then
they
would
have
a
discussion
and
they
would
decide
okay
and
if
I
could
mr.
vice
chair
since
I,
just
I
just
pulled
it
up.
I
want
to
swing
back
around
to
your
vehicle
sign
question,
sir,
so
the
relevant
language.
Q
This
would
be
on
page
32
of
the
ordinance
it's
the
definition
of
vehicle
sign.
I
talked
about
the
vehicle
which
is
cut
more
than
10%
cover,
10
square
feet
covered
by
the
vehicle,
but
it
has
to
be
parked
and
visible
from
the
public,
right-of-way,
okay
and
unless
said
vehicle
is
used
for
transporting
people
or
materials
in
the.
Q
R
O
We
discussed
that
before
you
came
on,
but
under
the
current
draft
they
are
prohibited
under
the
under
the
existing
code.
They're
not
addressed,
so
those
are
basically
the
options.
I
guess
the
planning
zoning
board
has
is
to
keep
them
as
not
addressed
where
people
just
put
them
up
or.
R
R
Q
R
R
S
B
R
Q
Well,
if
it
does
have
the
the
product
advertisement,
it's
gonna
be
an
advertising
sign,
it's
gonna
be
a
sign,
and
so
so
that's
what's
prohibited
you're,
not
as
that
as
a
restaurant,
for
instance,
with
you're
not
allowed
you're
not
prohibited
to
have
you
know
umbrellas
with
nothing
on
them.
You
know
how
to
cover
the
Sun
or
the
rain
or
whatnot
from
folks.
As
long
as
other
parts
of
the
zoning
code
say:
that's,
okay,
it's
only
whenever
they
have
advertised
advertising
on
it.
It's
a
really
that's
a
policy
decision.
Q
R
H
A
B
R
G
B
R
R
R
G
R
You
got
a
choice,
they
are
beat,
you
choose
a
and
you
don't
like
a
you're
stuck
III
mean
otherwise.
You
just
keep
appealing
til.
You
still
have
a
recourse
with
through
the
Circuit
Court,
but
this
gives
this
gives
the
average
person
an
opportunity
to
have
another
Avenue
if
they're
denied
their
permit,
as
opposed
to
going
straight
to
court
or
straight
back
to
the
person
who
or
the
department
that
sort
of
denied
you,
because
you
know,
given
a
choice.
He'd
go
in
front
of
the
Board
of
Adjustment.
B
I
B
R
G
O
S
G
G
A
R
Q
But
but
you'll
you'll
see
that
I
know
what
you're
saying
you're
talking
about
the
removal
part
of
it
and
the
Florida
Legislature
adopted
a
statute
which
deals
with
their
removal
and
that's
what's
quoted
in
the
in
the
ordinance
in
our
Archaea
our
Theory.
There
is
that
if
the
legislature
called
that
out
and
someone
sued,
if
our
ordinance
gets
struck,
so
does
the
statute.
G
Q
Again,
as
mrs.
Ella
was
saying
earlier,
you
know
when
one
city
staff
code
enforcement
staff
in
this
case
interpret
any
of
our
ordinances
right,
not
just
the
sign
code.
There's
an
amount
of
reasonableness
to
it.
You
know:
they're
human
beings,
interacting
they're,
gonna,
they're
gonna,
go
out
there.
They're
gonna
see
the
sign.
Maybe
they're
gonna
give
them
a
day.
Then
they're
gonna
knock
on
the
door.
Look
it's
it's
not
a
black-and-white
science
code
enforcement,
so
there
has
to
be
found
now
a
judgment
that.
J
E
R
R
R
So
give
it
given
the
what
the
fact
that
they're
the
ones
are
gonna
violate
it.
The
most
I
want
to
make
if
they're
playing
field
for
others
who
may
not
look
to
violate
it,
because
you
know,
if
you,
if
you
tell
the
John
Doe
down
the
street,
you
got
forty
days
on
a
temporary
sign.
Yet
those
who
are
there's
a
political
process
are
gonna,
probably
I'm,
just
anticipating
you'll
be
the
biggest
abusers
of
that
particular
or
permanence.
R
G
Another
item
we
talked
about
with
those
in
the
schools
but
I
think
you
guys
have
got
that
covered
and
there's
no
discussion
for
that.
One.
The
window
and
door
sign
requirements,
I,
don't
know
if
we've
really
had
a
real
discussion
or
pot
I
think
that
it
should
be
deferred
until
we
have
more
feedback
from
the
police
department
and
Public
Safety.
So
those
would
be
my
vote.
B
G
R
It
was
limited
to
three
flags,
but
you
had
single-family
limited
to
one
and
I
think
what
we're
suggesting
is,
if
it's
an
American
flag
that
doesn't
count
as
your
one.
So
you
would
you
would
be
able
to
have
the
American
flag
in
any
other
flag,
whether
it
was
a
service
flag.
You
know
marine
service
flag
state
of
Florida,
flag,
pirate
flag.
R
D
I
I
I
R
R
R
R
S
Hello,
hello!
Yes,
can
you
hear
me
yes,
good
evening
board?
Thank
you
for
your
hard
work.
Staying
up
so
late,
my
name
is
Chris
hrabowski,
one
6:02
Gulf,
Beach
Boulevard
tarpon
springs
three
four,
six,
eight,
nine
and
I
am
the
chair
of
the
Board
of
Adjustment,
but
I'm,
not
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
Board
of
Adjustment
I'm
speaking
as
an
individual
I.
Just
wanted
to
thank
vice
chair
who
scoot
us
for
bringing
that
up.
S
I
believe
that
it
is
the
right
Avenue
to
pursue
and
I
originally
made
this
phone
call
raised,
and
on
this
one
it
was
said
that
we
don't
meet
every
month.
Well,
of
course,
if
there's
nothing
on
our
agenda,
we
would
not
meet.
If
this
is
on
the
agenda,
we
will
meet,
and
so
she,
the
city,
attorney,
later
corrected
that,
but
I
wanted
to
make
it
clear
to
you
that
that's
that's
not
a
hindrance
and
it
also
seemed
like
they
were
trying
to
persuade
you
not
to
do
that
process.
S
On
the
other
hand,
because
it
would
be
a
lot
of
extra
work,
somebody's
going
to
have
to
change
our
rules
as
well
as
these
rules
that
you're
voting
on.
Don't
let
that
bother
you!
You
are
volunteers.
We
are
volunteers
on
our
board
as
far
as
I
know
all
the
boards,
except
for
the
board
of
commission
or
volunteers,
we're
happy
to
do
it.
S
S
It
needs
to
be
done
right
and
by
giving
people
more
access,
as
you
are
proposing,
I
believe
you're,
doing
the
right
thing
for
the
right
reasons
and
so
again,
I.
Thank
you
for
your
hard
work
and
I
know
for
one
on
the
Board
of
Adjustment
we'd
be
happy
to
take
part
in
this
procedure
thanks
again
and
have
a
good
night.
R
Unmuted,
okay,
after
I
had
done
you
I.
First
of
all,
just
by
comment
is,
with
the
with
the
speaker
had
said:
I
think
it
was
a
Kris,
the
optics
of
the
city
determining
after
after
a
application
is
denied
the
optics
aren't
good.
You
know
we
trust
these
citizens
and
taxpayers
of
Tarpon
Springs.
We
put
them
on
these
boards
to
make
these
types
of
decisions.
R
You
know
the
optics
of
decision
making
at
City
Hall
is
not
I,
don't
think
favors
City
Hall
or
they
were
the
optics
of
what
people
consider
or
the
perspective
of
residents
in
the
city
have
at
for
City
Hall
and
so
the
more
transparency
through
residents
and
taxpayers
of
this
community.
The
two-two-one
on
things
like
that
I
think
it
is
far
better
than
what
with
the
provisions
in
in
the
permit
or
the
ordinance
provides.
R
S
I
The
decision
of
a
denial,
as
noted
on
the
record
that
a
frame
spine
is
noted
on
the
record,
extending
duration
for
temporary
signs
is
noted
on
the
record.
The
deferring
the
school
sign
issues
noted
on
the
record,
the
American
flag
sign
is
noted
on
the
record
and
no
umbrella
sign
is
addressed
and
noted
on
the
record.
Yes,.
S
I
I
N
H
J
J
J
Can
attend
TRC
right
now,
we're
doing
a
desktop
for
you
with
no
meeting.
Obviously
it's
it's
a
public
meeting.
There's
no
public
input
that
at
that
meeting,
but
anyone
can
attend,
and
anyone
who
has
questions
for
myself
or
other
staff
on
the
process
or
the
types
of
were
the
codes
that
apply
or
anything
you
want
to
learn
more
about
on
these
applications.