►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Board 5-9-22
Description
Work Session
A
B
C
A
B
C
C
A
All
right
that
brings
us
to
item
two.
That's
our
workshop
session.
Tonight's
meeting
is,
is
kind
of
different.
It's
a
more
informal
meeting
to
discuss
some
of
the
issues
we've
had
in
in
past
months
and
just
try
to
develop
strategies.
We.
We
can't
really
make
a
lot
of
the
changes.
Probably
but
at
least
we
can,
we
can
talk
about
the
issues
and
and
try
to
strategize
ways
that
someone
who
who
does
have
the
authority
to
resolve
the
problems
could
do
so
and
the
staff
can
help
us
determine
the
appropriate
ways
to
do
that.
A
A
A
Okay,
the
the
staff
has
done
a
lot
of
work
to
help
us
put
the
sort
of
agenda
together.
It's
really
more
discussion
topics
than
it
is
a
complete
agenda,
but
kind
of
the.
The
first
item
was
board
powers
and
duties
and
was
in
response
to
one
of
our
comments
about
a
mission
statement
that
and
the
land
development
code,
section
227
pretty
much
enumerates
the
powers
and
duties
so
that
pretty
much
stands
as
our
current
mission
statement.
D
Yeah
one
of
the
concerns
that
we
have
is
that
we
are
quasi-judicial
and
then
the
board
of
commissioners
are
quasi-judicial.
I
know
that
we
have.
We
have
an
advisory
role,
but
I
think
it's
we
at
times
we
might
pass
something,
but
we
for
the
sake
of
moving
something
along,
but
there
might
be
a
point
that
we
have
that
we
want
emphasized.
D
I
mean
there
was
a
one
several
months
ago
where
we
we
passed
it
we.
It
was
a
project
that
we
found
acceptable,
but
there
was
a
couple
concerns
about
the
back
side
of
the
project.
Yeah.
We
had
some
general
recommendations
and
then
that
got
passed
along
to
the
board
of
commissioners
and
we
just
want
to.
D
Oh,
we,
you
know,
oh
the
the
the
planning
and
zoning
pass,
something
you
know
six
to
one
or
7-0,
it's
where,
when
we
have
an
observation,
we
would
like
that
observation
to
be
addressed
and
and
rather
than
just
passing
along
our
our
vote
and
sometimes
they're
nuanced
things
that
are
were
obviously
important
to
us
in
our
conversation.
So
that's
why
it
may
be
possibly
having
a
where
a
point
like
that
exists
is
either
having.
D
C
E
Are
those
recommendations
other
than
just
saying
the
board
of
you
know
the
zoning
board
had
to
prove
this.
Are
those
recommendations
are
part
and
parcel
of
when
you
make
the
presentation
in
front
of
the
commission
saying
that
the
zoning
board
approved
this
with
the
following
recommendations,
as
opposed
to
they
approved
it,
and-
and
I
think,
as
john
said
there
are
times-
we've
passed-
something
because
it
you
know,
we
don't
need
them
to
come
back
again.
F
F
F
We
have
noted
public
comment
in
opposition
and
in
favor,
and
so
we've
we've
kind
of
expanded
that
out
a
little
bit
and
I
I
would
like
to
also
clarify.
Maybe
I'm
city
attorney
can
help.
I
would
think
you
would.
It
would
be
on
individual
applications
if
they
want
a
representative
to
the
board
correct.
In
other
words,
if
there
was
one
in
particular.
B
You
could
do
it
either
way.
I
mean
if
it's
something
that
you
want
to
have
a
representative
every
commission
meeting
where
there's
an
application.
That's
previously
appeared
before
the
planning
and
zoning
board.
You
could
do
that
or
on
those
that
you
feel.
You
know
to
mr
couscous's
point
on
those
that
you
feel
maybe
are
not
just
oh
we're
recommending
this.
We
just
wanted
a
couple
things
on
those
that
were
we
had
a
very
you
know
in-depth
discussion
about
these
particular
things.
B
We
need
to
make
sure
one
of
us
is
in
front
of
the
board
of
commissioners
to
relay
that
information,
because
we're
not
so
sure
a
paragraph
and
a
staff
report
is
going
to
be
able
to
do
it
so
that
that's
something
that
you
know
you
guys
can
decide
but
keep
in
mind
if
you
send
a
representative
to
appear
before
the
board
of
commissioners.
That
representative
is
as
appearing
as
the
entire
board.
So
whatever
the
comments
are
made
have
to
be
confined
to
the
exact
discussion
that
was
had
at
the
meeting.
B
Right,
you
would.
I
would
suggest
that
at
that
meeting,
if
you
feel
like
it's
something
that
needs
to
go,
you
know
there
needs
to
be
representative
from
this
board
in
front
of
the
commission.
I
would
just
say:
okay,
but
you
know
if
you
take
the
vote
and
then
let's
decide
by
majority,
you
know
make
a
nomination
a
second
and
they
take
a
vote
on
who's
going
to
go.
And
then
you
know
qualify
what
exactly
they're
going
to
say.
C
G
Chair
that
that
went
really
well
first,
but
but
I
would
like
to
go
back
a
step
and
please
I
need
a
little
bit
of
patience
from
everyone
involved.
I
was
the
person
that
suggested
the
mission
statement
and
consistently
when
I
bring
up
the
mission
statement.
This
is
the
result.
I
get
the
mission
statement.
G
We
know
it's
enumerated,
but,
for
example,
the
code
enforcement
board
reads
their
mission
statement
before
every
meeting
and
it
frankly
is
a
bit
more
organic
and
encompassing
and
inviting
to
all
the
participants
and,
for
example,
any
corporation
or
any
moderately
sized
business
also
has
a
mission
statement,
and
that
mission
statement
isn't
jargon
and
it
isn't
legalese
which
no
one
really
understands.
We
know
all
that.
G
The
reason
that
I
brought
it
up
is
that
I
think
that
perhaps
the
planning
and
zoning
board
could
use
a
little
bit
better
flag
or
a
little
little
bit
better
guiding
statement
as
to
why
we're
meeting
every
meeting
the
purpose
of
our
meeting
sure
it
might
be
delineated
in
state
statute,
but
perhaps
something
along
the
lines
of
I
haven't.
Given
it
any
thought
at
all.
G
Well
we're
here
to
improve
the
lives
of
the
citizens
of
tarpon
springs
by
utilizing
the
enumerated
powers,
but
more
or
less
just
reminding
everyone
there
why
we
are
meeting
it's
not
just
technocrats,
but
maybe
there's
a
goal
involved
in
that
those
are
just
my
thoughts
and
we
can
just
dismiss
it.
But
frankly,
I
think
that
we
lack
that
guiding
principle
of
why
we're
meeting
every
time
and
that
perhaps
if
we
had
a
concise
guiding
principle,
it
would
help
us
in
our
complex
decision-making
process.
G
That's
just
my
opinion.
We
can
move
on
a
mission
statement
is,
can
be
kind
of
a
complicated
thing
and
probably
not
best
fleshed
out
here.
But
those
are
my
thoughts
on
that.
If
anybody
wants
to
move
on
or
if
anybody
wants
to
fill
that
out
a
little
bit
more
and
if
legal
wants
to
chime
in
I'm
not
saying
that
it's
how
we
actually
run
our
thing,
but
it
might
be
nice
to
stand
up.
G
E
You
I'd
like
to
piggyback
on
that
yeah,
which
actually
kind
of
questions.
What
our
role
is,
you
know
and
the
mission
statement
would
help
because
you
know,
I
know
that
I
I
I've
looked
through
the
memorandum
that
miss
that
the
mr
trask
had
provided,
and
you
know
it
talks
about
our
limitations
and
our
specific
role
and
it.
But
it
says
that
we
are.
You
know
we
are
a
quasi-judicial
board
and
the
commission
also
acts
as
a
quasi-judicial
board,
and
I
look
at
that.
You
know
the
what's
the
utility
of
having
two
quasi-judicial
boards.
E
I
mean
it's,
it's
repetitive
are
we
where
it
says
that
we
are
here
to
advise
the
commissioners
if
we
are
to
advise
the
commissioners
and
we
are
not
a
do
we
look
ourselves
as
a
quasi-judicial
board,
because
the
charter
says
we
are
or
or
we
just
make
recommendations
to
the
commissioners,
because
it's
kind
of
way
it
is
anyways,
I
mean
we
have
a
meeting
or
quasi
judicial.
We
make
a
recommendation
whether
the
commission
chooses
to
follow
our
recommendation
or
not
it's
up
to
the
purview
of
the
commission.
F
We
have
a
major,
comprehensive
plan
coming
up
and
and
those
things
you're
going
to
be
more
involved
in
notes.
Maybe
if
we
work
through
the
application
types
that'll
help,
you
clarify
that
and
you
could.
You
could
even
come
back
to
the
mission
statement,
like
mr
vesey's
saying,
as
you
start
to
line
these
things
up
and
clarify
in
your
mind.
Maybe
that
will
help
you
work
on
a
mission
statement.
If
that's
what
you
want
to
do.
A
We
we
have
talked
about
it
before
a
little
bit
and-
and
I'm
not
sure
I
know-
we've
got
a
lot
of
papers
here.
I
think
the
papers
we're
talking
about
that
would
sort
of
define
the
mission
statement,
or
these
two
pages
that
are
the
the
florida
statute
related
to
the
local
planning
agency
is.
Is
that
correct
from
from
both
staff
and
and
legal
perspective?
Yeah.
B
So
to
mr
seaman's
point
for
the
most
part:
yes,
it's
going
to
be
the
state
statute.
This
planning
and
zoning
board
has
been
appointed
by
the
city
commission
as
the
designated
by
the
city
as
the
local
planning
agency.
Every
municipality
is
required
to
have
a
local
planning
agency,
and
ms
mcneese
did
a
really
wonderful
presentation
about
what
exactly
that
meant.
B
B
It
shows
that
you're
in
advisory
capacity
to
the
point
of
the
memo
it
there
is
some.
There
is
information
there
about
the
quasijudicial,
but
it
depends
on
the
type
of
application
that
comes
before
you,
so
you
do
serve
in
a
legislative
function
as
well,
but
the
other
part
of
it
that
you
know
what
you
kind
of
are
here
to
do
today
in,
in
my
opinion,
is
to
talk
about
changes
to
the
land
development
code
and
to
the
comprehensive
plan.
B
You
know
you
guys
have
talked
about
setbacks
and
things
like
that
in
in
the
in
discussion
and
some
of
the
other
topics
that
are
included
here
today,
and
I
think
to
ms
mcneese's
point.
I
think
that's
a
good
idea
to
kind
of
go
through
those
things
and
it
might
solidify
exactly
what
your
mission
is,
but
your
mission
is
pretty
much
set
by
state
statute.
I
understand
your
point,
mr
bessie.
You
want
to
put
something:
that's
a
little
bit
more
user-friendly.
B
If
you
were,
if
you
will
to
say
this,
is
exactly
what
we're
supposed
to
do.
What
you're
supposed
to
do
is
you're
supposed
to
serve
as
a
local
planning
agency.
Everything
goes
through
you
and
you
make
recommendations
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
You
can
probably
find
a
better
way
to
say
that,
though,.
A
G
G
A
C
A
All
right,
the
anything,
that's
an
ordinance
which
would
be
annexations,
comprehensive
plan
amendments,
future
land
use
map,
amendments,
land,
development,
code,
amendments,
zoning
map,
amendments
and
preliminary
plan.
Developments,
including
rezonings,
would
fall
into
a
category
that
that
we
can't
be
the
final
decision
makers
on
is
that
am
I
correct
in
assuming
that
from
what
I
see
here
right.
E
Okay,
well,
the
reason
I
want
to
break
it
up
is
because
we
have
a
few
members
of
the
commission
here
and
and
yeah.
That's
something
I
think
is
is
important
that
we
as
we
as
a
board-
I
I
can't
tell
you
more
often
than
not.
We
get
requests
for
annexation
for
the
sole
purposes
of
accessing
the
utilities
here
in
tarpon
springs,
and
you
know,
what's
become
problematic,
is
prior
to
annexation.
E
E
D
You
know
we're
often
told
that
that
they're
required
to
be
annexed
in
to
to
connect
with
the
utilities,
if
they're
required
to
annex
in.
I
don't
understand
why
it
comes
before
us
to
decide
whether
to
approve
an
annexation.
When
the
applicants
often
say
oh
we're
being
forced
to
be
here
to
do
this,
so
I
I
think.
H
Hello,
everybody
renee
vinson
planning
director,
so
the
the
ordinance
that
you're
referring
to
is
is
actually
in
our
utility
section
of
the
code
and
it
was
adopted
in,
I
believe
2006,
and
it
does
require
it.
It
requires
that
the
applicant
annex
the
property
and
I
actually
just
recently
had
a
conversation
with
mr
trask
again
about
this
section
of
the
code.
You
know
and
it
says
and
meet
all
it
doesn't
say
codes
and
said
it
meet
all
existing
city
requirements,
and
I
asked
mr
point
blank.
H
H
Maybe
an
interlocal
agreement
with
pinellas
county
and
that's
a
and
I
will
tell
you
that
going
into
local
agreements
with
pinellas
county
is
not
an
easy
thing,
especially
with
regard
to
annexation.
Is
you
know,
but
if
that's
the
direction,
you
know
that
we
get
from
a
policy
standpoint.
We
can
certainly
try
to
go
down
that
path.
H
So
right
now,
we've
got
you
know
in
absence
of
any
specifics
in
the
code,
we're
administering
this,
the
best
that
we
can
and
the
way
that
it
has
been
administered
in
the
past,
and
so
you
know
you
have
you
you
apply
for
the
annexation.
You
know
our
code
actually
says
we
can
refuse
them
service.
I
honestly
don't
know
if
that's
legal
to
do
that,
that
that's
not
a
question.
A
A
question
about
a
potential
fix
and
I
realize
the
fixes
is
well
beyond
our
jurisdiction.
So
it's
just
a
general
question
that
somebody
else
would
have
to
pick
up
and
run
with.
But
if
there
is
a
defined
planning
area
for
the
city
of
tarpon
springs
correct
and
it
takes
in
any
property
that
would
potentially
come
up
for
annexation.
Correct.
H
A
A
H
H
H
I
would
say
well
if
they've
got
the
normal
process
for
annexation
and
when
you're
is
that
when
we
annex
a
property
in
you
have
a
couple
of
options,
they
either.
You
know
we,
you
typically
assign
a
land
use
designation
that
is
the
same
or
less
intensive
than
the
county.
So
that's
that's
required
and
and
same
thing
with
the
zoning
designation.
H
If,
for
some
reason
you
don't
have
something
that
meets
that
or
if
they
want
to
do
something
else,
they're
trying
to
do
a
you
know
something
go
from,
you
know
a
residential
to
a
commercial.
They
can't
do
that
in
the
county
without
going
through
a
land
use
and
zoning
change.
So
my
point
is
when
we
we're
required
by
unless
they're
actually
applying
to
amend
the
land,
use
and
zoning,
you
know
to
change
it
substantially
from
what
it
is
to
something
more
intensive.
We
have
to
bring
them
in
as
something
substantially
similar
or
less
intensive.
H
We
also
have
the
option
we've.
Never,
I
think,
we've
only
done
this
in
one
instance
with
the
mccalpin
property,
I
believe
whereby
we
didn't
actually
have
the
same
land
use,
designation,
that
the
county
did
of
a
half
a
unit
per
acre,
and
so
we
annexed
it
in
and
we
left
it
in
as
the
pinellas
county
designation,
and
it
was
now
exchanged
at
some
point
later,
but
you
have
the
option
to
do
that.
To
simply
say
you
need
to
stay
the
same
zoning
as
what
is
in
pinellas
county
we've.
Never
done
that
approach
with
zoning.
H
Our
densities
are
very
similar.
I
mean
that
the
land
use
establishes
the
density
and
they're
between
pinellas
county
and
a
little
bit
of
history,
because
we
had
for
years
the
requirement
that
we
had
a
countywide
plan
and
so
that
dictated
the
future
land
use
map
categories
that
every
jurisdiction
had
to
have
in
the
city,
now
not
not
parcel
by
parcel,
but
we
all
had
the
same
land
use,
map
categories,
residential,
suburban,
two
and
a
half
units
to
the
acre
residential
urban
seven
and
a
half
units
to
the
acre
there's
a
whole
litany
of
them.
H
So
if
you're
in
residential
low
in
pinellas
county
at
five
units
to
the
acre,
it
is
virtually
identical
to
residential
low
in
the
city
of
tarpon
springs
at
five
units
to
the
acre,
there
is
no
difference.
If
they
wanted
to
increase
the
density,
then
they
have
to
go
through
a
full-blown
land
use
map.
Amendment.
E
Which,
let's
assuming
they
go
through
the
pinellas
county
and
that's
something
here
in
tarpon
springs
we
would
have
maybe
looked
at
a
little
bit
more
differently
and,
and
so
there
it
gets.
It
gets
approved
by
the
county,
come
into
tarpon
springs
and
the
density
is
a
lot
greater
than
we
as
a
city
would
have
maybe
allowed.
But
you
know
the
thing
is
our
choices
are
limited
with,
because
we
have
to
supply
utilities.
E
E
H
It
depends
upon
the
the
type
of
the
non-conformity
you
know
and,
and
frankly
I
mean
we
always
make
sure
that
the
applicant
is
keenly
aware.
You
know,
if
you
do
this
you're,
maybe
non-conforming
when
you
get
into
the
city
of
tarpon
springs
at
the
end
of
the
day.
And
so,
if
something
happens
to
your
property,
you
may
have
some
very
detrimental
impacts
to
deal
with,
because
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
rebuild
in
the
manner
that
that
is
there.
We
we
make
sure
that
applications.
H
D
H
F
H
I
won't
talk
about
the
case,
but
I
saw
what
they
did
in
pinellas
county
and
I
picked
up
and
I
knew
they
were
going
to
turn
around
and
come
right
to
us
and
that's
exactly
what
they
did
and
you
know
I
know
what
they
did
and
you
know
I
know
they're
density
shopping,
and
so
we
very
much
discourage
that
unless,
for
some
reason
we
think
it's
a
good.
I
you
know
that
okay,
maybe
that
makes
sense
in
our
case.
Maybe
it
wasn't
good
for
pinellas
county,
but
that
obviously
those
all
come
to
you.
A
H
G
G
Why
is
there?
Why
does
it
even
see
the
board,
because
we're
often
referred
to
forgive
me
and
we're
told
if
it
meets
those
two
boxes?
I
know
there
might
be
another
box,
but
it's
not
relevant.
Is
it
as
long
as
it
meets
those
two
boxes,
we're
nearly
required
by
our
guidelines
in
227
g
that
we
have
to
say
yes,
and
I
think,
and
I'm
only
going
to
speak
for
myself,
that
we're
continually
frustrated
and
go.
G
G
Why
is
that
standard,
so
incredibly
low
and
the
risk
is
so
high
for
the
city?
That
adjacency
is
the
only
real
hurdle
that
they
need
and
then
and
then
the
city
is
left
on
the
hook
in
perpetuity
forever
to
maintain
these
highland
lakes
as
an
outlier
of
our
community
forever
that
perhaps
the
core
residents
have
no
interest
in
supplying
that.
G
How
about
we
just
say
if
it's
not
in
the
best
interest
of
the
city
of
tarpon
springs,
that's
it
mission,
state,
wow,
dude.
I
laid
that
out
for
you
and
you
picked
it
up.
Thank
you!
So
much
so,
and
and
I
and
and
I
want
to
go
back
one
more
thing.
I
want
to
refer
back
to
highland
lakes,
and
I
know
that's
probably
not
the
right
designation,
and
that
was
a
big
thing.
They
checked
all
the
boxes.
G
That's
not
my
concern,
but
here's
what
I
am
concerned
about
is
in
20
years,
mr
smith,
if
he's
still
with
us,
is
going
to
propose
a
rate
increase
because
we
had
a
main
water
line
break
or
the
road
flooded
out
there
and
now
the
city's
on
the
hook
for
taking
care
of
this
hundred
homes
that
we
put
out
there
and
I'm
a
little
bit
out
on
my
pipe
right
there.
But
that's
my
concern
and
I'll
end
my
concern
about.
Oh,
that's,
not
the
end.
G
B
G
B
Might
ever
be
recognized?
Yes,
so
there
are
for
purposes
of
this
discussion.
There's
two
kind
of
different
types
of
annexations
that
we're
talking
about.
One
is
the
utility
section
of
the
code.
That
is,
the
city
requires
the
annexation
to
provide
services,
if
you,
as
the
planning
and
zoning
board,
want
to
recommend
a
change
to
that
section
of
code
to
the
commission
by
all
means
you
have
the
power
to
do
so
voluntary
annexations
that
are
done
by
statute.
B
You
do
not
have
the
power
to
change
those
criteria.
Those
are
promulgated
by
the
state
legislature.
If
you
want
those
to
be
changed.
That
is
something
that
you
need
to
contact
your
representative
about
and
have
them
bring
it
up
in
the
state
legislature.
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from
perhaps
the
city
attorney-
and
I
can
look
to
see
if
the
commission
wishes
to
do
so,
based
upon
your
recommendation,
if
there's
anything
else
that
we
can
make
that
more
stringent,
I
don't
believe
the
statute
will
allow
us
to
do
so.
B
That's
kind
of
been
preempted
by
the
state,
but
that
is
kind
of
why
you're
getting
the
three
check
marks
that
you're
allowed
to
look
at,
because
that
is
one
quasi.
Excuse
me
a
quasi-judicial
decision,
so
you
were
only
allowed
to
consider
those
three
criteria
and
evidence
presented
against
it
and
two
it's
out
of
your
control,
because
unless
it's
the
utility
portion
and
then
it
needs
to
be
addressed
by
the
code,
otherwise
it
is
designated
by
state
statute.
B
The
non-statutory
is
that
the
city's
code
has,
as
rene
had
said,
has
a
provision
in
it
for
hooking
up
to
services.
So
if
you
are
provided,
if
you
are
being
provided
services,
my
understanding
is:
is
that
it's?
If
you're,
not
within
the
city,
limits
it's
at
a
higher
rate,
once
you
become
adjacent
to
the
city?
B
To
use
your
word,
you
are
then
required
to
apply
for
annexation
into
the
city,
because
if
the
city
is
going
to
provide
services
to
you,
it
wants
you
as
a
part
of
the
jurisdiction,
and
so
then
the
city
when
it
finds
out
that
there
is
this
adjacent
property,
goes
out
and
says
you
need
to
now
come
annex
into
the
city,
and
here
are
a
different
set
of
criteria.
It's
still
under
the
statute,
a
voluntary
annexation.
It's
not
mandatory!
B
G
And
if
I
may
and
renee,
I
know
you
have
some
thoughts
on
this.
I
want
to
just
take
this
one
more
step,
so
let's
say
that
we
have
that
application,
but
that
application
is
a
completely
non-conforming
project
by
which
our
entire
planning
and
zoning
department
hope
goal.
In
my
opinion,
is
to
create
conforming
projects.
But
yet
here
we're
going
to
bring
in
in
some
instances
a
blatantly
non-conforming
project
and
what
I'm
hearing
is.
We
don't
have
a
choice.
B
No,
what
you
heard
was
this
is
the
perfect
example
of
your
job
as
the
planning
and
zoning
board,
underneath
your
enabling
ordinance
to
find
something
in
the
land
development
code
that
potentially
could
be
addressed
and
make
a
recommendation
to
change
that
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
So
they
can
address
that.
You
heard
renee
talk
about.
You
know
in
speaking
with
mr
trask
that
some
of
that
language
in
there
isn't
very
clear
about
when
they
have
to
meet
city
standards.
Well,
what
did
that?
What
does
that
mean?
Does
that
mean
the
code?
B
H
If
you
want
to
make,
if
you
wanted,
where
mr
task
wouldn't
go,
is
telling
me
what
that
all
city
requirements,
what
that
means?
Well
until
such
time
that
you
actually
process
the
zoning
now
I
know
what
I'm
recommending
we're
recommending.
You
know
r70a
on
a
particular
project
as
when
it
comes
in
and
what
we
do
is
we
look
at.
H
We
look
at
the
lot
size
and
we
look
at
the
adjacency
of
what
the
city
zoning
is
in
the
area
and
we
have
to
make
a
recommendation
as
to
what
the
what
that
property
should
be
brought
in
as
knowing
that
it
may
be
non-conforming
with
what
is
in
pinellas
county
in
their
zoning.
But
my
problem
is,
I
can't
tell
them
you
have
to
meet
something
that
doesn't
it's
not
in
effect
yet
because
they're
in
pinellas
county.
So
that's
my
chicken
and
egg
problem
that.
E
I
have
rene.
Is
there
at
this
point
for
the
commission,
you
know
a
modification
of
the
ordinance
that
says
if
you're
you
know
if
you're
and
this
has
to
they
have
to
be
aware
of
the
county.
If
you're
going
to
be
applying
or
requesting
utilities
from
the
city
of
tarpon
springs,
you
must
comply
with
their
building
requirements.
E
H
E
H
H
But
my
problem
is,
I
don't
know
what
the
actual
zoning
that
eventually
is
going
to
get
approved
will
be.
I
can,
I
can
say
I
think
it.
I
would
recommend
this,
but
until
you
actually
go
through
a
rezoning
hearing
and
apply
the
zoning,
it
doesn't
exist
so
there
that's,
that's
the
that's
the
real
problem
with
the
way,
the
ordinance
with
the
with
the
ordinance
so.
G
H
What
I
think
you
could
do
is
within
that
section.
You
can
state
that
you
know
in
the
instance
that
a
property
becomes
non-conforming
upon
annexation,
that
they
must
apply
for
appropriate
variances
through
the
board
of
adjustments
so
that
they
can
become
conforming
again.
They
may
or
may
not
get
approved,
but
at
least
you've
recognized
that
there
is,
you
know,
a
non-conformity.
B
So
and
maybe
to
simplify
this,
what
I'm
hearing
is
that's
a
section
of
code
that
you
all
would
be
interested
in
changing.
I
would
suggest
if
we
have
a
majority
or
consensus
that
that's
something
that
you
would
recommend
that
change
and-
and
I
would
definitely
want
to
get
the
planning
department's
input
on
this,
like
maybe
they
could
draft
some
suggested
language
like
renee,
has
said
and
then
bring
it
back
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board.
And
then
you
guys
can
take
a
look
at
it
and
then
make
those
recommendations
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
D
They're,
tough
on
that
side,
the
so
renee,
so
maybe
you
could
help
us.
It
seems
like
you.
I
can
infer
from
some
of
your
expressions
that
you
have
some
of
the
same
concerns.
We
do
right
and
some
of
the
same
frustrations
of
being
able
to
identify
what
some
of
those
things
mean
because
they're
written
broadly
so
maybe
you
could
help
us
with
some
of
those
recommendations
for
ordinance
changes.
D
B
D
H
Do
want
to
say
this
just
from
a
from
a
practicality
standpoint:
we've
done
this.
You
know
before
starting
permits
in
pinellas
county,
you
know,
and
then
we
accept
those
permits
they
get
turned
over
to
our
building
department.
We
pick
up
where
they
left
off
with
this,
because
we're
all
under
the
under
the
you
know
the
florida
building
code
right,
we're
generally
there's
there's,
there's
not
really
a
missed,
beat
between
accepting
a
set
of
c.
You
know,
plans
that
have
been
approved
by
pinellas
county
and
bringing
them
into
the
city.
A
H
B
H
G
G
Also
wanted
to
show
you
so,
but
that's
what
I
wanted
to
hear,
and
I
didn't
mean
to
interrupt
so.
Your
suggestion
of
a
motion
for
a
review
or
a
change
of
the
ordinance
should
be
made
at
the
next
post,
and
that
would
be
action
on
this.
So
if
I
heard
this
correctly-
and
forgive
me
for
interrupting-
is
that
in
regards
to
annexation,
it
appears
that
the
most
prudent
path
right
now
would
be
that
this
board's
requests
or
makes
a
motion
for
a
request
of
the
change
of
the
ordinance
for
annexations.
B
Perhaps
I
also
heard
something
mr
seaman
about
looking
into
an
interlocal
agreement,
so
I
would
say
at
your
next
meeting
during
board
discussion
in
your
ordinance
details
how
that
happens
at
your
next
meeting
during
board
discussion.
You
guys
have
a
brief
discussion
on
you
know,
directing
staff
to
look
at.
You
know,
revamping
the
ordinance
or
discussing
the
issue
of
an
interlocal
agreement
with
the
city
attorney's
office
and
bring
that
back
to
you
guys
at
a
later
date,
and
you
can
certainly
do
that.
The
next
regular
meeting.
F
E
Requires
it
is
a
sustainability
component
as
well.
I
think
that
I
think
you
know
we
look
at
our
utilities
and
expansion
of
our
utilities
and
more
use
of
our
utilities.
You
know
I
always
ask
the
utility
department
is:
is
that
you
know?
Do
we
have
the
capacity
and
the
sustainability
to
to
bring
on?
You
know
additional?
E
H
You
know
to
ensure,
because
they're
not
going
to
give
a
permit
to
something
that
can't
be
hooked
up
to
utilities,
whether
it
stays
in
the
county
or
it
gets
annexed
in
so
and
then
just
you
know
holistically,
you
know
we
do
have
you
know
we
plan
for
the
tarpon
springs
planning
area,
that
larger
area
that
mr
seaman
was
talking
about.
You
know
from
a
utility
perspective
and
we're
there
really
is.
You
know
there
really
is
no
concern
about.
H
You
know
potable
water
and
sewer
service
with
our
with
our
main
plants,
where
the,
where
you
may
end
up
with
service
issues,
is
the
downstream
of
how
does
it
get
there
or
how
does
it?
You
know
both
directions,
you
may
you
know
so
and
that's
where
the
developers
need
to
be
on
the
hook,
for
whatever
downstream
impacts
are.
H
A
Well,
I
think
we
sort
of
have
a
plan
to
to
move
a
couple
things
forward
at
our
next
meeting.
Hopefully,
if
we
come
on
down
this
page
a
little
ways,
the
one
one
really
interesting
thing
that
the
staff
did
tell
us
here
is
that
we
could
be
the
final
decision
makers
related
to
conditional
uses
and
site
plans,
because
those
are
resolutions,
not
agreements
or
ordinances.
B
B
B
So
there
is
a
way
to
do
that
suggested.
Charter
changes
are
done
by
the
charter
review
committee
or
they
can
be
done
by
petition
by
the
residents
or
the
city.
Commission
can
choose
to
to
talk
about
a
charter
change,
but
this
board
doesn't
have
the
ability
in
its
enabling
ordinance
to
suggest
changes
to
the
charter.
A
B
Right,
it's,
I
believe
it's
on
a
five-year
schedule
I,
and
to
my
my
former
associate
mr
perez-
did
represent
the
charter
review
commission
the
last
one
I
oh,
my
memory
is
getting
a
little
rusty.
I
want
to
say
that
this
did
come
up
at
the
last
charter
review
session
series
of
sessions
and
it
was
not
changed.
G
A
It
streamlines
the
process
it.
It
takes
a
little
bit
of
stuff
off
of
the
the
boc's
table.
Lord
knows
they've
got
enough,
but
you
know,
and
it
it
reduces
the
issue
that
we
have
had
at
times
in
the
past,
where
we
felt
like
the
the
boc
was
not
listening
to
what
we
were
saying
and
we
were
putting
a
lot
of
effort
in
on
things
that
that
that
were
ultimately
overturned.
G
A
Okay,
and
just
kind
of
is
the
devil's
advocate,
does
the
is
that
going
to
address
kind
of
all
of
the
situations
that
that
we
could
think
of
where
we
might
have
a
large
project
come
in.
I
mean
I
guess:
if
do
we
ever
have
large
projects
come
in?
I
can't
really
think
of
one
offhand
that
that
changed
anything
that
that
didn't
require
the
future
land
use
map.
Amendment.
H
E
H
And-
and
I
agree
100
as
a
matter
of
practice,
you
know-
and
I've
spoken
with
the
city
manager
about
this.
You
know
that
has
stopped.
If
and
we
are
now
we
are
telling
applicants
now.
I
think
this
is
something
that
perhaps
needs
to
be
codified
and
made
much
more
clear,
because
right
now
we're
just
telling
them,
but
we
are
telling
the
applicants.
H
You
know
what
you're
going
to
planning
and
zoning
board
with
is
exactly
what
you're
going
to
the
board
of
commissioners
with
treat
it
with
that
same
respect,
because
you're
not
going
to
be
given
a
chance
to
supplement
or
amend
the
application
and
not
go
back
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board.
So
that's
a
matter
of
practice
that
you
know
when
working
with
the
city
manager
he
agrees
with
and
we
are
doing
it
probably
is
warrants
a
code
amendment.
You
know
somewhere
down
the
road
to
make
it
absolutely
iron-clad.
G
G
H
B
H
And
so
what
what
the
city
attorney
has
told
us
that
if
they
want
to
now
change
the
application,
her
opinion
is
that
they
should
actually
have
to
withdraw
it
and
reapply.
Okay,
I'll
be
honest
with
you.
I
don't
100
agree
with
that.
I
think
they
should
be
able
to
amend
an
application,
but
that's
something
that
that's
the
statutory
part
that
needs
to
be,
and
I
agree.
G
H
I
think
the
sticking
point
is
where
it
does.
It
doesn't
say
that
the
the
record
can't
be
supplemented
moving
between
the
planning
and
zoning
board
and
the
board
of
commissioners.
That's
the
verbal
arrangement
that
you're
hearing
right
now
the
commitment
that
we're
not
going
to
do
that
so
and
we've
done
that
on
two
different
occasions.
Now,
in
the
last
three
months,
so
we've
told
the
applicant,
you
got
to
go
with
what
you've
got.
You
can't
supplement
afterwards,
you
can
roll
the
dice
if
you
want,
but
that's
what
you're
stuck
with.
H
D
H
B
So
the
option
is
just
like
the
annexation
conversation
we
just
had
at
your
next
regular
meeting.
You
can
during
board
comments
suggests
that
staff
go
back
with
the
city
attorney's
office
and
revisit
that
section
of
code,
make
those
suggested
changes
and
bring
it
back
to
you,
and
that
way
you
can
get
the
ball
rolling
on
making
this
suggestion.
D
D
They
actually
listened
to
us
and
and
and
and
that
we
that
that
we
are
in
concert
together
because,
again
in
the
in
the
past,
we
feel
that
we
have
not
been
in
concert
together
with
the
board
of
commissioners
and
we're
just
like
an
island
on
our
own.
We
do
we
we
vote
on
something
and
it's
lost
in
the
in
the
history
of
of
tarpon
springs,
and
somebody
can
go
back
and
see
what
we
did,
but
it
doesn't
seem
to
ever
be
brought
up.
D
So
that's,
I
think
what
we're
all
this
is
about
is
is
that
we
can
be
have
a
more
fluid
process
and
that
that
are
our
hard
work,
because
we
do
really
hard
work
and
and
all
due
respect
we
get
a
when
we
get
a
a
project
that
comes
before
us.
You
know
we
don't
have
us,
they
have
a
lot
more
on
their
plate
than
we
do
right.
D
The
board
of
commissioners
had
a
lot
more
on
their
plate
than
the
planning
and
zoning,
so
we
might
just
have
one
thing
to
talk
about,
so
we
talked
about
it
for
two
hours.
They
might
have
15
minutes
to
talk
about
it,
so
our
two
hours
we
uncover
a
lot
of
stuff.
I
I
truly
believe
you
mentioned
include
harbor.
I
truly
believe
we
did
an
infinitely
more
exhaustive
analysis
and
and
questioning
process
on
that
than
the
board
of
commissioners.
D
A
In
the
the
hearing
process
for
these
developments-
and
I
I
don't
know
how
to
accomplish
it-
you
guys
know
more
about
how
to
accomplish
it.
But
I
see
with
this
the
separating
future
land
use
map
amendments
from
from
all
the
other
approvals
and
on
projects
that
involve
that
it
helps
but
give
some
thought
and
and
help
us
with.
A
I
personally
feel
like
need
to
come
to
at
least
two
meetings
with
us
and
two
meetings
with
the
boc,
some
somehow
or
other
whatever,
whether
it's
separating
a
rezoning
from
a
site
plan
or
whatever
mechanism
it
is
to
make
it
work.
I
I
for
one
would
would
not
vote
on
all
four
things
in
the
case
that
we
voted
on
the
first
time
on
that
particular
project.
I
would
be
against
at
least
a
couple
of
the
items,
probably
just
because
it's
it's
too
much
to
deal
with
it
at
one
session.
H
G
G
Okay,
so
at
the
last
sentence
of
resolutions,
florida
statute,
166
0.4,
a
resolution
is
an
administrative
in
nature
and
need
not
be
adopted
by
the
governing
body:
correct,
okay
and
then
below.
It
is
bulleted
conditional
uses
in
sight
plants.
So
what
I'm
reading
is
saying
that
those
can?
Those
are
administrative,
only
correct.
B
E
B
G
G
Right
right
other
than
what
we
just
covered
in
site
plans,
is
that,
in
regards
to
what
you
brought
up,
is
we're
getting
incomplete
applications
and
we're
forced
to
review
those.
So
now
that's
being
addressed
in
a
different
manner,
via
possibly
codified
in
ordinance
once
we
recommend
it
that
the
site
plans
have
to
be
complete
before
they
come.
E
G
Okay,
so
and
then
I'm
going
to
change
gears
again,
real
quick
is
hearing
for
large
development
and-
and
I
know
we've
been
through
that
once
or
twice
a
year-
we're
dropped
a
package.
Even
if
it
comes
a
week
early,
that's
got
three,
sometimes
four
but
we'll
just
say
three
and
I'm
just
repeating
what
was
already
done
and
each
one
of
those
is
wildly
complex
and
I
think
the
feeling
of
this
board
was.
G
A
G
A
It's
I
mean,
I
personally
think
it's
kind
of
a
disservice
to
the
developers
too,
because
they
spend
all
that
money,
doing
site
plans
and
everything
and
if
we
don't
approve
the
rezoning
that
starts
the
process.
They've
put
all
that
money
and
effort
into
the
psych
plan
for
nothing-
and
you
know
I
so
I
think,
even
though
it
delays
them
a
little
bit.
H
H
H
So
those
really
can't
be
strewn
apart
now,
you
could
definitely,
if
there's
a
land
use
amendment
you
can
make
them
do
that.
First,
that
land
use
map
amendment's
got
to
stand
on
its
own
face.
Is
it
you
know?
Does
it
comply
with
all
the
other
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan?
Is
it
a
good
idea
to
change
it?
Yes
or
no?
Okay?
Yes,
okay!
Now
you
can
go
now
now.
Let's
talk
about
the
site
plan
and
the
zoning
or
whatever
you
know
those
types,
I
think
that's
what
you're
trying
to
get
at.
G
G
And
if
I
may
speak
for
the
people
that
aren't
here
really
in
they
impact
our
citizens,
so
big,
you're,
so
polite
and
nice,
and
I'm
thinking
I
I'm
not
concerned
about
if
it
takes
four
more
months
for
the
developer,
because
the
city
of
tarpon
springs
is
stuck
with
it
forever
and
we
can
take
some
time
to
really
get
it
right.
So
I'm
be
interested
to
hear
how
we
can
make
that
process.
Work.
G
Out
over
so
we
don't
have
an
idea
for
that.
Does
anyone
on
the
board
have
an
idea
merle?
I
know
you've,
given
this
a
lot
of
thought
other
than
because
what
I
don't
want
to
see
is
this
stuff
to
be
tabled
and
we
go
two
more
years
down
the
road
and
we're
still
seeing
four
ordinances.
What
can
we
do
tonight?
I.
A
H
And
that's
a
good
point
that
final
plan
development
kick
that
out.
You
know
that
that
doesn't
have
to
go
on
the
same
night.
You
know
that
can
be
moved
out.
So
I
can
I
mean
we
can
look
at
from
the
things
that
make
sense
for
them
to
travel
together
and
we
can
strip
out
things
you
know,
or
you
know
and
put
in
processes
that
hopefully
can
give.
You
know.
I
guess
the
one
caveat
you
know
I
need
to.
H
B
H
H
H
Expertise,
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
and
if
we
look
at
the
way
the
ordinances
are
crafted.
If
we
can
provide
some
sort
of
discretion,
you
know
regarding
times
and
travel
of
of
applications,
but
we,
I
think
we
I
don't.
You
know
we
need
to
think
on
that
and
see
if
we
can
come
up
with
something
that
meets
everybody's.
G
C
G
Because
we,
it
does
obviously
you're
empathetic
to
our
thoughts
and
we
are,
but
it's
still
well,
I'm
going
to
use
a
fancy
word
still
just
tacit
knowledge
and
until
it
gets
codified
when,
if
you're
not
in
the
office
that
day
or
you're
not
there
that
week
and
then
it's
it's
just
gone.
So
I
want
to
see
it
move
away
from
just
conversation.
H
If
I
were
sitting
in
your
shoes,
I
would
want
the
same
type
of
posture
that
you
get
in
pinellas,
county
and
I'll.
Just
say
this:
if
you're
in
the,
if
something
is
a
project
in
pinellas
county
and
it
has
to
have
a
land
user
zoning
map
amendment
and
you
go
through
and
you
get
a
staff
recommendation
to
deny
and
you
get
a
planning
and
zoning
board
recommendation
to
deny
rarely,
will
you
ever
see
them
even
try
to
go
forward
to
the
board
of
commissioners
and
that's
the
type
of
now
they're
advisory?
Only.
H
F
One
more
just
minor
the
conditional
uses
a
couple
years
ago.
They
were
always
coupled
to
site
plans
that
was
was
broken
apart
and
you've
had
a
couple
conditional
uses
come
before
you
before
the
person
invested
in
the
site
plan,
which
is
good.
We
can
you
know
if
that's
something
we
we
could
certainly
encourage
that
to
happen
more,
and
we
do
tell
people
now
hey.
You
might
want
to
get
a
read
on
this
by
running
your
conditional
use,
then
you're
going
to
come
back
for
your
site
plan.
F
A
H
E
H
Has
that
really
hasn't
been?
I
mean
that's
a
really
a
policy
decision
as
to
you
know
whether
or
not
you
know-
and
I
guess
I
would
say
you
know
again-
we
would
want
to
be
looking
at
things
that
are,
you
know,
permitted
uses
by
right
or
in
kind
of
one
bucket,
and
then
these
other
more
nebulous
things
like
land
use
and
rezoning
things
that
really
have
to
apply
the
comprehensive
plan.
H
As
part
of
your
you
know
your
analysis,
you
know
those
are
the
things
that
you
you
know
there
may
be
policy
direction
to
you
to
look
at
that
sustainability
piece.
I
can
tell
you
from
a
matter
of
practicality,
we
fully
intend
to
wrap
the
sustainability
action
plan,
either
as
a
reference
document
or
direct
integration
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
as
well
as
whatever
comes
out
of
that.
That
needs
to
you
know
to
further
inform
land
development
code
amendments.
So
I
feel
like
that's
something
that
will
get
addressed
in
time,
we're
just
not
there
yet.
G
I'll
give
a
little
bit
of
background.
I
believe
I
brought
the
sustainability
topic
up.
I
happen
to
know
paul
smith
and
I
was
surprised
to
find
out
that
that
board
was
put
under
his
purview
and
that
there
is
a
new,
dedicated
sustainability
staff
member.
Yes,
I
didn't
have
the
time
to
reach
out
to
her,
though
we
exchanged
some
emails,
and
I
asked
some
of
these
questions
very
low
key
about
to
paul,
and
I
had
a
conference
call
with
the
two
of
them.
G
They
are
in
analysis
paralysis,
so
I'm
just
going
to
call
it
the
way
that
it
is
a
20
000
point
document
that
they
inherited
from
somebody
else.
I
was
like
whoa
I'll
get
loose
here.
I
said
hey
how
about
you
guys
just
weigh
in
on
whether
something
is
according
to
your
board,
sustainable
or
not.
He's
like
we're
not
going
to
do
that.
So
this
is
what's
strange.
This
is
what
strikes
me
strange
and
I'm
going
to
read
this
sentence.
G
Sustainability
board
input
on
project
review,
so
we
got
the
sustainability
board,
that's
been
in
action
for
at
least
a
year.
Maybe
longer
we
have
a
new
dedicated
full-time
staff
to
do
sustainability
stuff,
but
the
sustainability
committee
currently
has
no
review
authority
or
standards
of
review
for
development
projects,
not
just
currently
they're
not
going
to
in
the
future
they
have-
and
this
is
how
I
understand
it-
they
have
no
say
in
development
review
at
all,
not
even
as
like
part
of
the
trc.
G
That's
how
I
understand
it
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
in
other
words
an
entire
development
150
homes,
pud
sustainability
doesn't
even
look
at
it.
They
don't
know
whether
it's
sustainable
or
not.
Now
I
know
that
renee
said
well
we're
going
to
wrap
that
into
the
comprehensive
plan,
but
our
board
right
now
is
going
to
miss
that
boat,
and
it's
not
probably
going
to
be
part
of
that.
I'm
going
to
judge
whether
it's
right
or
wrong.
G
H
H
G
G
F
Been
to
a
few
of
their
meetings,
they
want
to
make
recommendations
on
on
development
review.
That
then,
would
be
in
standards.
If
that
those
codes
are
changed
and
you
all
and
us
would
review
for
those
standards.
You
know
limit
the
turf
in
a
subdivision
things
like
that
they
could
write
a
regular.
You
know
they
could
recommend
that
it
could
be
adopted
and
then
the
standard
would
be
there.
Whether
that's
sit
as
a
review
board.
E
E
The
sustainability
committee
recommends
approval,
we're
going
to
get
the
staff
has
reviewed
it
for
sustainability
and
staff
recommends
approval
based
on
the
staff
criteria.
At
this
point,
there
is
no
criteria
for
staff
to
look
at.
Am
I
correct
and
so
moving
forward?
Are
you
is
the
sustainability
committee
looking
at
six
months
before
they
have
something?
Six
years.
E
E
E
Even
though
you
remain
repurposed
property
tarpon
springs
are
reaching
build
out
and-
and
you
know
we
may
be
a
useless
board
at
some
point
in
time,
because
there's
nothing
else
to
build
or
nothing
else
to
go
through,
never
be
useless,
but
but
but
I
I
think
sustainability
is
important.
I
just
I
just.
H
Where,
if
there's,
if
there
is
you
know
it's
a
big
redevelopment
project,
you
know
they
may
come
up
with.
You
know
things
that
are
performance
driven.
So
if
you
do
x,
y
and
z,
you
can
get
a
benefit
of
x,
y
and
z.
I
don't
know,
tie
it
to
density
or
something
like
that,
but
there
may
be
instances
where
it's
not
a
bright
line
and
maybe
something
does
need
to
go
get
referred
directly
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board,
maybe
certain
size
projects.
H
D
This
is
a
little
off
subject,
but
it's
one
that
was
brought
up
at
one
of
our
little
breakouts
at
the
end
of
our
pnc
meeting,
and
I
think
it's
something
that
none
of
us
really
understand
when
we
get
the
at
the
bottom
of
a
of
a
ordinance
recommendation.
It
says:
staff
approves
or
staff
denies
right
right.
H
So
when
I
say
when
it
says,
staff
typically
99,
if
not
100,
of
the
projects
that
come
through
these
review
processes
site
plan
conditional
use
whatever
they
all
go
through
our
technical
review
committee
that
is
laid
out
in
in
our
statutes
as
to
who
sets
you
know
who
those
people
are
they're,
so
they're
representatives
from
every
department,
including
planning
their
everyone's
reviewing
it
for
their
area
area
of
expertise.
If
you
will,
you
know
roads
and
streets,
storm
water,
sanitation,
you
know
utilities,
you
know
all
those
folks
are
reviewing
site
plans,
rezonings
everything
you
know.
H
Sometimes
they
don't
have.
If
it's.
If
it's
a
land
use
map
amendment,
you
know
they
may
not
be
overly
concerned
about
it,
because
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
plan,
nothing
being
built,
but
but
they
do
everybody
does
review
it.
Then,
if
all
the
questions
have
been
reviewed
and
answered
and
responded
to,
then
it
can
move
toward
the
first
public
hearing,
which
is
planning
and
zoning
board.
So
the
technical
review
committee
is
a
it's
a
technical
committee.
We
meet
the
once
a
month
and
we
review
projects.
H
Then
it
will
come
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board.
That's
where
we
take
all
that
staff,
the
planning
department.
All
of
us
very
you
know,
play
in
this.
You
know
we
take
all
that
information
and
we
compile
the
staff
report
and
we
recommend
you
know
approval
or
denial
or
approval
with
conditions
and
provide
it
to
you,
based
on
the
evidence
that
that
we
have
does
that.
D
H
D
And
this
you
weren't
around
when
this
issue
came
up,
but
you
know,
obviously
we
had
an
election
and
that
election
was
a
pretty
transformational
election.
I
think
we
could
all
say
that
right
and
the
trust
that
exists
in
these
processes,
I
think,
were
in
question
and
and
pat
you
know
we
talked,
I
mean
we
had
you
and
you
weren't
here,
so
it
has
nothing
to
do
with
you,
but
you
know,
in
a
situation
of
that,
I
was
involved
in
where
thursday
a
report
goes
out.
H
D
I'll
talk
to
you
for
a
cup
of
coffee,
but
but
it's
but
the
point
we
are,
I
think
the
whole
point
of
all
this
is
that
we
have
again
like
when
I
I
keep
using
the
analogy
of
dancing
like
that
everything
is
smooth
and
that
we
all
need
to
have
a
mutual
respect.
We
want
the
respect
of
the
board
of
commissioners.
You
need
the
res.
You
want
the
respect
of
us
so
that
when
we
see
it
says
staff
approves,
it
means
something
to
us
and
we
just
don't.
D
Oh
well,
we're
just
going
to
go,
read
it
and
that
that
was
like
the
least
impactful
thing
that
we
that
we
saw,
because
we
want
to
have
that
confidence
as
because
it's
important,
because
you
guys
do
a
whole
lot
more
work
than
we're
capable
of
doing
on
reviewing
a
pro
a
project.
You
know
we
can't
do
all
the
things
all
the
different
little
things
that
you
guys
are
doing
for
weeks
before
it
comes
to
us.
D
A
A
But
I
I
have
wondered
some
whether
it
should
say
this,
this
item
or
or
this
application
is
complete
and-
and
we
feel
this
and
staff
feels
that
it
meets
the
criteria
or
this
application
is
not
complete
or
or
something,
but
without
actually
stating
approval,
just
kind
of
giving
the
the
information
of
how
you
feel
about
it,
sort
of,
but
without
actually
recommending
approval.
Perhaps
I
don't.
B
It's
gonna,
it's
gonna,
be
different
in
a
legislative
versus
a
quasi-judicial
context
too,
because
in
the
quasi-judicial
proceeding
the
city
is
a
party
to
the
action
you
know
like
in
the
memo
much
it's
like
a
courtroom,
so
they
they
come
out.
One
way
they
might
come
out
the
same
way
as
the
applicant,
but
they
they
got
a
position
and
they
they're
they're
there
to
present
the
evidence.
You
know
you
made
a
comment
that
sometimes
you
don't
always
go
with
what
the
the
city
staff
recommends,
and
you
know
we've
talked
about
that.
B
That's
the
you
know,
that's
exactly
what
your
job
is
is
to
take
those
you're
not
there
to
rubber
stamp
it
you're
there
to
take
what
they
have
now
keep
in
mind.
City
staffs
recommendation
is
based
on
all
the
information
that
they
have
at
the
time
that
they
make
their
staff
report.
We
all
everyone
in
this
room
knows
that
when
an
applicant
gets
before
the
board
and
they
stand
in
front
of
a
microphone,
more
information
comes
out
than
they've,
probably
supplied
to
staff,
and
so
I
hear
what
you're
saying
you
want.
B
H
If
it's
a
huge
project,
you
know
it
may
be
more
than
appropriate
to
present
all
the
facts,
especially
if
it's
something
that's
going
to
change
the
face
and
say
we're
presenting
everything,
it
appears
to
be
compliant
and
meets
all,
but
you
know
I
mean
we
can
temper
those
I
mean
I'll,
just
be
straight
up
and
tell
you.
We
have
one
coming
up
at
your
next
meeting
that
we
are
choosing
to
not
make
a
recommendation
on
just
telling
you
that.
B
And
and
we've
seen
that
before,
and
I
think
too
that
that's
not
necessarily
a
bad
way
to
go
because
remember
the
planning.
The
staff
report
is
the
city's
position
on
the
issue,
and-
and
I
you
know,
I
think
renee
was
hesitant
to
say
expertise.
But
I
that's
exactly
what
the
staff
report
is.
Is
it's
the
city's
experts,
people
who
are
that
have
the
specialization
in
those
fields
giving
you
the
most
information
that
you
can
from
the
city's
perspective
to
make
sure
it
does
meet
all
the
codes
to
make
sure
it
does
meet.
B
All
the
you
know,
the
comp
plan
and
the
vision
for
the
city.
You
take
that
and
then
you
take
all
the
other
evidence
that's
presented
by
the
applicant,
especially
in
a
quasi-judicial,
and
then
you
make
your
own
determination
based
on
the
criteria
or
if
it's
legislative,
you
make
your
own
determination
based
on.
What's
best
for
the
city,
you
know
and
what
you,
what
you
feel
you
can
recommend
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
B
So
I
I
think,
if
the
if
the
staff
feels
strongly
that
it
should
be
approved
or
it
should
be
denied
because
of
the
certain
criteria
or
because
of
whatever
from
a
legal
position,
it's
not
needed
one
way
or
the
other,
but
from
a
practical
position
it
may
be
something
that
you
want
to
have
and
then,
if
staff
doesn't
feel
like,
they
can
go
one
way
or
the
other.
I
think
that
should
be
a
staff
level
decision
that
they
should
be
able
to
to
make
the
board
dictating
how
staff
should
present
that.
A
Who
has
a
positive?
I
do
it
because
for
25
years
I
was
on
the
other
side
of
the
table,
making
those
presentations.
And,
generally
speaking,
if
I
had
a
positive
recommendation
from
the
staff
I
was
going
to
pass
and
I
can't
honestly
think
in
25
years
of
a
time
that
it
didn't
go
that
way.
And
so,
when
there's,
if
there's
any
question
about
whether
we
could
pass
it
or
not,
I
I
sort
of
feel
bad
for
them.
When
we,
when
we
turn
one
down
that
they
really
came
into
the
meeting
expecting
to
have
approved.
H
And
we
do
try
to
you,
know
prep
our
applicants.
You
know
through
the
process
that
look.
This
is
this
is
a
you
know.
This
is
a
recommendation.
Planning
and
zoning
board
makes
a
recommendation.
You
know
you're,
not
final
until
you
get
to
the
board
of
commissioners,
so
we
we
do
try
to,
and
you
know
properly
inform
them
of
that
that
just
because
we're
recommending-
and
we
do
you-
we
do
get
the
errant
phone
call.
Oh
you're
recommending
approval.
I
don't
need
to
be
there.
Yes,
you
need
to
be
there
so.
C
Real
quick
question:
what's
the
times
lapse
between
each
one,
so,
like
you're,
saying
our
next
board
meeting,
we
have
something
that
you've
already
done.
Was
that
done
within
like
the
last
month,
the
last
week,
the
last
because
I
know
like
the
next
one
for
the
board
of
commissioners
to
the
commissioners.
It's
usually
two
weeks
that
they.
F
H
Each
one,
unless
there's
something
overwhelmingly
driving
you
know,
and
we
do
try
to
work
with
with
you
know,
developers
if
we,
if
they're
trying
to
get
due
diligence
and
they've,
got
a
time
frame
on
a
contract
we
try
to.
We
try
to
move
things
through
good,
bad
or
indifferent,
and
so
generally
it's
my
policy
to
not
turn
things
around.
You
know
like
go
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board
in
the
past.
H
I've
seen
us
go
to
planning
and
zoning
board
one
night
and
literally
flip
them
the
next
night,
tuesday
night
and
go
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
I
hate
doing
that.
I'm
you
know
it's
not
my
policy,
you
know
unless
there's
unless
it's
some
extraordinary
circumstance,
I
don't
like
to
do
that.
I
don't
even
like
trying
to
turn
it
around
for
the
next
week.
H
The
policy
right
now
is,
if
you
go
in
a
may,
planning
and
zoning
board
meeting,
you're-
probably
going
to
be
on
the
first
meeting
in
june
with
the
board
of
commissioners.
Now.
Having
said
that,
I
have
an
exception
to
that.
That's
coming
up
that!
You
know
because
it's
just
it's
a
time-sensitive
issue
and
we're
trying
to
get
answers.
You
know
whether
just
good
or
bad
for
for
the
applicant
so.
H
Oh,
I
see
you're
so
like
a
difference
in
what
what
the
applicant
is
presenting
to
you
versus
when
they
get
in
front
of
the
board
of
commissioners
and
maybe
they're
making
a
different
presentation
and
from
even
what
and
that
gets
back
to
the
to
the
conversation
we
were
having
earlier
about.
You
know
we
have
now
made
it
up.
You
know
a
policy
that
you
know
and
with
the
city
manager,
giving
me
this
direction
to
do
so
that
what
goes
to
the
planning
and
zoning
board
cannot
be
all.
H
H
B
Information
yeah,
the
other
thing
too
is
testimony,
is
is
hard.
It's
not
concrete
evidence,
it's
testimonial
evidence,
and
then
you
have,
you
know,
mentioned
members
of
the
public.
If
you've
got
an
affected
party
that
stands
up
and
says
something
the
applicant
has
a
has
a
right
to
rebut
that.
So
that's
something
that
maybe
staff
never
even
heard
because
it
didn't
come
up.
There's
no
affected
parties
at
the
staff
level.
Oh.
C
B
Don't
know,
and
but
let's
be
clear,
some
of
those
emotional
things
are
facts,
and
some
of
that
is
relevant,
competent,
substantial
evidence
that
you
have
to
take
into
consideration,
albeit
having
sat
on
this
board
for
several
years
now.
A
lot
of
it
is
not,
but
you
know
some
of
it
is
so
that
you
do.
You
do
get
a
little
bit
different
than
what
staff
gets
just
because
of
how
the
process
works.
Okay,.
B
D
Pointed
out
to
us,
when
an
applicant
brought
some
information,
you
could
have
said.
We
never
saw
this
okay.
You've
said
that
before
okay
and
so
you've
brought
it
to
our
attention
when
information
is
being
brought
by
an
applicant,
you
made
it
clear
that
that
wasn't
something
you
guys
saw
in
making
your
recommendations.
So
I'm
just
I'm
giving
you
kudos.
You
have
done
that.
I
think
you've
done
it
on
multiple
occasions.
Okay,
I'm
sorry.
A
H
And
and
I've
you
know
I've
I
kind
of
have
to
defer
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
On
that
you
know
and
from
a
policy
perspective,
do
you
want
new?
I
guess
it
boils
down
to
do.
We
think
there's
going
to
be
monumental
shifts
in
the
comprehensive
plan.
You
know
I
mean
to
to
mr
cascuda's
point:
we're
we're
approaching
build
out.
You
know
so
you
know,
I
don't
think
that
you're,
you
know
you're
going
to
see
monumental
shifts
in
the
plan.
H
D
D
Okay,
okay,
so
the
pitch
penny
and
the
concern
I
had
was
you
know
that
they
were
going
up
towards
the
sidewalk
right
and
I
think
the
board
of
commissioners
actually
kicked
them
back
a
little
bit,
which
is
one
of
the
things
I
brought,
but
I
think
they
did
but
anyways
they
were
going
right
up
on
the
sidewalk
and
my
my
question
wasn't
that
they
were
going
to
be
my
concern.
Wasn't
necessarily
they
were
going
to
be
on
the
sidewalk.
D
My
concern
was
what
you
know
we
have
on
on
pinellas
avenue:
we've
got
businesses
that
are
back
set
back
and
we
got
a
few
older
ones
like
chris's,
pharmacy
and
stuff
that
are
on
zero
lot
lines
right,
they're,
right
up
on
this
on
on
the
sidewalk,
so
the
you
know
the
question
was:
what's
what's
the
vision
for
that
street?
I
have.
H
So
I
would
my
short
answer
is
we
have
a
vision?
It
is
on
the
street
and
that
that
that
was
the
adopted
special
area
plan
and
the
smart
code
that
was
adopted
for
the
downtown
and
the
sponge
docks
in
2011,
and
that
went
through
two
years
of
public
input
and
it
is
a
policy
document
of
itself
that
kind
of
overrides
the
comprehensive
plan,
it's
its
own
little
special
comprehensive
plan
for
those
areas.
H
D
G
Chair
and
the
remaining
time,
I
have
a
couple
of
additional
questions
and
it
has
to
do
with
this
very
fine
document
that
staff
prepared
on
the
memorandum
from
attorney
number
four
bottom
of
the
page.
What
is
a
special
planning
study,
in
other
words,
number
four
says-
to
conduct
special
planning
studies
as
directed
by
the
boc.
What
is
that.
B
G
Okay,
so
this
the
planning
and
zoning
board-
this
is
just
a
workshop-
is
in
essence
the
lpa
of
the
local
planning
agency.
We
get
told
that
a
lot
the
lpa
is
defined
by
statute,
as
in
quotation,
the
agency
designated
to
prepare
the
comprehensive
plan
or
plan
amendments
required
by
the
community
planning
act
and
quotation.
So.
G
G
To
that's
terrific
and
forgive
me,
but
this
is
what
strikes
me
as
unique.
Is
that
we're
supposed
to
be
driving
that
bus,
and
I
know
we
have
staff
to
do
that
because
we
have
lots
of
things
to
do,
but
it
strikes
me
as
odd
that
that
appears
to
be
one
of
the
number
one
purposes
of
our
board.
But
yet
it's
so
distant
from
us
and
frankly
other
than
this
meeting
that
we
were
even
told.
G
Maybe
we
shouldn't
have
we're
supposed
to
be
driving
that
bus
for
changes
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
but
we've
turned
all
that
work
over
to
staff
and-
and
I
know
you
want
to
comment,
but
I
I
have
a
couple
more
to
do
and
I'm
running
out
of
time
so
go
ahead.
Actually
let
us
know
how
are
we
going
to
be
involved
in
the
changes
to
the
comprehensive
plan
which
is
supposed
to
be
our
job.
G
H
So,
throughout
our
rounds
of
public
input,
we
actually
will
be
coming
back
to
to
this
board,
specifically
for
this
next
round
of
of
pub
of
fact
fact
finding
and
gathering
and
opinion
gathering
and
everything
else,
so
we're
working
on
that.
What
that
is
going
to
look
like
okay
and
we'll
be
coming,
we'll
we'll
in
fact
we
may
even
just
try,
rather
than
trying
to
piggyback
on
one
of
your
regular
board
members,
we'll
probably
try
boards
we'll,
probably
try
to
schedule
a
special
meeting
with
you
to
do
that.
H
G
G
You
so
staff
in
the
memorandum.
Second,
last
paragraph
page:
three
another
topic
was
trc
and
the
council
said
you
know
what
we're
not
supposed
to
be
at
the
trc,
which
makes
some
sense,
except
that
on
163.3174
we're
going
to
move
halfway
down
the
paragraph
and
I'll
read.
All
local
planning
agencies
shall
provide
opportunities
for
involvement
by
applicable
community
college
boards,
which
may
be
accomplished
by
blah
blah
blah
membership
on
technical
advisory
committees
or
other
appropriate
means.
So
what
I
hear
in
one
switch
appears
to
be
florida,
fs
statute
1.63.
G
G
B
G
B
A
B
B
And
keep
in
mind
this
says
all
local
planning
agencies
shall
provide
opportunities
for
involvement
by
applicable
community
college
boards.
That's
it
which
may
be
accomplished
by
formal
representation,
membership
on
technical
advisory
committees
or
other
appropriate
means.
So
it's
talking
about
the
lpa
provides
opportunities
for
involvement
by
community
college
boards
to
be
on
those
committees
and
the
trc.
G
And
then
I
want
to
go
back.
Forgive
me
I.
This
is
my
last
one
back
to
227.00
top
of
the
page,
the
annotated
discussion
topics,
there's
not
a
page
number
annotated
discussion
topics
for
the
workshop
and
this
227
lays
out
us
g
3
to
make
recommendations
to
the
boc
regarding
amendments
to
the
official
zoning
atlas,
conditional
use
and
site
plans.
G
C
G
C
B
Okay,
to
make
recommendations
regarding
amendments
to
this
code,
awesome
to
make
recommendations
to
the
board
of
commissioners
regarding
amendments
to
the
official
zoning
atlas,
conditional
uses
and
site
plans-
okay,
so
that's
the
one
you're
talking
about
and
it
says
to
conduct
special
planning
studies
as
directed
by
the
board
customers.
We
already
decided.
We
don't
know
what
those
are.
So,
when
you're
talking
about
making
recommendations
to
the
board
of
commissioners
regarding
amendments,
the
official
zoning
atlas
conditional
uses
and
site
plans
the
way
that
you're
doing.
B
That
is
how
it
tells
you
to
do
it
in
your
in
your
procedures,
which
tells
you
that
you
can
make
a
recommendation
by
approval
denial
approval
with
conditions,
because
then
you
have
to
go
to
the
site
plan
section
of
the
code
and
read
how
that
site
plan
is
done
and
how
that
process
is
done.
So
you
are
given
a
power
and
duty
here,
that's
100
correct
now.
The
other
thing
that
you
can
make
recommendations
is
on
the
ldc.
B
H
Think
I
can
help
so
where
it
says
to
make
recommendations
to
the
board
of
commissioners.
Regarding
amendments
to
the
official
zoning
atlas.
That's
one
thing:
you're
re-changing
the
zoning
map.
From
this
to
this,
you
can
make
a
recommendation
on
conditional
uses
and
a
recommendation
on
site
plans.
It's
the
the.
H
G
B
To
the
zoning
atlas
you
can
approve,
deny
or
or
approve
or
with
recommendations
here
is
an
application
for
conditional
use.
That's
what
this
section
is
saying:
here's
an
application
for
a
site
plan
approval
and
then
your
your
rule,
your
other,
the
other
procedures
laid
out
in
the
code.
Tell
you
how
to
do
that
that
you
can
approve
those
applications,
you
can
deny
them
or
you
can
prove
them.
What
conditions.
G
D
D
Left
can
I
I
want
to
bring
up
one
thing
just
so
we
are
so
thank
you
just
something
that
is
germane
to
all
that
we
do
right
and
a
a
once
former
bright
commissioner
once
asked.
The
question
of
the
city
attorney
on
the
board
of
commissioners
is
when
we
get
to
the
review
of
evidence,
and
we
have
that
it
has
to
be
relevant,
competent
and
substantial,
and
that
the
question
was
does
an
opinion.
B
B
G
D
That
that's
on
the
record,
I
would
really
I
was
kidding.
I
think
this
is
critically
important.
Okay,
that
opinion
alone
does
not
even
from
an
expert
does
not
meet
the
standard
of
rel
alone.
Merely
the
opinion
does
not
meet
this
the
standard
of
relevant,
competent
and
substantial
without
the
evidence
to
back
up
that
opinion.
D
So
you
can
get
you
know
the
smart
you
can
get.
We
can
get
elon
musk
in
here
and
ask
him
a
question
and
if
he
doesn't
have
the
support
in
documents
or
the
has
not
done
the
research
necessary
to
answer
that
question,
it
does
not
constitute
relevant,
competent
and
substantial
information,
an
opinion
alone,
because
that
came
up.
That
was
a
huge
issue
with
that
big
project
that
we
dealt
with
before
and
yeah.
You
know
things
like
that,
like
traffic
and
stuff
that
we
didn't
again,
if
we
didn't
feel
like
we
got.
D
B
And
keep
in
mind
when
you're
talking
about
an
opinion,
especially
when
you're
talking
about
in
light
of
the
law.
An
opinion
is
one
single
statement
iopine
as
an
expert
xyz.
Now
my
testimony
can
be.
I
spent
103
hours
surveying
you
know,
alternate
19,
you
know
at
all
times
of
day.
You
know
over
the
course
of
a
six
month
period
and
during
that
time
this
is
what
I
observed.
These
are
the
calculations
that
I
made
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
et
cetera.
B
Maybe
I
don't
have
a
piece
of
paper
in
front
of
you
that
says
it
I
probably
should,
but
that
testimony
is
the
the
relevant
competent
substantial
evidence,
I'm
presenting
to
you
to
support
my
blanket
opinion,
correct
and,
and
and
we've
talked
before
I
know
you
have
testified
in
court
as
a
forensic.
You
know
expert,
so
you
understand
that
you
give
an
opinion
and
then
you
have
something
to
support
that
opinion.
You.
B
And
that
is
why,
in
a
quasi-judicial
setting
that
cross-examination
is
very
important
for
procedural
due
process,
because
the
other
party
has
to
have
the
ability
to
question
those
statements
that
were
made
so
yes,
a
hundred
percent.
I
agree
with
exactly
what
you
said:
opinion
is
not
in
and
of
itself
enough,
but
an
opinion
is
a
single
sentence,
saying
I
opined
this
way.
This
is
why
I
apply
them
this
way.
There's
your
there's,
your
relevant,
competent,
substantial
evidence.
D
H
Mr
bessie,
one
thing
I
would
like
to
say
you
were
talking
about
you
know,
recommendations
regarding
a
site
plan
or
something
if
there's
something
that
you
feel
strongly
about,
that
you
wish
the
developer
would
consider,
there's
nothing
wrong
with
putting
that
into
the
into
the
testimony
and
saying.
I
would
really
like
that
you
consider
this
and
we'll
make
sure
that
gets
carried
through
you
know,
but
it's
you
know
it,
but
usually
it's
going
to
be
at
the
developer's
whim
on
some.
If
it's
something
way
outside
of
the
norms
of
the
code.
A
B
D
B
B
B
Well
and
keep
in
mind-
and
I've
said
this
in
to
the
board
of
adjustment
as
well.
I
understand
that
you
guys
want
to
be
helpful.
That's
not
really,
I
hate
to
say
it's
not
really
your
job,
you
know
they've
gone
through
a
process
with
staff
and
whether
and
staff
has
probably
helped
them
make
those
same
kind
of
decisions
and
whether
they
choose
to
do
that
or
not
is
going
to
ultimately
be
up
to
them.
B
E
I
I
understand
that,
but
sometimes
it's
a
matter
of
you
want
the
project
to
succeed
and
for
us
to
vote
for
the
project.
We
want
to
see
these
changes,
I
agree,
and-
and
so
you
know,
otherwise
it's
just
a
blanket
denial
and
we
don't
want
to
sit
there.
But
blanketly
deny
somebody
because
we
we
want.
We
want
to
see
certain
changes
or
recommended
changes
brought
forth.
E
E
B
B
Depe,
doesn't
matter
what
you
guys
actually
do
you
guys
make
your
own
decisions,
but
it
will
always
be
my
job
to
step
in
and
make
sure
the
record
is
straight
that
you
guys
are
only
supposed
to
use
what
you
know
the
criteria,
so
I
am
always
going
to
be
the
naysayer
when
you
guys
really
want
to
be
helpful,
because
that
is
what
my
job
is,
whether
or
not
you
guys
heed
that
or
whether
or
not
you
you
make
your
your
recommendation
based
on
something
else.
I'm
not
the
decision
maker
here.
D
B
You
can
do
that,
but
I
will
tell
you
on
a
quasi-judicial
application
if
you
vote
no.
For
that
reason,
and
that's
your
finding
of
fact-
and
they
challenge
it
say
say
the
board
of
commissioner
says
we
want
to
do
it
all
for
those
same
exact
reasons,
and
then
they
challenge
it
that
that
decision
is
likely
to
be
turned
over
if
it's
not
if
it's
not
supported
by
the
fact
that
it
doesn't
meet
the
criteria.
Well,.
D
B
D
B
Going
to
get
into
individual
applications,
I'm
just
letting
you
know,
I
I
don't
have
a
problem
on
legislative
stuff
with
you
guys
trying
to
say
this
is
for
better
tarpon
springs,
but
I
will
tell
you
from
a
legal
perspective.
My
job
is
on
especially
on
quasi-judicial
applications.
To
always
step
in
and
say,
hey
guys,
just
remember,
you've
got
criteria,
I'm
not
here
to
make
the
decisions.
You
guys
have
the
hard
job
to
do
that.