![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/B_U7zWvwij4/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Board September 25, 2023
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).
C
I
think
the
last
thing
we
talked
about
was
someone
had
asked
about
that
particular
policy,
and
that's
so
that's
one
if,
like,
if
a
mobile
home
Park's
getting
redeveloped,
making
sure
that
there's
adequate
housing
for
relocation
needs
prior
to
prior
to
displacement.
C
No
no!
This
is
if,
if,
if,
if
yeah,
if,
if
parcel,
if
something's
being
redeveloped
so
like
mobile
home
parks,
are
a
good
example
because
they're
a
lot
of
them
are
under
single
ownership
by
entity
or
Corporation,
if
they're
going
to
get
redeveloped
the
policies
intended
and
their
state
statute
to
this
effect
as
well
that
before
they're
allowed
to
demolish
and
dis,
you
know
and
displace
people,
there
has
to
be
a
certain
amount
of
relocation,
assistance
and
availability,
so
that
policy
speaks
to
that.
A
F
D
E
D
C
E
Pretty
clear,
they're
saying
as
soon
as
those
mobile
homes
have
any
are
destroyed,
we're
going
to
move
them,
put
affordable,
housing
there
and
we'll
try
to
make
places
a
little
theme
that
they
fit
now
so
new
policy
providing
protection
measures
of
existing.
Well,
that's
only
protecting
them
from
one
development.
Why
can't
we
protect
them
from
all
development.
C
Oh,
that's
a
good
point:
I
mean
that
tip
I.
Think
typically,
what
happens
is
we?
We
see
them
getting
redeveloped
as
new
residential,
but
no
I
think
that
I
think
that's
a.
C
Well,
well,
not
every
property,
so
just
for
clarification,
so
the
live.
Local
Act
only
applies
to
property
that
has
zoning
of
commercial,
industrial
or
mixed
use.
So
if
it's
a
residential
office
or
something
like
that,
all
the
other
property
is
does
not
fall
under
the
live
local
act.
So
if
something
is
zoned
straight
residential
now
they
don't
get
any
special
dispensation,
but
under
live
local.
They
still
have
to
go
through
all
of
our
processes
and
everything.
But
there's.
C
If
so,
if
you're
not
going
to
develop
it
as
redevelop
it
as
a
new
mobile
home
park,
then
it
needs
to
qualify
as
an
affordable
housing.
Development
is
is
what
the
intent
of
that
policy
is
I.
E
Okay
I
mean
if
anybody
else
I
just
you
know,
maybe
hi
something
I
just
feel
like
that's
the
the
goal
in
all
of
this
is
I
mean
it's
clear
from
the
very
beginning.
It
was
all
support,
you
know
not
just
private
developers,
but
in
the
very
beginning,
the
housing
authority-
and
you
know
everything
is
targeted
for
them,
but
I
mean
the
real,
affordable.
Housing
is
mobile.
Homes.
C
E
E
C
C
Well,
so
we
have
some,
we
actually
have.
We
have
a
one
big
mobile
home
park,
that's
his
own
Highway
business.
F
C
C
So
I
mean
that
that's
a
and
that
would
be
under
the
live
local
act.
Unfortunately,
so
all
right,
let
I
think
I
see
where
you're
going
so.
Okay.
G
C
It's
a
it's
a
different
Focus,
it's
it's
more!
In
my
opinion,
it's
more
it's
a
broader
policy
statement
of
housing
should
be
context
so
be
sensitive
to
what's
around
it.
You
don't
want
to
come
in
in
a
single-family,
neighborhood
and
drop
in.
You
know
a
large.
You
know.
G
C
C
E
G
C
D
E
C
D
E
E
C
E
C
E
C
I
think
what
we're
trying
to
say
is
that
it
could
be
appropriate
to
put
affordable
housing
in
areas
where
there
isn't
currently
a
fort,
that's
residential
in
area
residential
areas
that,
as
long
as
you
look
at
the
the
scale
and
the
physical
characteristics
and
you're
not
overwhelming
the
area.
So
with
what,
with
with
parking
on
like
things
that
would
impact
the
surrounding
area,
so
you're
you're
not
building
something
out
of
context
with
if
you're
in
a
single,
predominantly
single
family
neighborhood.
C
H
Trying
to
look
at
go
ahead,
I
I
thought
of
maybe
an
example
that
we
had
recently
that
went
to
Planning
and
Zoning
Board
of
it
was
the
Susana
projects.
That
was
a
project
where
we
used
the
term
content
sensitive
when
we
brought
it
to
you
guys,
basically,
what
that
meant
is.
They
are
doing
a
multi-family
development,
an
area
that
was
primarily
residential,
but
it
had
some
multi-family,
but
what
they
did
is
place.
H
The
parking
lot
behind
the
building
push
the
buildings
closer
to
the
street
to
be
more
in
contact
with
the
history
and
the
development
pattern.
This
is
a
smaller
scale,
development
that
achieves
getting
some
more
housing,
but
that
wasn't
going
to
be
detrimental
to
the
neighborhood.
So
it's
kind
of
an
example
of
a
project
you
guys
saw
we'll
we'll.
E
A
definition,
and
one
of
the
things
that
makes
me
uncomfortable,
is
because
I
reviewed
those
code,
hacks
is
one
of
the
things
was
to
eliminate
the
word
compatibility
from
these
comprehensive
use
plans
and
I.
Don't
like
that
elimination,
it's
very
so
it's
very
pointed
because
then
people,
don't
we
still
I,
don't
have
a
clear
understanding.
E
C
C
You
don't
get
the
same
pushback
in
some
instances
as
you
do
from
surrounding
areas
just
because
it's
affordable
and
you
know
we
don't
want
I'm,
just
using
a
derogatory
tart.
We
don't
want
those
people,
you
know.
So
that's
where
so
I
think
that's
where
the
Genesis
of
you
know
the
compatibility
issue
arises
in
that
you
can't
look
at
the
two
different
things
you
know
just
because
something
is
affordable.
Housing
doesn't
necessarily
mean
you
know.
It
doesn't
mean
that
it's
incompatible.
E
F
A
G
H
B
Okay,
Oxford
has
considered,
together
with
the
surrounding
you
know,
circumstances
or
or
area,
so
in
context
with
fits
it.
You
know
very
well
right:
it.
A
A
B
D
E
C
I
think
I
think
provide
for
density
bonus.
That's
what
we
do
now
and
provide
for
density
bonuses
for
affordable
and
contact,
sensitive
infill
housing
to
incentivize
I
mean
that's
this,
that's
our
common!
That's
what
we
do
now.
We
have
an
affordable
housing
bonus
density
process.
Do
conditional
use
built
into
our
Land
Development
code.
It's
been
there
for
many
many
years,
but.
A
A
C
K
E
C
C
C
I
think
I
said:
I
think
it's
something
that's
a
hold
over
from
a
long
time
ago.
That
probably
needs
to
come
out
of
our
Land
Development
Code
Zero
lot
line
is
allowed
under
our
affordable
housing
section
allowing
manufactured
housing
to
locate.
Well,
that's
all
existing
language,
cluster
development,
reduced.
E
C
Reduce
well
in
the
context
of
affordable
housing,
actually
parking
minimums
are
a
lot
lower
than
they
are
for
a
regular
market
rate
apartment
buildings.
A
good
example
is
Santa's
Isles
at
the
corner
of
Safford
and
MLK.
C
They
they
got
the
benefit
of
a
reduced
parking.
I
think
it
was
only
one
per
unit,
and
it's
still.
The
parking
lot
is
never
really
more
than
about
three-fourths
full,
so
they
just
they're
smaller,
generally
they're,
smaller
homes.
They
don't
have
the
means
to
have
three
or
four
vehicles,
so
I
mean
that's
just
that
one
I'd.
E
C
So
very
low
income
is
hold
on,
that's
gonna
be
less
or
equal
to
30
percent
of
area.
Median
income
I
mean
that
that
is
like
that's
public
housing
practically
I
mean
that's
the
only
way
that
you
get
units
for
that
low
income
is
going
to
be
50
to
80
percent
of
area
median
income,
and
then
once
you
get
above
80,
you
kind
of
start
falling
into
the
low
mod
and
moderate
income,
and
then
Workforce
goes
all
the
way
up
to
140
percent
of
area
median
income.
If.
I
F
I
C
E
E
For
a
note,
too,
the
attorney
pointed
out
the
very
low
income
statute
is
done
statute,
so
that
would
be
good
to
put
in
the
notes
more
than
the
survey
responses,
because
that
clarifies
why
it's
really
there
not
because
I,
don't
think
anyone
in
the
survey
actually
asked
me.
C
So
right
now
you
you
can't
have.
If
you
have
a
plaited
lot,
you
can
it's
zoned
for
single
family,
even
though
it
might
be
a
one
acre
lot.
You
can
have
one
single
family
house.
If
you
wanted
to
do
something
more
than
that,
and
let's
say
that:
there's
density
you'd
have
to
go
through
a
subdivision
process
and
you
know,
because
there's
no
way
to
allow
more
than
one
one
principal
building
on
a
lot.
C
So
there's
instances
where
we've
had
interest
to
you
know
maybe
put
like
just
a
small
cul-de-sac
in
and
have
whether
it's
called
cottage
court.
So
you
you
own
the
unit,
but
you
don't
own
the
land
underneath
you
can.
You
can
get
there
under
certain
zoning
districts
by
way
of,
if
you
do
a
condo
plat,
but
there's
just
it's
just
difficult
under
our
under
our
codes
right
now
and
it's
a
they're,
usually
very
small
they're.
Usually
not
you
know,
big
developments,
you'll
see
them.
C
You
know,
like
I
said
it
might
be
a
little
cul-de-sac
with
five
or
six
homes
on
it.
You
know
and
they're,
but
it's
on
in
this
instance.
They
wouldn't
have
to
be
platted
and
subdivided
into
individual
Lots
you'd
be
able
to
build,
have
more
than
one
home
and
the
rest
would
be
under
common.
You
know
Common
ownership,
so
it's
just
a
it's
just
a
development
type
that
it's
hard
for
us
to
get
to
Under
Our
Land
Development
code,
we're
not
going
through
a
ton
of
machinations.
C
B
G
In
the
policies
slightly
above,
would
there
be
any
policy
as
it
relates
to
organizations
like
Habitat
for
Humanity
homes,
for
is
there
something,
or
does
it
fall
under
any
of
these,
because
I
see
how
we
identify
Pinellas,
County
Housing
Trust,
we
list
them,
but
do
we
have
anything
that
takes
others
under
consideration?
I.
G
H
C
F
H
F
H
It
says
this
is
the
Housing
Authority
non-profit
organizations,
good.
F
I
C
D
C
C
It's
you
know
the
the
residences
the
primary
residence
has
to
be.
It's
got
to
be
owner
occupied,
that's
a
little
bit
difficult
to
in
the
Long
Haul
to
really
enforce,
but
we
do
have
that
already
in
our
affordable
housing
section,
the
Land
Development
code.
G
C
Some
of
it's
just
really
not
discretionary.
The
other
ones
are
referring
to
Historic
structure.
You
know
it's
homes
and
stuff.
That's
been
moved
to
the
historic
element.
C
C
B
H
Under
there's
the
policy
before
it
talks
about
the
demolition
program
at
the
police
department,
so
Police
Department,
our
Police
Department.
I
Because
I
haven't
done
this
in
Tarpon,
usually
when
it
is
a
Police
Demolition
program,
it's
usually
because
it's
a
confident
structure,
an
unsafe
structure.
F
I
B
H
L
C
We
just
pretty
majorly
overhauled
that
section
of
land
development
code
so
that
all
did
get
approved
by
the
Board
of
Commissioners,
so
that
is
effective.
Now,
so
that's
been.
F
C
K
Item
it
may
be
relevant
or
not
recently,
I
had
a
I'm
in
construction,
a
project
that
was
related
to
pervious
and
impervious
ratios.
F
K
Now,
if
anyone
doesn't
understand
what
that
is,
it's
pretty
straightforward,
the
idea
is,
if
you
have
a
residential
lot,
we'll
leave
commercial
off
for
this
moment
is
that
you're
only
allowed
to
cover
so
much
of
it
with
impervious
surfaces
like
concrete,
correct
the
concept
there
is
true,
we
flood
it
rains
all
the
time
and
the
more
that
is
impervious.
It
runs
somewhere
else
and
in
my
experience,
I
don't
think
I've
ever
encountered
a
municipality
that
does
not
have
impervious
impervious
ratio.
K
Having
done
a
worksheet,
I
just
saw
it
today
on
another
permit
for
Safety
Harbor,
it's
very
serious
business.
They
take
it
very
seriously.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
relevant
at
that
moment
since
you
asked
I
thought
it
struck
me
as
very
strange
that
we
don't
have
that,
and
perhaps
it's
a
good
topic,
and
this
would
might
be
a
good
place
to
bring
this
up
for
both
residential
and
Commercial
go
ahead.
H
So
after
we
spoke
because
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
this,
I
went
back
and
I
talked
to
Renee
too,
and
we
do
have
so
right
now.
Isr
and
previous
service
ratio
does
not
apply
to
single-family
residential
projects,
but
we
do
I
believe
have
an
already
in
our
land
use
categories
and
ISR
and
the
reason
why
is
because
they
allow
for
some
non-residential
uses.
So
that's
what
it
would
apply.
So
I
think
that
we
can
maybe
go
back
to
the
future
land
use
element
and
see
how
we
can
potentially
apply
it.
H
C
Sweater
I
I
think
that's
something
that
we
definitely
want
to
revisit
on
the
future
land
use
element
and
establish
whether
it's
in
the
housing
it
needs
to
be
in
the
future
land.
You
sell
them
because
that's
where
the
rubber
hits
the
road
so
for
all
of
our
residential
land
use
categories,
I
think
we
and
we'll
look
and
see
what
Pinellas
County
is
using,
but
0.65.35.
C
Yeah
otherwise
I
mean
you
know,
I'm,
seeing
it
all
over
the
place,
especially
as
as
water
rates
continue
to
go
up
and
it
costs
a
lot
of
money
to
try
to
keep
Landscaping
alive.
You
know
it
seems
like
the
default
is
well
I'll,
just
rip
up
all
this
landscaping
and
I'll
just
put
pavers
everywhere
and
so
I'm.
Seeing
that
happen
a
lot
and
so
and
while
that
might
solve
your
water
bill
issue
now
you're
creating
another
problem
by
an
increased
runoff
and
affecting
your
neighbors,
and
things
like
that.
H
Sort
of
put
one
point
of
clarity
that
there's
two
different
terms,
so
there's
the
ISR
impervious
service
ratio
and
there's
also
a
lot
coverage.
So
typically
lot
coverage
only
applies
to
like
structures.
So
in
this
the
smart
code
that
we
have
lot
coverage
means
the
structures
or
the
buildings
on
the
property.
Your
ISR
is
really
everything,
that's
impervious.
That
would
be.
You
know,
pools
patios
sheds
everything
so
sometimes
you'll
see
two
different
terms
and
they
mean
two
different
things.
B
B
Degree,
but
that
would
be
cause
to
accept
all
those
impervious
services
for
a
three
inch
rainfall
and
that
that's
how
they
gauge
the
volume
and
the
amount
of
drywall
necessitated.
C
Well,
we
had
talked
about
eventually,
that's
going
to
all
come
back
to
you
guys
again,
but
we
will.
We
want
to
definitely
look
at
what
some
other
communities
are
doing
and
the
county,
and
just
our
future
land
use
map
categories
to
reflect
an
ISR
for
for
residential
I.
Think
that's
just
good
business.
E
Just
real
quick
somebody
I
saw
people
asking
after
the
hurricane
about
these
I
guess.
Companies
that
raise
your
home
like
is
there
a
certain
procedure
because,
like
talking
about
flooding
for
Neighbors
I
mean
if
you
do
that,
first
of
all,
you're
still
in
the
flood
zone?
Even
your
house
is
now
more
protected,
but
your
neighbor's
homes
are
now
like
aren't.
Wouldn't
they
get
that
runoff.
E
E
C
I,
it's
pretty
rare,
because
it's
just
it's!
It's
really
expensive
now!
I
do
know
that
I
think
after
this
last
hurricane-
or
maybe
it
was
from
with
there
are.
There-
are
some
mitigation
grants
available,
I
think
at
the
individual
property
owner
level
to
where
you
can
get
a
certain
amount
of
money
toward
elevating
your
house
above
base
flood
elevation.
So
now
there
are
instances
where
you
know
I
mean
generally
they're
gonna
generally.
C
J
G
And
put
New
Foundations
and
raise
the
elevation
and
also
homes
that
are
along
that
Coastline.
Doing
that
I
have
a
general
question:
is
there
anywhere
I
would
think
it
might
be
in
the
housing,
the
subject
of
docs
on
Waterfront
I?
Look
at
two
issues:
building
requirements
such
as
elevation
because
I've
seen
a
lot
in
this
recent
where
docs
were
completely
underwater
and
some
of
them
were
destroyed
and
then
the
other
is
use
of
Waterfront
four
docks
I
know:
there's
been
a
moratorium
on
Doc's,
meaning
on
public.
C
G
C
Owned
Waterfront
I,
not
to
my
knowledge,
this
is
something
that
was
I,
guess
I've
seen
it
come
to
the
board
at
least
twice
and
I.
Think
the
last
time
it
went
to
the
board.
There
was
in
a
very
emphatic
direction
of
the
board
at
that.
Time
is
don't
bring
this
back
again,
but
obviously
you
can't
find
a
future
board,
but
we've
it
has
been.
It's
it's
been
decided
and
then
upheld
two
or
three
times
by
the
board
and
they
just
they're.
Just
not
don't
seem.
Historically,
the
policy
haven't
gone
there.
I
Yeah
because
there's
a
lot
in
the
water,
if
that
gets
very
tricky,
considering
it
because
a
lot
of
it
does
depend
on
where
your
boundaries
are,
especially
with
the
submerged
Lanes
between
you
and
like
so,
it's
I
haven't
seen
it
specifically
in
say
like
docs,
because,
like
I
said
it's
more,
you
know,
I
have
some
I
work
with
other
several
other
Coastal
municipalities.
I
They
haven't
really
had
to
do
anything
yet
with
it
and
because
now
granted,
they
haven't
had
like
the
issues
like
Tarpon
Springs,
had
especially
with
this
last
hurricane.
So
but
from
my
experience,
they've,
they
kind
of
were
shying
away
from
it.
They
didn't
similar
to
what
this
board
similar
to
what
happened
here
is
like
they.
I
If
it's
not
brought
up
they're,
not
they
don't
really,
because
it's
because
it
is
costly
because
we're
seeing
it
with
even
just
raising
up
the
raising
of
the
house,
it's
costly
to
do,
and
it
brings
in
potentially
other
issues
as
well
with
the
if
the
with
state
government
County
government
Federal,
depending
depending
on
where
it
is.
C
The
the
one
of
the
things
that
was
discussed
kind
of
at
length
was
since
it's
you
know,
so
if
a
strip
of
land
is
publicly
owned
and
why
does
the?
Why
does
the
property
on
the
other
side
of
the
road
have
any
more
right
to
use
that
for
a
dock
than
any
other
property
owner
in
the
city?
Why
can't
and
that's
that's
how
this
whole
thing
kind
of
got?
You
know
so,
and
that
was
why
I
think
the
board
really
was
like
this
is
there's
no
fair
way
to
do
that?
Why?
C
Why
is
it
just
because
you
happen
to
own
the
house
across
the
street,
you
technically,
you
have
water
view
property,
but
you
don't
have
waterfront
property
and
so
that
that
was
part
of
the
discussion
as
well
to
your
point
about
docs
themselves
and
construction
standards,
and
we
very
much
defer
to
Pinellas
County.
We
we
have
their.
We
follow
their
doc
ordinances.
You
know
chapter
and
verse,
essentially
yeah.
C
J
A
C
Yeah
we
we
review
it,
for
you
know
yeah
for
Center,
one
third
of
the
you
know
and
the
length
and
making
sure
there's,
not
a
boat
house
going
on
it
and
things
like
that.
But
where.
A
We
don't
really
get
into
anything
else,
and
any
new
ducks
are
built
up
higher
so
that
now
obviously
in
the
storm
like
we
just
had,
some
of
them
probably
were
underwater
too,
but
the
really
low
ones
that
we
have
problems
with.
G
People
call
the
Merle
that
you're,
seeing
that
the
county
or
the
city
is
putting
a
elevation
minimum
elevation,
because
I
haven't
seen
that,
so
anyone
can
go
out
there
and
put
a
and
they'll
can
build.
Two
of
the
setbacks
built
to
that.
But
I
haven't
seen
where
the
county,
or
even
even
core,
has
identified
a
minimum
elevation
for
people
to
put
in
them
like
just
a
foot
above
the
wall
for.
G
G
A
To
be
up
a
bit
still
to
be
functional,
docs
they
they
can't
be
up
enough
to
be
completely
out.
B
C
We
so
previously,
you
know
we
had
the
coastal
and
conservation
element.
It
was
one
element,
and
so
we
have
bifurcated
that
into
the
coastal
management
element
and
the
conservation
element.
So,
hopefully
again
so
you're
going
to
see
some
things
that
are
like
move
stricken
through.
So
it's
easier.
C
I
mean
Caroline:
did
you
want
to
provide
any
bigger
overview
than
that
right
now,
or
do
you
as
to
some
of
the
changes
Caroline
drafted?
Most
of
this.
M
Requirements
for
Coastal
management
that
have
grown
over
time
there's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
between
conservation,
Coastal
management,
but
we
want
to
keep
transformation
with
conservation
and
Coastal
management
to
specifically
make
sure
that
we
meet
all
of
the
requirements
that
the
statutes-
and
it's
going
to
be
very
difficult
to
read
and
strikethrough,
say
that
again,
it's
going
to
be
very
difficult
strike
through
underlying
it's
very
hard
to
follow.
I
would.
M
G
M
So
it
really,
it
has
not
really
editorialize
much.
There
are
some.
There
are
some
carpet
specific
six
weeks,
it's
one
of
them
being
that
me
to
move
from
no
net
loss
of
wetlands
to
an
enhancement
of
all
Wetlands.
We
have
no
off-site
mitigation
opportunities
so
that
that
a
person's
specific
thing
that's.
F
J
M
M
M
C
C
C
F
A
C
Yeah,
so
this
was
a
this
really.
What
this
really
is
is
like
Marina
facility
sighting
criteria
and
so
I'm
gonna
guess
that
you
will
find
that
criteria
also
in
the
Pinellas
County
code,
as
well
I
think
concerned
with
following
I
I
to
me.
I
get
your
point
this
to
me.
That
would
apply
to
sighting
of
new
facilities.
If
you
need
to
do
extensive
dredging
to
get
a
canal
into
a
boating
facility,
that's
going
to
be
discouraged.
Obviously,
maintenance,
dredging
for
existing
stuff
I
think
is
a
different,
different
yeah.
E
C
Right,
so
that
is
all
if
you
recall,
we
under
the
in
the
future
land
use
element,
which
is
where
you're
really
going
to
find
it.
We
now
have
the
the
place
based
map
and
we
called
out
those
those
areas
specifically
for
commercial
working
Waterfront.
The
fishing
was
a
wheat
they're
all
in
that
they're
yeah
they're
they're
they're
in
the
future
land
use
element
where
you're
gonna
key
on
them
and
find
them
rather
than
trying
to
core
through
an
entire.
D
C
Had
well
we
we
had,
we
had
very
similar
criteria,
I
believe
it
was
in
the
future
land
use
element
for
sighting
of
Marina
facilities.
Okay,
I
found
it
sorry,
I
found
it.
G
J
C
G
C
H
A
C
F
A
A
M
E
Maybe
you
can
just
make
a
note
to
go
back
when
we
go
back
to
the
future
land
use,
how
this
ties
in
with
protecting
commercial
fishing
in
the
working
Waterfront,
because
I'm,
seeing
a
lot
of
preferences
for
Marinas
and
and
I
with
this
inconsistency
between
the
one
and
the
other
I.
Don't
want
that
to
become
a
problem
where
oh,
it's
inconsistent.
So
you
have
to
change
your
future
land
use
or
whatever,
because
they
should
be.
E
C
Them
so
I
mean
this
is
a
this
Caroline.
This
bolded
list
is
that
coming
from.
C
E
I
mean
what
I'm
seeing
right
now
is
two
inconsistent
policies,
and
every
time
that
happens,
one
of
them
has
to
change
and
there's.
This
is
not
because
this
change
is
not
to
become
statutorally
compliant,
I
know,
because
you
told
us
we
were
always.
We
were
statutory
compliant
before
we
even
started
this
process
and
there's
no
statutory
requirement
to
make
room
for
Marinas.
E
J
E
F
C
E
G
2.2.2
mm-hmm
I
read
it
and
I,
see
where
it
says
all
right,
so
review
the
approval
of
the
Pinellas
County,
Water
navigation
board
for
docking
facility
sea
wall
stretch
and
fill
and
other
activities
under
their
review
shouldn't.
We
also
be
saying
that
they
should
be
seek
seek
other
approvals,
because
we
know
dep
Army
Corps
of
engineer
has
to
approve
even
a
residential
permit.
So
we
exclude
them
to
only
say
that
they're
good,
if
they
only
get
Pinellas
counties
but.
G
C
We
can't
hold
up
someone's
building
permit
for
let's
say
it's
a
doc
permit
and
let's
say
that
for
some
reason
you
think
it
might
need
an
Army
Corps
permit.
We
don't
have
the
jurisdiction
to
say
you
have
to
show
us
that
before
we
give
you
the
permit,
if
it's
now
Pinellas
County
is
different
because
they
are
the
permitting
Authority
for
specifically
for
docs
and
I
mean
we
operate
underneath
of
them,
so
we
review
it
and
it's
still
and
they
have
to
issue
a
permit.
But
to
my
knowledge
we
can't
really
outright
require.
J
G
J
C
J
I
G
G
I
If
someone's
gonna
hold
up
as
a
argument,
well
2.2.2
says:
I,
don't
have
to
do
it
so
therefore,
and
I
permit
permitting
office
is
going
to
go
to
go.
Tell
you
to
pound
sand,
but
you
know
it's
got
to
get
it
yeah,
but.
G
D
C
Reviewed
I
mean
we
can
you
know,
maybe
it's
a
matter
of.
You
know
making
sure
that
applicants
are
aware
that
they
have
their
other
permitting
requirements,
and
you
know
I
I,
don't
wanna
I,
don't
want
to
put
the
city
in
the
position
of
every
every
DOT
permit.
Every
you
know,
sea
wall
permit
that
we
are
now
notifying
every
jurisdiction
affected
jurisdiction.
That's.
G
Is
of
you
all,
can
we
at
least
check
with
Pinellas
County,
since
we're
saying
that
we
we
require
a
Pinellas,
County
approval
and
let's
ask
them:
what
does
their
application
say?
Yes,
for
these
categories
and
if
they
does
cover
it,
then
you
can
keep
the
statement
like
you
have
right
now,
because
you
know
Pinellas
County
is
going
to
be
asking
that.
C
G
G
Let
me
ask
this
question:
it's
just
more
over
this
whole,
this
whole
section
are
we
taking
a
consideration,
the
the
climate
change
impacts
and
making
sure
that
this
has
some
form
of
addressing
that
or
making
sure
that
the
applicant
or
anything
that
we
do
here
has
a
has
a
tone
of
climate
change
mitigation.
Two.
M
G
J
K
C
Well,
what
it
is
it's
like
it's
develop
if
you
just
take
out
the
evaluate
the
visibility,
the
feasibility
for
a
moment,
if,
if
it's
just
you
know,
develop
plans
and
programs
to
incentivize
climate
adaptation
techniques
and
the
acquisition
of
property
to
prevent
incompatible
development
in
areas
of
repeated
damage.
Okay,
that
could
be
a
costly
Endeavor.
So
I
think
that's
you
know.
That's
speaks
to
the
you
know.
K
C
Well
and
let's
I
think
if
couch
it
in
the
the
and
is
not
a
mandatory
here,
so
develop
plans
and
programs
to
incentivize
incentivize,
clam
climate
adaptation
techniques
and
or
the
acquisition
of
property.
You
know
just
make
it
a
little
less
yeah
yeah,
because
there
are
things
you
can
do
for
adaptation,
that
we
can
provide
incentives.
For
you
know,
even
though
it's
maybe
not
recognized
by
FEMA
for
flood
insurance
purposes,
but
you
know
dry
flood
proofing.
Your
home
is,
you
know,
can
do
a
lot
because
you
can
drive
flood
proof.
C
K
Is
is
this
an
obvious
tie
back
location
to
the
improve
perv
policy.
K
C
Is
do
we
do
we
have
in
the
coastal?
It's
probably,
it
may
probably
be
in
the
conservation
element,
but
we'll
we'll
make
a
note
to
make
sure
that
either
here
or
in
the
conservation
element
that
we
have
some
sort
of
a
policy
that
directs
us
back
to
the
future
land
use
element
in
terms
of
you
know,
evaluating
impervious
surface
ratios,
especially
in
like
residential
development,
for
you
know
to
reduce
flooding,
impacts
and
things
of
that
nature.
Maybe.
K
That
would
be
a
nice
segue
to
your
suggestion
of
encouraging
now
I'm
going
to
be
a
little
bit
cagey
for
a
second,
but
there
are
triggers
within
the
building
code
and
the
easiest
trigger
is
the
50
rule
right,
that's
an
obvious
trigger,
but
there
could
be
a
more
subtle
trigger
that
encourages
the
waterproofing
of
low
levels,
which
is
common
sense
that
people
don't
really
understand
the
drywall
gets
wet.
They
take
it
out.
K
They
put
the
old
drywall
back
in
instead
of
cement
board
and
moving
those
electrical
boxes
just
up
a
little
bit
so
without
getting
too
deep
into
that.
Maybe
that
is
a
really
nice
segue
of
hey.
Let's
use
an
opportunity
whenever
possible
to
help
those
homes,
residences
or
businesses
that
are
below
or
within
that
consistent
storm,
water,
a
high-rise
to
say,
hey,
okay,
here's
one
chance
fix
it.
Here's
two
chance
fix
it.
Three
chance:
let's
fix
it
so.
C
C
K
I,
don't
know
what
that
is
yeah,
but
I
could
sense.
It
hey
if
we're
going
to
have
consistent
high
water,
and
so
what
is
that
magical
thing
that
helps
the
homeowner?
Make
that
right,
logical,
move,
yeah.
K
And
and
then
this
this
could
also
tie
back
to
your
Place
based
map,
your
special
place,
Beat
Map,
those
that
are
easily
highlighted
as
flood
zones
that
say
Hey
if
you're
going
to
put
a
new
roof
on.
We
would
encourage
you
to
do
this.
Also.
G
Can
I,
please,
are
we
done
no
I,
don't
I
have
a
new
topic,
but
I'll
wait
till
let's
go
with
the
new
topic.
2.5.3
I
like
it
require
the
removal,
relocation
or
structural
modification
of
public
infrastructure.
That
experiences
repeated
store
damage
damage,
including
flood
damage.
J
G
I
But
if
they
that
again
considering
code
enforcement
is
to
is
corrective
in
nature,
but
if
we're
going
to
get
to
the
point
of
now,
you
have
to
move
it
or
remove,
remove
relocate
or
structural
modification.
Then
we're
coming
into
Bert
harrisack
we're
coming
into
inverse
condemnation.
We're
coming
into
a
lot.
L
I
F
I
There
I
won't
take,
there's,
there's
two
versions
of
their
substantial
damage
and
substantial
Improvement,
and
if
you
basically
go
over
50
of
the
structure
value,
then
you
have
to
you're
no
longer
grandfathered
in
you
have
to
raise
it
or
remove
whatever
your
improvements
are.
Thank
you.
D
C
J
K
I'm,
if
I
may
I
I
want
to
do
a
typing.
Excuse
me,
because
it's
referenced
twice
backing
on
a
ghoul2
under
objective
2.1
policy,
2.1.1.
C
K
C
Based
looks
at
literally
that
what
are
the,
what
are
the
assets
that
drive
jobs
in
your
existing
economy?
What
are
those
things
that
you
want
to
make
sure
that
you
preserve,
and
so
it
gets
to
intangible
things
like
you
know:
natural
resources,
your
cultural
resources,
the
things
that
draw
people
here
so
does
that
make
sense.
K
Oh,
it
makes
perfect
sense.
I
am
I'm
embarrassed
that
I
had
to
ask
okay
I.
Now
this
is
going
to
make
sense
in
a
moment
first,
because
I
couldn't
get
that
I,
think
that
there's
maybe
be
an
asterisk
or
an
explanation
of
what
asset
base
or
just
call
it.
Tourism,
Waterfront,
cultural,
just
just
call
it
out,
and
then
perhaps-
and
this
is
what's
critical-
is
we
are
forward.
Direct
permanent
residential
population
concentrations
outside
of
the
chha.
K
K
So
we're
at
policy
we
had
to
backtrack
because
it's
referenced
again
on
something
we
are
talking
about,
2.1.1
as
a
suggestion
that
the
and
in
quotations
direct
permanent
residential
population
concentrations
outside
the
coastal,
High,
Hazard
area,
perhaps
I,
would
suggest,
stands
as
a
policy
on
its
own
and
I'll,
give
an
argument
as
to
why?
Because
it
is
a
state
policy.
K
M
J
K
Absolutely
it
is
to
prior
to
prioritize
water
dependent
uses,
but
then
we
move
to
direct
away.
So
that's
just
an
idea,
and
then
it's
as
we
move
forward
to
where
we're
at
is
that
under
goal
three
and
they're
they're
tied
together
at
a
long
string
goal
three
without
reading
the
whole
thing,
reduce
the
risk
to
human
life.
Objective
number
one
limit
public
expenditures
that
subsidize
development
at
Coastal,
High,
Hazard
area,
so
again
we're
referring
to
the
chha
again,
but
in
two
different
places,
there's
something
that
I'm
like
well.
D
C
I
mean
we
have
a
lot
of,
we
have
a
lot
of
the
city
in
the
coastal,
High
Hazard
area,
and
so
you
know
in
case
in
point.
We
had
a
lot
of
public
roads
that
got
flooded
and
so
to
be
able
to
say
you
know
to
not
be
able
to
come
back
and
fix
those
roads
and
and
maybe
affected
infrastructure,
and
large
swaths
of
the
city
is
just
really.
That
would
be
a
significant.
C
C
G
G
C
That
is,
from
what
I
am
told,
much
more
accurate
than
the
FEMA
level
analysis
based
on
lidar,
and
so
there
is
a
Pinellas
County
ordinance
that
basically
now
the
way
that
their
their
flood
plain,
Ordinance
Works.
You
have
to
build
to
their
standard
or
if
the
FEMA
elevation,
whichever
is
more
restrictive,
we're
our
we
are
looking
at.
You
know:
I
just
started
looking
at
at
that
option,
but
I
would
like
us
to
add
a
policy
in
here
somewhere
to
evaluate
implementation
of
Pinellas,
County
vulnerability,
assessment,
ordinance
outcomes,
or
something
like
that.
G
C
J
C
C
G
M
M
C
Caroline
I'm
sorry
I
just
saw
something
about
this.
Also
just
jumped
up
at
me
provide
timely
notice
that
evacuates
leave
the
city
entirely
yeah
that
I
think
entirely.
We
really
we
want
people
to
shelter
as
close
to
where
they
are,
as
possible.
I
mean.
D
M
C
C
C
G
C
C
C
K
I'd
do
a
thought
experiment
is
that
wouldn't
a
particular
evacuation
Zone
also
be
subject
to
the
building
structure,
its
generation
capacity.
It's
elevation.
In
fact,
it
would
be
fair
to
say
that
under
the
right
circumstances,
if
it
were
upgraded,
the
hospital
would
be
a
location
for
people
to
evacuate
too
good.
K
C
Yeah
vertical
evacuation
right.
C
I
want
to
say,
I
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
for
us
to
talk
with
the
problem
with
with
that,
and
that
instance,
would
you
ever
feel
so
safe
if
you're,
if
you're
a
relative
of
yours
is
in
the
hospital-
and
there
was
a
you
know,
a
hurricane
coming
that
someone
could
arbitrarily
say,
I
think
you
know
we
did
all
these
improvements,
we're
not
going
to
evacuate
the
hospital,
but
if
you
lose
access
to
roads,
if
you
lose
utilities,
if
you
lose,
they
have
generators,
but
it's
just
I
think
there's
too
much.
You
know.
C
But
I
do
know,
you
know
I,
guess
part
I.
Think
part
of
the
part
of
the
analysis
for
me
is
that
the
you
may
not
want
to
be
expanding
your
room
capacity
but
other
facilities,
your
emergency
rooms,
your
you
know
your
diagnostic
facilities,
your
offices
and
things
like
that.
That
should
be,
you
know.
I
think
that
expanding
and
including
that
stuff
is
is
great,
but
I
think
expanding
your
non-ambulatory
room
count
and
I.
Don't
think
they're
really
doing
that
I
think
if
nothing
else,
they're
probably
actually
decreasing,
that
somewhat.
C
G
C
C
Only
be
a,
but
no
that's
what
it
is:
Pinellas
County,
the
Pinellas
County
comp
plan
says
b
as
well,
and
that
was
that's
we'll
look
at
this
a
little
bit
more
okay
and
we'll
yeah
I
definitely
wanted
to
follow
suit.
With
the
with
the
B
for
residential
living
facilities.
You
know
things
that,
because
they're
they're
just
they're
awful
to
have
to
evacuate
in
advance
of
a
storm
I,
you
know
when
Charlie
hit,
we
were
still
in
the
city
was
still
responsible
for
evacuating
the
you
know.
C
C
C
M
C
K
I
thought
no
one.
Oh
maybe
I'm
biased
here
that
if
we
were
evacuating,
Tarpon,
Springs,
no
one's
heading
right
and
heading
south,
because
everyone
is
heading
left
and
heading
north
because
you
need
to
get
out
because
there's
no
way
out
to
head
south.
So
my
my
thought
process
might
be
flawed
there.
But
I
would
consider
that
an
excellent
example
of
a
road
that
was
designed
for
evacuation
purposes
and
great
expense
to
the
city.
It
cost
us
an
arm
and
a
leg,
and
it
only
turns
right
so.
K
Did
it
just
now
with
all
getting
into
that
detail
in
this
detail?
It
did
strike
me
as
odd
that
this
new
route
wasn't
either
or
because
what
it
meant
was
anyone
that
evacuates
or
is
using
mirrors
as
a
way
to
leave
the
city,
because
we
have
a
very
fixed
number
of
those
and
again
the
Board
of
Commissioners
at
Great
expense
got
that
road
all
the
way
through,
and
it's
a
right-hand
Turn
Only.
C
C
C
It's
but
to
your
point
you
know
of
and
I
don't
know
that
I
mean
if
we
had.
Let's
suppose
we
had,
you
know
a
cat
four
cat,
five
bearing
down
on
us
and
we
knew
we
needed
to
evacuate
the
city.
If
that's,
that
is
an
East-West
route
out,
I
have
no
doubt
that
they
would
be
funneling
traffic
so
that
you
could
take
a
left
turn
out
of
there.
They
will
do
contraflow.
They
will
do
a
lot
of
different
things.
J
C
D
See
I
thought
the
extended
mirrors,
so
all
the
the
the
contractors
had
a
direct
route
to
the
to
the
dump
site.
C
C
So
all
the
transportation
impact
fees
from
that
development
went
into
supporting
that
road.
The
it
was
I
mean
hurricane
evacuation
was
a
consideration.
The
city
very
much
did
want
that
East-West
connection
completed
all
the
way.
Through
to
your
point.
You
know:
there's
no
feasible
way
right
now
to
put
a
left
out
of
there.
I
mean
you'd
have
to
put
in
order
to
put
a
light
at
that
you'd
have
to
probably
remove
a
light
at
MLK
and
that
you
know
this
is
a
still
of
a
bit
of
a
limited
right-of-way.
C
There
it'd
be
difficult
to
do
not
impossible,
so
you
have
a
constrained
right-of-way
on
on
the
extension
of
mirrors
out.
It
was
used
to
be
mango,
so
it
was
there's
not
a
lot
of
right-of-way
to
work
with
there
to
to
really
think
about
the
volume
of
traffic
that
and
what
happens
when
you
get
to
US
19
on
MLK,
it
flares
out
into
a
right
turn
and
then
I
mean
you've
got
a
lot
more
turning
movements
there,
because
you
have
right-of-way.
You
just
don't
have
that
at
mirrors
at
all
at
us,
19.
K
Far
too
seriously,
just
that
the
sentence
previously
written
in
this
sentence
now
it
makes
sense,
is
that
there
should
be
a
concept
for
prioritizing
funds
and
sometimes
subtle
changes
make
big
changes.
If
there
were
to
be
a
catastrophic
event
that
God
blessed
that
we
haven't
but
I'll
be
truthful
and
go.
K
You
know,
no
one
thought
it
was
going
to
happen
down
south
and
there
was
a
catastrophic
event
and
they
struggled
to
leave
and
they
didn't
have
timely
notice
and
they
stayed
and
the
storm
surge
took
care
of
the
rest.
So
if
a
left-hand
turn
helped
save
two
lives
well,
then
it's
worthy
of
at
least
discussion
and
making
sure
that
we're
prioritizing
that.
G
C
A
L
C
A
C
I
J
I
Because,
ultimately,
especially
for
complying
with
FEMA
regulations,
if
we're
complying
with
the
floodplain
ordinance
and,
quite
frankly,
just
code
enforcement
that
should
correct
if
we
need
to
if
it
needs
to
be
removed
or
relocated
or
made.
Structural
modifications,
FEMA
or
FEMA
or
floodplain,
should
be
able
to
resolve
that
by
itself.
C
H
I
G
J
C
C
Think
about
something
like
harborwatch
is
a
good
example.
Now
I,
don't
know
if
how
much
badly
harborwatch
might
flood,
but
that
is
all
private,
the
roads,
the
utilities,
it's
all
private.
So
you
know
I
think
another
key
here.
It
says
repeated
storm
damage,
so
it's
not
like
single
incident,
it
does
say
repeated
you
know,
but
by
that
logic
you
know
we
shouldn't
be,
you
know
doing
anything
to
do
deck
and
he's
Boulevard
yeah
I
mean
so
I
mean
this.
Is
a
this
Cuts
both
ways
private
and
public
yeah.
You
know.
C
G
G
I
have
one
another
one:
objective,
3.3
and
also
except
exact
policy
3.3.6,
it's
just
something
that
my
pet
peeve,
okay,
where
it
says
on
3.3
of
the
second
Senate
I'll,
just
continue.
The
second
Cent
management
initiative
to
reduce
risk
to
life.
I
propose
risk
to
life,
health
and
safety,
because
this
implies,
if
only
time,
you've
got
a
risk,
is
if
you
lose
a
life,
and
we
need
to
be
thinking
about.
You
know:
life,
health
and
safety.
So.
G
G
C
M
F
C
M
J
C
C
C
Now
they
will,
they
will
evacuate
in
mobile
homes,
even
if
they're,
nowhere
near
water
and
I
think
it's
because
of
wind.
So
if
this
is
meant
to
be
for
wind
mitigation,
I
think
we
need
to
make
a
distinction
here,
because
I
don't
want
to
necessarily
encourage
flood
hurricane
evacuation,
shelter,
level,
type
of
thing
for
flood
if
the
mobile
home
park
sitting
in
an
a
evacuation
zone
or
a
b
or
c
frankly.
So
that's.
G
C
C
C
K
F
K
C
Think
I
think
it's
the
reality
in
our
own
safety
building
that
we
operate,
our
Emergency
Management
out
of
is
built
only
to
a
cat,
C
hurricane
wind
load
standard,
so
I
think
what
I
think
what
I
would
be
comfortable
saying
is
requiring
just
like
we
just
did
with
multi-family
in
the
coastal
High
Hazard
area.
We
require
them
to
be
built
at
plus
three
base
flood
elevation
and
the
next
higher
wind
load
category
into
the
Florida
building
code.
C
K
K
How
about
if
we
took
it,
one
step
farther,
let's
say
multi-family:
it's
always
easy
to
use
your
own
personal
experience.
My
mom
lives
in
a
wonderful
Community
called
Savannah
Cove
over
there
God
bless
it's
there
right.
It's
a
income
reduced
for
people,
55
and
older
right.
It's
got
a
clubhouse,
but
that
Clubhouse
is
no
different
than
any
other
built
right
there.
So
it's
not
safer
than
anyone
anyplace
else
other
than
the
apartments
right.
It
doesn't
have
hurricane
windows.
K
K
And
and
I
could
be
way
too
far
down
the
road.
This
is
building
code,
but
it's
also
just
an
a
base
acknowledgment
that
hey
we've
got
stuff
coming
at
us.
Let's
acknowledge
it.
Let's
address
it:
straightforward
there's
going
to
be
some
apartments,
some
multi-families
built,
let's
give
them
a
space
within
their
community.
That
is
safe,
that
if
they
can't
take
a
left
on
Maris,
they
can
stay
at
their
apartment,
complex
and
be
safe.
Well,.
C
C
C
C
J
C
Yeah,
so
you
know
evaluate
and
Implement
more
stringent
development
regulations,
for
you
know
for
on-site
Sheltering.
Oh.
C
Them
and
then
we'll
you
know,
then
we
get
because
the
next
thing
we're
going
to
do
once
we
get
this
comp
plan
done,
is
guess
what
we're
going
to
start
updating
all
the
Land
Development
code
regulations,
so
we're
gonna
get
we'll
need
everybody
yeah,
making
sure
we
hit
all
these
things.
C
Where
there's
vacant
land
right,
regardless
of
let's
say
that
land
is,
has
a
land
use
category
that
allows
10
or
15
units
to
the
acre?
What
this
is
saying
is
that
if
there's
a
demonstrated
shelter
deficit
for
a
category
3
or
higher
storm
that,
regardless
of
what
your
future
land
use
map
says,
you
have,
you
cannot
exceed
five
dwelling
units
per
acre,
so
it's
keeping
the
density
down
unless.
C
You
have,
let's
see
so,
unless
it's
subject
to
a
hurricane
shelter
impact
mitigation,
so
there's
a
study
in
mitigation
and
the
coastal
Hazard
area
design
standards
of
the
Land
Development
code.
That's
what
we
just
adopted
was
the
plus
three
and
the
and
the
next
higher
win
load.
Category
Okay.
J
J
C
C
The
way
it
was
meant
to
be
interpreted
was,
if
you
want
to
I'm
into
Coastal
Hazard
area
and
I,
want
to
change.
I
want
to
change
my
land
use
designation
from
five
years
to
the
acre
to
ten
units
to
the
acre.
What
this
meant
was
that
you
could
do
that,
but
there
had
to
also
be
a
net
decrease,
a
decrease
decrease
somewhere
else.
C
So
what,
in
reality,
the
way
that
that
we
were
looking
at
this
there's
a
lot
of
land
like
Pinellas
County,
the
I
call
it
the
old
sham
property
that
it's
over
on
Carlton
that
area
all
the
Pinellas
County
came
in
and
they
bought
that
huge
piece
of
property
that
all
has
like
10
units
to
the
acre
residential
land
use
on
it.
C
That,
in
and
of
itself,
was
a
massive
decrease
in
available
density
in
the
coastal
High
Hazard
area.
So
could
you
you
know?
Could
you
create
basically
a
bank
and
say
all
right?
We
can
we're
not
we're
not
we're
we're.
Not.
We
don't
we
if
we
Increase
five
units
to
the
acre
over
here
to
10
on
this
two
acres
of
land,
we're
still
not
hitting
a
net
increase
gotcha.
That
was
the
way
that
it
was
I,
but
it's
it
honestly.
It
hasn't
been
tracked
well
and
I
would.
C
C
Yeah
this
is
like,
but
this
this
we
need
I,
want
to
square
this
back
to
the
changes
that
we
just
made,
because
we
basically
said
you
can't
increase
density
in
the
coastal
High
Hazard
area
for
by
any
mechanism,
whether
it
was
future
land
use,
conditional
use,
plan
development,
so
I
need
to
find
out
where
that
policy
landed
because
I
think
it's
missing
it's.
Oh
it's
in
the
future.
Land
use
element.
C
L
G
C
That
was
what
we
were
trying
to
create
an
incentive
for
people
to
transfer
their
development
rights
out
of
so
thinking
about
you
know,
vulnerable
property.
That's
you
know,
sitting
on
you
know
the
Gulf
of
Mexico
in
the
long
run
because
of
sea
level
rise,
there's
going
to
be
a
point
where
it's
not
going
to
be
habitable
anymore.
So
what
the
intent
of
this
was.
This
was
kind
of
pie
in
the
sky.
So
so,
let's
say
that
that
that
property's
got
you
know
a
density
allowance
of
one
unit
per
acre
on
it.
C
Can
you
you
could
create
kind
of
a
market
of
for
the
purposes
of
density
transfer,
we'll
allow
you
to
count
that
for
three
or
four
units
that
I
can
put
somewhere
outside
the
coastal
Hazard
somebody
that
needs
density
so
and
then
that
property
itself
would
go
like
into
a
conservation
easement
or
something
so
that
it
could
be
rebuilt.
But
it's
it!
You
know
it
was
a
way
to
try
to
incentivize
getting
yeah
getting.
You
know,
developed
properties
out
of
development
in
the
Long.
G
C
Something
else
that
I
would
like
I
mean
I
I.
Think
that's
something
worth
exploring
you
know.
Is
there
a
way
to
set
up
a
local
like
conservation,
something
that
status
that
you
put
your
property
into
with
full
knowledge
that
you
can't
repair
it?
You
can't
you
do
you
know
if
it
hits
a
certain
point
that,
but
you
get
the
tax
break.
C
C
C
That
would
facilitate
that
now
that
I,
if
I,
put
a
conservation
easement
on
on
the
problem,
I
mean
usually
it's
more
to
like
large
tracks
of
land,
that
you're
trying
to
preserve
versus
I
know
I
own
I
own,
a
waterfront
house
on
the
Gulf
of
Mexico
can
I
put
it
into
a
conservationism
and
such
that
if
it
gets
wiped
out
I
know
I
can't
rebuild,
but
it's
going
to
reduce
my
taxes.
You
know
for
the
next
30
Years
well,.
G
C
C
I
C
G
F
G
G
B
On
3.4
3.5,
where
it
says
established
procedures
for
post-event
damage,
is
there
some
sort
of
policy
currently
in
place
for
that
like
from
this
storm,
you
know
to
evaluate
dwellings
and
structures
and
such.
G
C
L
J
B
Up
north,
we
had
what
what
they
called
Ceda
and
it
was
a
state
program
that
trickled
down
to
the
jurisdictions.
It
was
code
enforcement
disaster,
resist
response,
and
you
got
qualified
in
that,
even
if
you
were
a
code
official
or
whatever.
This
was
a
little
bit
extra,
that
established
procedures
and
people
would
go
from
one
jurisdiction
to
another.
If
there
were
floods,
Upstate
or
you
know
a
problem
by
the
shore
for
for
hurricanes
and
such
people
would
come
down
state
from
upstate
to
fortify
and
enhance
the
Personnel.
C
Which
I,
which
I
mean
I,
think
largely?
We
have
very
similar.
You
know
trickle
down
here.
Maybe
three
five
one
should
basically
say:
Ensure
properly
trained
damage
assessment
teams
are,
you
know,
maintained
and
or
I,
don't
know,
I'm
just
trying
to
I.
F
C
G
C
Or
just
a
management,
just
you
know,
you
know
and
Ensure
properly
trained
damage
assessment
teams
are
maintained
or
made
or
adequate.
You
know,
I
Court
I
will
figure
it
out.
I
think
yeah
I
know
what.
C
F
G
By
the
way,
when
I
read,
assessment
teams
are
not
necessarily
assessment
teams
that
are
in
there
that
are
they're
they're.
Also
someone
that
says:
hey,
it's
more
think
at
this
level,
your
your
other
team
members
will
be
thinking
the
logistics,
the
the
corrective
actions.
What
we
have
to
take.
So
a
team
consists
of
various
levels
of
skills
and
experience.
So
that's
what
I'm
just
thinking
you.
G
J
G
B
And
I
think
it
was
the
fire
department
up
north.
They
had
assert
team
which
was
Community
emergency
response
team
and
they
were
trained
by
the
fire
officials
or
the
code
officials,
and
that
was
more
for
Community.
G
J
G
An
employee
of
the
jerseys
they're,
the
boots
on
the
ground
that
are
trained,
certified
to
take
step,
necessary
steps
and
actions
in
place
yeah.
But
then
you
had
another
level
which
were
like
when
you
see
you
see
the
the
Mayors
or
the
or
the
Public
Works
directors
or
the
vice
president.
All
I'm
pointing
out
is
this
should
consist
of
something
that
gives
consideration
to
anyone
in
the
city
that
may
have
and
you're
not
pointing
to
a
person
but
you're,
pointing
to
say
it's
also
open
too,
that
team
being
broader.
C
G
K
In
regards
to
that
whole
conversation,
the
fire
chief,
the
fire
department,
gets
thrown
around
a
lot.
You
know
they
got
a
lot
to
do.
Of
course
we
have
a
fire
department,
we
don't
have
any
fires.
You
know
we
have
a
lot
of
floods,
but
we
don't
have
a
flood
Department
and
that's
what's
really
going
on
in
our
city.
We.
C
L
L
G
B
G
D
C
That
was
I
mean
this
entire
objective
and
set
of
policies
was
something
that
was
near
and
dear
to
former
mayor
allahouses.
He
was
the
one
that
really
kind
of
pushed
to
get
this
into
the
comp
plan,
so
there
it
is.
C
If
there's
just
a
quick
update,
so
from
the
time
we
started
the
the
comp
plan
update
and
we
had
some
our
initial
kind
of
population
projections
and
stuff,
the
schimberg
housing
center
has
put
out
new,
updated
population
projections
and
that
will
have
a
bearing
on
for
to
the
good,
really
I
think
for
the
for
the
purposes
of
this
board,
that
it
appears
that
the
like
the
out
to
the
2040
population
projection
numbers
are
quite
a
bit
lower
than
what
we
had
were
originally
working
with.
C
So
we're
going
to
continue
to
kind
of
evaluate
that,
and
our
goal
would
be
to
have
that
updated
analysis
to
you
guys
as
part
of
the
continuing
review.
So
just
so
you've
got
it
for
reference.
I!
Think
it's
because
it
it
kind
of
makes
makes
our
job
a
little
easier.
If
we're
not
trying
to
house
five
thousand,
you.