![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/WNLdIyM2838/mqdefault.jpg)
►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Board June 19, 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).
B
So
Mr
vesely
I
think
you're,
the
only
member
that
wasn't
here
last
week.
Do
you
want
us
to
go
through
the
presentation
again
or
just
want
to
jump
in
you
know.
The
goal
for
tonight
really
is
to
focus
on
the
future
land
use
element.
We've
got
it
in
clean
version,
with
some
changes
that
we've
made
since
last
week,
based
on
discussions
as
well.
As
you
know,
you
have
the
strike
through
underline
so
I'll.
You
know
I'll
kind
of
proceed
at
y'all's
pace
and
how
you
want
to
attack
this.
B
If
we
can,
I
would
like
to
start
with
the
future
Landing
settlement.
I
also
wanted
to
give
Catherine
a
chance
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
Benish
and
what
their
company
does
and
who
they
work.
For
you
know
what
what
what
they
do,
since
some
of
you
were
here
for
the
when
they
started,
and
some
of
you
were
not
so.
C
D
If
I
may,
since
you
did
ask
me
a
question-
I
did
yeah
sorry,
perhaps
just
as
a
quick
review
for
everyone,
since
I
I
did
try
to
watch
it,
but
it
was
very
long
and
it
didn't
make
sense
from
the
video.
I'll.
Be
honest,
that's
fine!
Maybe
if
you
could
give
a
quick
synopsis
of
The
Good,
the
Bad
and
the
Ugly
honest
about
what
was
successful
in
last
week's
meeting
and
maybe
what
wasn't
super
successful,
just
just
like
just
to
bring
it
up
and
like
I'm
listening
and
like
what
was
good.
E
B
And
then
the
easiest
way
to
do
that
will
probably
be
going
through
starting
starting
with
the
clean
version,
so
we
can
focus
on
what's
been
amended
since
we
talked
last
week
based
on
those
discussions
and
so
I'll
let
Catherine
do
you
have
a
kind
of
a
highlight
highlight
low
light.
You
know
talk
about
just
introduction
on
Benish
and
kind
of
an
overview
and
I'll
fill
in
as
well
on
what
I
thought
I
heard
last
week
and
kind
of
what
what
we've
done
since
then,
and
then
we
can
jump
in.
F
Yeah
so
I
I,
realized
I,
didn't
do
a
great
job,
introducing
myself
last
week
to
the
new
folks,
I
just
jumped
right
in
because
I
feel,
like
we've
been
having
this
conversation
for
a
while
now
so
banish.
Well,
when
the
city
hired
us,
we
were
Tyndale
Oliver
and
it
was
a
small
firm.
Just
in
the
State
of
Florida
Steve
Tyndale
was
the
obviously
the
founder,
Bill,
Oliver,
actually
retired
a
number
of
years
ago.
F
Steve
was
ready
to
retire
too,
when
it
got
to
be
the
end
of
2021
mid-2021,
and
we
found
a
firm
to
merge
with
who
has
offices
all
over
the
country,
but
primarily
in
the
East
and
one
they
wanted
to
come
into
Florida,
and
they
did
not
do
the
stuff
that
we
did
at
Tyndale
Oliver.
F
So
it
was
a
new
market
for
them,
they're,
a
big
engineering
firm.
They
do
Aviation
and
runways
and
big
roads
and
railroads,
and
that
kind
of
stuff
and
Tyndale
Oliver
our
clients
were
smaller
cities,
counties
school
districts,
we've
done
a
number
of
school
Master
plans.
F
Fdot
is
a
big
client.
Mpos
like
for
Pinellas,
is
one
of
our
clients
and
we
are
one
of
the
firms
that
does
not
do
private
development
in
the
state,
and
so
we
merged
with
banish
and
Steve
retired
and
all
of
our
services
have
stayed
the
same.
We
also
do
Transit.
We
do
multimodal
Transit
Ada
transition
plans
for
local
governments,
comprehensive
planning
code
writing
that
kind
of
stuff.
So
we
are
a
public
sector
focused
firm.
F
We
don't
do
private
development
and
that's
been
really
important
to
the
firm,
because
we
don't
want
to
have
a
even
perceived
conflict
of
interest
when
we're
coming
to
you
and
helping
you
adopt,
you
know,
amend
your
laws
that
it's
being
bent
to
another
side,
and
so
my
professional
background,
I've
worked
for
15
years
for
the
public
sector
for
various
local
governments,
I've
been
a
planning
director,
community
development
director
and
the
two
little
firms.
I've
worked
for
the
first
one
was
Renaissance
Planning
Group,
which
is
when
I
first
met
Renee.
F
We
actually
did
your
multimodal
transportation
district
in
2008.,
so
I
wrote
the
majority
of
that
and
then
moved
back
into
the
public
sector
and
I've
been
I
started
with
Tyndale
Oliver.
In
the
fall
of
2020
and
I've
been
there
since
so
just
wanted
to
give
you
a
just
a
little
introduction
of
me
and
us:
do
you
want
to
hit
the
highway.
G
Thank
you,
I,
don't
think
that
was
missing
in
last
week's
meeting.
Just
an
introduction,
I
didn't
even
know
your
name
and.
G
G
F
F
G
F
G
B
Me
is
it
a
separate
company,
so
it's
a
separate
company,
so
kind
of
circling
back
on
what
we
did
last
week.
So
we
did
a
high
level
kind
of
overview
of
the
things
that
we
are
required
to
look
at.
You
know
for
our
for
our
comprehensive
plan.
You
know:
we've
updated
population
projections,
we
use
industry
standards
for
that
which
is,
you
know
the
Florida
business
of
Bieber
business
of
Economic
Development
research
that
they
do
our
population
projections
for
everybody.
B
We
do
have
to
plan
for
a
certain
number
of
at
least
population
growth
over
the
next
20
years.
The
high
point
of
the
analysis
that
we've
seen
is
that
our
existing
land
use
map
categories
and
our
densities,
and
things
are
more
than
adequate
to
accommodate
that
future
growth.
We
don't
need
to
increase
density
anywhere.
B
You
know
we
have
some
specific
things
to
be
cognizant
of
like
needs
for
affordable
housing,
and
even
that's
not
you
know,
those
numbers
aren't
overwhelming.
You
know
when
you're
looking
at
a
20-year
projection,
we
introduced
the
concept
of
this
place-based
area
map
which
is
really,
from
my
perspective,
trying
to
get
it.
What
a
comprehensive
plan
really
should
be,
if
you
leave
the
state
of
Florida,
you
don't
have
these
partial
by
parcel
future
land
use.
You
know
you
have
a
comprehensive
map,
that's
much
more
generalized.
B
We
have
to
have
a
partial
by
partial
future
land
use
map
and
that's
you
know
partly
mostly
kind
of
what
plant
rules,
but
so
we
have
to
be
consistent
with
the
county-wide
plan.
So
a
lot
of
our
edits
were
things
to
get
us
in
compliance
with
State
statutes,
things
to
make
sure
that
we
remain
compliant
with
the
county-wide
plan
and
their
future
land
use
map
categories.
B
Where
we
had
outdated
references
to
not
you
know
the
old
9j5,
you
know
the
old
Florida
growth
management
act.
So
a
lot
of
cleanup.
What
we
heard
from
at
the
last
meeting
was
that
I
think
there
was
some
concerns
about
the
amount
of
things
that
just
appeared
to
be
stricken
out
of
the
future
land
use
element.
B
We
went
back
and
took
a
very
hard
look
at
that
and
you'll
see
it's
easiest
to
see
in
the
what
we
call
the
clean
version
that
now
has
some
strike.
That
has
some
underlines
in
it
and
some
new
language
we
went
back
and
we
pulled
some
of
those
things
back
in
because,
as
you
really
looked,
we
were
asked
to
really
look
and
make
sure
is
that
if
we
took
something
out
in
the
strikethy
Wonderland,
you
know
the
old
version.
B
Is
it
really
captured
somewhere
in
either
in
this
element
or
in
another
element?
So
we
we
went
through
that
exercise.
So
you
see
a
lot
of
things
that
have
come
back
in
to
the
things
that
we
thought
were
still
valuable
to
have.
There's
certainly
no
harm
to
have
them,
so
we,
you
know
we
we
did
that.
B
B
You
know,
because
we're
talking
about
changing
some
names
to
be
consistent
with
the
county-wide
plan
categories,
but
we
also
had
some
changes
where
we
were
combining
a
few
of
our
categories
into
one
category
of
the
retail
and
services.
We
can
visit
that,
if
that
you
know
and
again
there.
B
Putting
some
additional
layers
of
protection,
which
is
really
in
my
opinion,
is
what
that
place-based
map
really
was
is
to
to
to
be
able
to
visualize.
These
are
areas
that
are
stable,
based
on
the
input
that
we
had
from
the
public.
B
There's
really
not
a
lot
of
appetite
to
to
go
increasing
density,
maybe
some
very
limited
retail
that
you
need
to
plan
for
before
you
do
it,
but
so
that's
what
we
try
to
capture
in
that
in
that
place-based:
Vision,
not
Vision
map,
but
area
map,
so
I'll
stop
there
and
if
I,
hopefully,
I
captured
somebody
that
was
here
last
week
and
what
we
did
and
you
know
I
think
maybe.
H
Would
put
it
very
simply,
you
know
towards
the
end
of
the
meeting
is
we
were
looking
at
this
this
little
packet
like
the,
if
I'm,
remembering
correctly,
the
strike
through
table
when
you
look
on
the
right
to
all
the
notes,
you
elaborated
on
those
notes.
B
Did
and
I
don't
know
how.
Well
we
did
that
because
it's
still
pretty
complicated
to
read
and
navigate
through,
but
we
did
our
best
and
in
doing
that,
it
forced
us
to
look.
We
found
a
few
things
that
were
like:
let's
bring
these
back
in
and
maybe
tweak
them
a
little
bit
so
I
I
still
think
it's
kind
of
easiest
to
look
at
the
clean
with
now
this
you
know
the
additions
on
the
future
land
use
document.
G
It's
the
last
meeting
yeah.
We
discussed
that
to
highlight
the
ones
that
were
priority,
that
needed
to
be
changed
to
be
statutorily
compliant,
which
I
do
see
at
least
one
statute,
which
is
nice.
It
would
have
been
nice
to
have
been
provided
the
actual
statute
that
we
could
compare
it
to
I
mean
there's
at
least
two
that
I've
found
and
I
think
the
most
qualified
person
on
tarpon's
payroll
to
interpret
these
statutes,
as
our
attorney
so
I
think.
G
The
best
plan
is
if,
if
the
entire
goal
of
this-
and
it
sounds
like
most
of
our
plan-
is
compliant
to
just
tackle
the
ones
that
first
of
all
are
not
compliant
and
I
want
to
understand
how
they
are
not
compliant
from
the
attorney
and
how
we
can
fix
them,
and
just
that
the
bare
minimum
and
I
don't
want
to
change.
That's
at
least
my
view
and
everybody
has
their
own
I.
Don't
want
to
change
anything
beyond
that
that
what's
not
statutory
compliant,
and
that
is
that
is
it.
G
We've
had
this
contract
with
Tyndale
since
2021,
and
the
original
contract
said
this
was
due
in
August
of
2023,
and
yet
we
are
having
workshops
two
months
before
it's
due
and
all
of
a
sudden,
well
I
haven't
seen
I
mean
I,
didn't
tell
me
if
there's
more,
but
I
does
Say
the
original
contract,
and
now
that
we've
learned
Tim
Bayless,
the
original
Associates
are
still
on
the
file.
You
know
this
rush,
we
shouldn't
be
punished
by
this
and
we
need
to
only
do
what
is
is
to
make
us
compliant
and
I.
D
Help
me
understand
just
a
little
bit
better
the
place
based
area
map
and
descriptions
for
one
person
like
it
makes
clicks.
It
makes
perfect
sense
to
me
I'm
a
little
bit
slower,
a
little
long,
the
Spectrum
and
then,
if
I
may,
once
you
share
with
me
a
little
bit
about
so
I
understand
that
play
space
map
that
you
like
and
seems
to
make
sense.
B
So
the
map
does
one
of
the
things
that
I
know.
You
know
that
you
have
brought
up.
Is
you
know
how
do
we?
How
do
we
gauge
annexations?
You
know
what's
good,
what's
bad,
so
it
it
so
the
play
space
map
at
the
high
level
was
established
to
to
recognize
areas
where
things
are
stable.
You're,
probably
not
going
to
have
a
lot
of
change
to
identify
areas
that
are
admittedly
already
transitional.
Where
we
see
you
have
conflicts
already.
B
You
know
when
you're
getting
a
lot
of
land
use
map
changes
coming
through
in
areas
you
know
so
the
north
side
of
the
river
US
19,
you
know,
that's
where
so
we're.
So
those
are.
Thank
you
if
you
can
pull
it
up
there.
Those
are
so
we
have
areas
that
are
just
transitional
and
so
the
transitional
areas
we
reckon
you
know
my
thought
process
and
in
the
language
just
talks
about
this-
is
that
those
are
areas
where
additional
planning
needs
to
take
place.
B
B
We
probably
need
to
do
that
type
of
exercise
and
see
what
do
we
really
want?
What's
remaining
or
the
Redevelopment?
You
know
the
vacant,
land
or
Redevelopment
of
underutilized
lands.
To
look
like
on
that
U.S
19
Corridor
same
thing:
you
know
north
side
of
the
river
we've
got
some
areas
that
you
know
where
we've
got
industrial
we've
got
residential.
We've
got
thing.
You
know
we
have
tremendous
pressures
for
residential
development,
yeah.
E
B
D
B
Do
they
do
and
so
again
that
that
whole
north
side
of
the
river
has
always
kind
of
been
a
bit
of
a
hodgepodge
of
like
what?
What
do
we
want?
You
know
what
do
we
want
to
be
there
and
and
then
you
know
the
unincorporated
areas
of
the
county
come
into
play.
They
have
their
visions
of
things,
so
we
tried
to
capture
the
areas,
the
Waterfront
areas
and
and
because
over
time,
some
of
that
uniqueness
of
those
areas
has
kind
of
been
lost.
You
know
so
the
working
Waterfront.
B
It
recognizes
the
existing
special
area
plan,
which
is
the
the
downtown
and
CRA
in
the
Sponge
Docks
in
downtown
community
redevelopment
area
and
the
smart
code.
That's
that
it's
its
own
entities,
its
own
little
code
and
and
future
you
know
and
comp
plan.
If
you
will
and
then
you
know,
we've
got
the
areas
around
those
that
are
kind
of
in
that
kind
of
a
purplish
color
that
that
are
the
old,
traditional
kind
of
development
patterns
and
where
you're
in
and
around
the
downtown.
So
you
have
kind
of
that.
B
And
then
you've,
and
then
we
have
this
area
and
we
we
called
it
environmental
Reserve,
that's
a
term
that
comes
out
of
the
smart
code,
Regional
planning,
but
basically
it's
to
recognize
those
areas
that
they
might
be
in
private
ownership
now,
but
they're
areas
where
we
know
they're
vulnerable,
they
might
be
have
environmental
assets.
B
But
if
there's
an
opportunity
in
the
you
know
in
the
future
to
set
some
of
that
aside
for
preservation
or
to
acquire
them
or
whatever,
and
so
that
environmental
preserve
layer
is
or
Reserve
layer
is
a
kind
of
an
overlay
of
of
the
other,
the
other
areas.
So
it's
in
so
this
map
is
meant
for
a
few
things,
one
it's
to
kind
of
recognize.
You
know
what
is
and
it's
to
provide
guidance,
When,
Future,
land
use,
changes
or
rezonings
or
annexations
are
coming
at
you,
so
that
you,
you
have
some.
B
B
If
this
comes
into
to
fruition,
then
we
would
also
go
through
and
we
would
pull
every
policy
and
objective
from
all
the
elements
into
this
table
that
are
Place
based.
So
in
this
area
these
are
the
things
that
we
should
be
considering,
so
that
we're
not
wrestling
with
at
times
the
entire
comprehensive
plan.
You
know
or
we're
giving
some
direction
to
thought
as
to
is
it.
Is
it
appropriate
to
change
a
land
use
map
category
here,
so
that
was
the
intent?
D
D
Terrific
and
then
second
shorty,
how
does
it
integrate
with
Pinellas
County
comp
plan?
And
since
so
much
of
this,
that
is
the
rattling
part.
We
just
wait
for
that
to
fall
into
our
lap,
pretty.
B
Pretty
much
yes,
now
the
one
thing
there
is
a
specific
policy
that
we
put
into
place
that
that
basically
says
if
you're
annexing
in
you
must
Annex
in
at
a
equal
or
less
intense
category.
B
And
then
after
you
Annex
in
you,
can
ask
for
a
future
land
use
map
change
and
go
through
the
process,
but
you're
not
going
to
do
it
at
the
same
time.
So
we're
trying
to
bifurcate
the
annexation
process
by
policy
so
that
you
know
you
don't
get
people
density
shopping.
You
know
and
coming
to
the
city
and
saying
hey
we'd
like
to
do
this,
but
we
need
to
Annex
in
will
you
give
us
15
years
to
the
acre?
The
county
will
only
give
us
10.
we're
trying
to
stop
that
by
policy
here.
B
D
B
I
E
B
I
mean
annexation
is
largely
driven
by
state
statute.
I
think
we
can
have
policies
related
to
annexation,
but
we
do
have
to
play
in
the
state
statute
realm.
So
you
know
we
I
mean
we
have
every
authority
to
say
you
know
if
you're
annexing
in
you'll
come
in,
you
know
similar
or
less
intensive
land
use
category
as
a
policy.
F
It
certainly
can
be,
and
particularly
for
Pinellas
County,
because
for
a
long
time
there
was
an
agreement
where
there
were
specific
planning
areas,
and
that
was
part
of
the
Pinellas
County
comprehensive
plan,
as
well
as
the
county-wide
plan
that
looked
at
things
like
utility
service
and
how
things
would
Annex
in
and
making
sure
things
are
compatible.
That
is
no
longer
in
the
Pinellas
County
plan.
They
took
all
that
out
when
they
updated
their
plan.
What
about
a
year
ago
now,
a
year
and
a
half
ago
when
they
adopted
theirs?
So
that's
no
longer
in
play.
F
B
Lot
of
that,
that
order
it
was
ordinance,
zero,
zero
63,
which
ultimately
was
struck
down
at
some
point.
A
lot
of
that
was
more
critical
to
the
municipalities
further
south,
where
they
were
fighting
each
other
to
try
to
gobble
up
land
between.
You
know
the
unincorporated
areas
of
the
county.
We
don't
have
a
competing
jurisdiction
up
here
that
we're
fighting
with
you
know
other
than
just
unincorporated
County
itself.
You
know,
obviously
they
don't
like
giving
up
their
land
either,
but
so.
E
C
A
General
question
kind
of
about
the
the
process:
I
guess
the
in
the
meeting
the
other
night
we
kind
of
talked
about
probably
taking
this
to
a
to
a
two-step
kind
of
affair,
where
we
deal
with
the
things
that
have
have
immediacy
associated
with
them
up
front
and
try
to
resolve
those
as
quickly
as
possible
and
and
then
pick
up
the
things
that
we'd
like
to
see
the
basically
the
future
improvements
to
the
plan,
I
mean
I,
think
that's
still
a
logical
approach
and
and
that's
the
approach
I'd
like
to
see
us
following
I-
think.
J
Okay,
yeah
and
I
have
to
agree
both
with
that
and
what
Joe
Jonas
said
before
about
doing
less
is
probably
smarter
at
this
point
than
doing
more
I.
Think
our
real
intention
be
galvanizing.
What
we
love
and
feel
that
we
need
to
reserve
and
and
preserve,
and
then
everything
else
is
optional.
It's
it's
tougher
to
change
something
and
then
look
to
unchange
it.
So
the
slower
we
can
go
with
whatever
is
not
essential.
Essentially
a
priority
at
this
time
is
better.
J
We
get
more
ideas
both
back
and
forth
between
you
and
us,
and
you
know
more
comparatives
and
other
jurisdictions.
But
the
main
thing
is:
is
this
the
slower
we
tread
I,
think
the
better,
so
the
concentration
should
be
on.
What
you
know
is
is
most
timely
as
far
as
a
need
to
change,
and
then
we
can
assess
the
ones
you
know
as
we
go
down
the
road
and.
I
I
want
to
apologize
for
coming
for
being
late
in
this
in
this
discussion,
but
there's
a
couple
things
that
I
maybe
get
direction
from
is
I
think
what
over
the
course
of
time,
maybe
I'm
wrong
about
this
board.
But
we've
we've
looked
at
density
as
being
a
significant
issue
that
we
did
not
want
to
see.
As
far
as
our
comprehensive
land
use
plan
is,
is
the
Sardine
effect
of
because
Tarpon
is
reaching
build
out.
I
We've
talked
about
except
for
annexation,
and
you
know
when,
when,
when
properties
are
being
annexed
and
they
go
through
the
county
first
and
they
get
you
know
they
may
be
able
to
get
whatever
density
the
County
May
grant
them.
That's
that's
always
been
I,
think
a
concern
and
I,
don't
you
know?
There's
we
had
talked
about
looking
at
the
counties.
I
guess
land
use
if
it
was
consistent
with
what
our
existing
land
use
is
outside
our
borders.
B
Yeah
you
you
did
so
that
we
did.
We
did
include
in
the
future
land
use
map
series
a
map
that
is
the
composite
of
both
the
city
and
the
unincorporated
County
I,
don't
know
if
we
included
the
actual.
B
G
G
What
my
concern
is
that
this
data
is
going
to
be
accepted
on
the
record
and
it's
going
to
be
accepted
as
from
a
professionally
accepted,
Source
I,
don't
know
if
it's
been
approved
by
this,
whatever
methodology
that
has
been
used,
but
if
this
is
professionally
accepted,
the
other
thing
the
statute
says
is:
it
has
to
be
approved
by
the
office
of
Economic
and
demographic
research,
and
my
concern
about
that
is
because
of
the
growth
that
has
been
mentioned
multiple
times,
I
did
get
an
opportunity
to
check
out
the
banesh
website,
as
well
as
some
articles
based
on
other
counties
that
they
also
can
solve,
for
as
Miss
hardly
mentioned
they
they
do
work
for
the
fdot.
G
They
actually
have
the
contract
for
the
long-range
Transportation
plan
for
Florida,
which
is
the
goal
of
2040.,
so
what
benesh
has
been
doing
is
going
to
workshops
and
consulting
which
I
would
call
lobbying
for
an
increase,
under
a
exception
to
the
Florida
statute.
This
is
implemented
in
2021
to
stop
impact
fees
from
being
raised,
because,
ultimately,
impact
fees
always
come
back
on
the
residents
and
that
makes
affordable
housing
unaffordable.
G
B
G
Want
to
make
sure
that
the
board
is
aware
of
all
these
things.
This
is
all
public
record
again,
it's
on
the
website.
They
have
a
contract
with
every
all.
This
has
been
happening
in
the
last
year.
B
We
have,
we
have
impact
fees
for
for
residential
right
for
various.
You
know
we
have
water,
sewer,
General,
Services,
police,
fire
yeah,
you
know
transportation,
we
you
know
we
have.
We
have
a
full
range
of
of
impact
fees
in
the
city,
to
my
knowledge,
that
other
than
for
things
like
water
and
sewer,
which
they're
doing
a
I
think
a
rate
study
is
underway.
Now
I
we
haven't,
we
haven't
touched
impact
fees
for
the
county,
sets
the
transport
County
why
they
set
the
transportation
impact
fees.
B
The
only
thing
we
have
control
over
locally
then
are
the
I
mean
we
don't
control
the
school
impact
fees?
You
know
it's
our
general
services
for
police
and
fire
and
there's
methodology
behind
those.
You
know
the
the
population
estimates
that
we
are
using.
They
they
produce
a
low,
a
medium
and
a
high.
B
You
know
we,
you
know
we
take
the
middle
estimates
of
population
and
and
that's
what
you
know
over
a
20-year
planning,
Horizon
and
as
I
said
you
know,
we've
we
don't
need
to
change
our
land
use
and
our
densities
to
to
you
know
to
accommodate.
You
know
we
do
have
to.
We
have
to
at
least
be
able
to
show
that
we
have
the
appropriate
land
use
in
place
to
accommodate
a
gross
project.
You
know
a
population
growth
that
is
required
me
if
I'm
wrong
by
Statute.
Yes,.
F
B
D
B
J
I
wouldn't
say
so
much
off
the
table
as
just
priority
yeah
set
back
until
we
need
to
do
what
we
need
to
do
in
a
more
timely
fashion
and
once
that's
achieved,
then
we
have
the
luxury
of
time
to
address
everything
else.
There
is
definitely
other
work
that
needs
to
be
done.
It's
not
just
minimal
compliance.
I.
B
B
Book
so
let's
talk
about
the
sense
of
urgency.
I
mean
the
only
sense
of
urgency
that
we
have
is
our
own.
We
have,
we
have
a
Benish
has
been
extended
through
the
end
of
the
year.
It
was
a
no-cost
extension,
so
you
know
we
have
their
services
through
the
end
of
the
year
we
have
to.
We
have
to
provide
a
letter
to
the
State
of
Florida.
That
is
statutorily
due
and
we
had
that
says.
Basically,
these
are
the
things
that
we're
going
to
address
in
our
air
base.
Our
ear
cycle,
evaluation
appraisal,
report
cycle.
C
B
Yeah
I
mean
yeah,
so
so
the
the
only
sense
of
urgency
is
just
the
fact
that
yes,
we've
been
in
process
for
a
while,
and
we
need
to
move
forward
and
decide
what
we're
changing
and
what
we're
not.
I
am
concerned
that
you
know
we
did
a
considerable
amount
of
public
Outreach
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
came
out
of
that.
That
I
think
are
are
valuable.
B
B
If
you
want
a
bifurcated
process,
we
can
certainly
do
that
I'm
just
but
I'm
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
sure.
You
know,
we've
got
draft
elements
of
everything
you
know
prepared.
That
includes
statutory
and
includes
updates,
based
on
community
input,
things
that
we,
as
your
planning
staff,
think
are
good
to
bring
into
like.
You
know
that
that
that
that
place-based
map
was
completely
came
out
of
our
department.
B
B
Started
out
calling
it
a
vision,
map
and
then
I,
we
changed
the
name
of
it.
I'm
like
no
that's
a
little
too
visiony
so
because
I
didn't
well
honestly,
I
didn't
I,
didn't
want
it
to
be.
I
didn't
want
the
map
to
reflect
a
like
a
vision,
I
wanted
it
to
reflect.
B
What
is
what
is
reality
today
and
where
do
we
need
more
planning
and
to
really
pick
up
the
environmental
Reserve
piece
of
it
that
to
me
that
was
a
you
know
and
as
a
as
something
that
we
can
look
to
when
we're
dealing
with
an
annexation
or
when
a
future
Landings
map
comes
into
play.
It's
like
you
know
so:
okay
in
the
US,
19,
Corridor
and
and
I.
Would
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
was
combining
those
residential
officer,
retail
and
the
commercial
General
land
use.
You
rightly
picked
up
one.
B
Well,
we
had
an
application
that
probably
wouldn't
have
had
to
go
through
a
public
hearing
process.
Then.
So,
if
I'm
going
to
be
true
to
what
I
wrote
in
that
transition
area,
it
says
these
areas
need
more
planning.
So
the
first
thing,
probably
you
know,
I,
had
no
problems
taking
that
change
off
the
table,
because
let's
do
the
plan,
you
know
otherwise
we'll
look
at
them
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
and
they
may
stay
in
place
for
quite
a
bit
longer
so
I
think
that's
a
legitimate
thing
to
you
know
to
home
in
on.
G
I
had
one
question
about
public,
Outreach
and
I
know
it's
difficult
to
get
the
public
involved.
It
is
but
I
think
and
I
did
go
to
one
of
the
I.
Remember
yeah.
You
know.
I
was
recently
looking
at
our
budget
and
it
actually
had
the
socioeconomic
breakdown
of
our
city,
which
the
biggest
population
is
actually
24
to
54.
G
G
B
I
would
say
no
I
mean
honestly,
you
know
when
we're
looking
at
public
input.
We've
got
a
lot
that
came
from
the
surveys
themselves
and
you
see
those
break
the
biggest
thing
that
I
think
that
we
heard
was
I
mean
there
were
certainly
interest
in
other
types
of
recreation
facilities.
We
heard
that
that
was
very
loud
and
clear
people
want
pickleball.
B
But
to
me
the
other
thing
that
was
really
valuable
was
that
in
the
you
know
what
we
heard
from
a
residential
perspective
and
then
those
areas
that
are
in
kind
of
that
light
tan
color,
the
vast
majority.
You
know,
there's
not
a
lot
of
appetite
for
you
know
they
don't
single
family
is
good,
maybe
one
two
when
you
showed
them
the
pla,
the
types
of
residential,
if
you
showed
them
a
duplex
or
a
Triplex
or
fourplex
that
really
still
looked
like
single
family,
they
got
it
and
they
were
like
yeah.
That
would
be
acceptable.
B
Now,
I
still,
you
still
need
to
plan
before
you
implement
something
like
that
and
I
think
it
needs
to
be
on
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
almost,
but
you
know,
but
we
also
heard
you
know,
support
for
things
like
a
you
know,
like
the
pop-up
commercial
and
said
you
know
that
whole
West,
half
of
the
city
I
mean
there's
no,
there's
really
no
commercial
over
there,
except
a
little
bit
on
Golf
Road.
And
so
you
know
people
have
to
drive.
B
B
So
those
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
I'm
that
that
we're
trying
to
kind
of
capture-
and
really
it's
more
at
that
place-
based
map
not
at
the
future
land
use
map
level,
because
that's
where
I
don't
want
I'm,
not
we
aren't
proposing
to
change
the
future
land
use
map
categories
to
implement
that.
At
this
point,
it's
really
that
was
kind
of
the
for
me.
The
way
to
kind
of
capture
those
things
from
a
land
use
perspective
was
really
through
this
type
of
of
a
map.
I
Renee,
yes,
you
mentioned
pop-up
retail
on
the
west
part
Western
portion
of
Tarpon
Springs.
Obviously
you're
talking
about
the
Sunset
Hills
area.
Currently,
the
only
commercial,
the
only
commercial
is
the
restaurant
and
the
Hess
station.
I
Everything
else
I
don't
see,
maybe
I'm
wrong,
but
that
that
there's
I
don't
know.
If
there's
any,
you
could
say
that
you
could
do
it,
but
there's
no
opportunity
for
vacant
land
to.
B
You're,
absolutely
right
and
that's
the
thing
people
were
were
kind
of
homing
in
on
that
and
saying
well
we'd
like
to
have
something
so
to
do
that.
You've
got
to
go
through
a
planning
effort.
That's
not
so
what
this
waste
of
time
yeah
it
if
a
if
a
group
comes
to
get.
If,
if
a
neighborhood
comes
together
and
says
they
want
to
transition
and
do
a
special
area
plan
that
allows
it
that's
I
mean
that
that
has
to
go
through
planning
and.
B
B
Sure
no
I
understand
I'm,
just
saying
we're,
you
know
if
you
read
the
description
for
that
all
that
area,
it
just
says
the
possibility
of
it
doesn't
say
that
you
shall
right,
so
it
opens
up
a
possible
and
and
only
for
one,
two,
three
four
family
at
the
most,
but
all
of
that
would
have
to
be
implemented
in
a
very
concrete
way.
It's
not
just
this.
B
This
doesn't
that
this
map
was
never
intended
to
drive
a
city
process
to
say
we're
going
to
come
in
and
we're
going
to
force
you
to
have
retail
out
here
on
the
West
half
of
the
city.
It
does
recognize
the
possibility
of
it
if
there's
support
for
it
through
a
planning
effort
that
that's
to
me,
that's
the
intent
of
this
of
this
map.
D
I,
like
your
map
and
I'm,
going
to
stand
alone,
probably
and
say:
I
like
your
strikethroughs,
people
are
afraid
of
change
Always,
and
this
is
a
planning
organization
and
the
plan
is
hard.
It's
not
easy
and
yes,
we
should
probably
go
incremental
and
I'll
use.
The
cherish
words
focus
on
the
things
that
need
to
be
done,
but
you've
clarified
that
this
is
a
voluntary
process.
D
B
B
B
But
yeah
I
mean
for
some
I
mean
I.
I
have
a
hard
time
trying
to
like
okay.
Where
did
it
go
and
everything?
But
if
you,
if
you
want
to,
if
you
had
had
a
chance
to
review
this-
and
you
have
specific
questions
about
things,
let's,
let's,
let's
tear.
G
B
At
this
point,
I'm
open
to
suggestion,
if
you
I
mean
the
the
the
things
that
are
so
on
the
key,
a
yellow
highlight
is
an
existing
goal
or
objective
or
policy.
That's
been
renumbered.
Green
is
a
new
goal
or
objective.
Yes,
so
a
lot
of
things,
some
things
were
just
removed.
Some
things
have
been
moved
and
some
things
are
new.
B
So
you
know
my
My
Hope
was
that
if
you
review
because
I
I
know
it's
hard,
it's
hard
to
transition
between
a
clean,
the
clean
and
this
you
know,
but
if
you
re,
if
you
re,
you
know
review,
and
because
it's
only
six
or
seven
pages
now.
C
G
E
J
B
B
G
B
B
G
E
B
Have
a
Florida
reference,
you
know
statue
in
Florida
reference,
there
I
mean
I'm,
just
gonna,
I'm
gonna
ask
Catherine,
there's
I
mean
our
plan
was
not
out
of
compliance.
Let
me
state
that
clearly,
it
was
not.
It
was
not
out
of.
It
was
not
out
of
compliance
with
State
Statute
from
the
standpoint
of
you
know.
If,
if
it
were,
we
couldn't
adopt
a
land
use
map
Amendment
and
send
it
up
to
the
state
they
wouldn't
review
it.
You
know.
B
G
G
G
F
E
F
K
I
could
be
the
answer
to
this
one
for
this
one,
and
this
is
where
sometimes
looking
at
the
clean
versions
helpful.
Just
it's
not
ordered
correctly,
but
objective
1.1.
Basically,
the
overall
objective
talks
about
consistency
with
the
comprehensive
plan
in
general.
So
once
you
get
down
to
the
policy,
you
don't
need
to
say
repeat
consistent
with
all
on
this
comprehensive
plan.
This
is
now
focusing
on
restricting
future
expansion.
Non-Conforming
uses
without
repeating
the
overall
objective
calculation.
G
There's
a
specific
word
which
is
compatible,
which
is
not
which
is
in
the
first
and
it's
not
in
the
second
and
compatibility,
is
a
huge.
So
that's
not
so
that's
not
the
same.
That's
not
redundant.
Consistency
and
compatibility
aren't
the
same
well.
I've
met
from
my
perspective.
They're,
not
words
are
very
important.
Consistency
and
compatibility
are
not
the
same
thing.
B
G
B
G
C
G
D
B
It's
so
this
was
removed,
says
policy
language
is
captured
in
goal,
one
language
and
further
addressing
the
utilities
element:
policymal
4.3.8,
the
coastal
management
goal,
one
and
objective
1.1
and
Associated
policy.
So
this
this
really
permeates
through
several
different
areas.
In
several
different
elements.
H
I
guess
someone
just
to
be
clear:
the
way
I'm
looking
at
it
and
yeah
you
want
to
avoid
being
redundant,
I
mean
that
is
kind
of
my
opinion
too,
but
again,
I
and
I.
Think
this
is
already
said.
You
don't
want
to
be
redundant,
not
redundant
to
the
point
when
you
missed
out
on
something
or
depending
on
where
the
language
is
located.
That
gives
it
a
different
context.
Perhaps
so,
wow.
C
H
Utilities
element
policy,
you
know,
maybe
the
wording
is
different.
You
know
it's
a
different
context
for
utilities
versus
the
overall
goal.
I
I
know
what
you
mean.
I
know
it's
what
the
goal
is
here,
but
maybe
I'm
becoming
worried
too
about
worried
too
about
getting
rid
of
redundancy.
You
know
I
just
yeah
yeah
as
long
as
it's
very
very
clear,
because
if
I
look
at
goal
one
it's
nowhere
near
what's
stated
in
1.1.2
nowhere
near.
H
B
So
you
I
mean
you
would
yeah,
you
would
have
to
make
that
cross-reference
over
to
the
coastal
management
element
right
and
which
go
on
there,
maintain,
restore
and
enhance
the
integrity
and
quality
of
living
and
non-living.
Coastal
resources.
Wait!
I'm,
sorry
were
you
reading.
That
is.
This
is
the
coastal
management
element
which
was
sent
out.
Those
were
sent
out.
You
know
at
the
at
the
end.
You
know
previously,
you
know
so.
I
So
so
I
mean,
isn't
it
easier,
there's
certain
things
that
probably
need
to
be
condensed
for
clarity
because
they're
redundant,
but
certain
things
that
that
basically
need
to
stand
on
their
own
and
and
like
1.1.2,
the
the
current
language,
even
though
it
makes
reference
to
I
guess
the
same
objectives
in
other
parts.
It's
pretty
important
that
that
overall,
like
I,
consider
that,
like
a
mission
statement
right
remain.
G
I
Plan
yeah,
so
so
I
I,
you
know,
I
have
no
problem,
leaving
the
entire
that
that
entire
language
in
there,
because,
like
I,
said
even
though
it
may
be
referenced
another
in
other
parts
of
the
plan.
There's
nothing.
You
know
when
you
start
out
a
a
mission
statement
it
may
it
may
make
reference
to
it
later
on
in
other
parts
of
of
what
you're
reading.
But
at
least
the
mission
statement
is
one
of
the
top
things
you
see
and
I
I
think,
keeping
that
consistent
might
be
might
be
better
and
listen.
I
I
I
first
want
to
say
things:
no,
when
it
comes
to
government
everything's
too
long,
but
there's
times
that,
if
it's
clear
and
concise
you
know
that's
not
a
play
on
words.
H
One
one
two
I
was
looking
back
at
goal:
one:
okay,
no
I,
like
I,
like
the
current
language.
B
So
it
sounds
like
this
board
would
be
much
more
comfortable
with
because
the
future
land
you
settlement
is
kind
of
the
entry
point
for
most
people
into
the
comp
plan.
You
would
just
prefer
to
it
clean
up
cross
references
if
necessary,
but
keep
the
majority
of
this
language
in
place,
even
though
it's
more
difficult
to
yeah.
I
I'm,
sorry,
no,
when
you're
addressing,
for
example,
utilities.
Okay,
whatever
that
one
to
me
1.12,
is,
is
sort
of
the
intro
to
everything
else.
When
you
go
into
the
the
subsection
of
utility,
whatever
you
know
like
what
Pat
said
that
additional
language
in
that
part
as
to
as
to
the
goal,
that's
that
would
that
would
say
it,
but
the
overall
so.
B
B
To
what
we
need
to
make
sure
is,
then,
is
that
any
other
elements
that
we
have
update,
where
we
have
done
updates
that
we
just
we
have
consistency
like
you
know
the
you
know
that
references,
the
coastal
and
conservation
album?
Well,
those
are
two
things
now,
so
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
yeah
that,
okay,
that
we're
making
the
right
the
right.
I
I
Objective
and
you-
and
you
know
as
to
that
particular
portion-
that
that
shouldn't
have
to
check
that
I
mean
what
Pat
says
in
there
should
remain
in
there,
because
that
that
would
be
the
idea
of
when
you're
talking
about
utilities
element
policy.
But
the
overall
narrative
for
the
whole
plan
should
be
remain
intact.
So.
B
G
I
just
think:
what
is
the
purpose
of
a
comprehensive
plan?
Is
it
not
for
the
vision
of
the
community
like
it
doesn't
have
to
be?
Every
single
sentence
doesn't
have
to
be
this.
This
goal,
that's
just
specifically,
you
know
it's
it's
an
overall
thing,
so
it's
supposed
to
be
in
other
plans,
because
otherwise
it's
not
being
covered.
It's
I
mean
by
definition
the
word
comprehensive.
That
is
what
it
stands
for.
B
B
I
hear
you
our
biggest
battle
with
this
from
a
staff
perspective
and
from
an
you
know
from
an
Administration
perspective,
is
when
you've
got
one
over
time
that
we
have
the
opportunity
to
fix
it
now,
but
over
time
we've
had
a
lot
of
inconsistency,
get
developed
between
elements.
People
can
take
advantage.
B
B
B
There
were
some
very
specific
regulations,
things
in
there
like
Urban,
Design,
regular
and
things
like
that.
That
were
I
mean
just
candidly
really
out
of
place,
and
so
I
would
hope
that
there's
some
tolerance
for
not
because
I
mean
they
haven't
gone
away
and
they're
just
we're
referencing,
essentially
the
design
standards
of
the
county-wide
plan
that
we
would
have
to
implement
those
anyway.
You
know
if
you're,
you
know,
we
we
maintain
the
policy
of
if
you've
got
a
large
area.
B
You
know
a
large
parcel
that
you
have
to
you've
got
to
use
one
of
those
mixed
land
use
categories.
It's
going
to
require
a
special
area
plan
boom.
It
kicks
you
right
over
to
those
Urban
Design
principles
that
are
going
to
have
to
be
considered
so
we're
trying
to
eliminate
some
of
the
redundancy
from
other
plans
that
we
can
make
by
a
reference.
B
So
but
yeah
I,
I,
understand
I,
understand
where
you're
at
and
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
it.
We
need
to
try
to
take
a
look
at
it
from
your
perspective
of
okay.
G
What
impact
does
this
have
on
zoning
later,
because
once
it's
inconsistent,
then
a
developer
can
just
come
around
five
years
later
and
be
like.
Oh,
your
comprehensive
plan
is
not
it's
not
consistent
with
zoning,
just
as
they
have
and
then
our
recommendation
and
everyone's
like
well
I
guess
we
have
to
change
it
because
it
doesn't
match,
but
we
act
like
these.
Two
things
don't
coexist
and
they
have
to
be
consistent
with
each
other.
What
are
the
ramifications
when
we
change
this?
How
is
that
going
to
affect
zoning?
And
it
does
we?
G
B
G
Not
yeah
again,
then
it's
not,
but
it
doesn't.
We
don't
change
the
zoning
when
we
change
the
plan,
but
when
a
developer
comes
in,
that's
with
exactly
what
they
go
to
is
your
plan
doesn't
match
the
zoning,
and
so
then
they
get
a
leg
up
and
they
and
then
everyone
says:
oh,
we
have
to
change
it
because
it
doesn't
match.
If.
F
D
D
It
where
it's
supposed
to
be
right,
if
I
may
I,
think
I'm
on
an
island
by
myself,
I
like
what
I
see
I'll.
Take
that
good,
better
otherwise
and
I've
only
made
it
through
three
points.
D
D
D
D
There
are
critical,
they're,
thoughtful,
they're,
important,
that's
what
we
asked
for
from
you
to
provide
us,
and
although
the
current
language
over
there
is
you
know
a
thousand
words
and
all
we
got
is
these
inputs?
Is
that
I
want
to
focus
on
that
and
say
that's
what
we
asked
for
that's
what
we
got
and
I
want
to
use
that
as
an
example
to
the
entire
package.
A
B
D
D
D
G
L
G
D
Does
matter
I
think
taken
out
might
not
be
the
correct
description
if
I
can
say
so.
Politely
revised
and
updated.
Just
like
all
the
photos
on
my
phone
I
got
a
thousand
of
them,
but
I
only
need
four
and
every
now
and
then
I
gotta
stop
and
throw
some
away
because
they're
not
relevant
and
they
weren't
a
good
idea
at
the.
D
D
D
D
G
I
J
Goal
one:
yes,
all
right,
I
think
in
the
big
picture,
when,
when
you
do
remove
something,
maybe
it's
better
if
there's
a
a
fingerprint
or
or
something
left
that
directs
you,
because
the
the
explanation
in
the
notes
is
great,
it
tells
you
where
everything
is
being
steered
to
now,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
those
notes
will
exist
in
the
policy
anymore.
So
there
may
be
something
to
you
know.
Just
a
bracket
see
you
know,
see
this
statute,
see
that
see
this
policy
in.
B
G
B
Requiring
infield
development
Redevelopment
to
take
into
account
natural
floodplain,
that's
in
that's
a
that's
covered
in
the
coastal
management
element.
It's
also
in
it.
We
didn't
put
the
notes
in
here.
It's
also
verbatim
and
our
floodplain
ordinances
in
Our
Land
Development
code
I
mean
you
just
can't
ignore
that
at
this
point.
J
B
Was
I
mean
again
it's
another
one
that
it's
a
it's
covered
elsewhere,
it's
in
our
Land
Development
code,
but
at
the
same
time
it's
a
generic
enough
statement
that
it
doesn't
matter.
If
you
leave
it
in
right
right,
you
know
so
again,
you
know
our
goal
was
to
try
to
just
remove
unnecessary
stuff.
I
mean
you
know.
This
is
very
analogous
to
what
Pinellas
County
did
you
know
over
three
or
four
years
when
they
update
I
mean
they
had
well.
It
was
something
like
1600
goals,
objectives
and
policies
in
their
comprehensive
plan.
It
was
unmanageable.
B
J
I'm
just
trying
to
think
like
a
Layman,
you
know
what
right
granted
we,
you
know
we
we
can
between
an
index
and
a
table
of
contents.
If
we're
looking
for
something
we
can
generally
find
it,
but
if
Mom
or
Dad
or
or
a
future
home
buyer
or
somebody
like
that
or
property
buyer,
what
to
investigate!
They
may
not
have
the
clarity
in
the
in
the
steps
and
the
direction,
and
sometimes
that's
a
good
thing.
Sometimes
that's
a
bad
thing.
So
it's
it's
more
just
a
matter
of
let's.
J
E
I
E
A
B
G
B
B
Yeah
and
so
I
mean
we're
just
you
know.
Instead
of
you
know,
trying
to
prioritize
industrial
use
light
over
heavy.
You
know
again,
we
have
light
industrial
areas.
We've
got
heavy
industrial
areas.
What
we're
really
trying
to
do
is
basically
say
the
heavy
industry
needs
to
stay
where
it's
at
and
not
really
encroach
anywhere
else.
So.
G
B
Data
protect
1.1
point:
11
became
2.3.3.
This
is
one
I
think
we
kind
of
we
put
this
one
back
in
again
we're
trying
to
focus
on
if
you're
doing
a
large
scale-
and
we
don't-
you
know,
let's
be
honest,
there's
only
one
or
two
properties
out
there
that
are
40
acres
or
more.
B
True,
and-
and
this
would
this
would
apply
to
annexation
as
well,
so
that
they
would
that
you
have
to
use.
Take
you
have
to
use
one
of
those
future
land
use
mixed
future
land
use
categories
that
are
established
in
the
element.
So
again
the
intent
there
is
try
to
get
more
planned
development,
for
you
get
a
large
parcel,
don't
come
in
as
a
monolithic
development,
so.
B
One
thing
that
we
have
not
given
you
guys
is
an
updated
definitions
section,
but
these
will
be
captured.
We
want
to
move
those
open
space
that
move
that
language
out
of
there
into
the
definition
section.
B
B
This
we
okay,
we
took
this
out
because
this
is
again
we've
got
impervious.
Surfaces
for
parking
lots
is
is
already
is,
is
in
the
Land
Development
code.
It
does
not.
However,
it
doesn't
reflect
it
as
mandatory
it's
an
allowance,
so
we
could
evaluate.
We
could
keep
this
and
basically
say
evaluate
language
to
reflect
mandatory
requirement
rather
than
allowance.
What
it's
really
trying
to
get
at
is
not
allow.
You
know
if
you're
parking,
you
know
parking
requirement
is
four
basis
per
thousand,
but
you
know
a
big
box.
B
Developer
wants
to
come
in
and
have
five
spaces
per
thousand.
It
requires
them
to
put
a
certain
amount
of
their
park,
they're
over
their
excess
parking
into
a
pervious
surface.
So
right
now
we
have
an
allowance
for
that
in
the
Land
Development
code.
It's
not
mandatory.
So
this
is.
This
is
a
mandatory
type
of
thing,
so
I'm
I'm
open
to
suggestion
on
this
one
I
know
we,
you
know
I,
think
we,
you
know
we
can
I
thought
I
thought
we'd
put
it
back
in.
We
didn't
okay,
I.
A
Think
you
know
because.
B
B
B
So
when
this
one,
we
actually
have
a
process
for
waivers
under
the
plan
development
process
that
does
allow
the
Board
of
Commissioners
to
Grant.
What
this
was
basically
was
getting
at
is
allowing
the
Board
of
Commissioners
on
a
site
plan
to
review
to
Grant
variants.
Essentially
I,
that's
you
know,
I
mean
that's
exactly
what
I
mean
it's
kind
of
what
it
says
where
existing.
E
B
A
B
So
there
so
just
be
aware:
I
mean
this.
Can
I
don't
have
a
problem?
Obviously
we
propose
to
strike
that
there
are
just
so
you
do
know
that
in
the
planned
development
section
of
the
Land
Development
code
waivers
are
something
that
the
Board
of
Commissioners
can
consider.
So
it's
already
in
there.
Okay,
but
and
there's
a
pro
a
similar
type
of
process
for
warrants.
You
know
in
deviations
in
the
smart
code
could.
I
How
it
makes
it
that
much
more
difficult
to
you
know
that
was
the
thing
with
co-catch.
E
B
B
B
G
Are
we
on
objective
1.2
now?
Yes,
so
why
is
tourist
area
taken
out.
B
G
B
G
K
About
they
I'm
just
thinking,
if
maybe
there's
a
separate
policy
addressing.
D
With
I
were
a
business
owner
on
Main
Street,
that
is
also
a
tourist
area.
I
would
say:
well
why
not
mainstream
and
then
I'd
also
have
to
ask.
Why
does
our
comprehensive
plan
use?
The
word
promote,
which
is
marketing
which
doesn't
necessarily
relate
to
land
use?
Just
I
can
see
why
there
was
some
verbiage
change.
Is
that
I
would
say,
hey
all
of
Tarpon.
Springs
should
be
important,
including
Main,
Street
and
then
1.2.
D
B
B
B
E
B
B
A
B
Strong
all
right
can
we
all
right
so.
E
We
tried.
B
B
And
I
would
say
h
is
something
that
was
added
since
the
last
meeting
and
again
that's
possible
expansion
of
that
boundary
to
include
areas
identified
as
neighborhood
traditional.
So
that's
on
that
place
based
Map
There's,
you
know
so,
can
we
put
character
districts
in
place
and
put
similar?
You
know
special
area
plan
in
place
that
recognizes
the
uniqueness
of
those
areas.
B
B
1.2.3
outdated
reference
allow
the
use
of
clustering
and
mixed
uses
and
the
county-wide
rules
plan
Redevelopment
districts
and
special
area
plans.
We
do
that
anyway,
remove
outdated
references
to
the
county-wide
plan.
Yeah.
Everything
in
the
county-wide
plan
has
moved.
B
B
B
Provide
for
a
vibrant
lifelong
Community,
where
people
can
meet
all
daily
needs
of
all
daily
needs
of
living.
So
that's
a
very
lofty
goal
that
some
of
that
came
specifically
out
of
the
Strategic
plan.
Planning
efforts
it
overlaps
with
was
a
lot
of
the
goals
and
objectives
of
that
document,
prevent.
B
Is
it
I'm
sorry
discourage
her
as
well
I
think
we've
got
other
specific
things
on
urban
sprawl.
Don't
we
I
mean.
I
I
I
They
want
to
save
their
rural,
okay,
sure
so
the
way
they
would
save
it
is
by
annexing
now
under
their
current
density,
which
means
nobody,
a
developer,
can't
go
to
the
county
and
get
the
density
then
try
to
Annex,
because
it's
the
property's
already
annexed
and
it's
annexed
as
agricultural
or
does
that
make
sense.
It.
B
So
when
the
county
went
through
their
account,
they
did
the
county-wide
plan
map
I,
call
it
consolidation
and
they
started
consolidating
and
getting
rid
of
like
residential
half
a
unit
per
acre
one
unit,
five,
two
and
a
half
five
all
these
gradations
and
they
collapsed
them.
And
what
that
set
up
was
an
incentive
for
those,
the
folks
out,
Keystone
Road
area
to
try
to
Annex
into
the
city
Even
in
our
lowest
designation.
B
B
It's
going
to
remain
what
it
is,
and
so,
yes,
and
so,
and
to
that
point,
if
you
you
know,
when
you
look
at
our
map
that
place
based
map
up
there,
all
that
area
in
green
out
through
there
yep.
That
is
this.
That's
exactly
what
I'm
trying
to
to
do
is
say.
This
is
what
you
got.
Don't
ask
for
anything
else.
B
It's
not
going
to
change
when
you
come
in.
Unless
something
drastic
happens,
but
I
mean
that's,
you
know
we
can't
can't
say
never,
but
that's
the
intent
of
that
of
that
green
is
to
basically
hold
the
line
and
say
this
is
recognized
as
rural
at
best
estate
residential.
But
you
know
dog
kennels.
You
know
Urban
Farms.
B
That
kind
of
stuff
needs
to
be
that's
what
that
area
is
the
other,
the
other
layer
of
protection
just
for
people's
for
a
keystone
that
is
recognized
as
a
Scenic,
non-commercial
Corridor,
under
the
county-wide
plan
and
under
Pinellas
County,
and
we
had
to
follow
it
as
well.
So,
even
if
somebody
tries
to
you
know
like
residential
is
one
thing,
but
if
you
try
to
go
out
there
and
put
commercial
in
you
get
smacked
by
that
Scenic
non-commercial
Corridor
status
at
the
county-wide
level
that
you
know
so
it
becomes
pretty
difficult
to
get.
D
B
E
E
D
Humor,
okay,
that
was
the
first
question.
Okay,
the
second
one
specifically
into
the
conversation
you
were
having
about
green
yeah
Keystone.
Yes,
if
we
could
go
back
in
time
so
that
I
can
square
what
you
just
said,
and
our
comp
plan
and
a
residential
development
that
came
at
us
approximately
three
years
ago,
and
we
got
one
of
those
multi-packages
where
we
got
a
future
land
use,
Amendment,
an
ordinance,
an
annexation
and
a
development
agreement.
All
in
one
like
that,
thick.
C
D
E
I
A
D
E
A
K
D
B
D
C
D
D
Very
poorly
worded
question:
are
those
agricultural
size
or
egg
I
won't
be
able
to
see
it
fast
enough
that
so.
I
B
B
Can
you
cluster
things
if
you've
got
environmental
lands,
maybe
I'm
trying
to
think
through
this,
so
that
that's
kind
of
what
happened
I
believe
with
with
North
Lake?
Is
they
they
set
aside?
You
know
the
the
wetlands
and
everything
and
and
did
use
the
density
transfer
or
density
averaging
over
the
site,
and
they
ended
up
with
a
range
of
of
lot
sizes,
but
it
was
still.
It
still
turns
out
to
be
primarily
just
you
know,
Big
Lot
residential
estate
residential.
B
B
C
E
B
B
Slash
residential
state,
so
it
says
Incorporated
areas
in
the
Eastern
area
of
the
city
and
adjacent
unincorporated
areas
of
Pinellas
County,
characterized
by
agriculture,
Agricultural
and
estate
residential
development
patterns,
where
large,
Lots,
Hobby
Farms
horse
farms,
dog
kennels
in
a
more
rural
lifestyle
is
possible.
So
it
really
is
meant.
I
B
I
I
B
I
A
Thought
into
that,
and
another
tangent
kind
of
that
probably
isn't
something
we
really
need
to
talk
about
tonight.
That
I'm
going
to
throw
the
concept
out
there
is
is
some
more
discussion,
I
think
needs
to
happen,
related
to
density
averaging
and
and
how
it
works
and
and
how
it
should
work
and
how
it
shouldn't
work,
and
next
time
we're
talking
about
the
the
ordinance
as
opposed
to
the
to
the
land
use
plan.
I
think
we
need
to.
G
D
D
Northlake
Estates
a
few
pages
further
on
we're
gonna
come
across
verbiage
as
multimodal.
D
How,
today,
in
the
future
and
under
the
past,
how
would
a
development
such
as
that
which
is
observably,
obviously
not
multimodal,
but
yet
multimodal
is
a
part
of
the
county,
comprehensive
plan
and
then
therefore
ours,
how?
How
would
it?
How
would
that
have
met
that
multimodal
or
is
there
an
exception
for
it
and
does
a
multimodal
ever
get
any
traction
or
teeth,
or
is
it
just
something
that
we
say
we're
going
to
do,
but
never
actually
enforce?
Now
that
might
not
be
the.
B
So
we
have
I,
don't
know
about
that
particular
I
mean
that
you
know
we.
You
know
we
look
at
multimodal
from
a
kind
of
a
functional
standpoint
of
Something's.
Coming
in
and
you're
you
can
make
a
connection
to
the
Pinellas
Trail.
You
can
make
sidewalk
connections
outside
you
know
things
that
are
I
mean
multimodal
can
just
be
bike
and
ped
I
mean
it
doesn't
have
to
be.
You
know,
bus
or
rail.
You
know
anything,
so
multimodal
is
pretty
broad.
So
we
we
look
at
it
more
from
a
functional
standpoint.
B
We
do
have
a
policy
to
basically
do
a
a
city-wide
multimodal
plan.
So
at
that
point
you
know
we
have
the
we
have
the
the
multimetal
transportation
district
that
was
analyzed
that
Catherine
talked
about
when
Renaissance
did
that
for
us,
when
we
still
had
Transportation
concurrency
in
order
for
us
to
to
bump
up
density
and
intensity
in
the
downtown
and
Implement
that
downtown
Redevelopment
plan,
we
had
to
have
a
way
to
address.
B
B
I
mean
so
I
mean
you.
We
have
requirements
that
you
have
to
put
in
sidewalks
on
both
sides.
You
know
you
have
to
you,
gotta,
there's
certain
things
that
you
have
to
do
if
you
can
present
a
functional
argument
or
another
way
during
the
development
review
process
to
meet
that
requirement.
You
know
an
alternate,
you
know
an
alternative.
What's
our
term
in
the
plan,
development
section
preferred
alternative
or
a
super
yeah
yeah
there's
a
term
there.
B
I
B
All
right
so.
B
Two
point
all
right,
so
I
think
we're
at
so
objective.
It
used
to
be
2.1
is
now
2.2.
This
is
just
establishing
our
Litany
of
land
use
map
categories,
maintaining
the
future.
Let's
say:
2.2.4
maintain
the
future
land
use
map
depictions
dot
designations,
so
this
is
just
establishing
our
future
land
use
map
in
the
comprehensive
plan.
B
This
does
show
with
these
are
listed
as
they
with
the
consolidation.
Yes,.
E
B
And
if
that
is
just
something
that
you
just
don't
want
to
tackle
right
now
and
I
I'm
I'm,
very
okay,
with
with
some
of
these,
are
just
named
literally
name
changes
to
be
consistent
with
the
county-wide
plan
and
in
the
descriptions
the
significant
one
I
would
think.
That
is
that
common.
If
combining
the
commercial
General
on
the
RoR
under
the
retail
and
services.
I
G
Was
a
little
confused
because
there
was
some
of
this
I
think
that
was
your
future
requirements
put
up
there
and
I
was
I
was
confused
about
that,
like
that
they
were
going
to
change,
but
I
don't
think
anything's
been
signed
off
on
so
when
it
was
presented,
I
mean
they're.
Coming
back
because
of
the
new
information.
G
G
B
I
B
E
G
Changes
we
will
be
changing
the
code
to
that
and
so
I.
Don't
remember
that.
B
H
B
Yes,
I
thought
it
was
so
yeah,
ultimately
yeah.
The
board
did
ask
that,
because
the
agreement
was
done.
They
did
ask
that
It
Go.
You
know
come
back
to
the
to
the
planning
and
Zone,
and
rightly.
G
So
this
I'm
sorry
about
this
tangent
and
I-
know
it's
not
about
tonight.
But
commissioner
coulias
mentioned
and
asked
about
having
a
site
plan
before
request.
Is
that
something
that
we
can
Implement.
B
I
mean
why
not
okay,
so
let
me
all
right,
so
let's
talk
a
little
bit
about
that.
So,
on
the
one
hand,
we've
gotten
a
ton
of
direction
from
y'all
and
the
Board
of
Commissioners
that
if
you're
asking
for
a
future
land
use
map,
then
damn
it
that's
got
to
stand
on
its
own.
Well,
that's
exactly
what
it
means,
and
so
you
take
out
unless
you're
going
through
a
planned
development
type
of
process
and
so
you're
looking
at
the
like,
in
that
instance,
maybe
you're.
B
Looking
at
the
you
know
a
site
plan
running
concurrently
with
something
which
we
have
been
repeatedly
told.
We
don't
want
to
see
that,
so
we
went
back
and
we
changed
the
Land
Development
code.
So
if
you
want,
if
you
need
a
zoning
map,
change
and
a
future
land
use
map
change
and
a
conditional
use-
and
you
have
to
now
do
all
of
those
things
unless
it's
a
very
small
property,
there's
a
little
bit
of
an
exception
there.
B
G
This
circumstance
I
mean
in
which
you
identified
that
even
some
of
the
stuff
would
be
problematic,
but
you
didn't
say
impossible
when
I
that
you
said
that
they
made
it
sound
impossible.
To
do
I
mean
it's
totally
impossible.
You
didn't
say
that,
but
I
mean.
Is
it
too
much
to
say
to
have
a
site
planning?
They
had
this
agreement
and
they
gave
us
so
it
doesn't
build
a
lot
of
trust
because.
G
B
A
so
the
board
basically
has
now
said:
if
you've
got
a
concept
plan,
please
present
it
and
I
was
I,
told
the
board
I'm
like
as
long
as
everybody
understands
that
if
they
turn
around
and
flip
this
tomorrow,
this
concept
plan
means
absolutely
nothing
other
than
the
fact
that
well,
you
still
have
to
come
back
in
front
of
the
board,
this
board
and
the
port
and
the
Board
of
Commissioners
in
order
to
get
a
plan
approved.
So
it's
going
to
look
poor
I
mean.
B
A
So
some
history,
on
how
we
got
to
this
point,
though,
is
I
mean
it's.
It's
related
to
some
things
that
we're
still
still
having
problems
with
that
that
happened
a
few
years
ago,
where
everything
for
a
very
large
project
was
one
run
through
in
at
one
time
at
one
time,
and
the
idea
was
to
try
to
split
it
out
and
and
also
to
be
somewhat
kind
to
developers
and
in
the
case
where
they
don't
spend
a
million
dollars
doing
plans
and
then
get
turned
down.
G
B
I
A
basic
yeah
yeah.
I
B
B
Totally
understand
I
mean
I
mean
you
know:
I
I
wasn't
100,
you
know
behind
the
change
in
the
Land
Development
code.
That
says
that
you
know
if
you're
submitting
a
conditional
use.
That
also
requires
a
site
plan
that
you
can't
submit
those
together.
I
mean:
are
they
I
mean
that
you
have
to
submit
them
together?
You
know
so
because
case
in
point
I
mean
the
hotel
project
down
the
docks
required,
a
conditional
use.
B
Why
make
them
spend?
You
know,
go
to
the
level
of
detail
of
a
site
plan
if
you
can't
even
get
through
the
conditional
use
process,
but
now
we
have
those
married
back
together
again
because
in
some
instances
that
information
may
have
been
Val,
it
may
have
been
valuable
to
the
decision
making.
So
you
know,
we've
we've
moved
back
toward.
You
know.
B
So,
okay,
so
again,
I
put
some
thought
into
I
mean
if,
if
you're
on
the
proposals
on
the
future
land
use
categories,
there's
the
combination,
one
I
do
think
there's
validity
and
not
pursuing
the
the
merger
of
the
commercial
General
and
the
RoR.
At
this
point,
I
don't
have
a
problem
pulling
that
out
of
the
out
of
the
flavor
out
of
the
mix.
B
Yes,
but
I
will
be
done
at
least
in
terms
of
that
category
up
there.
Yes,
all
right
all
right,
so
then
we
move
to
I.
Think.
Are
we
to
goal
three
now.
E
B
B
It's
there,
it
is
there
misdirecting
it
up.
Okay,
so
yeah
so
objective
3.3
reads:
ensure
availability
of
Utility
Services
necessary
to
support
proposed
development,
just
it
should
say,
discourage,
not
discourages,
discourage
urban
sprawl
and
meet
established
levels
of
service.
So
there's
one
reference
to
urban
sprawl,
but
and
then
policy
3.3.2.
B
Says
discourage
urban
sprawl
through
the
use
of
infield
development
and
compact
growth
contiguous
to
existing
developed
areas
to
maximize
use
of
existing
facilities
in
the
proposed
language.
So
it's
like
a
couple
Pages
away,
3.3,
yeah,
objective,
3.3
and
then
the
policies
underneath
of
that.
So
you
got
so
the
yeah,
the
urban
sprawl
stuff
comes
up
a
little
bit
later.
There.
E
B
B
I
lost
myself
all
right
so
goal
three
public
facilities,
objective
3.1.
B
G
G
We're
not
here
to
you
know,
support
them.
If
they're
coming
in,
they
need
our
permission.
They
should
build,
be
building
consistently
with
our
facilities.
G
B
We
don't
so
as
a
matter
of
practicality
in
the
Land
Development
code,
when
something
is
being
built,
their
developers
are
required
to
extend
utilities
for
their.
You
know,
and
we
have
to
ensure
that
that
that's
being
done
and
so
to
me
that's
what
the
goal
is
stating
that
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we
have
adequate
facilities.
B
G
Just
think
the
vision
is
I
think
we
should
have
a
consistent
vision
and
there's
nothing
wrong
with
saying
Urban,
discouraging
it's
important
to
note
when
it's
in
our
comprehensive
plan
multiple
times
that
that's
our
City's
Vision,
it's
okay,
it
should
be
there
more
than
once.
That
is
a
good
thing
to
have
to
show
that
that
is
our
vision,
yeah
foreign.
B
B
B
G
G
I
B
G
B
B
That
truly
is
a
redundant
policy.
Okay
was
reviewing
pact
of
intended
use
upon
Wellhead
protection.
We
have
an
entire
section
on
wellfield
wellfield
protection
in
the
Land
Development
code.
So
this
this
is
one
that
was
in
original
original
1990
comp
plan.
That's
been
done
and
never
taken
out.
So
we
have
an
entire
well
field
protection
section
in
the
Land
Development
code,
as
well
as
its
addressed
in
the
utilities
element.
B
Soil
suitability
again
we
have
that
that's
in
the
Land
Development
code.
These
are
all
things
that
were
required
back
in
the
day
that
have
been
done.
3.1.3.
B
Let's
see
3.1.5
restrict
industrial
uses
and
again
that
that
is
all
verbatim.
If
you
look
at
that
section
of
the
Land
Development
code,
it
tells
you
exactly
what
can
and
can't
be
in
the
wellfield
areas.
So.
G
G
C
B
So,
oh
yeah,
all
the
well-filled
stuff
is,
is
all
in
the
updated
utilities
element
and
that
just
I
think
we
told
you
this.
The
utilities
element
was
actually
that
was
updated
by
Tommy
Kilgore,
the
assistant
Public
Services
director,
so
that
was
done
with
in-house
staff
and
to
make
it
consistent
with
the
water,
the
the
water
supply
plan,
capital
and
everything.
So
they
they
did
a
if
you.
If
we
get
to
that
point,
you
have
questions
about
the
utilities
element
I
may
have
to
drag
Tommy
in
the.
G
B
G
That
affect
the
mobile
homes,
like
the
news,
because
I
did
notice
that,
on
the
those
were
expanded
in
the
flooding
on
the
maps,
right
right,
which
is
good,
but
you
know,
there's
always
another
side
to
it,
and
we
discussed
that.
Has
that
part
we
did
discuss
the
mobile
homes
last
time
attorney
Kardash
brought
up
that
if
they
were
wiped
out,
they
would
not
be
able
to
come
in
under
the
flooding
and
I.
Don't
you
know
I
don't
want
to
take
away
any
of
their
protections,
because.
B
We've
got
a
couple
that
are
in
you
know:
Coastal
High,
Hazard
area,
flood
areas
that
I
think
would
be
problematic
to
redevelop.
But
if,
when
we've
got
the
map
somewhere
of
the,
we
have
all
the
mobile
home
parks,
mapped
I.
Think
from
from
our
perspective,
the
problem
is,
we
have
we
have
some
mobile
home
parks
that
aren't
even
designated
as
mobile
home
parks
they
have
like
are
or
somewhere
or
some
are
Trail
or
literally
trailer
parks.
B
So
we
have
some
of
those
types
of
uses,
but
in
our
in
our
in
the
housing
element
we
did
make
changes
there
where
we're
trying
we
were
trying
to.
We
were
trying
to
strengthen
protections
for
them
and
not
have
them
be
lost.
I
think
we
were
talking
about
it.
Didn't
maybe
it
didn't
appear
that
way
when
you
were
when
you
were
reading
that
we
haven't
made
any
any
additional
changes
since
last
week
regarding
mobile
homes,
but.
I
But
they
they're
grandfathered
in
any
ways
as
far
as
their,
where
they're
at,
because
they,
otherwise
they
can't
get
any
insurance.
B
Right-
and
so
we
I
mean
we
do
have,
we
do
have
language
that
basically
says
that
mobile
home
parks
can
continue
to
operate,
so
you
can
replace
mobile
homes
in
in
areas,
but
you
still
have
to
meet.
You
know
based.
G
B
It
wouldn't
be
enforceable,
then
yeah,
so
some
of
it
is
just
simple.
Is
that
is
the
density
on
the
land
use
map
today
enough
to
let's,
let's
suppose
you
know,
mobile
home
park
was
wiped
out
for
whatever
reason
and
the
underlying
land
use
density
didn't
support
the
number
of
units
to
be
rebuilt.
B
B
G
B
B
All
right,
so
then
we
get
to
the
so
okay,
so
the
coastline.
This
is
all
right.
So
now
we're
back
to
the
Mr
vessey's
call
out
the
3.2.1
I.
B
My
tenure
coming
back
this
this
whole
section
was
put
in
to
the
comprehensive
plan
in
2018
19
time
frame.
It
did
not
exist.
What
was
what
was
left
was
basically
the
policy
you
see
under
that
the
Dallas
call
is
3.2.2
and
it
simply
said,
You
shall
not
increase
density
in
the
coastal,
High
Hazard
area
and
then
within
the
community
redevelopment
area
only
which,
where
we
were
recognizing
we're
trying
to
encourage
Redevelopment,
we
had
a
specific
set
of
circumstances.
B
B
So
when
you
do
a
density
increase
in
the
coastal
Hazard
area
and
they
evaluated,
this
is
what
they
evaluated
for
I'm,
going
to
tell
you
straight
up,
we
do
not
have
to
have
this
policy
in
the
comprehensive
plan
if
we
want
to
go
back
to
hey
inside
the
community
redevelopment
area
and
if
you
do
a
mixed
use
in
this
in
the
residentials.
On
the
second
floor,
you
can
ask
for
a
density
increase,
otherwise
you're
stuck
with
what
you've
got.
B
B
Three
three
point:
what's
enabled
is
3.2.1
now
opens
up,
that's
why
we
had
to
go
back
and
amend
it.
We
put
in
the
zoning
map
amendments
the
plan
Redevelopment
conditional
uses,
I'm
telling
you
that
entire
policy
was
put
into
the
comprehensive
plan
around
2018
2019
and
doesn't
have
to
be
there.
We
do
not
have
to
entertain.
We
do
not
have
to
have
a
policy
that
says
that
we'll
entertain
a
land
use
density
increase
in
the
coastal
High
Hazard
area
period.
B
I
B
B
G
E
G
G
B
They
I
mean
they
have
they
had
density
at
15
years
to
the
acre.
Already,
what
it's
going
to
really
stop
is
you
know
you
know
the
the
parcels
out
there
that
are
just
trying
to
get.
You
know
higher
density,
for
you
know
just
to
get
more
bucks
when
they
do
a
development
and
if
it's
in
the
coastal,
High
Hazard
area.
G
B
And
there's
so
everyone's
aware,
those
those
underlines
that
you
see
those
are
that
that
that
actual
comp
plan
text
amendment
was
was
done.
We
put
those
in
here
about
that
was
done
about
six
months
ago,
so
that
so
we
were
just
trying
to
get
this
called
up
to
to
what
was
our
that
there's
an
ordinance
that
already
added
those
things
in
at
y'all's
direction.
We
worked
through
all
of
that,
so,
but
I'm
telling
you
straight
up.
This
does
not
need
to
be
my
opinion.
G
B
I
B
D
F
D
B
So
as
the
map
changed,
we
updated
the
maps
and
basically
to
capture
if,
if
you're,
if
before
the
coastal
Hazard
area,
you
had,
you
know
15
units
to
the
acre
and
now
you're
you're
in
the
coastal
Hazard
area,
we
I
mean
we
found
that
we
have
a
tracking
mechanism
in
there,
so
that
so
that
you
know
you,
don't
you
don't
lose
ground,
you
can
at
least
keep
what
you
had,
but
don't
ask
for,
but
don't
ask
for
an
increase.
Essentially
so
you
have
to
you
have
to
work
with.
What
you've
got
is.
E
B
All
right
so
I
think
we
agree
on
that.
B
B
B
Let's
see
so
objective,
3.3
or
the
what's
now
is
objective.
Three
three
ensure
availability
of
utility
services
necessary
to
support,
proposed
development,
discourage
urban
sprawl
and
meet
established
level
of
service
standards.
D
B
D
But
just
the
nature
of
some
of
the
developments
that
have
passed
before
us,
we're
going
to
see
again
are,
in
effect
the
definition
of
urban
sprawl.
So
why
do
we
say
we're
going
to
discourage
it
when,
in
fact,
virtually
everything
we're
doing
here?
Is
the
encouragement
of
and
I'm
going
to
add
a
little
bit
more,
especially
when
it
comes
to
you
ensuring
availability
of
support
proposed.
Okay,
excuse
me
we're
saying:
hey:
we've
always
got
to
have
enough
water
and
sewer.
D
We
know
we've
got
a
lot,
but
what
we're
really
seeing
is
the
city
is
required
to
it's.
A
self-fulfilling
prophecy
is
that
the
city's
always
required
to
build
in
advance
for
what
we're
trying
to
discourage
I,
just
I
feel
like
there's
something
that
doesn't
make
sense
in
that
discourage
urban
sprawl,
but
be
prepared
for
development
growth.
D
B
F
B
B
No
I
mean
I
think
you
know
well,
so
so
ex
allowing
developments
in
areas
where
you
don't
have
Utility
Services.
You
can't
meet
level
service
requirements
and
things
like
that
I
believe,
is
what
the
is.
What
urban
sprawl
is
speaking
to
at
the
end
of
the
day
by
by
the
Department
of
Economic
Deo
Department
of
Economic
Opportunity,
Pinellas
County,
the
entire
area
is
word
recognized
as
a
dense,
Urban
land
area,
so
I
mean
you
know
we're
we're
under
a
weird.
B
F
It
reads:
the
owner
of
a
parcel
of
land
defined
as
agriculture
Enclave
May
apply
for
an
amendment
to
the
local
government
comprehensive
plan
pursuant
to
blah
blah
blah.
Such
an
amendment
is
presumed
not
to
be
urban
sprawl
if
it
includes
land
uses
and
intensities
of
use
that
are
consistent
with
the
uses
and
intensities
of
use.
F
They
can't
write
use
of
the
industrial
commercial
residential
areas
that
surround
the
parcel.
This
presumption
may
be
rebutted
by
clear
and
convincing
evidence
each
application
for
a
comprehensive
plan
Amendment
under
this
subsection
for
a
parcel
larger
than
640
acres,
which
must
include
appropriate
New,
urbanism,
Concepts
I.
Don't
remember.
L
Just
it
just
remind
again,
the
discouragement
of
urban
sprawl
is
actually
required
language
within
the
statute
for
the
comprehensive
plan,
so
it
has
to
be
in
there,
regardless
of
personal
feelings,
of
that
it
has
to
be
in
there
now
for
the
definition
of
urban
sprawl
development
pattern
characterized
by
low
density,
automobile
automobile
dependent
development
with
either
single
use
or
multiple
multiple
use
uses
that
are
not
functionally
related
to
requiring
the
extension
of
public
facilities
and
services
in
an
inefficient
Manner
and
failing
to
provide
a
clear
separation
between
urban
and
rural
uses.
Wow.
G
D
L
But
but
they
understand
it
even
if
there's
not
an
agreement
with
it
it's
this
is
what
their
definition
is
remember.
The
keywords
in
here
are
services
in
an
inefficient
manner,
so
there's
there
is
efficient,
inefficient
manner,
so
there's
play
with
the
terms.
So
that's
what
you
have
to
understand
as
well
so
and
it
can
so
it
has
to
kind
of
dovetail
with
the
rest
of
your
comprehensive
plant.
So
that's
and
again
it
requires
and
you're
required
to
have
discouraging
urban
sprawl
I'm.
G
D
You
only
get
there
by
cars,
wasn't
quite
right:
I
meant
North
Highland
mm-hmm.
D
By
car,
no
sidewalks
needed
septic
stretched
our
municipalities
just
saying.
Maybe
if
there's
another
one
that
comes
our
way,
we've
got
a
whole
bunch
of
of
of
the.
E
G
E
G
G
G
I
I
G
Mean
you
know
once
you
don't
have
the
ability-
and
you
say
no,
that
is
when
you
expose
yourself
to
lot
to
to
litigation.
That
is
where
you
do
it,
because
otherwise
in
and
when
I
had
orientation,
Pat
explained
to
me
because
she
came
from
Monroe
County
and
she
said
they
sue
all
the
time
and
she
said
they
just
don't
Sue
over
here.
So
all
this
stuff,
you.
F
G
H
G
I
D
B
E
I
B
B
F
B
3.3.2
discourage
urban
sprawl.
Okay,
we
just
kind
of
rewarded
that
I
don't
know
that
we
did
anything
dangerous
there
3.3.3.
A
B
B
E
B
Yeah
utilize,
okay,
3.4.4
utilize,
planned
Redevelopment,
future
land
use
and
Zoning
concept
for
the
design,
controls
and
signature
land
compatibility,
prevent
urban
sprawl
promote
infill.
B
B
Does
it
really
doesn't
say
a
lot
so
policy
3.4.5?
B
B
G
B
Three
four:
six
there's
your
okay,
that
was
restrict
commercial
uses
from
so
this
is
the
one
where
we
basically
are.
We
took
this
out
again.
I
think
this
is
one
you
could
put
back
in
if
you
really
felt
because
it
speaks
to
some
of
the
things
you've
been
talking
about
it's
specific
to
Keystone.
Again
we
were
you
know
this
is
where
I
talked
about
the
scenic
non-commercial
status
in
the
countywide
plan
that
working
required
to
be
consistent
with
I.
B
G
B
B
B
We
move
this
3.4.8
to
the
rec
open
space
element.
I,
don't
think
we
changed
the
wording
on
it.
B
That
was
that
was
a
absolute
prohibition
that,
if
you've
got
something
that's
and
that
this
is
meant
to
be
I,
think
I
believe
city-owned
land,
so
Craig
Park.
You
know
we
can't
change
that
from
what
it
is
to
something.
That's
not
you
know
there
has
to
be
an
overriding
public
need
to
take
that
out
of
a
wreck
open
space
type
of
use,
so
it
was
really
meant
as
a
way
to
preserve
and
not
allow
your
Recreation
lands
and
your
preservation
lands
to
somehow
be
rolled
back
to
something
else.
B
B
G
B
B
Yeah,
let's
see
three
four
nine.
B
Dredge
spoil
disposal
sites
were
required
to
address
that
we
have
to
plan
for
them
three.
Four
one.
B
More
dredgeboro
disposal
coordinate
with
the
Army
Corps
dried
spoil
disposal.
B
C
B
So
this
we
have
to
show
how
our
land
use
map
categories
are
consistent
with
the
caliwad
plan
map
categories.
So
that's
426.,.
B
B
Here's
the
thing
about
transferable
development
rights.
Somebody
brought
this
up
earlier
so
objective.
Actually
we
changed
this
to
a
policy
statement,
so
it's
actually
a
little
stronger,
1.3.3
utilize,
transferable
development
rights,
consistent
with
Article
5
of
the
county-wide
rules.
So
they
have
a
very
specific
set
of
rules
on
on
how
you
use
transfer
development
rights
for
the
following
purposes:
promote
environmentally,
that
should
just
say:
Protect
I,
don't
know
what
it
says
promote.
It
should
say
to
protect
environmentally
sensitive
lands,
promote
infill
development
and
redirect
population
growth
away
from
the
coastal
Hazard
area.
F
So
if
you
have
a
vacant
parcel
that
has
some
entitlements
on
it,
let's
say
it's
15
units
per
acre
and
you
would
rather
see
that
land
protected
the
owner
can
then
you
would
have
to
track
this
internally.
It's
it's
difficult
to
implement,
but
someone
could
theoretically
transfer
that
density
onto
another
parcel,
and
then
you
put
the
parcel
that
it
came
from
into
conservation
or
preservation
or
whatever,
and
it
can't
be
developed.
A
A
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
but
what
what
I
see
people
trying
to
do
seems
like
sometimes
is
is
on
projects
like
like
out
Keystone,
where
the
density
is
relatively
low.
They
wind
up
taking
entitlements
from
floodplain
areas
and
transferring
those
to
the
Upland
areas
so
that,
even
if
we
have
a
requirement
of
two
acres,
they
wind
up
building
on
half
acre
lots.
F
Exactly
but
this
is
like
that's
a
different
concept,
so
this
is
moving
the
density
completely
off
the
parcel
and
sending
it
downtown
or
whatever
so.
A
B
So
and
we
do
have,
we
do
have
land
that
that
does
have
Wetlands
on
it.
That
historically
there
is
a
there
is
either
there's
a
either
a
land
use
designation
on
them
at
some
density.
Obviously
we
don't
want
those
to
develop
so
the
wetlands
to
be
developed.
So
we
allow
that
density
to
move
to
the
Upland
you
know
to
to
density
average.
It
now
that's
a
that's
a
that's
an
interesting
concept.
I've
heard
a
lot
of
of
pushback
against
it.
It's
it's
very
common.
It's
been
used
in
the
city
for
quite
a
while.
B
B
A
I,
don't
know
that
it
entirely
needs
to
go
away,
but
I
think
we
run
into
problems
where
we
talk
about
compatibility,
that
we
always
talk
about
in
these
cases
and
if
it's
two
acre
lots
or
one
acre
lots
or
whatever
it
is,
and
they
wind
up
building
on
little
bitty
Lots
right,
because
they're
doing
that
I
don't
believe,
that's
compatible
right.
And
so
we
just
need
to
make
sure
that
somehow
in
the
process,
we
still
have
the
ability
to
say
no.
B
B
I
Transferable
development
rights
can
only
be
applied
towards
I.
Forgot
I
forgot
the
verb
that
you
used,
but
you
know
compatibility
because
you
know
I
put
a
combat
compatibility.
B
K
D
B
E
B
Think
is
there
and
we
did
there's
a
there's,
a
specific
mechanism
in
the
special
area
plan
and
the
smart
code
to
to-
and
we
put
that
in
place
as
an
incentive
to
because
density
was
increased
in
the
smart
code
area
and
so
was
floor
area
ratio.
But
we
didn't
want.
B
We
wanted
the
ability
to
for
the
owners
to
be
able
to
to
use
that
and
to
to
basically
sell
it
to
where
there's
vacant
property
so
that
you
can
get
a
more
desirable
project
and
and
then
used
because
we
didn't
want
what
we
didn't
want
to
see
was
historic
structures
getting
torn
down,
because
now,
all
of
a
sudden
they've
got
a,
they
have
a
higher
density.
They
have
more
development
potential
than
they
back
than
they
actually
have
built.
So
that
was
there's
a
we
very
purposely
put
in
a
density
transfer
provision
in
the
smart
code.
B
The
only
way
you
can
do
it
is
from
is
in
outside
of
the
coastal
High
Hazard
area.
You
can't
do
any
density
transfers
into
or
within
the
coastal
Hazard
area,
but
you
can
transfer
out
to
a
or
so
we've
had
one
or
two
projects
that
I
think
where
we
actually
have
a
reduction
unit.
Yeah
it's
and
it's
literally
been
like
you
know
a
unit
here,
a
unit
there
where
density's
been
transferred,
but
as
but
density
averaging
is
what
you
see.
I
mean
the
whole
mcalpin
project.
B
I
I,
don't
I,
think
it
I
think
limited
to
this.
It's
it's
positive.
You
know
we
certainly
want
to
protect
what
Wetlands
that
we
have
left
and
provide
an
incentive
for
developers
to
protect
them.
Now.
Having
said
that,
we
took
we
we
or
we
outright
took
out
the
ability
to
impact
wetlands
in
this
version
of
the
comp
plan.
Just
you
will
not
impact
Wetland,
so
that's
kind
of
off
the
table,
but
it
could
be
if
it
was
like
critical
up
on
habitat
that
we
wanted
preserved.
G
B
All
of
them
I
mean
we.
We
have
a
provision
that
says
to
protect
critical
Upland
habitat,
but
it's
it's
kind
of.
You
know
how
how
do
you,
but
it
also
has
land
use
and
Zoning
on
it,
so
the
transfer
or
the
density
averaging
Mech.
You
know
the
construct
then
allows
you
to
Cluster
the
development
on
the
non-sensitive
areas.
So
you
can
set
aside
an
area
and
keep
it
pristine.
So
it's
an
incentive
to
specially
for
Uplands
I
think
with
Wetlands.
B
We
basically
have
said
you're
not
going
to
develop
them
critical,
Upland
habitat's
a
little
bit
more
of
a
bear
for
us,
because
no
pun
intended
it
is,
is
you
know,
that's
harder
to
get
set
aside
during
a
development
process,
so
allowing
them
to
density
average
is
one
one
mechanism
to
do
that:
I
still
like
the
idea
of
adding
the
compatibility
on
the
density
averaging
so
that
if
you're
ending
up
with
lot
sizes,
that
are,
you
know,
5
000
square
feet
next
to
I.
A
B
That
is
just
going
to
be
inundated,
and
so
you
know
a
transfer
of
the
of
development
rights
mechanism
whereby
okay
as
an
incentive,
so
maybe
I
put
my
Gulf
front
home
into
a
conservation
easement
such
to
the
benefit
of
the
city,
such
that
in
one.
So
my
taxes
will
get,
but
if
it
gets
wiped
out
Beyond
fifty
percent
you're
done.
B
Objective,
2.3,
improved
quality
of
life,
but
writing
diverse
world
is
out
of
walkable
destinations.
Okay,
that's
just
a
very
broad
statement,
update
and
implement
the
multimodal
transportation
plan.
B
It's
a
statement.
We
need
to
do
it
objective,
Okay.
So
all
of
the
a
lot
of
this
stuff
under
five.
These
were
the
design
criteria.
I
was
talking
about
that
was
was
lifted
straight
out
of
the
county-wide
plan,
rules
and
kind
of
plopped
in
here,
and
it's
kind
of
out
of
context
in
a
lot
of
ways,
and
so
I
mean
we
would
just
like
to
you:
we've
specified
for
those
large
projects.
B
B
But
if
there
was
a
couple,
though,
that
we
kept
in
that,
we
noticed
after
we
took
a
hard
dive
on
it,
again
amend
the
Land
Development
code.
So
what
is
2.3.6
now
amend
the
Land
Development
code
to
prohibit
drive-through
service
windows
from
being
located
on
building
facades
facing
the
public,
right-of-way
and
public
streets?
That's
a
good
policy.
E
D
D
B
Again,
the
context
of
these
was
not
looking
at
a
small
little.
This
was
put
in
the
context
of
you
got
a
large
property.
You
need
to
do
mixed
use.
You
need
to
integrate
it
with
the
community
and
do
all
these
things.
It
was
not
really.
It
was
not
really
meant
to
look
at
it,
but
that
particular
policy,
though
we
started
digging
on
it
more
like
no.
No,
that
needs
to
be
a
specific
development
code.
J
C
B
Objective
2.5
occurs:
development
of
pedestrian
scale,
mixed
use
areas.
We
keep
the
objective
primary
implementation
show
me
through
the
use
of
the
those
mixed-use
future
land
use
categories,
so
we're
trying
to
keep
these
the
intent
of
these,
but
take
some
of
these
very
specific
policies.
Again,
the
Town
Center,
the
neighborhood
center.
All
of
that
was
strictly.
It
was
right
out
of
the
county-wide
plan.
B
A
A
A
To
still
cover
here,
I,
don't
think
we're
gonna
make
it
tonight.
Certainly
do
we
do
we
want
to
look
at
scheduling
another
night
to
pick
it
back
up.
B
Exactly
oh
yeah,
most
of
that
yeah,
it's
right
now
that
yeah
it
kind
of
ends
at
goal
three,
so.
E
I
D
D
To
maybe
we
could
take
a
five
minute
break
I'll
just
make
a
suggestion,
and
although
there's
a
lot
of
pages
remaining,
if
no
one
had
an
objection,
perhaps
everyone
could
quickly
review
it
and
if
there
was
a
particular
item
to
be
brought
up
rather
than
putting
off
what
we
might
be
able
to
finish
tonight.
If
we.
E
D
D
I
B
D
B
B
Well
is
is:
are
there
other
nights
beside
Monday
that
you
would
rather
meet
on
or
is
Monday
kind
of
good
for
okay
and
I?
Guess
you
know?
What's
your
tolerance
for
pain
here
on
how
frequently
you
want
to
meet
on
this
stuff,
because
we,
you
know,
we
just
have
a
lot
to
chew
through
all
these
other
elements
and
stuff,
because
I'm
just
I'm
committed
to
getting
this
to
a
point
of
where
we
can
take.
All
of
this
input
can.
I
I
G
B
No
we're
we're
fine
I
mean
we're,
like
I,
said
we're
we're
on
our
schedule.
At
this
point,
I
mean
I
want
this
I
want
this
as
close
to
done,
hopefully
by
the
end
of
the
year,
from
at
least
having
a
a
draft
that
everybody
is
comfortable
with
there's
a
lot
that
still
has
to
go
into
creating
the
you
know
you
got
to
have
the
write-ups
and
everything
everything
kind
of
goes
with
this,
but
getting
through
these
goals,
objectives
and
policies
is
the
hard
part
is.
B
It's
not,
we
were
not
proposing
to
make
any
changes
to
that
right
now,
I
mean,
but
that's
a
other
than
the
fact
that
we
made.
We
have
the
policy
that
says
that
the
special
area
plan
and
the
smart
code
need
to
be
periodically
evaluated.
I
think
that's
another
effort
in
and
of
itself
and
I
would
say
that
it's
going
to
come
full
circle
with
the
the
great
town
thing
that's
going
on,
because
yeah
we're
gonna
have
to
come
back
and
revisit
it.
So
it
is
time
to
revisit
it.
B
B
B
B
And
if,
as
as
you're
reading
through
things
and
because
you
do
have
the
other
draft
elements
and
stuff,
if
you
have
questions
you
can
contact
one
of
us
and
at
any
time
and
say:
hey
I,
what's
the
gist
of
this
and
why
I
mean
you
know:
I,
don't
there's
nothing
magical
at
this
point.
I,
don't
think
about
you
know,
contacting
staff
and
asking
questions
I
mean
we
can
they
can
do
that
correct
I,
believe
so?
Yes,
yeah,
okay,
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure.
But
I
don't
want
you
to
feel
like
that.