Good evening all. Scare me. 632. I'd like to open the planning and Zoning meeting of February 23rd, 2026. And we have a. Oh, that was the call to order.
I'll give everybody a chance to scoot closer. While we're waiting. If anybody with the powers. Could you turn off the air conditioning? Turn it up.
Here, here. All right. For roll call. Vice chair Vessey here, Mr. Rocklin. Here, miss early here, miss Swenson, miss Weaver
here. Mr. Collins here. Miss Wade and Chairperson Curtis is absent. Pledge of allegiance.
I'll go ahead and. See. I pledge allegiance to the flag. United States of America and to
the Republic for which it stands. One. With justice all.
I would like to make a moment of reflection tonight. God bless the men's hockey team.
The men's Olympic hockey team. If you didn't see it yesterday, it was a miracle on ice to. That's actually really all I had at the short notice. But if
anybody wanted to add anything for tonight's reflection, please. Okay, then I was going
to say something. I'm not really good at this. But I just really want to pray and hope for peace in this world. It just seems like, you know,
we're in a lot of confrontation. And he's not only in this world, but also in our locality. That's it. Thank you. Amen. So
we'll move right on to number five, the workshop session, Land Development Code amendment discussion. And I think this would be for Patricia McNeese. Yes. Thank you. Pat McNeese,
planning supervisor tonight with this is a workshop session. So we'll be having discussion questions, suggestions from you all and input on some of our
code changes that we're we're starting to work on. The first one is on stormwater. And we have our stormwater consultants
here, Brian Anderson and Rick Aguilar, both with WSP company. But they have been working with the city for a very long time. They know Tarpon Springs back,
back and forth, and they've been working on on all of the stormwater issues. So I'll let let Brian kind of introduce the
whole package of changes that, that the stormwater issue is undergoing at this point. And
we can go from there. Good evening. Thank you. Thank you. Pat. My name is Brian Anderson. I'm with WSP USA here in Tampa.
And as Pat mentioned, yes, I've been doing a lot of I've been working with the city for stormwater design and permitting since 2009, 2010. So I'm just honored to be here and
I appreciate your time. We'll get started here. So a little bit a little bit of background of why these changes are, are why they're coming forthcoming
to you tonight. Back in 2000, 22, staff initiated a discussion of needed review and updates to the city Stormwater Land Development Code. And from
those discussions, basically was the idea of drafting stormwater technical manual. And once that was created in
2023, 2024, in order to adopt that stormwater manual, we needed to make changes to the land Development Code as well as the municipal code to reflect the stormwater
technical manual. So since basically 2024, we've been working with staff, making revisions to the land development code and municipal code that we're going to kind
of go over in a high level view this evening. So stormwater code revisions with respect to the land development code, why now, what are the benefits. And
these are just a high level overview of what the of the revisions are. So today in the Land Development Code, the single family and duplex development for lots of record
is currently exempt for stormwater management plan requirements. And so this exemption is actually been very challenging for staff and us who are doing reviews of these
properties, because we still must demonstrate that their project will not create adverse impacts to their neighbors or surrounding property or the city assets. Right. And as we
all know, not all lots sit on top of the hill. Right? And so you have some undesirable lots that are at the bottom of the hill, which normally are cherry picked off here. Now, there's
not a whole lot of lots left in city of Tarpon Springs. So those are the type of lots that are getting developed now. And the ones at the bottom of the hill are the ones that hold water. Right. And so when you
add fill to those they can create problems. So that becomes one of the challenges here with these with that exemption, this each one of these bullets I go through are
things that we're correcting in the code. So in the bold underneath that this criteria has been revised with this revision. So the current code
land development code is also lacks definitive stormwater criteria with to assist with developmental applications. This has been relocated. The
criteria itself has been updated and relocated to the stormwater technical manual. And I'll touch on that here shortly. The current land development code is also
missing criteria that defines inspections, violations and penalties related to the construction of stormwater infrastructure, which ultimately protects our surrounding water quality,
which we all enjoy here. Living in the coastal city of City of Tarpon Springs, we've added this criteria to the the Land Development Code. The current
code also lacks stormwater criteria for proposed redevelopment. So there's a lot of redevelopment going on. Old parcels getting developed. The current code is lacking criteria for that redevelopment.
So we've made those changes as well. So with respect to the municipal code, why now? What are the benefits. Again this the municipal codes missing
definitive criteria on the city's stormwater management utility fees and how they're calculated. So we've updated that. So it's more transparent how that utility fee is
actually assessed and calculated. That's been updated. The municipal code has outdated definitions related to the city's illicit discharge and the city's I'm sorry, city
doesn't have illicit discharge. Misspoke there outdated definitions related to illicit discharges, which is governed by the DEP through the city's
municipal Separate storm sewer permit, which is the Ms4. So every year the city submits the Ms4 permit and that defines illicit discharges and so forth, that criteria is missing in the
municipal code that's been updated. The current municipal codes also missing violation penalty fee matrix for illicit discharges. So we've added that
fee matrix in there. So if people are found at, you know, having illicit discharges, they know what type of fees they're going to be assessed. That's been updated. Also missing in
there with respect to illicit discharges is the is the the grading of the type of discharge, whether it's a minor, whether it's moderate, whether it's major or if it's actually
willful. So we've added those definitions to illicit discharge to the municipal code as well. And then the code is also missing criteria on
obstruction of stormwater. And so we've clarified that in the municipal code. So getting into the stormwater technical manual
this is what kind of precipitated all the a lot of these changes. It's this document is going to be the central location for all the city's stormwater design
criteria for all development and redevelopment before it. Right now, as it sits today, there's stormwater design criteria, lives in the land development code. And there's and there's design that lives
in the criteria, lives in the municipal code. Now we have one central document that houses all of that in one location. This document will also define
the criteria to reduce a development stormwater management utility fee through the use of green infrastructure. So this is where applicants can come in and demonstrate that
they're doing extra to do water quality treatment or holding water back attenuation, and then they get a fee reduction in their stormwater management fee. That criteria is in the
stormwater manual. The manual also includes development of application checklists, which is going to streamline the development submittals to the city and will streamline the
permitting process. Right. It gives the the applicants a very clear roadmap of what the city needs in order to review their
application, and the document also. Excuse me when changes are needed, does that staff is not going to need to go back and revise the land development
code or municipal code with this document. They just it all. They just have to update the actual document itself and not have to come back in. Oh excuse me, we'll have to come in to,
to make revisions to the land development code or municipal code, which is, as you all know, can be challenging. Overall benefits of all these, the changes to the municipal code, the land development code,
development of stormwater technical manual, what are the overall benefits? It's a we're basically creating a better roadmap for development applications with respect to
their checklist clarification design criteria. This is going to streamline the city's internal review process and make things a lot more efficient for the city, as well
as the the applicants. It's going to increase protection for the private properties, the city assets, and improve water quality. It includes updates
that address the updated comp plan changes. And it will allow the city to have better enforcement with respect to their stormwater code. With
that, I'll open it up for questions. Yes, ma'am. Oh thank you, thank you. I was making notes. Give please give me just
a moment to catch up. Thank you. Is it Brian? Yes, sir. Thank you for that presentation. You're welcome. We're going to do something a little bit
different tonight. We're going to start with me. I'm kidding. Let's go ahead and start from the right now. Again, these are
questions specific to the presentation. Go ahead okay. Just a few. First of all you said that stormwater utility is
here. Criteria. Pardon me Miss Susan. Thank you. So does that mean that the residents are going to receive more detailed information on their bills? No,
ma'am. There won't be more. There will not be information on their bill itself, but there will be information in the code that explains how that that fee that they've received is
calculated based on their property. Okay. And if they want to know that, they can call. Absolutely. Okay. The other one was I think you answered on the last one, but
how to monitor discharges code enforcement or who's going to really monitor discharges like if somebody is or is not washing a whole load of cars in front of their house. Yeah, that's code enforcement. All city staff, especially the
stormwater and public works and public administration, are trained to recognize illicit discharges. There's training that staff has to undergo every year related to the ms4
permitting. So they're trained to to recognize where why illicit discharges may be happening, as well as its calls that come in from just regular citizens. Right. They see a a
change in the water quality in their backyard, a lot more turbid. So a lot of times it's really the citizens that are that are picking up on these things. My neighbor discharged
all this rain from his tall high house onto my land and destroyed my seawall. I mean, that's another old story. But anyway, the other one was.
Overall benefits. You listed as increased protection for private properties. Yeah. So again, it was kind of like goes back to the example I used earlier of not all lots live on
the top or on top of the hill. Right. So some of these lots are in the low lying areas and there's already a development next to them, another home. So that's how it's going to be protecting those private
properties from. So you would allow them to alter their landscaping or whatever would be necessary. Because I know an example of they didn't allow somebody to raise their, you
know, their back lawn when somebody else's rain was coming onto it. So how are you going to protect people if they're in that situation? It seems kind of extreme. Well, this these changes are going to allow us
to ask them to demonstrate to us that they're not making a problem off site. Yeah. Well, right now that's really not defined very well at all in the code. Yeah. And I love the
checklist. Good good good. That's it. Thank you ma'am. Good questions. Yeah. Thank you Brian very much. And unfortunately I'm quite familiar with stormwater being
a retired building official. What governs the process and regulations now is there a state or county deck manual that's reflected to when
necessary? And I agree with all of this distilling into what you describe, because it's to me it's customary. It's reasonable. It's definitely necessary, even though the topography here is kind of kind
of level. In Florida, like you said, there are higher and lower grounds, and I'm well aware of the negative impact that even small changes can make. I'm curious, in the
current manual, we used to use a design standard up north. It was a two inch rainfall on any impervious surface, whether it was a roof line or you were adding additional roof line or
your driveways or any sort of, you know, paved or impervious areas is what do they use any kind of standard? Now to judge, because we used to force commercial and residential
development to capture that two inch rainfall in its entirety by a dry wells. Yeah. And I know dry wells down here, people don't have the the room in front or rear yards and the,
you know, the permeability of the sand may be quite different for absorption and percolation, but what what are they go by now or do they not go by anything. Yeah. Good question.
So the water management district which one. The one that governs this area is the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Their criteria for for multifamily or
commercial development is for the 25 year storm event. And so the applicant must demonstrate that the existing 25 year discharge rate, they must
calculate what that discharge is, and then they have to demonstrate that their proposed development doesn't exceed the existing 25 year. So they have to retain the difference in volume between the two events.
That's where you have the stormwater ponds. And then there's criteria related to water quality on top of that. Does that answer your question? Yes. Thank you much. You're
welcome. Now it's your turn. I'll go. Okay, sir. I'm good. You're good. Okay. So. Well, let's. You'll think of
something. Curler. Go ahead. You mentioned code enforcement in response to who's going to monitor this? And slap me if
I'm wrong. But I thought we only had one code enforcement officer in Tarpon. We have more than one. Yeah, yeah, there. I don't know how many code
enforcement staff that city may have, but I what I was saying is that I know that all of the public works public, you know, public works staff, they're
trained to recognize illicit discharges and then they are to report them if they're if they if they see one. Right. So they're, they're trained to know what one what what what
they look like, what they can even smell them sometimes. And so they're all trained on that as part of their it's part of the ms4 permitting through the
state. Okay. So they go out and they check. Yeah. Well they're out doing their normal daily work all throughout the city, checking on existing infrastructure, existing storm,
existing projects, just doing their daily work routine. If they see something that doesn't look right or looks like an illicit discharge, as they're trained to recognize that and
then report it. Okay, I guess, and I is there some sort of a reporting requirement to come back to the city, meaning like we did this, here's the proof.
We did this as far as the city staff. Like if they if they reported it. No, no, I mean the, the the development owner, the the developer, you know, if
they're required to meet certain standards or do certain things for stormwater, do they provide the city with some kind of notification that we have done this? Absolutely, yes. So
with their applications, they have to they have to submit drainage design documentation to demonstrate that their projects meeting all the code criteria. Okay. Is that what
you're asking? Yes. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And that's that's where this is really helpful. It's we're creating a checklist for them. So it's very clear they can say oh I need this I need that document, I need this
document. It's very clear to them as to what is needed so staff can have a complete review okay. Thank you. You're welcome. I've got a couple
concerns. I mean this is very expensive, right? So is it applying overall equally to residential and commercial
commercial property. You know, like for example, if I look at the pervious concrete reductions is that is that for
residential and commercial? Yes. It would apply to to both. Yes. Okay. Because because you know it's not really defining
residential overall as opposed to commercial throughout the document. So yeah it does in places but not not. Yes. Right okay. So so where it doesn't
state it's applying to both is is what I can assume if it doesn't state commercial or residential, it would apply to both equally. As far as the
calculation for impervious surface. Well as far as as any of the requirements in the document. So the stormwater technical manual is broken down specifically that way, single
family commercial multi development. So it's broken out whatever. So whichever one you have you would go to that section and understand what kind of criteria you need to
follow what you need to submit. All right. There's one. There was one area where it discusses parking. Right. So parking is
always a hot issue in Tarpon. I'm just curious. And maybe maybe actually even Pat can chime in if, if a if parking if
a parking allowance is given to a, let's say a commercial property in one instance, can another commercial property
also claim that same parking space? That I would I you know, you know, I'm saying in a proposal can can can a space be
shared in a proposal. Yes. As far as a development, yeah. Can someone come later down the road and say, okay, I, I've met my parking, but I'm utilizing
my 25% of, of parking outside of my own property, and that parking has already been been necessarily utilized by someone else to meet a requirement.
Like coach would be kind of an example, right? So so in a sense, they, they they're using parking that that's not on their property. I can tell you
that for as far as how stormwater related, the applicant is going to be responsible for the proposed parking spaces or impervious surfaces associated with his
development only, so the they are required to treat or attenuate for the runoff generated by the parking spaces that are required for that development. Any other
development wouldn't be able to say, oh, well, they're treating that stormwater. I shouldn't have to treat mine. That wouldn't happen. I don't know if that's what if that's where you're looking at from a
stormwater perspective. They're separate. They're not shared. All right. As far as the runoff that's generated from the site, specifically asking if they're going to use if they need to
use property at another site, further parking, does that other property right. Or public parking. Yeah. So. And I can do
you want to repeat to me to if they're using public if they're using to meet the criteria for parking let's say and and this is it's in here. It's so it
sparked my attention. If you're if you're able to utilize a parking space. That's off your property to meet the parking
requirement, can someone else also utilize that park, that public parking space to meet their requirement? I'm just I
don't have an answer for that. From from a stormwater. I don't think maybe I can help if we're talking about a public parking lot, for example, one that the city owns, the city would
design that public parking lot to meet stormwater requirements, so it doesn't matter who's using it. I'm not sure what your question is. It would be
designed to meet stormwater requirements just like any the Brian and Rick do pretty much the stormwater design or review to for the city project, so
that would be an example. The responsible party would be the responsible party. Sure. Yeah. Okay. That's it for me. Hey,
Brian, thanks for this presentation. My question is around easement and drainage. And like retention ponds, reading the technical manual
and all the easement. And I'm assuming this is for new drainage easements is 15ft width. But there's no like limitation on depth. And my my
question is is like if sediment falls in these easement ponds doesn't have enough area to hold like year after year, like are we for I guess first question, are we digging out
the existing easement drainage to allow for adequate storage of water on heavy rain days, and are the new ones? How are
we getting the depth instead of like, is there a formula where because all I'm reading is really just width, but for the depth like to actually hold the
amount of water. Okay, so an easement is just a, a definition of area that the city has access and rights to, to use for infrastructure or
access. Okay. It's just a width. And they have rights to bury, say a storm pipe in that area. So that's what the drainage easement or they use it for
access to a drainage pond or another facility. That's what the easement is for. Okay. Does that help answer? It does is it does. Thank you. And in
relation to a pawn then. Yeah. Like how do we calculate how much water could actually hold. And if it needs to be redug. Are we doing existing versus
only. This is for new. Moving on. So the size of the pond is going to be dictated by the seasonal high groundwater table. Right. Because that is controlling how much water you can put in the pond. You can
dig a hole out, but you can't where the water level is on a seasonal high groundwater table for, say, the summer, that's the highest it's going to be. You can't put any more water
inside water, right? So the stacking of the water above that is, is what is what the designer uses to demonstrate that they're meeting criteria.
So the pond size is generated or, or controlled by the seasonal high groundwater table and your topography of your land. Are you super, super flat or do you have any relief. So
the volume requirements are controlled through geotechnical and topography. And then the type of development that you're doing to control the volumes that are required for your for
your for your permit. Okay, I appreciate that. And my last question is based on your professional opinion, do you think we are filling in low
level areas? At a disservice to our community by eliminating those low level areas to support heavy rainfall, storm
surge, or anything like that? Are we doing a good job as a whole or are we moving too fast, bringing in too much dirt and taking away our low lying level?
That's my question. That's a good question. I'm I'm excited about this document because it's going to give us the I'm excited about the stormwater code changes here, because it's
going to give us the ability to review applicants for those low lying development properties, where in the past it's been challenging based on the criteria, based on the code
that is now. So I am excited that we're going to have more, I guess, regulation of that and have the ability to require on the applicant to demonstrate that they are not creating a
flooding condition or exacerbating existing flooding condition with their proposed fill and the low lying areas. And so I think I think the city is doing a good job on making
sure that we're staying ahead of that, because, as I mentioned, as we all know, who if you live here in the city, not all the lots available now are the ones sitting up on the hill, right? It's a lot of the
lower lying ones that are less desirable, but there's still lots of of record that can be developed. And so our job is to make sure that when you do development, they're not going to adversely impact our
neighbors and the city's properties or their assets. So I do think in the professionally that the city is doing a great job managing that with respect to the current
code and state criteria. Hope that answer your question. It does. It really does. I thank you for your insight.
Appreciate it. I have another one. If I may, just to educate myself. You know, the Montrose
development over there on is it Klosterman up there? I just was watching and they removed all trees, all trees from the area.
So it was blank, naked, whole. Then they brought in. I noticed tons and tons and tons of sand.
To put in there to fill in, and my curiosity is, is that is that what should be done? So in
terms of stormwater. Yeah. So they could be importing that fill right. That sand to increase the elevation of their property so that they could do
a couple things. One, have the ability to provide better drainage for their site. Right. They could be a low lying property. So now they built up elevation. They can build in changes in elevation of their
property so that they can have proper drainage. That'd be one reason that they would increase elevation of their of their site, but their increase is going to cause problems for
somebody else, isn't it? They have they have to demonstrate that they're not sending their water offsite. They have to contain their runoff. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Yeah. Right. And the other thing, though, that I,
I guess is irrelevant to us for this, but how is that stable to build on loose sand? How is that? They compacted, they roll. You've seen the big rollers and.
Yeah, people driving those so that that soil gets compacted and there's compaction requirements or criteria that are density requirements that it has to meet in order for them to then put structures or
even parking lots and so forth on it. I mean, I grew up in an area of all sand dunes, so I know exactly they move sand moves. Yeah. And I, I'm just
really I was kind of stunned by that. It still moves, right? I mean, we still have cracks in our roads and, you know, it cracks through our sidewalks and stuff. It still moves. It's
just not you're trying to slow down that movement with the density. Thank you. You're welcome. Thanks. Just one more quick thought, Brian, since
you're kind of, you know, omnipresent in many jurisdictions, and that, to your knowledge, is any municipality using any sort of storm drain filters on like
main roadways in that to cut down hydrocarbons and other sorts of chemicals, you know, infiltrating into the groundwater and the and the estuaries. Yeah, absolutely.
There's a lot of proprietary filters that are out there that are available for water quality treatment. That's what those are used for. Absolutely. The
county is using them. The city does not have any off the top of my head as far as a proprietary filter. We have a
really nice right over here by the where the where the trail is. Along. What's it right here? Tarpon I'm sorry. Safford. They
have a we have a sedimentation box there that's kind of visible see through lid. Yes. And that collects sediment inflatables that are generated
from actually all the way down to Tarpon Drive. And so that pipe runs from Tarpon Drive all the way up to here to this and goes out to the Anclote River. So that thing cleans up all the
floatable trash that gets collected and it's, well, sediment. And you can see that there's a little kiosk there, explains how it works and so forth. But yeah, there's a lot
of different filtration systems that the counties do and the cities use. They're expensive though. Yes, they are expensive and they're hard to maintain.
So they're not always the best. Sure. Thank you. You're welcome. Anyone else have any other questions? Actually, along
those lines, I noticed the documents kind of void of. Of runoff of any type of fertilizer. Or is that going to
be separate or coming up in something else that that kind of overlaps with this? Yeah. The city's adopted the Pinellas Counties Ordinance with respect to fertilizer. So, yeah, that's
not in the stormwater technical manual. Okay. Okay. I have a couple questions. Hey. Thank you. Brian, I want to clarify that the presentation that
we've had in the questions, those are just applicable to number two, stormwater technical manual. Right. And the land development code changes and the municipal code
changes okay. Really. So this is an all shot one. Good. Yeah. Well that works for me because I have questions about all those. But I just wanted to know if it was referred
specifically to the manual. No, but it's not. So this is kind of the entire presentation. Yes, sir. Okay. Great. I'm going to
be kind of slow okay. All right. But it's not going to pertain to items in number B planning and Zoning Board. Article one.
Article two. No, sir. Okay. Okay I might go in circles because some people brought up some good points and I didn't. Somehow I missed the manual, so
all I had to do was read and answered some of my own questions. Okay, so some are going to be questions and some are going to be clarifications, okay? And they're not in any order of importance. But just
so that like everyone else, I can understand a little bit
better. Can I jump in while he's thinking, oh, because I'm putting my words together, but
you're going to get yes in a moment. Okay. So I remember when we kind of started this, and part of it was a concern about the fact that there weren't any perv ratios for
residential stuff. And it struck me as odd. In fact, there weren't any perv ratios for some commercial stuff. And when some of these conversations came up quite some time ago and of course, got this new manual, you're
real proud of it. It's excellent. My question will make sense in a second. And it's great that we have it now,
and we're going to adopt it in a short time. But we've been rolling for about 100 years and are almost completely built out without this document. And so now we're trying to catch a
little bit that's less. And as you've said, twice high waters rolling under low water. We've got these low water lots that might be impacting. But man we're really down to the bottom end of what's going on. And it
would have been neat if we maybe had addressed this 20 years ago, but that spilled milk. So my question is are there any retroactive triggers
or retroactive applications that might not be there yet, or has there been any conversation about it so that perhaps we can reach back and grab and correct
some of our mistakes or the lack that it wasn't enforced then? I don't see any retroactive triggers. Meaning if a permit were to be applied for, whether it's residential or commercial, but has there
been any thought to or am I missing that in regard to retroactively enforcing these new good rules that didn't exist before? Yeah. Good question. So yes, it is
actually happening. It's happening now when a development comes in or a single family residence comes in to have have a permit to add
a new driveway or what have you, we are requesting them to provide us their impervious surface, their property. So we're reevaluating and making
sure that we have the right number for that piece of property when they come back in for redevelopment or for another permit for redevelopment on their property.
That's ongoing. Okay. So that's occurring right now. Yes, sir. Okay. And that would be any permit for any change or residential permit that meets a
class one, class two or commercial. I mean, what would be the lowest threshold? Is it just a driveway? Is it an addition? Certainly is not a bathroom. It's just going to be something that triggers an
evaluation of the site. I think an addition to the site. Okay. Well that's good. And has that been in place or is that new to your knowledge? That's new to my knowledge as far as having
them, having us recalculate their having them provide us their impervious surface area. Okay. And so to drill into that, of course, that new number is 1945, which was a great year
and a unique number. And I'd love to know how we came up with 1945. Yeah, actually I know, I know, just the person to answer that hit me is that
is that is that Rick? Yes, sir. It is. Thank you. Rick I'm sorry. So the city was supposedly did hire somebody to do a study of the overall properties in within the city,
and they determined that the average residential property had 1940 five square foot. So that became the standard. Then the residential lot, then and
all commercial development. Then they developed a formula to equate impervious, you know, areas and commercial sites to that residential. So they can compare residential and
commercial equally and assess. Yeah. Okay. Super. So this is a great segue and thank you for
being there because on page. 6 or 17, exemption, now I'm not going to expect you to know it, but this would be easier. So
you said the key word which is impervious or per or however you want to do it. Anti forward I think the verbiage is. Because this is a strike record.
Right. And there's a lot going on in here. The construction of a single family and duplex residence with a lot coverage
of 1945 I think I think the intent is with a lot impervious surface coverage of 1945. This
is strictly an administrative or kind of a scrivener. Is that saint? And I don't mean to talk too loud because if it just says lot coverage in 1945, it would be easy to read it, that
it's a lot of 1940 five square feet, which of course is not what I don't think that's the intent. The intent is lot coverage of impervious surface
of 1940 five square feet. That's a good point. Is that a maybe on that. Exactly. Right. The the the object of that was again in the in the current
code, basically every home, regardless of size, gets assigned one issue, which is 1940 five square feet. They can have an actual home that's got 3000, 4000, 5000. So essentially we're trying to
capture that. So essentially we wanted to allow for the existing homes that meet the current criteria, which is 1940 five square feet of impervious
or less. Yes. To still be that one issue. Right, right. So I agree that if that's what it says on the on the that the intent was to actually allow
any home that's being proposed or comes in with a modification that that has 1940 five square feet or less, they can still meet the one criteria. Right.
And I think you're still got it exactly right. I just as someone that's not that didn't write this, I see the sentence and forgive me for being this.
I see the sentence as needing an impervious coverage of not just coverage of okay, cool, I can move on from that. I see your point, and I agree that it
just it needs to dictate exactly that impervious surface. Yeah, a lot of 19. Right. Okay, cool. Okay, good. I have a
couple more I love these documents and I read it. I got a bunch of red line. This is it puts me to sleep. I mean, no, it keeps me awake. Okay. Super.
So I can tell you I reread this like, several times, and I go back and I skim through that. Yep, that's exactly what I'm thinking. It's so tough. Okay. And so thank you for the question of retroactive
triggers. I got some old and news. Okay. So now I'm going to just maybe a little bit more of a thought experiment. And this goes back to I'm going to
abandon commercial altogether because the civil stuff usually takes care of that. But let's just get on residential where it's neighbor to neighbor. And all of us have homes, we all live in it. And frankly, one of
our neighbors is flooding on us, right? It happens all the time. So there was a comment and then and it's in the document that it says, hey, the concept here
is that residential stuff should be kind of like, this is my interpretation, kind of like commercial is you need to be able to contain it on your own lot, or at least have it
drained, right. According to the plan. What would be an example of how this plan can
protect neighbor to neighbor in stormwater mitigation? And I want to coin the acronym right now. I want to credit for this
and neighbor to neighbor. There's humor in that. Right. But and it would also go back to because there's a talk you know, of the new stuff is easy right. But there's not that
many of it. We've got a bunch of old stuff where everybody's slopping on each other. It happens to me. It's happening to her. So what would be a specific example of how when a
permit came in and they provided a little grading plan, how they would mitigate within their own lot? Well, I mean, so there are different aspects of
that question. Right? It's in other words, Florida statutes currently basically state that property owners adjacent to each other, like the downstream
property owner, cannot block the drainage from the upstream property owner. And likewise, the upstream property owner cannot basically change the drainage pattern or increase
drainage in a manner that impedes or impacts the downstream. So without the city getting involved neighbor to neighbor, if that's occurring right now, it's handled through
the civil courts and stuff like that. Okay. What we're trying to do is to make sure, because there were not clear definitions of obstruction, you know, what what constitute
obstruction. We're trying to clarify some of that as far as like right now, property rights. In other words, the city and
most municipalities cannot deny a property owner from developing that property. There has to be a lot of different criteria, but we have at least tried to define how and and
that property owner can still develop it. But but at the minimum, he has to demonstrate no impact to the adjacent property and to get back to.
And this is I mean, I've been helping Brian and basically investigate a lot of the drainage complaints. And one of the first things I usually because they usually are two neighbors and on his property,
I mean, his water is coming onto my property or and usually my quick response is like, it's not his water or your water, it's just water. And it falls from the sky and it hits and it
falls on the ground, and it wants to drain from the high point to the low point and hopefully down to the river. And the best we can do is try to make sure that when we
develop pieces of properties that we're not basically messing with the natural scheme of things. I don't know if that helps, but it it does, it does.
It's it's complicated and you're there on the ground. You know how tricky this can be. And if you don't mind. Yes, sir. I was just going to add just a little more detail. I think you were saying how how does an
application mitigate for that? Right. So we're looking to see that the applicant is providing the right type of elevations on their plan to demonstrate that
their the water is going to go to, like the historical low point and not going to go over to their neighbor, or they're not directing their water all there. They don't have all
their roof drains coming out to their driveway. That then goes down the driveway and crosses the road into the neighbor's yard. So we're looking for those type of details on the
application to mitigate that. Does that make sense? Yes. Oh it does okay. It does okay. That's great. That would lead. We're a real good team here. So
that would lead to another. This is a detail that kind of a verbiage Segway is that within the document I see the term
used. Either or. But I think that there might need to be consistency. And that is engineer of record versus registered design professional. So there was actually a strike
and replacement deeper in the document under one of the codes where engineer record was struck and then registered design professional was
installed. But then in the actual and this is a nice document, the technical manual, it does say clearly I've lost it. Engineer of record. Now
personally I'm unconcerned, but I think that the document has got just a little bit where it's got to be consistent. And I do think it's important because a design professional
doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as not just engineer record, because I'm in construction and sometimes mechanical engineers get out of
their lane and architects. That's. So I think it would be maybe better for everyone if it said civil engineer of record,
not just engineer, because you can have a structural engineer that will stamp a design set, and he could just stamp that first page to that. Maybe the seriousness of this would say
that, hey, we need to have someone that specializes in stormwater or civil, be the consistent design professional that's got to approve those,
because then I'm going to flip right back to and this makes it hard on the applicant. I know this, but the applicant would have to provide a plan to the building department that is
reviewed by possibly a civil engineer to show that that plan should work. And that hurts, but that is what should be done. Yeah, that's happening because what's is happening exactly
that. Okay, good. With residential, you usually have a contractor maybe working with an architect. Yes. Skipping the civil. Yes. And that's where a lot of the. Yeah. The, the
drainage and grading issues. Yes. We know because they're not getting in there and measuring with their sticks on the back of the lot that we do have the correct slope from front to back. They're completely unconcerned. It's
Phil run maybe compact and get out okay. Super. So just a note on that, that I think within the document that verbiage might be being flip flopped. And there probably should be a consistent sentence to go through. I might have it
highlighted somewhere, but I don't think that's important right at the second. Okay, I've got a couple more now. I know somebody else has got some questions, but if I may just
have a couple more minutes. Okay. Is that an okay? Okay. Super. Under exemptions. Page
67. Halfway down the first one we covered, which was the use of the term impervious number one volume sensitive basin. I put define here, but I didn't
see you had a defined within document. Thank you. Of what a sensitive basin is wetland or flood hazard area okay. So just
as a thought, if we're looking again at some one for 1.01 exemptions, a one flood hazard
areas, I was curious if we wanted to be more specific on this because there's lots of flood hazard areas. Did we want to or need to list or define
the flood hazard areas as the A or other? We know that X, isn't it? But do we want to say right out there, yes or no? We may want to be careful with that
because we know of flood hazard areas within the city that are not within FEMA. Flood hazard not identified as FEMA, flood hazard, well played. And and and or would we want to add the
term I don't know if we have flood plain and maybe that's not the same. But there are flood plains I'm only familiar with. They're typically around rivers and they have a
different sensitivity to them. And then you've got the overlay of floodplain and then the rising flood. Yes or no? No. I mean there are like most what most people refer to is the
FEMA flood plains, and it's the 100 year flood that the FEMA has actually developed the firm maps for. Right? If you're in a coastal area that floods those,
those flood hazard areas typically are related to a flood surge. But as you move away from the coast, you get into what they call riverine systems. Yes, creeks and those
Anclote River, when studied, they have an associated 100 year flood elevation. Okay. And so it's an established 100 year flood plain. Okay. Also have
isolated pockets, isolated wetlands that maybe connect during some of those areas. And they may also have separate 100 year flood elevations. Those
are all technically 100 year flood zone or within the flood zone. And in the 100 year flood plan. But what I'm saying is that we also have areas that
are volume sensitive, that are not identified by FEMA as have are that are technically, but, you know, okay, well, that that is super. That that is a great
answer. But that sounds to me like it's tacit information and not explicit information. And when you're not there, who
knows that? Well again we yeah. So on the technical manual, the volume sensitive of of volume sensitive basins that we
identified are those those are the areas that you associate with those flood prone areas. That may not be, but yes. Anybody come to anybody who
needs or wants to develop within the city of Tarpon now has those volume sensitive areas maps that they can identify. And if you fall within that area, you're not
designing to a 25 year, oh, you're not designing to the 25 year storm. You're designing to 100 year storm. It's a more stringent design volume, you know. So okay. Yeah. So those
those areas can be captured by anybody on city staff that's reviewing development permits. Because and anybody developing within the city can also know then that they're going to be
required to design to the higher level, because we have now established those flood prone areas. Okay. Thank you so much. I only have a little bit more. Sure. I really appreciate
your patience with me. Okay. That's what we're here for. Super. Peach. Oh now moving to for this might be too far Edu.
That's the next section isn't it? Yeah. Edu and visibility triangles. So that's forward
too much. Too much. All right okay. So last but not least, this one's kind of on the fly. And it has to do with infill. And I know that there's
verbiage in here. Verbiage or verbiage depending on your flavor of bringing in a fill to these lower areas. And. It can
happen and it can be used. But it's. A few years ago I had to do an Adu project in what's
considered Pinellas County. And this falls back to the question I had about flood basin or flood zone and the Pinellas
County Storm plain manager was in that system, was adamant that under no circumstances was any fill allowed at all. You
had no excuse for it whatsoever, because the infill would cause the mathematics of one. So our verbiage is, hey, you can do it, but you got to show that it's
not going to affect anything but Pinellas County stance within these river zones is that it's not even an option.
You shall not bring fill in at all. We might have those zones right now. And so I'm going to make my question up right now is why are we kind of loosey
goosey on that when we know that any fill whatsoever is causing issues? If there's not a mitigating thing in a residential, it can't to bring in, fill in. You're pushing. So
help me with why Pinellas County says no fill whatsoever. But we allow fill. I mean, I can maybe point at some of the instances, like, for instance,
Pinellas County might have those areas identified and, and zones that they know any fill is going to be impacted, impacting somebody else. We actually have some of those
within the city now that if no drainage improvements are made, any development, if again, it's a bowl, if you're at the if even if you're a developing at the top of the hill, that extra
runoff is running to the bottom of the hill. And those folks are seeing that water level rise and rise and rise. So that's one of the reasons we have those. Excuse me, extra
caveats for developments within those areas. But just conversely, there are areas that are low areas. One of the blessings that you city has that other surrounding counties
don't have is you have, for the most part, very well draining soils. So a lot of times it can be developed, even if you bring fill in, as long as you provide
enough volume to make up for that additional runoff that's going to be generated from the additional impervious areas, and you can contain that in a manner that's not going to
impact anybody else. There are ways that development can occur in some of those, because it's it's kind of hard to tell property owners that maybe have had properties in their, in their families for for
generations that they can't now develop or they can't do something with their properties. I guess there's a lot of especially with single family,
most municipalities don't regulate down to the single family, most single family home development is exempt from most regulations for that reason. So we're trying to again, we've
had enough issues come up in the past. We have identified problem areas that that become chronic, and there's not a whole lot the city has been able to do in the past, because
the regulations can't prevent that from happening. So if we develop these, it puts the onus then on the developer, whoever's developing the property, and that they have to
demonstrate to the city and to us that whatever they're going to do is not going to impact adjacent property. And I can tell you, I've at least 3 or 4 projects that have been that
are trying to get permit within the city that have been going through the process for years, and we've not been able to approve their developments because they cannot demonstrate
that they're not going to impact other people. Thank you so much for your patience. I appreciate that and you guys being here tonight. Thank you. And now if second line of
questions I know had one. But we go ahead and start all the way across. Follow up questions. Yes I to sort of follow up with
you I was looking I was just reading again the development within flood prone and restricted areas. It was seeing
any fill proposed in existing low lots, which lie at elevation lower than the street and receive runoff from the road, must be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Public Works or his or her designee, which is what you were talking about. And here we go. The engineer of record. To
your point, I would agree that it should be. A little more clear civil engineer of record. You know, I would agree, says
must be able to demonstrate no adverse off site drainage impacts. I mean, maybe an affidavit, you know, because
right now all the FEMA rules and construction, they love to see these municipalities like to toss out that affidavit that puts a rope around the engineer's neck. Unfortunate. Or the contractor's neck that
says, hey, I certify that x, y, z. Just food for thought. Go ahead. They're doing that when they're signing the document. So when they sign the plans are,
you know, that those plans meet all applicable state city code. So the mere signing of the of the document is is all that's
needed. I, I know what you're saying. I agree, I do like the suggestion of adding the word civil, and we can easily change that on the. As a civil guy,
I'm assuming it is we've, we've, we've we have an existing case today where it's clear that the engineer of record is not a civil engineer. He's been
brought up on charges for it, you know, so it's we deal with this, and I like that. Okay. Yeah. Continuing down the line,
Mr. Rockland. No, I have just two easy ones. One is. So are you saying within this document under illicit discharge? Not that I have, but you can't wash
your own car in your private driveway? No, ma'am. No, ma'am. Is that not what it says? No. In there then? Okay, I could go back and reread it. Yeah. No, you're allowed to wash your vehicle on your own. But now if
you install a car wash because it said, oh, well, I bought the car washes around, I don't wash my own car. But the way it was worded, I thought it said that the second one, obviously we see it every day or I see it
every day. You're not supposed to like weed whack or weed blow into the streets. Yeah, that is that is that is the code. You're not you're technically you're not supposed to you're
supposed to contain your your weed clippings and grass clippings and your own yard and use your, your waste basket to just to discharge those or take
them to the landfill. That is the code. If you see people specifically blowing them down the drains. You absolutely can.
And that is a that is a violation of state criteria. So that's part of the city's Ms4 permit. Yeah. It's one of the things that the city staff also look for, you know, when they
go out and look at. But yeah, it's very hard to enforce. And because education is also part I mean, a good part of the city, they go out and talk to folks and say, look, this is not
going to go to a treatment plan or any sort. This goes I agree, I agree. I just know that on our block we only have about 15 or 16 houses, and I think one guy does most of the houses and
I see him with that. It goes beyond just the grass clippings. Yeah. The leaf litter to rake and. Oh yes. Okay. Super. Well, if we're all done with our questions, we'll give the
gentleman a break and I think we're ready for our next section. Miss Mcniece, thank you very much. If I can, I'm. I'm going to take a one minute break. If anybody else would like a short break before we
dive in. Okay? It's going to be a five minute break. Yeah. In the meantime, in case I don't
come back, Mr. Rockline is in charge.
Before we begin, the clerk has asked that everyone make sure that they speak into the microphone, and the microphone is on, please. What?
Okay, super miss Mcniece, you may continue. Special guest star. Okay, next we have some land development code changes
that were starting on. So I'll let Ali introduce those. Okay. So as you all know, we just recently well about a year ago adopted our updated comprehensive plan. We've also
over the last several years identified a lot of things in the code that we wanted to to update, fix and address. And we're referring to those as quick fixes. So how we are
going about updating the land development code is kind of incrementally, rather than going through the entire code at one time and bringing it forward. We think this will be a little bit more manageable.
So we are looking at each article in its entirety and then reviewing the text, incorporating the changes that are recommended from our comprehensive plan, and addressing those quick fixes that have been identified. And
then as we complete each review of the article, we'll bring it forward for discussion and adoption. So we may have a couple on at one time, or we may just have one article depending on its complexity. So
tonight we have brought you articles one, two and three. We provided strikethrough underlined versions of those. I think the what I'll do is kind
of just give the big changes or big items for each of those articles, and then we can just open up for discussion. We can go into the detail of each line if you need to, but we can talk
about it in general. But I'm just going to kind of give you highlights of each of the article changes. So for article one these are your general provisions. There's really not much recommended for change in
there really. Just some minor clarity and some text edits. And then we are removing some unnecessary language that's really intended to be in an adoption ordinance and should not be in your land development
code. So that's the big strikethrough underline that you see in that section is just removing unnecessary language. But article one is pretty straightforward. Article two is
your district regulations. So this is a section that basically lays out all the different zoning districts in the city. What their general dimensional standards are. So
setbacks, height, those types of standards. That's all found within article two. So we made really the big changes here is we wanted to make it a little
more user friendly. It's a very long section and a lot of text and lists. We wanted to format everything into tables, so it's easier to kind of comprehend what you can and cannot do on
your property. And then we also wanted to kind of reorganize some of the information, because we found there's a lot of repetition throughout that. The section of the code, one of
the big things that we are recommending is really the only district that we're recommending a change for is the R 100 zoning district. It's a single family zoning district.
We're recommending to combine R 100 and R 100 together, so would just be the R 100 district. And we're looking to utilize the R 100 A district
standards. That really is in response to a lot of variances that have been processed over the past several years in response to really our historic lot layout. In most cases right now, you're required, like a
10,000 square foot lot in the R 100 district, but a lot of our lots are less than that, and that results in sometimes a necessary need for a variance. Or meeting those larger setbacks is not really applicable. So we're
recommending combining those two districts. Another change we're looking to do is right now all of the permitted and conditional uses are formatted.
And I can kind of show you this might be helpful. To just what we're talking about it. Okay.
So let me zoom in here. So right now for every district we have a list of permitted uses and a list of conditional uses. And again that adds length complexity. It's hard to see
where you can and do and do something when you're reading it in these list forms. So we're recommending creating a whole section about permitted land uses at the end of this code, and formatting all this
existing information into a table I didn't provide to you the table. I'm still working on that. Just double checking we have everything captured, but that will make it a lot more user friendly not only for us,
but for the public because we get calls all the time. For example, they're like, where can I put a daycare in the city? And you have to scroll through the entire document to basically say, you can do it here, here and here. So that's
a big change that we're looking to do. And then let's see. And the other item that is in this section that we're wanting to address are our legally nonconforming lots of record
right now. If there is a lot of record under common ownership with an adjacent property, if someone wanted to split those two lots into their historic lot layout, they have to go get
a variance approval. This is something that I think in the over five years that I've been handling the Board of Adjustment, I think that every single one has been approved. So there's still criteria to be a legal lot has to, you know,
have been platted in the past, but it just takes away that extra level of review. We can look at it and make sure it meets the criteria and not make them go through a variance process. So those are the big
changes for article two. Article three is your supplementary district regulations. So specific requirements about, you know,
various items on a property or specific to a type of use of the property. So in this article a lot of this, we are capturing some of the quick fix
items that have been identified. And we're trying to provide better clarification across the board. So the big thing is for accessory structures, we wanted to provide additional clarity
in that section. You know, if you can have a structure this size, where can it be on your property? If it's bigger than that size, where can it be on your property? Right now we have an interpretation
internally, but now we want to capture that in the code. We are adding some allowances for people that have screen enclosures to have a hard roof. Right now you're set at your
district setbacks. And a lot of people, as we all know, want to have shaded space in their yard. So we're allowing some encroachments similar to what we do for porches now. We want
to reduce the allowable front yard fence height. Right now you can go up to four feet. Our site visibility triangle basically says you can't have anything within 3 to 8ft. So we
think it's best just to reduce the height in the front yard. So that's one of the recommendations that we are looking to do. Along those same lines, we get a lot of questions about how to measure and calculate the site
visibility triangle. So we put a lot of clarity, I think, into those provisions and then provided a graphic so people know exactly how to calculate
those site visibility triangles. Let's see. We added a new section at the end of the code that's addressing building
orientation for townhomes and multifamily. This is directly in response to a policy in the comprehensive plan that wanted those to be oriented towards the street. So we added those standards into the code here.
And then lastly, the other big changes is to accessory dwelling units, which are your ADUs. Right now in our current code, standards for those are in two different locations. So
we're looking to put it in one location. And then in support of the comprehensive plan, we're looking to increase the minimum or maximum sorry size
of an Adu from 600ft■!S to 800f, or 20% of your primary structure, which is still in place. So increasing this size that you're allowed to have, and then also providing a lot
more clarity about what an Adu is, what constitutes an Adu, how we calculate it. We wanted to really kind of tackle that section again, because right now it's in two different places, and it lacks a lot of
information that we think is necessary. Let's see. I think those are really kind of the big ticket items that are in these three sections that I wanted to just highlight, but
I'm happy to kind of go through, however, in detail you would like to or to talk about things in general. So I'll throw it back to the board. Thank you, Miss Keen, for that excellent
presentation of the highlights. There's a lot in there. If anyone were to have any
questions clarification, just ask, hey, what the heck does that mean? Please will start at the end at my left. And then
we'll take a couple passes through and really put her through the grinder. Yeah. And I mean, if you would rather go through each article, we can do it that way. But it may be that
whatever is easiest for you. So is there a sense that we want to tackle in one article at a time? Okay. They'll help me from clicking back and forth to okay, so with staff support, if
you have any questions in regards to article one, we'll go old, old style, no rules, just whoever gets in front.
First ask your question. Kind of like Southwest Airlines used to be, right? Just pile in. And
while you're thinking, just so you know, this will obviously be coming back to you guys for a formal adoption process. So this isn't like the final set. This is just so you guys can have some input ahead of time.
Article one really didn't have too much. The only question I think you said it just didn't belong here was the removal of severability. And you put that
somewhere else, right? You said so that's all. That's all stuff that you would typically have an ordinance that you draft. It's all like sections of an ordinance. So when the Land Development Code was initially
adopted, the ordinance had all of that language in there. It's not necessary to be in your code. Okay. Yeah, we don't really. We talked with Mr. Saltzman and we don't really know how it ever ended up in
there. Okay, I think that's it for that one. Okay. So I'm good for one. Yeah, I have a first of all, I appreciate the fact that we're trying to make this streamlining nice and clean.
And I, I think the community will really appreciate that. My question is you mentioned something about like a search function. Is that like a digital? Is that like control-f
type thing or is that going to be like a table of contents? You can click a hyperlink. It takes you right to. Is that how it currently works or are we trying to advance it. So
actually right now our land development code is available on Municode, which is an online platform that has a search bar in it. So you can like you can look up a word, you're like,
what do I do for, you know, recreational vehicles, you can type that in and it will pull up anything in the code that addresses that. So you can already do a search function now and then it also that code
typically it should all if it's referring to another section that's like a link to take you to that section. So that's a function that's built into Municode which is which is great. So we're not going to lose that. We're we're looking
to try and improve. Usability is not having to read a lengthy paragraph or list of items. And that's primarily by putting things in table format. So if I
go for an example back to like the zoning districts. So right now we're looking to do take all the information that's already in the code, put it in a simple table so you can look
at one section, get all the information. Whereas now you have to read through a whole paragraph. So that's how we're trying to make it a little more user friendly in this point. Yeah, that makes a lot more
sense. I didn't catch that on the first run through, but yeah, I like that. That does make sense. The this is jumping to article two. Okay. So you said
you're going to combine our 100 to our 100 Alpha. Can you kind of explain what that entails. If we were reading that chart.
And let's say you wanted a resident wanted to do an extension and they were smaller than, I'm assuming what an Or 100 is. So there is no variance
needed at that time. We could just move forward with the permitting. It wouldn't. So I'll explain the differences and then I'll explain how this is improving the situation. So
right now really the big difference is for the 100 district, we're looking to adjust the minimum lot standards. So say someone comes
in and plots a new subdivision and it's in the R 100 district. Each lot would now have to meet these requirements. Currently, for example, the R 100 requires
a minimum lot area of 10,000ft■, whereas 7000ft■!S is our 100 standard and is a little more consistent. I'd say average across the board. Yes, we have some of the larger lots, but generally they're smaller. How?
That's how it would apply for new development. How it improves existing situations is when we're talking about nonconforming lots of record. There are a lot of historically platted, lots that are in this
zoning district that don't meet the area or don't meet the minimum width. And in order to build on it, you would you basically need a special exception to do so because it's
too small if it's like an undeveloped piece of property. So this is just trying to address these are things that we're seeing in repeated variances on. Another change is
primarily to the setbacks. And I think really it's just the only difference is the the side street a little bit to the side and the rear setback. Currently
our 100 has a minimum rear setback of 30ft. That's a pretty cumbersome setback, especially when looking at how historic lots have been developed. There's a lot of
properties that don't even acknowledge that setback at all. Say someone has a house on existing lot was built, you know, predates this code. They want to do an addition on the
back and their house is already at, you know, 25ft. You know, it's just it's not correlating with our current existing development. So this is really just reducing it five feet. So
25ft is what our 100 requires. And this is would be allowable for this district. Now the only other change is the side setback. It is a minimum of ten feet currently. But it also
says and a total of 25ft for both sides. That means you need to have 15 on one side, ten on another. This is just saying ten. This is ten minimum
setback and then side street. I think our 100 is is 15ft, whereas our 100 is ten feet. So it's a minor adjustment in the setbacks. And the main reason we're doing this is in response
to repeated variances that we're getting is because typically these lots are a little bit smaller. It's not really feasible to meet some of these more cumbersome setbacks.
Did that make sense? It does. Thank you. I do have one more question. Is article three okay. You said they you're going to minimize the front fence height
requirement. Does that have anything to do with like landscaping shrubs that residents have that is not a fence but is way higher. It was
like how do you determine fence versus shrubs. So actually right now how the code is drafted. Let me see if I can
get to it. And since. That's a good question because Hedges got a strikethrough. Yes. And I was just going to address that. So right now how the code is
drafted I can't. Was it 36. Which one is it. Thank you. Okay. So right now the code is written as fences walls and hedges have to be basically if
you're in your front yard, the maximum height it can be in the front yard is described by your setback. So it's not just like your front yard. Your setback is where we would regulate this. The setback area required right
now, hedges don't require any sort of permitting or anything like that. And we've never reviewed hedges in this respect under the code. But with that
said, we have site visibility requirements. And if there is an obstruction in our required site visibility triangle areas and it's causing an issue and it's that applies to everything
across the board. So that's anything that doesn't, you know, is a certain diameter or larger certain between 3 and 8ft. You can't have that in your visibility triangle. So that
applies regardless. So say there's existing vegetation on a piece of property and you think it's causing a site visibility issue with an intersection or a driveway. We can take a look at that and see,
say, it's a hedge. It's too tall. It's impeding the visibility. We can say, cut that down. So that's already kind of built in. Okay. Last thing, since you just made me
remember this, every day when I drive to work, there is a city sidewalk barricade off Curlew West, Curlew Place and
Peninsula Drive, and you can't see like you have to pull out to oncoming traffic to actually get a good view because that
it's it's a metal fence and it blocks the view from. I guess that would be East. Yeah. I mean, I can't see and I drive
it every day. So I'm saying like the eastbound traffic, you can't see it unless you're almost like into the westbound traffic to get out there. And look, is this is this like a temporary barricade that's out
there? It's just a it's a permanent structure. Permanent structure? Yeah. I would say that's something that's probably worth contacting, I guess. I guess it'd be code enforcement. But you could also
contact our public works department. But code enforcement can go out and take a look at that and see if it's it's creating an issue. And it's something that we can address. And it's a city, I
mean, entity, it's a slow highway. I mean, yeah, street. I don't think it's an issue. It's just like, except for you can't see unless you know, but that's definitely that's something. And the visibility
triangle section, it talks about like any obstruction basically you can basically have addressed, you know, the city manager or designee can basically determine, you know,
this is an obstruction. This needs to be taken care of, whether it's the cities or cities, you know, property or not. It just depends on who's responsible. But that's that's something you could definitely
contact code enforcement. They can go past it. They typically will converse with us to see if it falls in the triangle area. And if it's just purely, blatantly a problem then it can be taken care of. Okay. It
should be taken care of. That's all I got. Thank you. Okay. Yep. I've got something. Sure. How do we how do we define
shoreline today? What is the parameter for defining shoreline. So the the code for when we're measuring like setbacks and things of that nature. It's typically measured
from the mean high water line. Or if you have a seawall on a property then it's the center of the seawall. That's actually a clarification that we put in there, because it doesn't always have that, that distinction. But so for
measuring purposes in this context, it's mean high water line or center of seawall cap. Okay. So all right. So mean
high water. Generally generally you measure from mean they take the mean of the highest waters. But you're saying you're just taking high water, the mean
heights. You know, the average high water when it's at its highest point. Lowest point, it's the mean water line. Okay. That's the only question. And
there's actually an article for there's actually specific standards about like wetland and shoreline buffers. And it goes a little more detail of
how you protect those areas okay. More questions. I have a general question. You know,
when we talk about pervious and impervious. Should the city be instead of concrete? I mean, should the city or does it make a difference? Use pavers. Is
that it obviously is more pervious than concrete, but how much more? I don't know. So elsewhere in the code, like as far as development goes, there
are options for different types of material. Actually, the stormwater changes and stormwater technical technical manual I think is going to address different options as
well. But you can use different material types if that makes sense. But regardless, especially now that we're looking to do these changes to our stormwater code and add the
manual, it's going to make it much more clear what you can and can't do, and make sure that you're really not creating the adverse impact that potentially could happen under our current regulations. Thank
you. You're welcome, Mr. Rocklin. No, I'm I'm good. I digested quite a bit of this, so thank you for your explanation and the detail of the presentation. And we'll get
comments, I guess, from the Board of Commissioners also, before it comes back to us, I don't believe we're going to go to them separately. I think we're going to kind of work it
with you guys and then take it through the process. But with that said, that could change. Just depends. Thank you. You're welcome. One quick one. I believe it's in here. I don't
recall what section it's in where talked about. If you are on water you cannot count you know in fact I'm on a canal and
they actually have within our information that our land goes out to like so many feet into the water. And you can't really count that. And I understand it because my neighbor lady tried
to use that extra feet to get more allowable dogs in her house or something like that. But that is in here too. Yes. So how that's addressed and that's in this section, it
basically says submerged lands. They can't be counted towards your minimum lot areas. And it also can't be counted when you're measuring setbacks. So they can't measure, you know, your rear setback from like
40ft in the water. They have to measure it from, you know, an actual land. I was surprised they even included that in the I mean, yeah, the dogs or the
suburban. Yeah, they would include that additional amount of water. Yeah. And that's and we put that information that
was in the code now. But we added everything. Every single table has that in there. Just to reinforce the fact that that doesn't count. Yeah. Okay. I
come up last. It looks like we got to all the sections. So I'm going to go ahead and just dive in. And then we can do some
more questions after that. 36.04 x 80. And this is wonderful that we're starting to bring this in. And of course
we have had it. And clarity item number six okay. Just just a thought. What page are you I
rewrote it page four of 20. Four okay. This is just verbiage. Not anything more than that. I saw it as my
printer printed it so small I can't read it with my glasses. Here I have them on. Okay, so I rewrote it. I got rid of the I
think it's a or n separate metered or individual connection for the Adu shall not be permitted. All I did was restructure the sentence. That's all it is. Just a
wordsmith. Is that because I just thought it was a kind of a double negative? And so I just restructured it. Now this can be a very, very sensitive topic. When one dives into Adu,
everyone's trying to pull this string. They're like, hey, I want to build it, but I totally want to rent it. I want to have a separate meter on it or a separate water. It only is power and water. And so I
thought maybe emphasizing the fact that it is clear, it is clear, but I would rewrite it. You could review it as separate
or individual metered utility connections for the Adu shall not be permitted. Get it out there loud and proud, because it will be the intent of half
the Adu applicants. Yeah, okay. And then I added and I added another one. And this is actually a clarification that only just for myself. So I added a number eight surprise
may not be individually addressed. Okay. So here's here's the thought experiment on them. If it can't be individually metered they can't
apply for an individual address. But in a maybe less regulated area, let's say the address was 701. They do an Adu because they can be rented. You can have two people there, two
different households that they make it 701 and a half and the mail would come there. But I think that that goes against the concept of not individually metered one meter, one address,
one address, one not metered. Now, I don't personally have an opinion, but I think that that should be addressed within this code because someone's going to want to try. They're going to head down to the mail department and they're going to
like, well, get me something. So is there any input on that right now? Any feedback? Let it rip. Yeah, I probably I mean probably defer to our attorney if that's something that we can
actually urge. Paterno's. Okay. I do have a clarification. You said something about not renting the Adu. There's no
restriction right now on rental of an Adu to the. I didn't suggest that. No, it can be rented because you only have to have an owner in one or the other unit. But they could they
could have an address without a meter, just like an apartment or anything. Has an address to get mail. Okay. Yeah, but but we we assign addresses all the
time that don't have. Okay. So my number eight got struck through before it got included. So in other words, they can have two separate addresses on that property. Yeah. And I
think if they're technically a unit it probably is better to have it like have it I mean the address typically you said it should be say it's 701 something. You know if it's an
Adu like 701 half or A or B or whatever, that's probably the best way to handle it. I think, you know, moving forward with addressing it doesn't make sense necessarily to have that 701 and 705 all the same parcel.
That doesn't help anybody. I can see the error of my ways. I didn't think that one through. Okay, I'll take the hit on that. Great suggestion to talk about. Okay. So now I've got just a little bit more red line. Page
five of 20. I guess that's just following down on the next page. Halfway through five of 20 on section three. And this is a
nice call out of at the top this it reads recorded Restriction Covenant outlining the above requirements that must be provided with the
building permit application. Yeah. So at some point in the future someone's going to have to do that. And the first thing they're going to ask you is, well, how do you want that to
look? And you'll say, well, a restrictive covenant. And they'll be like, well, where do I get that? And you say, well, have AI write it, or an attorney. Well, my attorney is
AI. Okay. So yeah, company notwithstanding is would it be a thought to provide that document in advance exactly how you want that restrictive
covenant? Because this is all about streamlining, facilitating and providing less work for everyone. Yes. So actually this is a standard that we have today. This is not
anything new. It's in the other section of the code. So it's an existing standard. And we actually do have we've had people that have asked us that exact question like what do we
need to do? And so we have one that's kind of drafted that we can provide to okay to people. So it wouldn't be proper right within the verbiage of this document to say, see addendum
8.3 for that restrictive covenant. And then it's a link to that document so that they don't even have to bother you for it. We could you do let me think about how that yeah,
there might be some sort of at least or verbiage to give the indication that we have one that they can utilize. But yeah, let me, let me, let me think on that. Okay. CA CV restrictive
covenant that's provided because now nowadays, for example, in a different era, notice of commencement was used really loosely and everybody did their own. But now each municipality says you shall use
ours. And it's titled exactly the way they want it. Yeah. And it may even be just giving it a formal title in this sentence. But yeah, let me think about
how to make that note. Now I'm going to get really weird. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So let's see how
this goes right away. Okay. So within the articles that are here and probably within the entire document, there's a
reoccurring refrain that is the city manager has the right to review and waive or designate any of. And it seems like a
really easy get out of jail free card for when there's not a good answer for something. Fine, I'll stay with me. I'm
concerned about the use and the. Relinquishment of those issues to the city manager. Now, maybe this is how all of our codes
and ordinances are structured, but it strikes me as odd that within these documents that are very specific and under the purview of planning
professional, and we have a department head who is incredibly professional, that when it comes to a tough question, we're just going to say, you know, unless the city
manager decides that he wants it or not, I think that that's lazy in a way. And so before you answer, is there a better
suggestion or can we say it stays at least within planning? Because why do we want to have the city manager weighing in on a triangle purview? That's not what we hire a city manager to
do. He's there to manage, not get into the minutia of of certain things. So before, again, before you answer and other sections concerned city manager right away, the waiver
of or his designee, which could be the person that brings him lunch. This seems out of his or her lane and should be within
the purview. Okay, so back to that city manager thing and how it applies within these three sections. I think that that's not good. I might be alone on that. You weigh in okay. So
that is really, really common language for codes, not just here I would say everywhere typically, you know the city manager is our like the top
entity. But you always typically have. And that's actually we wanted to add in I think in some places it doesn't have that or designee in there just to provide that, that
clarification. The designee is your department heads typically. So say it is a planning related item that says City manager or their designee. It's going to be the head of that department
that's related to that entity. In most cases, this is going to be the planning director for almost a majority of these items. But there's some that maybe is a public works purview, and that's the designee. The
city manager does not weigh in on specific requirements of what you can and cannot do. That's just the typical standard language that you see in a code. Because say, for example, we said the planning
director say in the case there may not be a planning director or that person doesn't isn't here. That's why you have the generality for the languages. It's never just a random person
that's designated. It has to be under the purview of the department. But it doesn't say that. It just says designee. It
could be the fire chief. I mean, they can't they can't he can't designate, you know, but he can. It just says and or his. I forgive me for being ticky tack, but this is the letter of the
law. And it says his designee. It could be anyone. I know. It's not. I know, but that's not how it's written. So so I
mean, I guess the other option is to go through and you can specify, I guess, the relevant department or entity. I just I
know I'm more bold than I know you answered. I don't care for the I know that the city manager steps on top of everyone. I don't understand that. That's not what we hired
him to do, just to come in to weigh in on those topics. So this would just be my opinion. Anything relevant to these documents? I think that it should be the head of the PNC
or not. Yeah. Rene Vincent, but if that's how it is, maybe our attorney wants to weigh in and just say, nope, this is how it is. That's general language and that's usually how it is. Okay.
Does that make it good? Since we're reviewing a document, we're trying to improve a document. I mean, I understand your concern and, and and yours
is the worst case scenario type of situation. But always remember that city manager has to answer to the to the board. And if the city manager is doing things outside of their
purview, then they're not going to be city manager very long. Yeah, okay. Fair enough. I mean, that's just how that ends up
happening. Okay. A lot of times the state code would designate that this blanket title of authority having jurisdiction, and then that would be
distilled or, you know, refined a little by a local code, possibly to say, in this case, it's the building official. In this case, it's, you know, somebody else. So, I mean, if
they I mean, the truth is, if it wasn't, say, the assistant city manager or the, you know, planning director, then there would be some issues that would
arise immediately. Yeah. So so last but not least. Okay, I'm a dad of 3 or 3 girls, right. And I got five girls in the house. So it's always worst case
scenario for me is, is that. In the verbiage that's in this document that I'm referring to. And I only have this little piece, is that in the case of
unique situation, all situations are unique. That seems to be what we're around all the time is. It's always a unique situation. It says the city manager shall have the
authority or his designee to decide what it is. I'm uncomfortable with that, because that means that in any situation that an applicant or there's a situation that
requires specific review that isn't outlined, that person can go knock on the city manager's door and go, hey, I really want to see it this way. And then that person trumps down. And
without maybe anything else, gets to decide how that's done. I just don't think that that's good business. I think that those questions should be answered specifically within the document itself, or it
should be delineated specifically to a profession, to an expert within that zone. And we don't say that. We just say city manager or the designee. I think that only an
expert within that field should answer those questions that are not already covered within here, and we shouldn't have this catch all phrase that says
special situation. That's back to just my personal opinion. I might be way out of my lane on it, might not ever come up, but I've said it so that when it does, you have to deal with the
city manager saying, I want it this way. And you're like, well, that doesn't make any sense. Well, we wrote it into the code and that's how it shall be. We can look at if there's better
clarification in those situations. Yes, we will look at that. Very polite. You listen me all the way through. Absolutely. Okay. I do understand what he is saying.
Never say never, right. Our developers look for those loopholes in our verbiage. Okay,
last but not least. Yeah, this is great. It's more city manager stuff. It's called
separation of powers. I guess. You know, we need some more of that right now. Okay. At the bottom of 37.00 parentheses one
notice I'm going to read this one. This is a beauty. That was a nightmare to whenever the city manager comma after investigation comma determines that any tree, comma, shrubbery
or other object planted fixed upon any right of way or private property to a street or intersection obstructs vision. Vehicles passing over. Okay, so
this is like a plate in and this is under. Oh visibility triangles. Yeah. So this is how I read this I know what the intent is. But in read I wrote
when I was reviewing this this morning. This is quote this is weird. And now our city manager is a code enforcement guy. So
this is how I read this. It's not the intent. City manager's cruising to work. Kind of like Matt down there. And he sees he's sitting at a stoplight and he sees this tree in somebody's
yard and he's like, man, that's obstructing my vision. I don't like that tree. That is okay. Except that that's not his job. That's the job of code
enforcement or Matt or someone to report that. But here we're giving the city manager the power to cruise around and decide what he likes to see and
what he doesn't like to see anywhere. And I just don't think that that is good verbiage to be in our code of ordinances. And I'll repeat,
because it says whenever, whenever the city manager, after inspection or sees it, determines that any tree or
shrubbery or object, fixed or not, or private property adjacent to a street intersection obstructs. He gets to decide it doesn't count. That means he can just cruise
around appointed stuff and somebody shows up and takes it down. I'd like to see that sentence struck. Okay. It's it's not really the intent behind that provision. It's really the intent is specific
to the example that Mr. Collins brought up. Agreed. But the clarifying language, I mean, we can we can look at instead of utilizing that terminology, city manager will see what can work. But and that's like I
said, it's just that's not the intent. Basically saying the city has the authority to go in and make this determination and notice a property of a violation. The city manager is
in charge of the city. These people work for him. He has the ability to direct those things and do those things. You have a city manager form of government. That's what we have. If you're
taking away individual powers of the city manager, that's not the way. It's not a city manager form of government, and that's not what you have. You have elected officials that
hire a city manager, and that city manager runs the city. I think his concern, and I understand it is more one of
God, not golly, we got to take power away from the city manager. That's not it. It's that that task or that responsibility should go to
someone who is. That's the determination of the city manager. Oh, okay. Okay. All these people answer. At the end of the day, let's just say it the other way. So there's an
obstruction and and we have an accident because nobody did anything about it. Who's responsible for that? At the end of the day, it's the city manager. And on his appointment,
he can't. It doesn't matter who he points to, it's him. It's he's responsible. If his employees aren't doing that, then that's his responsibility.
He's a charter officer. That's what that's what we do. It's just it's no different than ultimately, for me as a city attorney, I'm responsible for certain things. I can't point
to anybody else. At the end of the day, it's my responsibility how I choose to do that or or enforce it or do those things that might be under my purview. But the city manager has to
have the ability to do those things. And there is a process for repeal, and I'm sure there's some sort of notification trail to the if it's a private property owner
to say you need to do this because and he would send in Mike to. Yeah, we would. I mean that's how we handle everything again. And I'm not trying to be.
Argumentative on this, but if the city manager is doing those things that you're worried about, they're not going to be the city manager very long. Yeah, but how can the okay to be devil's advocate? I mean,
how could the poor city manager keep up with all the visual obstructions in the city of Tarpon? So they don't. Yeah, they, they if they see
something. I mean, I've had many
city. Managers that call up the appropriate person to go out and and do it. That's what we do all the time. Verify the complaint or I mean, it's it's city manager or his designee, right? That's how it's done from a practical standpoint.
Thank you. And maybe as as the vice chairman saying maybe if it specified the city manager or his designee, it doesn't look like it. You know, it's a yeah, I Solomon said we can we can definitely tweak the language. I just don't want you
to think that we're going to tweak it in a way that they that would take away you don't have to you don't have to tweak it at all. I just was. I thought it was odd that instead
of saying code enforcement officer or someone that has expertise in that area is not the person that was called out. And then I'll go one step further and I will stop if, in
fact, what? And of course, our attorney is exactly correct, that the city manager is responsible for everything, then every one of our codes ordinances would say that same,
same thing. Ultimately, the city manager is responsible for that and that and that and that and that. But it's not for some reason we're just calling out certain things, saying he's responsible for that. Yeah, I
hear you. Yeah, I think we can work on the wording. And and generally the intent is there are certain aspects of the code that require some different interpretation and review that isn't necessarily something
that triggers it to go through this full public hearing process. And I think those are the items that get called out and have that term, that reference. But we'll look and see if we can give a little
more clarity and maybe even define what we mean by City manager or their designee. I mean, it might be as easy as putting like defining what we mean by designee in the code.
So we'll look at that. Thank you for your patience with me. Appropriate appropriate designee. Oh forgive me I mean I of course we're going on I just want just a few questions.
First of all, there's a flag lot. What's a flag lot? They are basically a lot that has a long, skinny piece that goes out to the road or to get you
access. That's a flag lot. Okay. Yeah. Got it. Also, we know that the Adu is gone from 600 to 800ft■!S, or 20% of the property. We did have someone
come in here once that had a huge home and was wanting to put 20%, and we're just figuring out, you know, where to put it. Do you ever consider
putting a limit up to like a maximum size? We could I think that that limit I think that's kind of what we are doing now with the the maximum 800ft■!S or
20% of the primary, because in instances maybe you do have a really large structure. If you have an accessory dwelling unit, that's 20% of that. It's not going to be as impactful. I guess if you have such a large
structure on the property. But I get what you're saying, like up to a certain standpoint, you could we could consider that. Yeah. If that's something that you guys want us to look into.
Another question is abandoned vehicles in section 340. It doesn't state how long an abandoned vehicle say it has license plates on it and not,
you know, and how long should that abandoned vehicle be able to stay there and not be moved if it's licensed currently? So
in this code, it basically determines what we mean by abandoned vehicle. There's not necessarily a time frame. I think if it's determined that the vehicle is abandoned, then there's code enforcement action
essentially to notify the property owner, get it off the property or to take care of it. There's not necessarily you're allowed to have it for so long. It's basically saying if you have a vehicle on your property,
it needs to be properly licensed and plated. And and the last one, lodging facility, bed and breakfast. Is that just not complete on there. So that's kind of for some reason
our code defines lodging facilities. It's basically a bed and breakfast. So I just said that's what it was. Yeah. Because these standards are only intended to be applicable to bed and breakfast facilities.
I don't know why we just don't say bed and breakfast. No. No kitchen. I think it's in there. Yeah. Yeah. So that's basically stating, you know, if you're having a bed and breakfast type use this is these are
applicable to that. But I don't know why. Lodging facility and bed and breakfast is interchangeable in this code. It doesn't really make sense okay. Thank you I have one last
question. So there's a sentence in here that says where a primary structure does not exist, the Adu cannot exceed 800ft■!S. Is that is that allowg
an Adu to be built where there is no primary structure on the property. So that is specific to non residential and mixed use zoning. So it's not necessarily on a residential property. There are instances
where there's commercial uses that will have an Adu that is specific in the code that it's for like, you know, a property caretaker or an employee. That's what it's intent is for.
So I guess an example is if there is a, a use that doesn't necessarily have any buildings, it's saying you can still have this type of structure, but it can only be this big. It's only specific to nonresidential
because that doesn't have you can't have an Adu on a property without the single family home. Okay. Should that be specified
in here that, that that's what it's referring to. It is it is. Yeah. It's next to see. It's it's hard because there's lots struck out here. But next to see it says non residential
mixed use zoning classifications. And so like subsection B addresses the residential classifications.
And subsection C is that. Any more questions of staff. No thank you. Sorry. Right okay
then thank you. We'll we'll take all these comments and work on these edits and hopefully we'll be back before you soon. Thank you. Thanks.
Number six. Unless there's any other business I'm missing, are we ready for board and staff comments? Any staff comments?
No. I'll just say it doesn't look like there are any cases coming from March, so we're hoping we can. Get some comment.
Some more sections ready for you for discussion. In the meantime, we're kind of shooting for potentially bringing this back for hearing
advertised hearing on ordinances hopefully April. So I want to keep it moving. So yep, any board comments? I know
we covered three articles. How many total are there just okay, so is it a big manual? Okay cool. Thank you. And and I, I
noticed the public notice sign that appeared to be on the corner of Mirrors and South Pinellas. Is that something that will be coming up in the
future? That property you all saw, that property, a site plan on that not not too long ago. Last fall. That applicant is
requesting a variance that will be heard on Wednesday night of this week. This is a medical facility that we're talking
well, may or may not be. Yeah. The packet for the variance is posted. If you all would like to look at look at Board of Adjustment Agenda, it is posted
if you're interested. Thanks. Any other comments. Last question when is Chipotle going
to be built? Well, my wife wants to know too. Gosh, I hope soon. No, they they've applied for their permits and I believe that their site work permit has
gone through the process and they're they're ready to pay for that and go. They've been moving moving along. So hopefully soon. And what about Catalinas? I can't answer that
one because they were they came in for a sign approval and I thought that that was a good. Yeah, yeah yeah. They'll incrementally have some. We do have some facade grant
applications from them that will be at next week's TRC. So thank you. Adjourned. That was
really intense. 832. I mean, I don't get to do it very often, so I'm gonna do it. I'm gonna do it every time I get back.
You need another wooden surface, though.