CAPTIONING OCTOBER 12, 2009 PLANNING COMMISSION ***This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the ***following meeting. It should be used for informational ***purposes only. This document has not been edited; ***therefore, there may be additions, deletions, or words ***that did not translate. >>BRUCE CURY: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET ME CALL TO ORDER THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 12th, 2009. FOR THOSE -- PLEASE REMEMBER TO -- LET ME INTRODUCE MYSELF. MY NAME IS BRUCE CURY. I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE NOT -- ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH OUR PROCESS AND OUR FORMAT, PLEASE LET ME ASK YOU TO SIGN AT THE REAR OF THE ROOM, THERE IS A REGISTRY WHERE YOU PLACE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. ALSO, IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE OR OTHER ELECTRICAL DEVICE THAT MIGHT BE OF AN ANNOYANCE DURING THE MEETING, WE ASK THAT YOU TURN IT OFF. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH OUR PROCESS, LET ME OUTLINE IT FOR YOU. THE MATTER THAT YOU PRESENT TO US, WE WILL CALL IT, YOU WILL HEAR A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF GIVE A BRIEFING FOR APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES. FOLLOWING THAT BRIEFING, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A 15-MINUTE TIME TO PRESENT WHATEVER TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE THEY HAVE TO SUPPORT THEIR POSITION. FOLLOWING THAT, THE APPLICANT'S 15 MINUTES, THERE WILL BE THREE MINUTES GIVEN TO EACH PERSON THAT DESIRES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE POSITION OR THE APPLICATION. FOLLOWING THAT TIME, THERE WILL BE THREE MINUTES TO EACH PERSON THAT WOULD STAND IN OPPOSITION. IF THERE'S OPPOSITION, THERE'LL BE THREE MINUTES GIVEN FOR REBUTTAL BY THE APPLICANT. AT THE END OF THAT FORMAT, YOU WILL THEN HEAR US ASK QUESTIONS. FOLLOWING THOSE QUESTIONS, THEN PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE CLOSED. WE WILL THEN, BY MOTION AND SECOND AND DISCUSSION, MAKE A DECISION UPON THE MATTER THAT YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US. I WOULD NOW LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER BUFORD TO GIVE US THE PRAYER AND PLEDGE. >>JILL BUFORD: DEAR GOD, CREATOR OF ALL THINGS [OFF MICROPHONE] PEACE AND WITHOUT FEAR. BLESS US WITH THE ABUNDANCE AND THE ABILITY TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY. GIVE US STRENGTH AND WISDOM TO COMPLETE THE TASK AT HAND. BLESS OUR STAFF, OUR CITIZENS, AND ALL THOSE [INAUDIBLE] FOR THESE BLESSINGS, WE GIVE YOU THANKS AND PRAISE. IN YOUR NAME, AMEN. >> AMEN. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >>BRUCE CURY: MADAM CLERK, MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL. [ROLL CALL TAKEN] THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE INTRODUCTION OF MR. GARY SEARS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE CLERK ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE AND THE CODE OF CONDUCT TO HIM. >>THE CLERK: MR. SEARS, WOULD YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND REPEAT AFTER ME. I, GARY D. SEARS ... >>GARY SEARS: I, GARY D. SEARS ... >>THE CLERK: A PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTEE >>GARY SEARS: A PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTEE >>THE CLERK: OF THE CITY OF PLANT CITY COMMISSION >>GARY SEARS OF THE CITY OF PLANT CITY COMMISSION >>THE CLERK: DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM >>GARY SEARS: DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR AND AFFIRM >>THE CLERK: THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY PERFORM THE DUTIES >>GARY SEARS: THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY PERFORM THE DUTIES >>THE CLERK: OF MY APPOINTED OFFICE >>GARY SEARS: OF MY APPOINTED OFFICE >>THE CLERK: AND WILL SUPPORT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY >>GARY SEARS: AND WILL SUPPORT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY >>THE CLERK: ALL APPLICABLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY >>GARY SEARS: ALL APPLICABLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY >>THE CLERK: AS WELL AS THE BYLAWS, BELIEFS, VISION >>GARY SEARS: AS WELL AS THE BYLAWS, BELIEFS, AND VISION >>THE CLERK: MISSION, POLICIES, PROCEDURES >>GARY SEARS: MISSION, POLICIES, AND PROCEDURES >>THE CLERK: CODE OF ETHICS AND CODE OF CONDUCT >>GARY SEARS: CODE OF CONDUCT AND CODE OF ETHICS >>THE CLERK: OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. >>GARY SEARS: OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITY PLANNING -- CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. >>THE CLERK: I HEREBY THROUGH THIS OATH >>GARY SEARS: I HEREBY THROUGH THIS OATH >>THE CLERK: AFFIRM THAT I WILL PERFORM THE DUTIES >>GARY SEARS: AFFIRM THAT I WILL -- >>THE CLERK: -- PERFORM THE DUTIES >>GARY SEARS: -- PERFORM THE DUTIES >>THE CLERK: OF THIS PUBLIC TRUST IN A FAIR >>GARY SEARS: OF THIS PUBLIC TRUST IN A FAIR >>THE CLERK: EQUITABLE AND ETHICAL MANNER BEFITTING >>GARY SEARS: ETHICAL -- ETHICAL AND -- >>THE CLERK: EQUITABLE >>GARY SEARS: EQUITABLE >>THE CLERK: MANNER >>GARY SEARS: MANNER >>THE CLERK: BEFITTING THE DIGNITY >>GARY SEARS: BEFITTING THE DIGNITY >>THE CLERK: AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE. >>GARY SEARS: AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE. >>THE CLERK: THANK YOU, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: COMMISSIONER SEARS, YOU HAVE -- WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU. ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I SAY WELCOME, AND WE'RE ALL AWARE OF YOUR CREDENTIALS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO US BY -- BY OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND YOU'RE WELL SUITED FOR THE POSITION. WE'RE PROUD TO HAVE YOU. >>GARY SEARS: THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS? >>GARY SEARS: I'D JUST LIKE TO THANK THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. >> THERE YOU GO. >>GARY SEARS: I'D LIKE TO THANK THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. THIS IS THE MOST PEOPLE I'VE LOOKED AT IN MY CAREER, AND IT'S EXCITING. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW, I HAVE A LITTLE OVER 20 YEARS' EXPERIENCE IN PLANNING AND ZONING, AND I'M MARRIED, THREE CHILDREN, SIX GRANDCHILDREN, AND I'M VERY EXCITED. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAS -- WOULD LIKE TO ENDOW YOU WITH THE CAP OF AUTHORITY. >>ROBERT HUNTER: COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS AND COMMISSIONER SEARS. THE FIRST ONE IS THE OFFICIAL PLANNING COMMISSION CAP. WE COULDN'T AFFORD THE WHOLE CAP, SO WE GOT HALF A CAP FOR YOU. [LAUGHTER] >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: BUDGET PROBLEMS. >>GARY SEARS: THANK YOU. >>ROBERT HUNTER: BUT WE KNOW YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN UP YOUR RIGHT AS A CITIZEN BY GETTING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SO WE'VE GOTTEN YOU THE HAT THAT YOU CAN WEAR SOMETIMES THAT SAYS PLANNING COMMISSION -- OR CITIZEN, AND THE OTHER SIDE IF YOU WANT TO ASSERT THAT YOU ARE A PLANNING COMMISSIONER, THERE'S YOUR HAT. >>GARY SEARS: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. >>ROBERT HUNTER: AND ONE OTHER ONE IS THE OFFICIAL LAPEL PIN THAT SAYS YOU'RE PROUD TO BE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THAT YOU'LL WEAR IT FAITHFULLY, I'M SURE, EVERYWHERE YOU GO. CONGRATULATIONS, MR. SEARS. >>GARY SEARS: THANK YOU, SIR. >>ROBERT HUNTER: YES, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. THOSE MINUTES WHICH I REQUEST APPROVAL ARE THE PUBLIC HEARING OF 5/11/09, THE REGULAR HEARING 8/10/09, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING 8/10/09. DO I HAVE A MOTION? >>TERRI COBB: I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. >>MILLER DOWDY: SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT WAS A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN THE FORMAL PART OF THE AGENDA, BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS IN MEMORIAL FOR DOOLEY HOUGHTALING, WHO WAS A COMMISSIONER. AND I THINK IT APPROPRIATE THAT I GO TO THE LECTERN. MR. SEARS, YOU SEE, YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS A PROBLEM WITH FAILING TO TURN THE MICROPHONE ON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JAY. AS YOU-ALL KNOW, DOOLEY HOUGHTALING DIED LAST WEDNESDAY. HE WAS APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND SERVED AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER FROM 1995 TO 2001. HE WAS A RESIDENT OF SOUTH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. HE WAS A CITRUS FARMER, HE WAS AN ENVIRONMENTALIST, AND HE WAS A PHYSICIST, AND HE WAS A CONCERNED CITIZEN. I HAD THE PLEASURE OF BEING ON THIS COMMISSION -- AT THE END OF THE TIME HE SERVED WAS THE BEGINNING OF MY TIME, BUT I KNOW HIM BY REPUTATION AND I KNOW HIM BY OBSERVATION AND HAVING BEEN SEATED AT THE DAIS FOR AT LEAST A YEAR AND A HALF BEFORE HE LEFT. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME OBSERVATIONS OF THINGS THAT I SAW AND HEARD AND FELT IN REGARD TO MR. HOUGHTALING. HE WAS A -- HE WAS AN INDIVIDUAL -- HE WAS A RUGGED INDIVIDUALIST. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT REMEMBER YOUR HIGH SCHOOL DAYS, HE COULD HAVE LIVED WELL WITH HENRY DAVID THOREAU ON THE POND. HE WAS ALWAYS PRECISE IN HIS LANGUAGE. HIS POSITIONS WERE ALWAYS CLEAR AND WELL SUPPORTED. I NOTICED THAT HE WAS ALWAYS IMPARTIAL AND EVEN-HANDED. HE WAS A MAN THAT BELIEVED THAT WHEN A FEW WORDS WILL DO, NO USE TO USE TOO MANY. HE WAS A MAN THAT SPOKE INFREQUENTLY. HE LISTENED MORE THAN HE SPOKE, BUT WHEN HE SPOKE, OTHERS WERE QUIET AND THEY WERE INFLUENCED BY THE THINGS THAT HE SAID. FOR THESE REASONS, I THINK THAT HE WAS OF GREAT VALUE TO THE CITIZENS OF SOUTH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY WHOSE VISIONS HE EXPRESSED FOR THEM. REGARDING HIS VALUE TO THIS PLANNING COMMISSION, JUST AS THE LION IS MADE UP OF ALL THE SHEEP THAT THAT LION EATS, SO ARE WE MADE UP BY ALL THOSE THAT INFLUENCE US. DOOLEY HOUGHTALING, COMMISSIONER HOUGHTALING, WAS A MAN BY HIS INTELLECT AND HIS PERSONALITY, CONTRIBUTED TO THE CULTURE OF THIS COMMISSION AND TO THE FABRIC OF ITS PLANNING VISION. WE WILL MISS HIM, AND WE GIVE HIM A TRIBUTE FOR MAKING THIS COUNTY AND THIS COMMISSION BETTER THAN WHEN HE FOUND IT. THANK YOU. PROCEEDING TO THE THIRD ITEM -- RATHER THE SECOND ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION REGARDING THOSE THINGS -- >> YES. >>TERRI COBB: YOU SKIPPED ITEM "F." >>BRUCE CURY: OH, I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. MAY WE -- BEFORE I GET TO ITEM 2, CAN WE HAVE ITEM -- THE COLLECTION OF FORMS REQUIRED BY ITEM 1, SUBSECTION "F." WHAT IS THIS? >>TRACY ROBIN: IT'S ALL YOURS, MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, COUNSEL. RETURNING TO ITEM NUMBER 2, PUBLIC INPUT. IS THERE ANYONE WHO CARES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION REGARDING THOSE THINGS THAT ARE NOT -- ANY ITEM WHICH IS NOT SCHEDULED? SEEING NO RESPONSE, THEN I WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 3, TAMPA: CONSISTENCY FINDING, AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 27 ZONING CODE. MR. COLLINS. >>JAY COLLINS: THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSION. JAY COLLINS, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. ITEM NUMBER 3 IS THE TAMPA AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 27, THE ZONING CODE FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA. YOUR PACKETS, YOU RECEIVED THE FULL STRIKE-THROUGH AND UNDERLINE, SO WHAT I WILL BE PROVIDING YOU TODAY WILL BE A SHORT, YET THOROUGH OVERVIEW OF THOSE CHANGES. IF THIS BOARD OR THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR CONCERN, MS. CATHY COYLE, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA, IS HERE TO PROVIDE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. AGAIN, THESE ARE INITIATED BY THE CITY OF TAMPA AS WELL AS PRIVATE ENTITIES. THERE IS ONE CHANGE THAT IS INITIATED BY A PRIVATE ENTITY, AND I WILL MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT. THIS IS SUBMITTED VIA MOTION OF TAMPA CITY COUNCIL, AND THIS IS PART OF THE JANUARY 2009 CYCLE FOR AMENDMENTS. PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS IS TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, TO AVOID UNNECESSARY CONTINUANCES, AND TO CLARIFY EXISTING LANGUAGE WITHIN THE CODE. THE SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES THEMSELVES, ONE IS THE CREATION OF AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, HERE THE GARRISON -- EXCUSE ME, THE GARRISON CHANNEL SUBENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. THIS IS THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT'S THE CONVENTION CENTER, HOTEL, THE ARENAS, THE SHOPS AT CHANNELSIDE, AS WELL AS THE CRUISE TERMINALS. REVISIONS TO OPEN STORAGE, SETBACKS, AND HEIGHTS. THIS REMOVED A PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS STORAGE IN FRONT OF CORNER YARDS WHEN LOCATED ACROSS A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM A RESIDENTIAL USE. IT ALSO ADDED TEXT AND TABLES THAT SPELL OUT THESE STACKING HEIGHTS THAT ABUT AND DO NOT ABUT THESE RESIDENTIAL USES. TRUCK RENTALS. THIS ALLOWED IN A -- IN A SPECIAL USE -- THIS IS A SPECIAL USE-2 IS WHAT IT CREATES IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. HERE YOU MUST NOT HAVE -- THE TRUCK CANNOT BE OVER 24 FEET, SO THESE ARE BOX TRUCKS THE SIZE OF A U-HALL OR A RYDER TRUCK, AND YOU CAN HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TEN TRUCKS FOR ANY ESTABLISHMENT. THERE'S ALSO A SET THAT YOU MAY ONLY HAVE ONE TRUCK PER 400 SQUARE FEET OF UNDEVELOPED LAND. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MENTION, THOUGH, THAT IT'S ONLY TEN TRUCKS FOR ANY ESTABLISHMENT AS A MAXIMUM. THE REVISION OF PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES, THIS WAS ACTUALLY WITHDRAWN BY THE CITY OF TAMPA. PUBLIC NOTICE. PUBLISHED NOTICE IN THE NEWSPAPER TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE SECOND READING RATHER THAN THE FIRST. THIS IS PURSUANT TO A STATE STATUTE. AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PROCESS OF THE APPROVAL OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSES WITHIN SIDEWALK CAFES. SO THOSE REQUESTED ARE EITHER "X" OR "R," BEING EITHER A TRUE ENOUGH LOUNGE OR TAVERN OR "R," WHICH IS FOR A RESTAURANT, AND AGAIN, THIS IS A SIDEWALK CAFE IN THE AREAS OF THE CHANNEL DISTRICT, THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, OR YBOR CITY'S HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS ALREADY FOLLOWS THE SAME OUTLINE AS WHAT YOU WILL SEE WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION CODE, SO THEY'RE JUST MIMICKING WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE IN ONE OTHER AREA OF THE CODE. RADIO, TV ANTENNA COMMUNICATION TOWERS. THIS IS YOUR PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT. THIS PROVIDES AN ACCESSORY USE TO A RADIO OR TV STUDIO FACILITY IN THE M-AP ZONING DISTRICT. THE M-AP ZONING DISTRICT ARE THOSE DISTRICTS THAT YOU FIND AROUND TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, SO THE TOWERS WOULD BE THERE AS LONG AS THERE IS NOT AN OBJECTION, OBVIOUSLY, FROM THE AVIATION AUTHORITY DUE TO HEIGHT. THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AGAIN, THIS IS A CONSISTENCY FINDING. OBJECTIVE D-2, ALL EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SHALL BE MADE CONSISTENT WITH THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AGAIN, WHY WE'RE HERE. POLICY D-2.2, EACH LAND USE CATEGORY SHALL HAVE A UNIQUE SET OF ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE FOR THE PERMITTED LAND USE IN THAT CATEGORY. D-2.3, DEVELOPMENTS MUST MEET ALL LDR REQUIREMENTS IN THE CITY, THE STATE, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. DEVELOPMENT MUST MITIGATE ANY ADVERSE NOISE, VISUAL, ODOR, AND VIBRATION IMPACTS CREATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT. AND AS ALWAYS, THE CITY OF TAMPA, WE MUST RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF NEIGHBORHOODS WHEN IMPLEMENTING OUR CITY CODES HERE. WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE PROPOSED CHANGES CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MR. COLLINS. IS THERE SOMEONE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? THE APPLICANT. >> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS CATHERINE COYLE. I'M THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA. IF I COULD JUST CLARIFY A COUPLE OF POINTS MADE BY MR. COLLINS. HE DID A GREAT PRESENTATION. THE GARRISON SEAPORT CHANNEL ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT WAS NOTED AS A CREATION OF A DISTRICT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT'S ACTUALLY A REVISION TO AN EXISTING DISTRICT. IT DOES BASICALLY SERVE AS THAT BRIDGE CONNECTOR BETWEEN THE DOWNTOWN, CBD, AND THE CHANNEL DISTRICT. BECAUSE OF THE USES THAT HAVE BASICALLY FORMED IN THAT AREA, IT IS -- WE ALREADY HAD AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, BUT IT STOPPED AT THE CHANNEL DISTRICT, AND GIVEN THE CONNECTION OF THE STREETCAR, THE INCLUSION OF THE AQUARIUM, THE GARRISON SEAPORT SHOPS, AND SO ON, THOSE USES HAVE NOW CONNECTED OVER TIME. I'LL SHOW YOU THE MAP. IS THERE A MICROPHONE OVER HERE? I'M PRETTY LOUD. I'M SURE THEY CAN HEAR ME. THANK YOU. JUST TO CLARIFY, THE ORIGINAL GARRISON SEAPORT STOPPED HERE AT THE BRIDGE ESSENTIALLY, AT THE -- AT MERIDIAN. THIS IS CONNECTING IT AND BRIDGING AND CONNECTING THOSE OTHER USES AND CAPTURING WHERE THE STREETCAR CONNECTS AS WELL. THE NEXT ITEM I JUST WANTED TO ALSO CLARIFY FOR YOU IS THE REMOVAL OF THE PRIVATE YACHT CLUB. WE ARE WITHDRAWING THAT AT THIS TIME. THERE WAS A PRIVATE REQUEST ORIGINALLY FOR A USE DETERMINATION FOR THE PRIVATE YACHT CLUB, WHICH CREATED THAT DEFINITION AND THAT USE. THIS WAS JUST THE CLEANUP OF ACTUALLY PLACING IT IN THE CODE. THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME REVISIONS TO THAT BASED ON THE INPUT WE'VE HAD FROM THAT ORIGINAL INQUIRY, SO AT THIS TIME WE'RE ACTUALLY WITHDRAWING IT TO BETTER CLARIFY THAT, SO YOU PROBABLY WILL SEE IT IN THE FUTURE. ALSO ON THE SIDEWALK CAFES, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE ABOUT IT BEING AN EXTENSION OF A BAR OR LOUNGE. SPECIFICALLY IT IS SIDEWALK CAFES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND THERE'S A TWO-PART REQUEST. THIS -- THESE -- THERE ARE ALSO CHANGES TO CHAPTER 22, THE STREETS AND SIDEWALKS CHAPTER IN THIS PACKET THAT YOU HAVE. THERE'S AN INITIAL PERMIT THAT'S ISSUED BY TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S FOR THE USE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THERE'S A SECONDARY PERMIT THAT'S ISSUED FOR THE USE FOR ALCOHOL SALES. TO SIMPLY CLARIFY THIS, IN ORDER TO GET THAT EXTENSION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS, THAT ADDITIONAL PERMIT, UNDER THE TRANSPORTATION CODE WILL SPECIFICALLY BE FOR A RESTAURANT, COFFEE SHOP, OR RETAIL TOBACCO SHOP, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH A LOT OF THE REQUESTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THE PURPOSE OF THIS CHANGE, HOWEVER, IS TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE, IS TO LOOK AT HOW WE ISSUE THEM. CURRENTLY IT TAKES MANY, MANY MONTHS AND IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. WE ACTUALLY STREAMLINED CHAPTER 22 SO THAT IT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST TO GET JUST THE PERMIT TO USE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE DOWNTOWN, YBOR, AND CHANNEL DISTRICT, THE THREE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY. THE REST OF THE CITY THAT PERMIT STILL DOES GO TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT WAS THE DIVIDE. IN CURRENT CODE THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN STREETS DOWNTOWN THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY GET ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. WITH THE HISTORY AND THE WAY THESE PERMITS ARE GOING AND THE CALL FROM CITY COUNCIL TO DO THIS, WE FIGURED THE STREAMLINING OF IT AND TO MAKE IT ADMINISTRATIVE IN THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS MADE SENSE. THE SECOND PERMIT, THE ALCOHOL PERMIT, BEING VERY, VERY RESTRICTIVE TO ONLY THE "R" DESIGNATION OR AN "X." IT IS AN EXTENSION OF THE ALCOHOL SALES THAT YOU HAVE INSIDE. THERE ARE NO PACKAGE SALES FROM THE SIDEWALK. IT IS LITERALLY AN EXTENSION OF WHAT YOU HAVE INSIDE. THAT ALSO WILL BECOME AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL BECAUSE THE MAIN PRINCIPAL ALCOHOL PERMIT ALREADY WENT THROUGH CITY COUNCIL. THOSE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS. SO THIS IS JUST AN EXTENSION OF AN ALREADY APPROVED ALCOHOL SALES PERMIT. AND WITH THAT, I'LL -- I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE AS WELL ON OTHER USES. JUST FOR THE RECORD, MS. COLE IS HERE AS WELL FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. I WAS SUBPOENAED TO COURT AT 3:00, SO I MAY HAVE TO LEAVE, BUT SHE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>BRUCE CURY: I'VE HEARD THAT SO MANY TIMES WHEN THE CROSS-EXAMINATION COMES, I GOTTA GO. >> SORRY, GOTTA GO. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. COYLE. >> THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: IS THERE ANYONE THAT CARES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? ARE THERE THOSE THAT WOULD SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? >> MARGARET VIZZI, 213 SOUTH SHERRILL. SO GLAD TO SEE ALL OF YOU HERE TODAY. WE SPENT SOME TIME WITH THOSE WHO WERE HERE LAST MONTH, BUT I'M GLAD TO BE HERE WITH ALL OF YOU TODAY. I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW TAMPA HOMEOWNERS, THE ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS, REVIEWED THESE MANY, MANY MONTHS AGO, THESE -- THIS IS THE JANUARY CYCLE, AND DURING THAT TIME, WE ONLY HAD TWO CONCERNS. ONE WAS WITH THE TRUCK RENTALS AND ONE WITH THE STORE -- OUTDOOR STORAGE AND THE HEIGHTS, BUT THE OUTDOOR STORAGE WAS MADE -- WAS CORRECTED AND DONE SO THAT WE WERE OKAY WITH IT. HOWEVER, WITH THE TRUCK RENTALS, WE DO HAVE A CONCERN BECAUSE CG IS ALL OVER THE CITY OF TAMPA VERY CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, VERY CLOSE TO HOMES, AND THE PARTICULAR ONE THAT WENT TO COUNCIL WAS TO ALLOW THIS PERSON WHO WAS GETTING THESE TRUCKS AND RENTING THE TRUCKS FROM A CONVENIENCE STORE, WHICH WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO RESIDENTIAL. COUNCIL DID FEEL -- I'LL USE THE WORD -- SORRY FOR THE GENTLEMAN, SO ASKED THE ZONING DEPARTMENT THEN TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY COULD DO TO LET HIM CONTINUE WITH THESE TRUCK RENTALS. LATER YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME PICTURES OF THESE TRUCKS WHICH, REMEMBER, ARE PARKED IMMEDIATELY ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL AREA. TRUCK RENTALS ARE NOT THE KIND OF USE THAT IS A -- REALLY THE CG IS SUPPOSED TO LEND ITSELF TO SERVING A NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE TRUCK RENTALS ALL OVER THE PLACE. THE TRUCK RENTAL PERSON HAD BEEN HERE AT THE LAST HEARING, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE IT. I DON'T THINK HE'S HERE TODAY. SO THOUGH THIS WAS REQUESTED FOR -- TO LOOK AT IT FOR A SINGLE PERSON, THE TRUCK RENTAL COMPANIES ARE LOOKING AT IT AS A WAY TO GET THESE TRUCK RENTALS, IN OUR OPINION, IN EVERY AREA THAT HAS CG. WE UNDERSTAND IT HAS TO GO TO COUNCIL, BUT THAT'S ONLY ANOTHER HEARING THAT NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD HAVE TO PUT UP WITH TO FIGHT A TRUCK RENTAL BUSINESS NEXT TO A RESIDENCE. SO TAMPA HOMEOWNERS, WHICH I'M SPEAKING FOR -- WOFFORD JOHNSON COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. SUE LYON WILL ALSO BE SHOWING THE PICTURES. WE'RE HERE TO REPRESENT TAMPA HOMEOWNERS, WHICH FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, IT IS THE UMBRELLA ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS. WE HAVE A ZONING COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWS -- WE REVIEWED THE COMP PLAN, WE REVIEWED ALL THE ORDINANCE AND THE CITY CODES HAVING TO DO WITH ZONING, AND THEN PRESENT OUR FINDINGS AFTER WE GO TO THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP AND GET THEIR SUPPORT OR NONSUPPORT, WHICHEVER COMES OUT, BUT ON THIS ONE WE WERE ALL UNITED IN NOT WANTING TRUCK RENTALS NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL. SO PLEASE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ONE THAT HAS TO DO WITH TRUCK RENTALS. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MS. VIZZI. >> MY NAME IS SUE LYON, AND I'M HERE WITH TAMPA HOMEOWNERS, WHICH IS USUALLY CALLED T.H.A.N. WE HAVE -- I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE YOUR PICTURE MACHINE. THIS IS JUST A SNAPSHOT FROM THE ROAD, AND IT SHOWS HOW MANY TRUCKS THERE ARE, AND I COUNTED -- I WENT BY THIS MORNING. THERE ARE TWO TRAILERS BY THE ROAD, TWO OPEN DUMPSTERS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, THERE ARE TWO FLAT TRAILERS, FOUR REGULAR TRAILERS BACK IN THE BACK NEXT TO THE RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S SIX RENTAL TRUCKS, THERE ARE ILLEGAL SIGNS UP NEAR THE ROAD, THERE'S ONE TRAILER THAT'S USED TO SELL BOXES OUT OF, AND THERE WERE FOUR CARS PARKED THERE AND ONE SHED. AND THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO A -- IF YOU SEE THE TWO-STORY BUILDING IN THE BACK, THAT'S SOMEONE'S HOME, AND WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A GOOD THING TO BE PUTTING THEM THAT CLOSE TO THE HOMES. WHEN IT CAME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, THEY PUT A LOT OF STIPULATIONS THAT THEY SAID IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR ANYONE TO HAVE A RENTAL TRUCK PLACE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THEY WERE GOING TO PUT VERY STRICT CONDITIONS ON IT. WELL, THESE ARE NOT ABIDING BY THE STRICT CONDITIONS, AND THIS IS THE FIRST ONE. AND IF THE FIRST ONE DOESN'T DO IT, YOU KNOW THE REST OF THEM AREN'T, AND WE WOULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION IN NOT ALLOWING THIS TO HAPPEN TO THE CITY. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU -- IS THAT ALL YOU WANTED TO SAY, MS. LYON? >> YEP. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET ME -- ONE MINUTE BEFORE YOU BEGIN. I THOUGHT I HAD CALLED FOR THOSE IN FAVOR, AND IT APPEARS I'VE HEARD JUST TWO NEGATIVE COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? YOU WANT TO SPEAK -- OKAY. PLEASE COME UP. >> MY NAME'S CHRIS WALKER. I'M THE ONE THAT'S 5229 SOUTH MacDILL. I WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW WITH THE CITY. WE GOT INVOLVED IN THIS THING WITH THE ZONING VIOLATION, AND IT WAS NO FAULT OF OURS THAT WE WERE INVOLVED IN IT. WHAT HAPPENED WAS WE HAD A PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. FOR LACK OF -- LACK OF WORDS, IT WAS A SLUMLORD TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, AND SO THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. THEY CAME OUT, AND THEY -- I GOT KIND OF SUCKED INTO THE WHOLE REALM, OKAY. I WAS TOLD THAT, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS I KEPT IT UNDER TEN TRUCKS, WHICH I TOTALLY HAVE -- THOSE PICTURES WEREN'T THIS MORNING, BY THE WAY. THAT ONE PICTURE IS PROBABLY A COUPLE -- THREE DAYS OLD, BUT ANYWAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH U-HAUL OR NOT. IT'S KIND OF A NATIONAL THING. PEOPLE LOOK AT U-HAUL AND SAY, OH, IT'S A U-HAUL TRUCK. U-HAUL HAS TWO LEGS. IT HAS THE CORPORATE LEG, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE BIG STORAGE YOU SEE, THE BIG -- YOU KNOW, THE BIG CENTERS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. THEN IT HAS THE OTHER LEG, WHICH THEY CALL INDEPENDENT DEALERS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEALER, WHICH IS LIKE MYSELF, AND WHAT WE DO IS WE HAVE A BUSINESS, AND IN ORDER TO SUPPORT OUR BUSINESS, WE BRING IN OTHER LITTLE BUSINESSES TO TRY TO JUST MAKE A GO OF IT, MAKE A GO OF THAT. SOUTH TAMPA WHERE I'M AT IS ACTUALLY -- FOR LACK OF BETTER WORDS, IS ECONOMICALLY CHALLENGED RIGHT NOW. WE'VE HAD PROBABLY 12 TO 15 BUSINESSES IN THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT HAVE ACTUALLY FOLDED AND GONE OUT OF BUSINESS. WHAT WASN'T SHOWN WAS TO THE LEFT I MY PROPERTY IS A CAR -- ABANDONED CAR LOT WITH ABOUT 12, 15 JUNK CARS THAT AREN'T EVEN TAGGED OR ACROSS THE STREET THERE'S VANS ACROSS THE STREET THAT'S NOT TAGGED. DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME IS A HOUSING PROJECT THAT WAS STARTED SOMETIME AGO THAT THE WEEDS ARE AS TALL AS MY WAIST IS. IT'S NOT HYDE PARK, IT'S NOT CHANNELSIDE, IT'S NOT ONE OF THESE, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WOULD NOT -- OR TRUCK RENTAL BUSINESS WOULD BE CONDUCIVE. WHAT WE HAVE PROMISED THE CITY IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR LIKE THE LAST FIVE YEARS. I'VE BEEN THERE FIVE YEARS THE 31st OF THIS MONTH. I'M SHOOTING FOR, WHAT, TWO WEEKS IT WILL BE MY FIFTH-YEAR ANNIVERSARY. FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN PAYING THE CITY OF TAMPA TAXES, FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN IN COMPLIANCE, FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN A GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN. I HAVE SCHOOLS, I HAVE -- I HAVE CHURCHES. BALLAST POINT CHURCH JUST LAST WEEK I GAVE THEM A TRUCK FOR THE WEEKEND FOR A YARD SALE. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS I PUT BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY, OKAY. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT U-HAUL, DON'T LOOK AT U-HAUL LIKE THE BIG CORPORATE. YOU KNOW, I'M AN INDEPENDENT DEALER, OKAY. I ONLY HAVE TWO EMPLOYEES. I'M NOT WAL-MART WHERE I HAVE, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF EMPLOYEES OR LIKE THE U-HAUL COMPANY. I HAVE TWO EMPLOYEES. IF I LOSE THESE TRUCKS AND THE OTHER 12 DEALERS -- THE OTHER 12 DEALERS WITHIN THE CITY OF TAMPA LIMITS, OKAY, LOSE THEIR TRUCKS, I CAN'T SAY THEY WOULD CLOSE UP THE BUSINESS, BUT I WOULD SAY I WOULD DEFINITELY BE OUT OF BUSINESS WITHOUT QUESTION. IS MY TIME UP? >>BRUCE CURY: MR. WALKER, TECHNICALLY YOUR TIME IS UP, BUT I TRY TO BE AS RESPECTFUL AS POSSIBLE. >> OKAY. >>BRUCE CURY: JUST BRING IT TO A CLOSE. >> OKAY. I SURE WILL. JUST A COUPLE THINGS. LET ME JUST HIT A COUPLE THINGS REAL QUICK. THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEALER, WHICH I AM, OKAY, WE'RE NOT INTO THE BIG RENTALS, WE'RE INTO THE RESIDENTIAL MOVING. WE DON'T DO REFRIGERATION TRUCKS, WE DON'T DO TRUCKS THAT HAVE ELECTRIC LIFTS IN THE BACK, HYDRAULIC LIFTS. WE'RE THE GUY THAT'S GOING TO MOVE POINT "A" TO POINT "B." THE MAJORITY OF MY RENTALS ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT JUST BOUGHT A COUCH DOWN THE STREET AT A YARD SALE OR HAD BOUGHT SOMETHING -- THIS IS WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEALER IS ALL ABOUT. WE HELP THE COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND -- I'M GOING TO CUT IT SHORT HERE, BUT I UNDERSTOOD TOO THAT THEY'RE -- YOU KNOW, THESE PEOPLE -- AND I'VE GOT 45 SIGNATURES HERE OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE COMMUNITY, OKAY, THAT ARE SUPPORTING IT. THE HOUSE THAT WAS REFERRED TO THAT'S BEHIND ME HAS NEVER BEEN LIVED IN. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR THREE YEARS. IT'S NEVER BEEN LIVED IN. IT DOESN'T HAVE POWER IN IT. IN FACT, THE HOUSE IS UNFINISHED. THE BUILDER WENT BANKRUPT. AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS HE CAME IN ONE DAY -- >>BRUCE CURY: MR. WALKER, PLEASE BRING TO A CLOSE, SIR. >> OKAY. LONG STORY SHORT, I WISH AND PRAY THAT YOU-ALL WOULD ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE AND THE OTHER LOCATIONS TO CONTINUE WITHIN THE CITY. U-HAUL IS NOT GOING TO START PUTTING TRUCKS ON EVERY CORNER, EVERY CG LOCATION. THAT WOULDN'T BE GOOD BUSINESS SENSE, YOU KNOW. SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR LISTENING TO ME. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR, MR. WALKER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. ARE THERE OTHERS THAT WOULD CARE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE POSITION? IS IT -- OKAY. ARE THERE QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? >>TERRI COBB: I HAVE A QUESTION. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>TERRI COBB: I'M NOT SURE WHO CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION, BUT MR. COLLINS, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP ME. IT SAYS HERE IN WHAT WILL BE REQUIRED THAT THE STORAGE AREA SHALL BE SCREENED FROM THE VIEW OF ALL RIGHTS-OF-WAY WITH SOLID MASONRY WALL. >>JAY COLLINS: YES, MA'AM, YOU ARE CORRECT. AND I BELIEVE, IF I MAY, THAT YOU ARE READING FROM SECTION 27-272, PAGE 11, AND I BELIEVE YOU -- >>TERRI COBB: YES. >>JAY COLLINS: -- JUST READ FROM "D." >>TERRI COBB: CORRECT. I DIDN'T NOTICE A WALL AROUND THE TRUCKS, AND IF THERE WAS A WALL, THE TRUCKS WOULDN'T BE VERY VISIBLE, BUT IS THAT THE INTENT TO KEEP IT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? >> JULIE COLE, CITY OF TAMPA LEGAL DEPARTMENT, AND MS. COYLE DID NEED TO LEAVE, AND SHE DID HAVE A SUBPOENA THAT SHE DID NEED TO DEAL WITH. WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED ASSUMING THAT WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND CITY COUNCIL DOES APPROVE THIS CODE AMENDMENT IS THIS GENTLEMAN OR ANYBODY WHO HAD A CG PROPERTY WHO WANTED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOCATE A TRUCK RENTAL, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET AN S-2 SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THEN THEY WOULD BE -- IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THAT PERMIT, THEY WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO THEN COMPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS. YOU NOTED THE REQUIREMENT IN "D," BUT THERE'S MANY REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO BE REQUIRED WITH UNLESS THROUGH THIS PROCESS, OUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS, A WAIVER WAS OBTAINED FROM CITY COUNCIL, SO ASSUMING THIS GENTLEMAN AND HIS BUSINESS MEETS THESE CRITERIA, THEN HE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING. >>TERRI COBB: SO WHEN YOU SPOKE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PEOPLE, WERE THEY CONTENT TO HAVE THAT WALL AROUND THAT AREA? WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THEY WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH? >> FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, THE T.H.A.N. FOLKS WHO CAME AND SPOKE TO YOU, THEY TOOK THIS TO THEIR ZONING COMMITTEE, AND THEY WERE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE CONCEPT FROM WHAT I WAS HEARING OF HAVING THE AVAILABILITY OF AN SU PERMIT WITH THESE CONDITIONS ON CG PROPERTY. THEY, FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, DID NOT FEEL THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR TRUCK RENTAL TO BE LOCATED. >>TERRI COBB: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: MR. COLLINS -- ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. COLLINS -- YES, COMMISSIONER. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. YEAH, JUST READING THROUGH THE -- THE CRITERIA THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO MEET -- AND COMMISSIONER COBB MENTIONED IT -- A CONCRETE MASONRY WALL, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION EVER GIVEN TO ANY OTHER TYPES OF FENCING OR -- I MEAN, THEY HAVE FOAM STUCCO WALLS NOW THAT LOOK JUST LIKE A CONCRETE WALL. I CAN -- YOU KNOW, A CONCRETE WALL IS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO BUILD. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT HERE. YOU KNOW, FOR ALL THE PARKING AND EMPLOYEES THAT'S IN THE REAR, IT SEEMS LIKE WE WANT THIS THING TO LOOK LIKE A PRISON TO HIDE THE TRUCKS AND WE DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHO'S USING THEM. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THESE TRUCKS EVER DID TO ANYBODY, BUT IT JUST SEEMS WAY OVERREACHING. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHEN I HEAR T.H.A.N. GET UP AND TALK, THEY TALK ABOUT TAMPA HOMEOWNERS. THEY NEED TO REALIZE THAT BUSINESSES ARE PART OF THE FABRIC OF EVERY SINGLE NEIGHBORHOOD. THESE BUSINESSES THAT ARE ON THE -- THE PERIPHERAL OF THESE -- THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, THESE RESIDENTIAL PORTIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I THINK THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT SERVES THE RESIDENTS WITHIN THAT AREA. SO WHAT CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO OTHER TYPES OF -- >>JAY COLLINS: COMMISSIONER, YOU ARE CORRECT WITH THE IDEA OF OTHER TYPES OF SCREENINGS, AND A WAIVER CAN ALSO BE ASKED FOR A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SCREENING. IF THE APPLICANT DOES NOT WISH TO DO A MASONRY FENCE, THAT APPLICANT MAY ASK FOR A WAIVER AND DO A PVC FENCE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF SCREENING THAT THE APPLICANT SEEMS TO BE FEASIBLE AND DOABLE IN THEIR CERTAIN SITUATION. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: OKAY. WHEN WE GET TO THE SIDEWALK CAFE PORTION SECTION IT TALKS ABOUT THE OFFICIAL ALL THROUGH THIS. WHO IS THE OFFICIAL? >> JULIA COLE, CITY OF TAMPA LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THE OFFICIAL UNDER OUR CHAPTER 22 IS OUR TRANSPORTATION MANAGER. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY TRANSPORTATION MANAGER? >> BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY IT HAS BEEN DEFINED AND THE WAY THAT CHAPTER 22 HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN DRAFTED, AND I THINK IN ALL FAIRNESS, WE PROBABLY NEED TO REVISIT THE WAY OUR ENTIRE CHAPTER 22 WAS DRAFTED, BUT IN ORDER NOT TO HAVE TO CLEAN UP THE ENTIRE CODE, THEY WENT AHEAD AND DID THAT. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: MR. COLLINS, IF YOU WOULD. DID YOU HEAR THE -- DID YOU HEAR THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY MS. VIZZI? >>JAY COLLINS: YES, SIR, I DID. >>BRUCE CURY: WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE WHAT YOU THOUGHT THOSE OBJECTIONS WERE AND RESPOND TO THEM. >>JAY COLLINS: I CAN GO BACK TO -- MS. VIZZI, THROUGH T.H.A.N., WAS MENTIONING THE ISSUES AGAIN WITH THE CG WITH THE SPECIAL USE-2 PERMIT, AND WE DID BRIEFLY COVER SOME OF THE IDEAS OF SCREENING, ALSO THE ISSUE OF THE FACT THAT THAT SCREENING, IT SHOULD BE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. SO THERE'S ONE OF THE ISSUES OF WHERE YOU ACTUALLY SEE OPEN STORAGE USES IN THE CITY OF TAMPA ARE USUALLY SCREENED IN THE REAR OF A PROPERTY. ALSO, THE ISSUE OF THE FACT THAT ALL VEHICLES, TRAILERS FOR RENT SHALL BE PARKED EITHER ON ASPHALT, CONCRETE, OR A PERVIOUS PAVEMENT. AGAIN -- AND I'M SORRY. FOR THE COMMISSION AND ALSO THOSE AT HOME READING, I'M READING FROM SECTION 27-272. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU. MR. COLLINS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>JAY COLLINS: YES. >>BRUCE CURY: THOSE ARE MARVELOUS, WONDERFUL ANSWERS. LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION. MY MEMORY OF WHAT SHE SAID, HER OBJECTION DISTILLS TO THIS, THAT PLACING TRUCKS -- TRUCKS IN -- IN -- IN AND NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA WITHOUT -- WAS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. LET ME FIRST -- BEFORE YOU RESPOND TO THAT, IS IT SO THAT IF -- WITH THIS, THROUGHOUT THE -- THROUGHOUT THE -- THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES OF THIS CITY EVERY CG WILL BE PERMITTED TO HAVE TRUCK RENTALS? YES? >>JAY COLLINS: THAT IS INCORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: PLEASE -- PLEASE HELP ME THEN. >>JAY COLLINS: YES, SIR. AGAIN, THROUGH THE LANGUAGE THAT IS WRITTEN HERE, THIS CG MUST BE LOCATED ALONG AN ARTERIAL, SO THESE ARE ROADWAYS THAT ARE CLASSIFIED IN THE CITY OF TAMPA SUCH AS DALE MABRY, FLORIDA, NEBRASKA, AND SUCH THAT MUST HAVE IT. THERE ARE AREAS THAT ARE CG IN THIS COMMUNITY THAT ARE NOT LOCATED ALONG ARTERIALS. THERE ARE AREAS OF MacDILL AVENUE THAT ARE NOT ACTUALLY CLASSIFIED AS ARTERIALS. THEY'RE, IN FACT, CLASSIFIED AS COLLECTORS FURTHER SOUTH ON GANDY, FURTHER SOUTH OF GANDY. >>BRUCE CURY: SO ARTERIAL IS ONE STRATIFICATION, AND THEN COLLECTOR IS ANOTHER, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE -- THE LESSER ROADWAYS, SO IT'S NO LESSER ROADWAY, IT IS NO COLLECTOR, AND IT IS ONLY ARTERIALS? >>JAY COLLINS: THAT IS CORRECT, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ASK YOU. >>JAY COLLINS: OH, THANK YOU, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: YOUR ANSWER WAS -- THE ANSWER WAS EXCELLENT. YOU'VE SATISFIED ME. >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER -- WHAT? COMMISSIONER MAI, PLEASE GO AHEAD. >>HUNG MAI: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: ALLOW ME TO BE GRACIOUS. PLEASE GO AHEAD. >>HUNG MAI: YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANT MARGARET VIZZI TO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO GET THE SPECIAL USE ON THE CG, YOU KNOW, ZONING AND WITH ALL OF THAT PROTECTION, AND THEN AGAIN, LIKE MR. COLLINS SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY PROPERTY ON ARTERIAL ROADWAY IS NOT, YOU KNOW, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: COMMISSIONER SEARS. >>GARY SEARS: I DID NOT EXPECT TO BE SPEAKING ON THIS SUBJECT, BUT I HAD STUDIED THIS AT HOME. TO ME IT'S KIND OF LIKE A CASE OF THE CAMEL GETTING ITS HEAD IN THE TENT AND -- BUT ALSO, WHEN I TURN AROUND AND LOOK AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, MINIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET WON'T EVEN COVER THOSE BOX TRUCKS. I MEAN, YOU'RE STILL -- YOU'RE NOT HIDING ANYTHING. THAT'S -- I -- I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND -- BUT I THINK SOMETHING COULD POSSIBLY BE DONE BY WORKING WITH THE HOMEOWNERS, BUT A MINIMUM HEIGHT -- LET'S FACE IT, A MINIMUM HEIGHT, IT ISN'T GOING TO BE OVER SIX FOOT BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT HAS BEEN SET AS A MINIMUM, SO IF YOU STAND BESIDE ONE OF THESE BOX TRUCKS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PROBABLY FOUR OR FIVE FOOT EASY EXTENDING ABOVE A WALL OF ANY TYPE. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. COMMISSIONER, ARE THERE -- ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? >>JILL BUFORD: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>JILL BUFORD: I HAVE A -- I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE STORAGE SETBACKS AND HEIGHT LIMITS AS WELL. I JUST -- ON PAGE 9, THE NEW NUMBER 1, IT TALKS ABOUT OUTDOOR STORAGE AREAS BEING SCREENED FROM VIEW OF ANY ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR STREET, AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT'S JUST A REGULAR COLLECTOR? DOES THIS INCLUDE A NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR AS WELL? I WANT TO -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE THERE'S A -- THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO, MY UNDERSTANDING -- I MEAN, I CAME TO SOME LEVEL OF SATISFACTION. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS WORD "COLLECTOR." WHAT I UNDERSTOOD FROM MR. COLLINS IS ONLY ON ARTERIALS. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: IT'S ON A DIFFERENT -- NO, A DIFFERENT SUBJECT. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT AFTER YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION, YOU -- MY FEELING IS IT'S INCOMPATIBLE WITH -- WITH -- THERE ISN'T SUFFICIENT TRANSITION, THERE IS NO -- IT'S -- BUT AS LONG AS IT'S ON AN ARTERIAL ONLY, THEN I'M SILENT, OKAY. PLEASE GO AHEAD. I -- >>JILL BUFORD: RIGHT. THIS IS ON THE STORAGE SETBACKS AND HEIGHT LIMITS, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>JILL BUFORD: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS ARE PART OF THAT COLLECTOR CLASSIFICATION. >>JAY COLLINS: A COLLECTOR AND A NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR. NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS ARE -- YOU HAVE AN ARTERIAL, THEN A COLLECTOR, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE LOCAL -- THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOCALS -- >>JILL BUFORD: COLLECTORS. >>JAY COLLINS: -- OF COLLECTORS. YES. SO YOU -- >>JILL BUFORD: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN THERE SOMEWHERE. >>JAY COLLINS: YES. YES. >>JILL BUFORD: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SEARS. I THINK THAT SIX-FOOT HEIGHT -- A MINIMUM OF SIX FOOT ON A WALL FOR TRUCKS IS MINIMUM -- IF IT'S A MINIMUM OF SIX FOOT, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET IS A SIX-FOOT WALL. NO ONE'S GOING TO GO HIGHER, AND THOSE TRUCKS ARE GOING TO STAND OUT, I AGREE. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST EIGHT FEET; HOWEVER, IT'S ON AN ARTERIAL, WHICH THAT -- THAT IS WHAT ARTERIALS ARE TO DO, THEY'RE TO SUPPORT AND SERVE THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, SO IF WE CAN GET THE -- IF WE CAN GET THE HEIGHT A LITTLE -- HEIGHT A LITTLE HIGHER, I WOULD BE REALLY HAPPY ABOUT THAT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR SOMEONE RESPOND TO THAT? I MIGHT JUST REFLECT THIS WAY. I CAN UNDERSTAND -- THE FIRST THING IS THAT IF IT'S OFF AN ARTERIAL, AND THAT IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT FACT FOR ME, THEN THOSE THAT ARE BEHIND SORT OF ASSUME THE RISK ATTENDANT TO THE ACTIVITY. I MEAN, THEY PURCHASED DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. I SEE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT -- I HAVE A DIFFERENT POSITION ENTIRELY OFF AN ARTERIAL, BUT AN ARTERIAL. AS FAR AS RAISING THE HEIGHT ON THE WALL, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE WISDOM OF MR. COLLINS. ONE THING I DO KNOW IN MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT WHEN WE'VE PUT UP WALLS -- IN MY OTHER LIFE, WHEN WE PUT UP WALLS, WE -- WE CREATED -- WE HAD COMMENTS BY THOSE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT WE HAD TAKEN LIGHT AND AIR AWAY FROM THEM, THAT WE'D MADE A PENITENTIARY, SO I DON'T KNOW. JUST -- I DO FEEL THAT IT'S NECESSARY TO HAVE PROPER SHIELDING, BUT -- AND WHAT MR. SEARS SAID I AGREE WITH, BUT WHEN YOU GET OVER SIX FEET, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE A DIFFICULTY WITH THAT KIND OF PENITENTIARY FEEL. PLEASE, DID YOU CONSIDER HIGHER, AND WHY WAS IT REJECTED IF IT WAS CONSIDERED? >>JAY COLLINS: WELL, I WILL MENTION THAT A SIX-FOOT HEIGHT IS A COMMON STANDARD WITHIN THE CG DISTRICT. ALSO, AS YOU KNOW, THIS BODY MAY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO TAMPA CITY COUNCIL ON ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE. THAT WAY THIS COMMISSION MAY HAVE THEIR VOICES HEARD AT CITY COUNCIL FOR WHAT IT IS THAT THEY SEE AS ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. MS. COLE, WOULD YOU COME UP AND SAY SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT IS THE LOGIC OF SIX FOOT, OR CAN IT -- WHAT DO YOU FEEL? WHAT ARE YOUR FEELINGS? >> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT'S GENERALLY THE STANDARD REQUIREMENT IN A CG DISTRICT IS PROBABLY HOW THAT SIX-FOOT CAME ABOUT. AND THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT CITY COUNCIL HAD REQUESTED THAT STAFF LOOK INTO AND PROVIDE SOME STANDARDS, AND THAT'S HOW ALL OF THIS LANGUAGE CAME ABOUT. >>BRUCE CURY: IS THE STORAGE OF TRUCKS A FACT SUFFICIENTLY DIFFERENT THAT MAYBE A WALL GREATER THAN SIX FOOT SHOULD BE CONTEMPLATED? >> I MEAN, I THINK GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IF THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS BODY, THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE BACK TO CITY COUNCIL AND LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS BODY IS RECOMMENDING A HIGHER WALL ALLOWABILITY, WHICH THEN, IF A PROPERTY OWNER DID NOT FEEL THEY COULD PROVIDE THAT MUCH OF A HEIGHT OR THERE IS SOME OTHER REASON, A WAIVER COULD BE REQUESTED TO LOWER THE HEIGHT. ALTERNATIVELY A WAIVER COULD BE REQUESTED TO MAKE IT HIGHER, BUT -- BUT CERTAINLY IF THIS BODY FEELS THAT AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD MAKE THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT MORE IN -- IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE'D TAKE THAT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL. >>BRUCE CURY: MAYBE -- MAYBE THE INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE ELICITED FROM THIS QUESTION MAY BE HELPFUL. ASSUMING THAT -- ASSUMING THAT CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTS THE CHANGES; THAT IS, ON ARTERIALS, THEN CG WILL PERMIT TRUCKS TO BE STORED? >> CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. AN INDIVIDUAL, THEN, DOES NOT HAVE THE PRIVILEGE -- IT IS NOT SELF-EXECUTING. AN INDIVIDUAL THEN DOES NOT HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF PUTTING TRUCKS ON CG, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SPECIAL PROCESS AND A HEARING. WHAT TYPES OF EVIDENCE MUST THEY PRESENT IN ORDER TO SUCCEED? >> SHE WOULD NEED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT THEY COMPLY WITH THE CRITERIA THAT IS SET FORTH WITHIN -- THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT'S SET FORTH IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS THAT WE WENT THROUGH EARLIER, PLUS THEY WOULD HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY MEET THE GENERAL STANDARDS, WHICH ARE GENERAL COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS AND STANDARDS OF NOT IMPACTING THE PUBLIC HEALTH, AND I DON'T HAVE ACTUALLY ALL THOSE IN FRONT OF ME, BUT THOSE ARE THE GENERAL STANDARDS THAT YOU NEED TO MEET ON ANY SPECIAL USE PERMIT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU -- YOU ARE COMPATIBLE, WHETHER -- GIVEN A SPECIFIC PROPERTY, WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAUSE ANY KIND OF PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES, AND THOSE KINDS OF -- OF ITEMS. THAT WOULD HAPPEN THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GRANT OR DENY THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MS. COLE. YES, COMMISSIONER. >>TERRI COBB: I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THIS BECAUSE ON AN -- I'VE NEVER SEEN A U-HAUL BUSINESS THAT HAD WALLS THAT HID THE TRUCKS. THEY'RE ALWAYS VISIBLE BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU KNOW THEY HAVE THEM. I MEAN, IT'S -- IT JUST SEEMS INCONGRUOUS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A WALL THAT WOULD DISGUISE THEM, SO THEREFORE -- >>BRUCE CURY: AT THE REAR -- >>TERRI COBB: -- WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE YOU'D SEE ALL THE TRUCKS. YOU HAVE TO SEE THEM IN ORDER TO RENT THEM. >>BRUCE CURY: NOT -- NOT -- NOT FACED -- NOT AS YOU DRIVE ON THE ARTERIAL. IMAGINE DRIVING DOWN KENNEDY BOULEVARD. >>TERRI COBB: WELL, THAT WOULD BE FINE. I THINK THAT'S -- >>BRUCE CURY: YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A WALL AT THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU'D HAVE A WALL AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH -- >>TERRI COBB: LEADS TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>TERRI COBB: YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT THE WAY THIS IS SET UP, THAT DOESN'T CLARIFY THAT, IT JUST -- MAYBE THEY CAN GO BACK AND REWORK THIS ONE ISSUE, AND CAN WE SEPARATE THIS FROM THE OTHERS SO THAT WE CAN VOTE SEPARATELY ON IT IF WE SHOULD DECIDE TO DO THAT? >>BRUCE CURY: WE CERTAINLY CAN, BUT LET'S SEE. MAYBE -- MAYBE THERE'S NO -- WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHETHER THERE'S AN ISSUE. ONE SAYS YES, ANOTHER SAYS NO. IT MAY BE AFTER WE TALK THROUGH -- >>TERRI COBB: I AGREE WITH YOU, YES. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER KITCHEN. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: I DID -- I'LL WAIT. YOU SAID SOMETHING AT THE END OF YOUR COMMENTS THAT [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. WE HAVEN'T HAD THE VOTE, SO WE DON'T HAVE THE ISSUE YET. WE CAN BIFURCATE IT IF NECESSARY. YES, MR. DOWDY. >>MILLER DOWDY: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAVE ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL AS WELL. IN DISCUSSION OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, IF THEY DO DECIDE TO STAY FOR WHATEVER THEIR REASONING IS WITH THE SIX-FOOT WALL, MAYBE THEY COULD CONSIDER LANDSCAPE BUFFERING THAT WOULD GO UP AND BEYOND THE SIX-FOOT WALL. IT WOULD PROVIDE A SENSE OF LIGHT AND SOUND DAMPENING AS WELL AS VISUAL ENHANCEMENT AS WELL, SO IF THEY DO DECIDE TO STAY WITH THE SIX-FOOT, IF THEY COULD CONSIDER THAT AS WELL, THAT WOULD BE TREMENDOUS. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: I NEVER -- I CANNOT TELL YOU THE JOY I GET WHEN -- WHEN I BECOME INTRANSIGENT ON A PARTICULAR POSITION, THINK I'M RIGHT, AND THEN HEAR SOMEONE SAY SOMETHING AND REALIZE I'M TOTALLY WRONG AND I ENJOY IT. WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, I THINK SIX FOOT -- I HEAR ALL THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT SIX FOOT, AND I HEAR THE BUFFERING, BUT IMAGINE -- IMAGINE TRAVELING -- IMAGINE TRAVELING ALONG AN ARTERY AND YOU SEE A TEN-FOOT WALL. I MEAN, THINK OF THE AESTHETIC, I GUESS, AND THINK OF THE DIFFERENCE -- THE DIFFERENCE IN THE -- I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S THINGS TO CONSIDER. YES. COMMISSIONER CHILLURA, DID YOU -- >>FRANK CHILLURA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. CERTAINLY THERE'S CERTAIN VIEWPOINTS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE TABLE HERE, AND, YOU KNOW, CG ZONING ON AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY IS PRETTY INTENSE. I MEAN, YOUR NEXT ZONING IS WHAT, CI? AND THEN YOU GO TO INDUSTRIAL. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY LOWER ZONINGS LIKE CN, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M SURE IF YOU WERE TO READ OFF THE USES THAT WERE ALLOWED IN A CG ZONING, THERE ARE OTHER USES THAT ARE MUCH MORE INTENSE THAN PARKING TRUCKS IN A PARKING LOT WHICH YOU'RE LIMITING TO TEN TRUCKS. I THINK THE LENGTH -- I DIDN'T SEE THAT HERE IN MY DESCRIPTION, BUT MR. COLLINS STATED THAT THE TRUCKS WERE 24 FEET LONG MAXIMUM? >>JAY COLLINS: NO LONGER THAN, YES, SIR. >>FRANK CHILLURA: NO LONGER THAN, WHICH IS FROM HERE TO THAT WALL. I MEAN, I DRIVE A TUNDRA FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE, AND THAT'S 17, 18 FEET LONG. HEIGHT'S NOT THERE, BUT I CAN SEE RIGHT NOW -- AS THIS DISCUSSION'S GOING ON, I'M THINKING YOU GO TO THE MECHANIC SHOP TO GET YOUR OIL CHANGED, AND THEY ROTATE YOUR TIRES AND YOU HEAR THAT AIR RATCHET GOING OFF ALL DAY LONG. THAT'S PERMITTED IN CG. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO SAY WHERE -- WHERE IS, YOU KNOW, THE RIGHTS OF -- OF ALL INVOLVED? I USED TO LIVE ON A MAJOR -- MY BACKYARD USED TO BE ON FOWLER AVENUE, VERY INTENSE. COULDN'T STAND IT, BUT I BOUGHT THE HOUSE. WELL, AFTER THREE YEARS OF THAT, I MOVED ON THE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER, NIGHT AND DAY ENVIRONMENT, BUT I KNEW WHAT WAS THERE, SO, I MEAN, ZONINGS ARE PUT IN PLACE FOR CERTAIN REASONS. I MEAN, YOU CAN'T EXPECT SOMEBODY TO HAVE A LEASING COMPANY TO GO IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA, YOU KNOW. I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT COMMERCIAL INTENSE IS FOR LEASING A LITTLE MOVING TRUCK. THESE AREN'T SEMI TRUCKS, THEY'RE LITTLE MOVING TRUCKS. YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT. IT'S NOT GOING INTO A COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING, WHICH IS LIKE YOUR LITTLE, YOU KNOW, MALL CENTER, LITTLE STRIP MALLS IN A LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE DRY-CLEANERS, AND THE OTHERS, SO THERE CAN BE A FINE LINE. MR. DOWDY HAD A GOOD POINT THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, MAYBE PUT A FEW TREES, LANDSCAPING. IT'S GOING TO TAKE YOU TEN YEARS TO GET THE BUSHES UP, BUT A FEW OAK TREES IN THE BACK. YOU CAN CERTAINLY HELP OFFSET SOME OF THAT SITE, BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE INTENSE USES THAT CAN GO ON IN A CG ZONING THAN PARKING TEN TRUCKS, AND THEY'RE LIMITING IT, A MINIMUM OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. NOW, I DO AGREE THAT SOMETIMES WHERE YOU HAVE THESE -- I'VE SEEN A FEW OF THESE WHERE THEY HAVE CONVENIENCE STORES AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE THIS USE THAT POPS IN THERE -- I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S PERMITTED OR HOW IT'S DONE, BUT IF IT'S MONITORED AND REGULATED FOR EACH TRUCK YOU MUST HAVE SO MANY SQUARE FEET, AS I THINK IS EXPRESSED IN THE WORDING HERE THAT WAS CREATED BY MR. COLLINS -- BUT IF THAT'S UNFAIRLY -- YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. YOU HAVE TO BE GIVEN CERTAIN RIGHTS TO USE IT. YOU'RE NOT GOING INTO THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND ASKING ON AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY -- I MEAN, AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL AREA, WE CERTAINLY WANT TO PROTECT THE OTHERS AS WELL, SO THAT -- YOU KNOW, I'M JUST LISTENING TO ALL SIDES OF THIS. WHERE DO YOU WANT THEM TO GO? I MEAN, DO WE WANT THEM TO GO TO AN INDUSTRIAL PARK? BUT THEN AGAIN, THE MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE USING THESE TRUCKS ARE IN THAT LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THOSE LITTLE NEIGHBORHOODS, SO THEY'RE NOT COMING FROM ACROSS TOWN, FROM THE SHIPYARDS TO GET ONE OF THESE LITTLE TRUCKS, IT'S SOMEBODY MOVING FROM THIS HOUSE TO THIS APARTMENT OR VICE VERSA. THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO THE LITTLE TRUCK RENTAL OR CAR RENTAL PLACE, GET A TRUCK, GET THEIR LITTLE FURNITURE, AND MOVE IT RIGHT DOWN THE STREET. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AS INTENSE AS WE'RE MAKING IT -- AS IT'S BEING PUT OUT TO BE. YEAH, YOU CAN PRETTY IT UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT TO START BUILDING EIGHT-FOOT WALLS, I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE, LIKE, COMPOUNDS THEN, AND I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE MORE OF A TREE -- A FEW TREES AROUND THERE THAN EIGHT-FOOT WALLS, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: COMMISSIONER KITCHEN. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: SOMEONE SAID THAT WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL IN TERMS OF OUR CONCERNS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE. I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD DO THIS -- OKAY. I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD DO THIS AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, MAKE OUR CONCERNS KNOWN, AND GO AHEAD AND TAKE ACTION ON THE TOTAL AMENDMENT. >>BRUCE CURY: IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE -- IF THERE'S NOT -- YES, COMMISSIONER. >>HUNG MAI: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO -- I MEAN, INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, SIX-FOOT HIGH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO INCREASE THAT TO EIGHT FEET WALL WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME CONDITION THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY MIGHT ASKING A DIFFERENT TYPE OF, YOU KNOW, MASONRY WALL THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, EASE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN ABOUT A SERIES OF THE TRUCK, YOU KNOW, PARKING. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED IS WE GOT IN -- WE DEGENERATED INTO COMMENTS, AND WHAT WE NEED IS TO HAVE A MOTION ABOUT WHICH WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION, SO I WILL TAKE THAT AS A FIRST MOTION. THE MOTION IS APPROVAL WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT -- THAT -- THAT THE WALL TO WHICH WE HAVE REFERRED BE EIGHT FEET INSTEAD OF SIX FEET. ALL RIGHT. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] LANDSCAPING? >>HUNG MAI: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: HOW DO WE ARTICULATE IT? CAN WE DO IT THAT WAY, OR DO WE NEED TO SAY YES OR NO WITH SUGGESTIONS. >>ROBERT HUNTER: YOU CAN APPROVE ALL THESE WITH THE EXPLICIT SUGGESTION ON JUST ONE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. WE CAN'T DISAPPROVE IT -- WE CAN'T CHANGE IT NOW. WHAT WE CAN SAY IS WE APPROVE IT WITH THAT EXCEPTION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, THE SUGGESTION WAS TO ADD THE -- THE BUFFERING OF PLANTS. DID YOU -- HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR POSITION? WE HAVE A MOTION -- >>HUNG MAI: RIGHT. >>BRUCE CURY: AND NO SECOND ON ACCEPTING -- ACCEPTING THIS ITEM WITH THE ONLY CHANGE BEING TO ENHANCE -- TO AUGMENT THE WALL BY TWO FEET TO EIGHT FEET. IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE -- MR. GARCIA, I ASSUME YOU'RE NOT WANDERING AIMLESSLY. WAS THERE A PURPOSE -- WHAT'S THE MATTER? >>TONY GARCIA: MAY I BE RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR? >>BRUCE CURY: ABSOLUTELY, SIR. >>TONY GARCIA: THANK YOU, SIR. TONY GARCIA, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. IF I MAY, A FRIENDLY SUGGESTION AS TO PROBABLY SHORTENING THE DISCUSSION YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ON THIS. THE RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE PROPOSAL OF THE MOTION THAT'S BEING MADE BY MR. MAI POTENTIALLY COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL PREDICATED ON THE CONSIDERATION BY TAMPA CITY COUNCIL OF SEVERAL ADDITIONAL MITIGATION FEATURES, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY BE "A," A HIGHER FENCE, "B," ADDITIONAL VEGETATIVE BUFFERING, OR "C," A DIFFERENT KIND OF WALL TREATMENT, OR EVEN A POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL BUFFERING FROM RESIDENTIAL. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THE FIRST THING IS FOR ME TO RESOLVE THE CONTROVERSY, THEN WHAT FORMAT TO PUT IT IN IS THE SECOND STEP, BUT I THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. IS THERE DISCUSSION? >> I THINK THAT THE QUESTION THAT WAS BEING BROUGHT UP WAS -- MR. MAI'S MOTION -- WAS THAT THERE BE AN EIGHT-FOOT BUFFER WALL OF WHATEVER SORT BE DESIGNATED, BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT -- AND CERTAIN -- WOULD THERE BE DISCRETION GIVEN THAT YOU COULD HAVE THE EIGHT-FOOT WALL OR YOU COULD DO AS MR. DOWDY SAID, HAVE TREES -- A LITTLE LANDSCAPING IS NOT GOING TO DO YOU ANY GOOD, YOU'RE SEEING IT FROM THIS SIDE - - FROM THE INSIDE OF THIS WALL, BUT IF YOU'RE ABLE TO PUT TREES, IT CAN EXTEND BEYOND THE SIX-FOOT WALL, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE PUTTING AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL AND YOU'RE PUTTING TREES, THEN THAT'S -- THAT'S REALLY OVERKILLING THE MATTER BECAUSE THE TREE AT SOME POINT'S GOING TO KICK IN AND TAKE OVER, SO IF YOU -- I WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO DOING EIGHT FOOT OR SIX FOOT AND TREES. THAT WOULD CREATE A -- A BUFFER THERE, BUT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST AN IDEA OR SUGGESTION FOR DISCUSSION. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. JUST SO THAT WE DON'T DRIFT TOO FAR, WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR IS A FINDING OF CONSISTENCY. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR A FINDING OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AN APPROVAL OF THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION WITH A ATTENDANT SUGGESTION THAT WE HAVE A WALL -- THE WALL WILL BE ENHANCED BY TWO FEET. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR. DOES EVERYBODY AGREE WITH MY DISTILLATION? YEAH. GOOD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT. >>FRANK CHILLURA: AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. MAI IF HE WOULD CONSIDER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WOULD INCORPORATE HIS ORIGINAL MOTION THAT THERE EITHER BE AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL OR THERE WOULD BE A SIX-FOOT WALL WITH LANDSCAPE TREES THAT WOULD BE SPACED OUT APPROPRIATELY TO CREATE THAT BUFFER. >>HUNG MAI: I -- MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: LANDSCAPE TREES AS OPPOSED TO -- >>FRANK CHILLURA: WELL, TREES -- [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] LIKE AN OAK TREE. >>BRUCE CURY: NOT VEGETATION, HEDGES, YOU WANT TREES? >>FRANK CHILLURA: WELL, AND THE PURPOSE -- HEDGES ARE WONDERFUL AND BEAUTIFUL, BUT BEFORE A HEDGE GETS EIGHT FEET TALL -- >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL I WANT TO DO IS CLARIFY -- >>FRANK CHILLURA: I'M SAYING TREES, YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. A SIX -- SIX-FOOT WALL WITH TREES OR AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL? >>FRANK CHILLURA: CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE, CONSISTENCY, APPROVAL, WITH THE SUGGESTION OF AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL OR SIX-FOOT WALL WITH TREES. >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO AMEND, YOU KNOW, MY MOTION. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >> GREAT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. I'M JUST WAITING TO SEE IF THE BALL SETTLES BEFORE -- OKAY. >>JILL BUFORD: I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY EITHER A SIX-FOOT SOLID WALL WITH TREES OR AN EIGHT-FOOT SOLID WALL WITHOUT THE TREES? IT'S STILL SOLID; RIGHT? WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT AND IT'S NOW A CHAIN-LINK FENCE. >> NO. >>JILL BUFORD: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL IS THE SAME THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT WHICH IS ARTICULATED HERE. IF IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY SAID, IT'S NOT CHANGED. OKAY. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: MAY I UNDERSTAND SOMETHING. WE ARE APPROVING THIS AMENDMENT WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, OR WHAT DO WE CALL -- WHAT IS ALL OF THIS, SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, OR WHAT? >>BRUCE CURY: WE'RE GOING -- WE'RE GOING TO FIND IT CONSISTENT. THAT WAS JUST PRESENTED. WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION WITH THE SUGGESTIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY HAVE AN EIGHT- FOOT WALL OR A SIX-FOOT WALL WITH TREES. DOES THAT ANSWER -- DOES THAT ANSWER -- >>TERRI COBB: BUFFER. >>BRUCE CURY: WAIT. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: TREES WITH BUFFER? >>FRANK CHILLURA: THAT CREATES BUFFER. >>BRUCE CURY: HE JUST WANTS TREES. WE TALKED ABOUT HEDGES. HE DIDN'T WANT THAT. >>FRANK CHILLURA: THE HEDGES ARE GOING TO SERVE THE PURPOSE OF CREATING A BUFFER, BUT, YOU KNOW -- >>BRUCE CURY: SOONER OR LATER, WE HAVE TO GET THE YES OR NO. >>FRANK CHILLURA: GOTCHA. CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO HELP US? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND AND WE HAVE DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE. MOVING TO ITEM NUMBER 4, CONSISTENCY FINDING, FY 10-2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, CIP. MR. AUGUSTINE. >>WILL AUGUSTINE: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. WILL AUGUSTINE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE CITY OF TAMPA'S FISCAL YEAR 2010 TO 2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 97-351 LAWS OF FLORIDA TO PERFORM AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OF THE CITY OF TAMPA. THIS ANNUAL REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO ENSURE THAT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OF THE CITY OF TAMPA INCLUDES A SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS THAT'S CARRIED OUT BASED ON A PREDETERMINED PRIORITY OF NEED AND THE ABILITY TO FUND THOSE PROJECTS, THAT THE SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS REFLECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THAT THE SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS INVOLVE COORDINATION WITH ADJACENT JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OUTLINES FUNDING PRIORITIES THAT GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC FACILITIES. THESE FUNDING PRIORITIES INCLUDE THE REPLACEMENT OR REPAIR OF FACILITIES WHICH CONTRIBUTE ACHIEVING OR MAINTAINING THE ADOPTED LEVEL-OF-SERVICE STANDARD, THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW FACILITIES THAT REDUCE OR ELIMINATE DEFICIENCIES FOR EXISTING DEMAND, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW FACILITIES THAT MAINTAIN STANDARDS FOR NEW GROWTH. STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 TO 2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM DOES MEET THESE PRIORITIES AND COMPLIES WITH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ALL CIE PROJECTS WERE RELATED TO THE LAND USE PLAN DENSITIES AND INTENSITIES. IT WAS DETERMINED BY STAFF THAT THESE CORRESPONDING CIE PROJECTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH WATER AND SEWER SERVICE AREAS. THESE SERVICE AREAS ALSO INCLUDE THE CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE, WHICH HAS AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH TAMPA SINCE 1962 TO TREAT THEIR WASTEWATER. THE CITY'S LAND USE PLAN DEPICTS USES 20 YEARS INTO THE FUTURE AND URBAN USES THAT REQUIRE CONCURRENCY TO HAVE PUBLIC FACILITY CAPACITY AVAILABLE. STAFF REVIEWED THE CIE-RELATED PROJECTS AND HAS DETERMINED THAT THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DENSITIES PROJECTED IN THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. WITHIN THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, SIX FUNCTIONAL AREAS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET CONCURRENCY -- THE CONCURRENCY TESTS UNDER RULE 9J-5. THESE ARE WATER, TRANSPORTATION, WASTEWATER, PARKS, STORMWATER, AND SOLID WASTE. THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 TO 2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM INCLUDES 101 PROJECTS THAT TOTAL OVER $228 MILLION. THE LARGEST FUNCTIONAL AREA OF EXPENDITURE IS FUNDED IN THE TRANSPORTATION, WATER, AND STORMWATER CAPITAL PROGRAMS. THESE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ACCOUNT FOR 74 OF THE 101 PROJECTS, TOTALING OVER 200 MILLION OR 87% OF THE TOTAL CIP. THE LARGEST FUNCTIONAL PERCENTAGE AREAS OF CAPITAL PROJECT IS FOUND IN THE TRANSPORTATION, WATER, STORMWATER, AND WASTEWATER PROGRAMS. THESE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ACCOUNT FOR 92 OF THE 101 PROJECTS, TOTALING OVER 217 MILLION OR 89% OF THE TOTAL CIP. IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT STATE LAW DEFINES FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY AS ACHIEVING AND MAINTAINING THE ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICES THROUGH THE SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS. IT'S STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE EXISTING DEFICIENCIES IN MEETING LEVEL OF SERVICE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM. THIS LEVEL-OF-SERVICE DEFICIENCY EXISTS ALONG BRUCE B. DOWNS BOULEVARD, WHICH IS OUTSIDE THE TAMPA'S TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA BOUNDARY. THE LAW REGARDING FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ALSO INCLUDES ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE AFTER DECEMBER 1st OF 2011. UNDER THE NEW TCEA REQUIREMENTS, THE CITY HAS THE OPTION OF DOING AWAY WITH LOCAL CONCURRENCY OR MAINTAINING IT. UNLESS AMENDED, EXISTING LOCAL CONCURRENCY PROVISIONS CONTINUE TO APPLY IN THE TCEA. STAFF FINDS THAT THE DRAFT RECOMMENDED -- OR THE -- THE STAFF RECOMMENDED TAMPA -- CITY OF TAMPA FISCAL YEAR 2010 TO 2015 CIP ADHERES TO PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED CITY OF TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE PLANS OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA REPORTS DEFICIENT LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR TRANSPORTATION ROADWAYS WHICH ARE CURRENTLY BEING ADDRESSED BY THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AS WELL AS THE CITY OF TAMPA. REGARDING THIS TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY, THERE MAY BE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ISSUES. FINALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CONSISTENT WITH ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FORWARD THE STAFF REPORT AND THE RESOLUTION TO THE CITY OF TAMPA. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MR. AUGUSTINE. ARE THERE THOSE THAT CARE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? ARE THERE THOSE THAT WOULD SPEAK TO THE CONTRARY? ARE THERE QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED. DO I HAVE A MOTION. >>TERRI COBB: I MOVE -- >> [INAUDIBLE] >>TERRI COBB: -- OR SECOND. SOMEONE ELSE MOVED. >>JILL BUFORD: ACTUALLY, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE -- I DO HAVE A COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE ANYTHING. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. >>JILL BUFORD: THE GANDY BOULEVARD, WESTSHORE BOULEVARD INTERSECTIONS IMPROVEMENT IS SHOWING A DEFICIENCY, AND FD - - I'M VERY CONFUSED BECAUSE FDOT HAS JUST DONE A TOTAL REVAMP OF GANDY BOULEVARD, WHICH INCLUDED WESTSHORE -- THE WESTSHORE INTERSECTION. ALSO, THE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY IS PLANNING A BYPASS OF THAT INTERSECTION WITH THEIR -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S -- I CALL IT THE BRIDGE OVER GANDY, THE CONNECTOR THAT IS HAPPENING, AND I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THIS PROGRAM IS SHOWING $8,732,000 TO IMPROVE AN INTERSECTION THAT IS, IN MY -- FROM MY POINT OF VIEW HAS BEEN IMPROVED AND IS GETTING SOME RELIEF IN FUTURE YEARS. I HAVE -- I JUST NEED TO SAY THAT I HAVE A GREAT -- I HAVE GREAT ISSUE WITH THIS. IT'S $8 MILLION THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE SPENDING IT THERE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. WHY DON'T WE -- WHY DON'T WE ASK MR. AUGUSTINE TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION. >>JILL BUFORD: ALL RIGHT. >>WILL AUGUSTINE: WITH THAT SPECIFIC PROJECT I'LL NEED TO RESEARCH AND GET BACK WITH YOU. I -- I -- I NEED TO FIND OUT ALL THE PARTICULARS ABOUT THAT. >>JILL BUFORD: OKAY. THAT'S FAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: BUT IN THE MEANTIME -- >>JILL BUFORD: IN THE MEANTIME -- >>BRUCE CURY: YES. THERE'S THE EXPECTATION THAT WE GO AHEAD WITH THIS THING. ALL RIGHT. >>MILLER DOWDY: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>MILLER DOWDY: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE FINDING OF CONSISTENCY, FOR THE TAMPA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR '10 THROUGH '15. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. YES, MA'AM. >>TERRI COBB: DISCUSSION? >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>TERRI COBB: YES. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS, BUT I -- I DO AGREE WITH YOU. WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT INVOLVE THAT INTERSECTION, SO I DON'T KNOW WHICH OF THEM TAKES PRECEDENCE OR WHETHER THIS IS GOING AHEAD REGARDLESS OF THE OTHERS OR ISN'T REALLY GOING AHEAD. I'D LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT THAT AS WELL. >>WILL AUGUSTINE: YES, MA'AM. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. I WAS HOPING THAT YOU'D HAVE SOME CLARIFICATION, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE THINGS EASY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I GUESS WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS YOU MUST DIGEST ALL THE THINGS YOU'VE HEARD. IF -- IF THE MOTION FAILS, THEN THAT IS ONE THING. IF IT PASSES, THEN PLEASE PROVIDE THE REPORT TO THIS -- THIS BODY AT -- AT OUR NEXT MEETING. OKAY? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? WE'VE SEEN ALL THIS MONEY, WE SEE WHAT IS EXISTENT ON THE GROUND. WHY IS THERE STILL A DEFICIT OF THIS MAGNITUDE, THAT'S ALL. >>WILL AUGUSTINE: YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. IS THAT -- CAN YOU DO THAT? I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU SOMETHING THAT'S -- >>WILL AUGUSTINE: YES, SIR, THAT COULD BE DONE. >>BRUCE CURY: GOOD. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. >>JILL BUFORD: OKAY. >>BRUCE CURY: IT APPEARS THAT IT WAS UNANIMOUS WITH THE SINGLE VOTE OF COMMISSIONER BUFORD. MOVING TO ITEM NUMBER 5, TAMPA: CONSISTENCY FINDING FY 10-2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM CIP. MR. -- >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I'M NOT MR. AUGUSTINE. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BETTER, YOU SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT I DID NOT READ WHAT WAS APPROPRIATE. ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO ITEM -- YES. MS. LAMBOY WILL PRESENT THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CONSISTENCY FINDING, LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SHAW FAMILY LEARNING GATE COMMUNITY SCHOOLING LOG CABIN. MS. LAMBOY. >>HEATHER LAMBOY: THANK YOU, CHAIR CURY. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS HEATHER LAMBOY WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF, AND THIS AFTERNOON I'M HERE TO SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT THE SHAW FAMILY LOG CABIN, WHICH IS CURRENTLY LOCATED AT THE LEARNING GATE SCHOOL, WHICH IS BETWEEN AND NORTH OF INTERSTATE 275 AND NEBRASKA AVENUE IN OUR LUTZ PLANNING AREA IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THE CABIN WAS ORIGINALLY LOCATED ACTUALLY ON A DIFFERENT PROPERTY AND SERVED AS AN ORIGINAL HOME TO THE DAIRY INSPECTOR FOR THE WESTERN COAST OF FLORIDA. MR. SHAW MOVED TO TALLAHASSEE AFTER A WHILE BUT STARTED OUT HIS CAREER HERE IN THE TAMPA BAY REGION, AND HE EVENTUALLY BECAME THE DIRECTOR OF THE DAIRY DIVISION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE IN TALLAHASSEE. THE SHAW FAMILY LOG CABIN WAS BUILT IN 1935 AND WAS BUILT OF A CYPRESS LOG CONSTRUCTION, WHICH CYPRESS LOG, IF YOU DON'T KNOW, IS RESISTANT TO TERMITE INFILTRATION SO HAD NATURAL FEATURES THAT HELPED TO SURVIVE OUR SOMETIMES HARSH ENVIRONMENT, AND ALSO WATER IS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT CYPRESS LOG CONSTRUCTION IS GOOD FOR. HILLSBOROUGH RIVER LIMESTONE WAS USED FOR THE BASE PIERS AS WELL AS FOR THE CHIMNEY, AND THEN THE -- THE CABIN ALSO HAS STILL THE ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS, WHICH ARE THE EIGHT-PANEL OR EIGHT PANES OF GLASS, OVER EIGHT PANES OF GLASS WOODEN WINDOWS AND THE FOUR LIGHT CASEMENT WINDOWS. THERE'S A REMARKABLE STORY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS CABIN. THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY THAT IT WAS LOCATED ON, WHICH WAS IN LUTZ, ON INDIAN MOUND ROAD, WAS THE SUBJECT OF A REZONING APPROVAL FOR SOME TOWNHOMES, AND WHEN THE PROPERTY WENT THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS, THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY STAFF FOUND THE LOG CABIN TO BE SIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF THE -- THE LOCAL HISTORY OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND SO AS PART OF THAT REZONING APPROVAL, A CONDITION WAS PLACED ON THE APPROVAL DOCUMENT THAT THE LOG CABIN WOULD BE SAVED AND MOVED TO A DIFFERENT PROPERTY, AND LEARNING GATE SCHOOL WAS SEEN AS AN APPROPRIATE VENUE BECAUSE IT CAN SERVE AS AN EDUCATIONAL TOOL, AND LEARNING GATE CERTAINLY DID PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY IN USING THEIR CAMPUS. SO THE SHAW FAMILY LOG CABIN MEETS THE DESIGNATION CRITERIA. TWO OF THEM HERE STATE THAT IT, FIRST OF ALL, EXEMPLIFIES THE HISTORICAL, CULTURAL, POLITICAL, OR ECONOMIC HISTORY OF OUR COMMUNITY, IT EMBODIES THE DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF A CERTAIN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. YOU MIGHT THINK TO YOURSELF, WELL, THIS IS JUST A LOG CABIN, BUT THE VERNACULAR OFTEN IS SOMETHING THAT'S LOST REALLY EASILY, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO EVEN SAVE THESE SIMPLE BUILDINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND ALSO IT IS -- HAS ELEMENTS OF DESIGN AND CRAFTSMANSHIP THAT ARE USED EVEN TODAY IN EDUCATING OUR YOUTH ABOUT OUR HISTORY HERE IN FLORIDA. SO THEREFORE, THE LANDMARK PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH OBJECTIVE 15 IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH FURTHERS THE EFFORT TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S SPECIAL HERITAGE. I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER SUPPORTS THIS PROPOSAL TO LANDMARK THIS LOG CABIN. THAT WOULD BE THE LEARNING GATE SCHOOL. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE SHAW FAMILY LOG CABIN CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MS. LAMBOY. ARE THERE THOSE THAT WOULD SPEAK IN FAVOR? IS THE APPLICANT HERE? >>HEATHER LAMBOY: I'M SORRY. I DID NOT MENTION THAT CHARNER REECE WITH PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT IS HERE TO REPRESENT PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE, BUT SHE DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD. >>BRUCE CURY: WHERE IS THIS LADY? IS SHE HERE? >>HEATHER LAMBOY: OH, OKAY. >>BRUCE CURY: IS IT MS. REECE? >>HEATHER LAMBOY: YES, MS. REECE. >>BRUCE CURY: MS. REECE, IS THERE SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO SAY? THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO BE ON TV. [LAUGHTER] OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ARE THERE QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? PUBLIC COMMENT IS THEN CLOSED. MAY I HAVE A MOTION. >>TERRI COBB: I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION, BUT I'D LIKE TO SAY OUR STAFF ALWAYS PRESENTS US WITH A VERY INTERESTING VIEW WHEN -- WHEN WE'RE DOING SOMETHING HISTORIC, AND THIS ONE -- I INCLUDE THIS ONE AS WELL. IT'S ALWAYS INTERESTING HEARING ABOUT OUR FOREFATHERS, AND I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE THIS. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR -- ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE. ITEM NUMBER 6, AREAWIDE: CONSISTENCY FINDING, SCHOOL DISTRICT FIVE-YEAR FACILITIES PLAN. MS. KELLY. >>KRISTA KELLY: THANK YOU. KRISTA KELLY, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. ONCE A YEAR THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWS THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES PLAN FOR CONSISTENCY WITH ALL FOUR JURISDICTIONS' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW IS THE 2009-10 TO 2013-14 FACILITIES PLAN. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE COMPONENTS OF THIS PLAN AND FINDS IT CONSISTENT WITH ALL FOUR JURISDICTIONS, LAND USE, AND FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS. AT THIS TIME CATHY VALDES, CHIEF FACILITY OFFICER, WILL DESCRIBE IN GREATER DETAIL THE COMPONENTS OF THE FACILITIES PLAN, AND FOLLOWING HER PRESENTATION, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE FACILITY PLANS FOR ALL FOUR JURISDICTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THEIR PLANS. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: CHIEF VALDES. >> WELL, THANK YOU, CHAIR CURY. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. >> CATHY VALDES, CHIEF FACILITIES OFFICER FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. IT'S INDEED MY PLEASURE TO ONCE AGAIN COME TO DELIVER OUR FIVE-YEAR FACILITIES WORK PLAN. WE DO HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION. I BELIEVE -- ARE YOU LOOKING AT IT? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. YES. >> OKAY. GREAT. WE HAVE A PLAN THAT, AS YOU KNOW, IS ANNUALLY UPDATED, AND IT LOOKS OUT FIVE YEARS TO PROJECT OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. WE THEN BRING IT BEFORE YOU AND ALSO BEFORE THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS FOR APPROVAL. OUR PLAN THIS YEAR PROVIDES FOR $293,546,580 OF MAJOR MAINTENANCE PLANS AND RENOVATION AND REMODELING, NEW CONSTRUCTION PLANS. WE HAVE, AS YOU KNOW, OPENED FIVE SCHOOLS FOR THIS PARTICULAR YEAR, IN '09-10. IN AUGUST WE OPENED THE DICK STOWERS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OUT IN CIRCA FISHHAWK SUBDIVISION, FORMERLY KNOWN AS LAKE HUTTO, AND ON A -- JUST ADJACENT TO THAT SCHOOL, GLENN BARRINGTON MIDDLE SCHOOL ALSO OPENED THIS AUGUST. YOU KNOW MS. COBB, COMMISSIONER COBB, THAT WE OPENED STEINBRENNER HIGH SCHOOL. I'M SURE THAT SOME OF YOU WERE PROBABLY READY FOR US TO GET THOSE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS DONE. THE COUNTY'S WORKING ON THOSE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND STEINBRENNER HIGH SCHOOL, BUT THAT WAS A FINE OPENING AS WELL OF OUR NEW HIGH SCHOOL THERE ON LUTZ- LAKE FERN ROAD. AND A HIGH SCHOOL AND AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN THE DOVER AREA OFF OF I-4 BETWEEN GALLAGHER AND McINTOSH, STRAWBERRY CREST HIGH SCHOOL AND DAVID E. BAILEY JR. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED. AND COMMISSIONER SEARS, I BELIEVE YOU WERE IN THAT GROUP THAT TOURED STRAWBERRY CREST AT THE BEGINNING RIGHT BEFORE THE SCHOOL OPENED, AND INDEED A VERY BEAUTIFUL BUILDING, SO WE WERE VERY PLEASED TO OPEN THOSE FIVE SCHOOLS THIS YEAR, BUT LOOKING AT OUR NEXT FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, YOU'RE GOING TO NOTICE SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED FROM HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR SOMETIME, AND THAT'S THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS OF NO SCHOOL OPENINGS, AND THAT HASN'T HAPPENED, THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS OF NO NEW SCHOOLS OR NO REOPENINGS, SINCE 1946, SO IT'S BEEN A VERY LONG TIME THAT WE'VE HAD THAT SORT OF A FLAT GROWTH PERIOD. SO THREE YEARS OF THAT. BUT IN THE FIFTH YEAR OF OUR PLAN, IN '13-14, IF ALL GOES AS PROJECTED, WE ARE LOOKING TO OPEN THE SCHOOL IN TAMPA HEIGHTS, AND WE'RE KEEPING A CLOSE EYE ON THAT DEVELOPMENT, AND IF THAT DEVELOPMENT COMES AS EXPECTED, WE WILL BE OPENING THAT AND WE'LL BE FUNDING THAT THROUGH IMPACT FEES THAT WE'RE COLLECTING UP THROUGH THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD. WE'LL ALSO -- ARE LOOKING TO NOT OPEN IN THIS FIVE-YEAR PERIOD BUT TO FUND IN THIS FIVE-YEAR PERIOD A MIDDLE SCHOOL IN REGION FIVE THAT WOULD BE IN THE SOUTH COUNTY AREA AND A SITE THAT'S YET TO BE DETERMINED. ALSO IN THIS FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, YOU KNOW, WE'VE COME TO YOU IN PREVIOUS YEARS WITH LOTS AND LOTS OF CLASS SIZE -- CLASSROOM ADDITIONS BECAUSE OF THE CLASS SIZE REDUCTION AMENDMENT, AND WE OPENED 43 ONE YEAR, AND PREVIOUS TO THAT WE HAD 30-SOMETHING THAT OPENED. THIS YEAR IN '9-10 WE OPENED EIGHT IN AUGUST, BUT LOOKED OUT WE'RE EXPECTING TO ADD NONE. NOW, YOU'RE GOING TO ASK ME ABOUT THE PLANT HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION, AND THAT'S KIND OF AN ADDITION THAT STRADDLES A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT YEARS IN OUR FIVE-YEAR PLANNING PROCESS. IT WAS FUNDED IN THE LAST FIVE-YEAR PLAN, AND IT'S NOT REFLECTED HERE, EVEN THOUGH WE DID TAKE ADVANTAGE AND REFLECT THE CAPACITY IN THIS PLAN, BUT THAT'LL BE THE LAST CLASSROOM ADDITION AS WELL. WE ARE CURRENTLY USING WHATEVER SAVINGS THAT WE HAVE FROM OPENING ALL THOSE ADDITIONS WITH OUR CLASSROOM FOR KIDS DOLLARS, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE SWITCHING OUT SOME OF THOSE PORTABLES FOR MODULARS, AND AT THAT POINT THAT WILL BECOME PERMANENT CAPACITY FOR THE SCHOOL. WE'VE ALREADY PUT WINGS EVERYWHERE WE CAN PUT WINGS AND TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THAT CAPACITY. ALSO, WE HAVE ON THE REVENUE SIDE, SAME AS GROWTH IS DOWN, OUR REVENUE IS DOWN JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE'S REVENUE IS DOWN. WE HAVE ANTICIPATED REVENUES FOR CONSTRUCTION $52,135,297. WE GET THAT FROM OUR LOCAL MILLAGE, WHICH CAPITAL MILLAGE USED TO BE TWO MILLS. THE LEGISLATURE IN TWO CONSECUTIVE YEARS SAW FIT TO REDUCE THAT BY .5 MILLS, AND THAT .5 MILLS WENT TO THE OPERATING SIDE OF THE BUDGET TO BE ABLE TO PAY TEACHER SALARIES AND OPEN THE DOORS. ALSO WE FUND OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS WITH IMPACT FEES. THAT'S CERTAINLY -- EVEN THOUGH WE A FEW YEARS AGO GOT AN INCREASED IMPACT FEE, WE'VE NOT REALIZED THAT FULL POTENTIAL BECAUSE GROWTH IMMEDIATELY STOPPED, BUT WE ARE PROJECTING SOME IMPACT FEES, AND OF COURSE, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE COLLECTING UP TO BUILD THOSE FUTURE SCHOOLS THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER. WE GET SOME PECO, PUBLIC EDUCATION CAPITAL OUTLAY, DOLLARS IN THE FORM OF MAINTENANCE AS WELL AS NEW CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS. PECO MAINTENANCE DOLLARS USUALLY IN ABOUT -- $11- TO $14 MILLION IS KIND OF AN AVERAGE. THIS YEAR WE GOT $3.1 MILLION, AND WE GOT NO; THAT IS, ZERO PECO NEW CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS, SO WE HAVE A CONSTRUCTION NEED OF $199,724,205, AND THAT DELTA, OF COURSE, IS FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND THE 18 REMODELING PROJECTS. WHAT REMAINS UNFUNDED ARE THOSE REMODELING PROJECTS, AND IN PREVIOUS YEARS YOU-ALL HAVE INDICATED TO US THAT YOU THINK THAT ALSO IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND WE DO KEEP ON A 20- TO 25- YEAR CYCLE OF REMODELING OUR SCHOOLS SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE USING THEM, AND THAT'S CERTAINLY THE BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK FOR THE TAXPAYER. WE HATE TO GET BEHIND ON THOSE REMODELING PROJECTS. WE KEPT THEM IN THE PLAN, BUT THEY ARE YET UNFUNDED. AND JUST AS AN ASIDE, I NOTICED ON THE TAMPA PRESENTATION, THE FIRST SLIDE ON TAMPA WAS HILLSBOROUGH HIGH SCHOOL, AND YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A SCHOOL THAT WAS RENOVATED AT SOME $30 MILLION BUT I THINK A BIG BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY. SO OUR MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AT 296 SITES, $241,411,283. OUR UNDERFUNDED, AS I SAID, ON THE DOLLAR SIDE OF THOSE REMODELING PROJECTS, $147,588,908. AND THE REASON THAT I'M TELLING YOU THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FUNDING OUR NEW SCHOOLS WITH IMPACT FEES IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A DEBT OF $1.8 MILLION -- BILLION, I'M SORRY. $1.8 BILLION. SO THE SCHOOL BOARD DOES NOT FEEL AND OUR SUPERINTENDENT THAT IT'S WISE TO BORROW MORE MONEY. WE DID HAVE THE ABILITY TO -- TO GET SOME STIMULUS DOLLARS FOR CAPITAL NEED, WHICH WOULD HAVE FUNDED THE TWO RENOVATIONS THAT ARE IN THE PROJECT FOR THIS YEAR, BUT TO GET THAT, IT WASN'T JUST A GIFT, IT WAS THE ABILITY TO BORROW THE MONEY INTEREST FREE, BUT THAT STILL INCREASES YOUR DEBT, AND BECAUSE WE'RE DOWN TO $1.5 MILLION OF WHICH ONE MILL GOES TO THE PAYING OF THE DEBT SERVICE ON THAT $1.1 BILLION, THAT ONLY LEAVES US .5 MILLS TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL OF OUR CAPITAL WORK, WHICH MEANS ALL THE MAINTENANCE THAT WE DO OF OUR 296 SITES, SO THAT IS THE SHORT STORY OF OUR REDUCED NEED BUT OUR VERY REDUCED REVENUE, BUT WE ARE ABLE TO OPEN THE DOORS AND, QUITE FRANKLY, QUITE PROUD THAT WE HAD NO TEACHER LAYOFFS, NO LAYOFFS OF PERSONNEL THIS YEAR. ANY QUESTIONS? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER MAI. >>HUNG MAI: CATHY, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE GAITHER HIGH SCHOOL, YOU SAID THAT WE HAVE NO FUNDING FOR THAT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. THE RENOVATION? >>HUNG MAI: RIGHT. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >>HUNG MAI: IT'S VERY CROWDED RIGHT NOW AND SCRAMBLING. >> EXCUSE ME? >>HUNG MAI: IT'S VERY, YOU KNOW, CROWDED. THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. >> WELL -- AND YOU'LL BE HAPPY TO KNOW THIS. IT IS NOT EXACTLY A DEAD ISSUE. WHAT WE DID, BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO KEEP ON SCHEDULE -- AND, YOU KNOW THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FUNDED, GAITHER AND BLOOMINGDALE, AND THAT'S AN IDENTICAL PROTOTYPE. GAITHER AND BLOOMINGDALE FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE THE SAME SCHOOL. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND WE JUST SELECTED ARCHITECTS TO DO THE SCOPING FOR THOSE TWO PROJECTS BECAUSE WE'RE LIVING IN HOPE THAT THERE'LL BE SOME WAY THAT WE CAN COME TO SOME WAY TO GET THE DOLLARS. THERE ARE SOME OTHER STIMULUS DOLLARS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO COME FORWARD. THAT MAY BE MORE IN THE WAY OF A 21st CENTURY -- I DON'T WANT TO SAY GRANT, EVEN THOUGH IT IS TECHNICALLY A GRANT, BUT IT WOULD BE MONEY THAT WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE PAID BACK. THAT'S POTENTIAL. AND THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO FUND THOSE. SO WE'RE GOING AHEAD AND SCOPING THOSE TWO PROJECTS SO THAT WHEN MONEY BECOMES AVAILABLE, THOSE ARE THE NEXT TWO RENOVATIONS BECAUSE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, IT ISN'T SMART TO LET YOUR DEFERRED MAINTENANCE PILE UP LIKE THAT, AND THOSE TWO HIGH SCHOOLS REALLY DO NEED TO BE RENOVATED. WE'RE VERY PLEASED THAT WE'RE COMPLETING ARMWOOD NOW. HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATIONS ARE EXPENSIVE. THERE MAY BE SOME CAPACITY IN SOME OF THOSE -- THOSE COPS, THE DEBT THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. AS PROJECTS HAVE COME IN -- AND THE GOOD NEWS IS WE HAVE GOTTEN PROJECTS TO COME IN CHEAPER, SO WHEN CAPACITY CAN BE IDENTIFIED IN THOSE EXISTING COPS, THERE IS SOME POSSIBILITY TOO THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET THOSE ADDED ON THERE, SO WE'RE SCOPING THEM, WE'RE READY, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD LIKE WE HAVE THE MONEY. WE'RE NOT LETTING ANY CONTRACTS BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL, BUT WE'RE LIVING IN HOPE, AND I'M VERY OPTIMISTIC, BUT I'M AN OPTIMISTIC PERSON. >>HUNG MAI: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: MS. VALDES. >> YES, MA'AM. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: WHEN YOU MADE THE STATEMENT YOU'LL BE HAPPY TO KNOW THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY TEACHER LAYOFFS -- >> YES, MA'AM. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: -- I'D LIKE TO EXTEND THAT. I WAS HAPPY TO KNOW THAT NOT ONLY DID WE HAVE NO LAYOFFS, BUT WE ALSO HAD A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF JOB VACANCIES IN OUR COUNTY THAT A LOT OF COUNTIES DID NOT HAVE, WHICH SAYS THAT WE PREPARED AHEAD OF TIME OF WHAT WAS TO HAPPEN. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KITCHEN. AND I DO WANT TO TAKE -- I MEAN, IT'S SHAMELESS, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, TO PLUG FOR OUR SUPERINTENDENT AND OUR BOARD, I THINK THAT THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. THE PROACTIVE NATURE OF BUDGETING IS TREMENDOUS, AND BELIEVE ME, ALL OF US -- ALL OF US EMPLOYEES DO APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE JOBS, AND FOR SEVERAL YEARS SUPERINTENDENT AND THE BOARD HAVE BEEN LOOKING OUT AT THE - - AT THE HORIZON, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, AND WE WERE ABLE TO PREPARE FOR THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GIVING ME THAT OPPORTUNITY. >>BRUCE CURY: YOU'RE RIGHT, THAT WAS SHAMELESS, BUT YOU PULLED IT OFF VERY WELL. >> WELL, I'VE GOT HILLSBOROUGH HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION, I GOT A PLUG FOR OUR SUPERINTENDENT AND BOARD. LET ME SEE WHAT ELSE I CAN DO. I'M ON TV. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >>TERRI COBB: DO WE NEED ACTION ON THIS? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. LET ME SEE. IS THERE ANY COMMENT FROM ANYONE PRESENT FOR OR AGAINST? PUBLIC -- ARE THERE QUESTIONS? PUBLIC COMMENT IS THEN CLOSED. DO I HAVE A MOTION? >>TERRI COBB: I'LL MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THIS AND -- FOR A FINDING OF CONSISTENCY. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: I SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: WE HAVE A MOTION -- WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR A FINDING OF CONSISTENCY. IS -- IS THERE DISCUSSION? YES, MA'AM. >> JUST ONE FURTHER COMMENT, PLEASE. I WOULD BE REMISS -- LORRAINE DUFFY SUAREZ, ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS, WAS IN THE AUDIENCE TO BE ABLE TO BE OF ANY ASSISTANCE, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE RECOGNIZED HER. THANK YOU. >>TERRI COBB: IT IS RARE TO HAVE MS. DUFFY SUAREZ IN THE AUDIENCE AND NOT HEAR FROM HER. [LAUGHTER] >> I COULD SAY SOMETHING. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT VOTE ON ITEM 6 WAS UNANIMOUS. MOVING TO ITEM NUMBER 7. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY: BRIEFING ON FIRST CYCLE OF 2010 COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS. MS. ZORNITTA. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: GOOD AFTERNOON -- THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MELISSA ZORNITTA WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THIS IS AN INFORMATION ITEM TO GIVE YOU A BRIEFING ON THE FIRST CYCLE 2010 PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE HAVE 19 PLAN AMENDMENTS IN THIS ROUND OF AMENDMENTS. SEVEN OF THEM ARE MAP AMENDMENTS, 12 ARE TEXT AMENDMENTS, 9 OF THEM ARE PRIVATELY INITIATED, AND 10 OF THEM ARE INITIATED EITHER BY STAFF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR OF THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. WE'LL BRIEFLY GO THROUGH EACH OF THEM. THE FIRST OF THE MAP AMENDMENTS IS IN THE RUSKIN AREA. IT'S AT 10th AVENUE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTH 50th STREET. IT'S A SMALL-SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 4.6 ACRES GOING FROM RESIDENTIAL-4 TO RESIDENTIAL-9. OUR NEXT MAP AMENDMENT IS ALSO A SMALL-SCALE AMENDMENT. WHILE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NEARBY, IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE PALM RIVER AREA AT 10th AVENUE AND SOUTH 49th STREET. IT'S A REQUEST FOR 3.27 ACRES TO GO FROM RESIDENTIAL-9 TO SMU-6. OUR THIRD MAP AMENDMENT IS IN THE NORTHWEST TOWN 'N COUNTRY AREA. IT'S AT THE INTERSECTION OF WATERS AVENUE AND THE VETERANS EXPRESSWAY, AND IT IS AN AMENDMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 15 ACRES TO GO TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL -- FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO OFFICE COMMERCIAL-20. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS THAT ARE JOINT THIS ROUND. THEY ARE MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT GO IN CONJUNCTION WITH EACH OTHER. THE FIRST OF THESE IS A PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT FOR A PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE TOWER DAIRY. IT'S IN THE PALM RIVER AREA ALONG 78th STREET, JUST NORTH OF PROGRESS BOULEVARD. IT IS GOING FROM -- REQUESTED TO GO FROM RESIDENTIAL-6 TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE-6, AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT MAP AMENDMENT, THEY ARE PROPOSING A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE PALM RIVER COMMUNITY PLAN TO ALLOW FOR THAT RANGE OF USES TO OCCUR ON THAT SITE. OUR NEXT AMENDMENT IS A MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENT RELATED TO AN ENERGY INDUSTRIAL PARK. THE TEXT AMENDMENT PROPOSES A NEW LAND USE CATEGORY TO ALLOW FOR AN ENERGY INDUSTRIAL PARK, AND THEN THE MAP AMENDMENT WOULD APPLY THAT CATEGORY TO APPROXIMATELY 3,000 ACRES EAST OF DOVER ROAD, SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 60. WE HAVE SOME MORE JOINT MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS. THIS ONE WILL BE FAMILIAR TO YOU. THIS IS THE TAMPA BAY MULTIMODAL CENTER OVERLAY. THIS AMENDMENT WAS BEFORE YOU IN THE LAST CYCLE OF AMENDMENTS. IT WAS WITHDRAWN BEFORE IT WENT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND RESUBMITTED AS PART OF THIS CYCLE OF AMENDMENTS. THE TEXT AMENDMENT CREATES THE MULTIMODAL CENTER OVERLAY, AND THEN THE MAP AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL RURAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND NATURAL PRESERVATION. THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY IS DOWN ON U.S. 41 JUST NORTH OF THE MANATEE COUNTY LINE. THE I-4 GREEN TECH CORRIDOR, YOU'VE HAD A BRIEFING FROM HEATHER LAMBOY OF OUR STAFF ON THIS ONGOING STUDY AND PLAN AMENDMENT. THIS IS A PUBLICLY INITIATED PLAN AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY THAT THEN WOULD BE APPLIED TO SPECIFIC PROPERTIES ALONG THE I-4 CORRIDOR. WE HAVE FIVE COMMUNITY PLANS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AS PART OF THIS ROUND OF PLAN AMENDMENTS. THE GREATER CARROLLWOOD NORTHDALE COMMUNITY PLAN, THE LITTLE MANATEE SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN. THOSE TWO PLANS ARE INITIATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE SEFFNER-MANGO, BRANDON, AND GREATER SUN CITY CENTER AREA ARE INITIATED BY PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF. AND THEN WE HAVE THREE TEXT AMENDMENTS. YOU'VE SEEN ME MANY TIMES OVER THE SUMMER ON TRANSIT- ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, AND SO THAT PLAN AMENDMENT IS MOVING FORWARD AS PART OF THIS ROUND. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE A POLICY CLARIFICATION RELATED TO THE POLICY ON MINIMUM DENSITIES TO JUST CLARIFY HOW THAT'S INTENDED TO BE IMPLEMENTED AND THEN A REQUEST INITIATED BY THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT TO ELIMINATE POLICY 9.5 OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, WHICH RELATES TO VARIANCES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE SIZE OF PROPERTIES. BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY AMENDMENTS, WE HAVE A LENGTHY SCHEDULE WITH YOU-ALL FOR THE -- AHEAD OF US. WE HAVE A WORKSHOP SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 14th, AND THEN WE HAVE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED ON FEBRUARY 8th, FEBRUARY 22nd, MARCH 8th, AND THEN WE HAVE MARCH 22nd SET ASIDE AS A CONTINUATION DATE IF WE CAN'T GET ALL 19 HEARD IN THOSE THREE DATES. SO THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. WE LOOK FORWARD TO GIVING YOU GREATER DETAIL ON EACH OF THE AMENDMENTS AT OUR WORKSHOP ON DECEMBER 14th. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THANK YOU, MS. ZORNITTA. THAT REQUIRES NO ACTION ON OUR PART. THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO IS ITEM NUMBER 8. HOWEVER, IT APPEARS THAT THAT WILL BE FOR 60 MINUTES, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO TAKE A TEN-MINUTE BREAK. WE'RE NOW IN RECESS FOR TEN MINUTES. [RECESS TAKEN] >>BRUCE CURY: [INAUDIBLE] THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITY-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AND THE ITEM WHICH FIRST CONFRONTS US IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY: SECOND ROUND 2009 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS. YES, MR. ZORNITTA. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. MELISSA ZORNITTA WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THIS IS THE SECOND ROUND FOR 2009 OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS FOR UNINCORPORATED HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REVIEWED THE 17 AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU AND FOUND THEM ALL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HELD THEIR FIRST OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THESE ITEMS LAST THURSDAY EVENING. AT THAT TIME THERE WERE TWO ITEMS THAT SEEMED TO HAVE THE - - THE MOST COMMENT, WHICH WAS ITEM "A" OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS RELATED TO CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS, AND ITEM "C" RELATED TO THE PLATTED SUBDIVISION WITH NO IMPROVEMENTS BEING CHANGED TO A MINOR SUBDIVISION. THAT'S ITEM "C" ON YOUR LIST. WE HAVE JOE MOREDA WITH THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF OTHER STAFF WITH PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT HERE TO WALK THROUGH EACH OF THE AMENDMENTS. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS AS JOE GOES THROUGH EACH AMENDMENT, IF WE CAN TAKE A STRAW VOTE ON EACH ONE, THEN WE CAN TAKE A FINAL VOTE AT THE END ON A RESOLUTION, IF THAT'S SOUNDS AGREEABLE. >>BRUCE CURY: THAT'S AGREEABLE. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: OKAY. GREAT. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JOE THEN. >>JOE MOREDA: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. JOE MOREDA, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR THE RECORD. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THE SAME AGENDA AND BACKUP THAT WAS SENT TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR OCTOBER 8th PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH IS THE FIRST OF TWO, AND IN THAT PACKAGE THERE IS A STAFF REPORT WITH A RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS A RETURN BACK TO THE OLD DAYS WHEN WE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROVIDED A REPORT. THE GIVE-AND-TAKE OF IT IS THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES MADE BASED ON WHAT WE LEARNED AT THE BOARD MEETING WHEN WE REVIEWED THE TEXT AFTER WE EXITED THAT MEETING, SO THERE ARE SOME SLIGHT CHANGES THAT I'LL GO THROUGH AS -- AS WE GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE, BUT MOST OF THEM I WOULD CONSIDER IN THE NONSUBSTANTIVE AREA. ITEMS "A" AND "B," THE FIRST ONE ON THE AGENDA, ARE THE TWO CONTINUANCES, AND I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE, SO I'LL PROCEED TO THE SECOND PART, WHICH IS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT, ITEM "A," WHICH IS A PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES TO THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. THIS IS A PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT. STAFF IS SUPPORTING PART OF IT, BUT ESSENTIALLY IT'S A DENIAL BECAUSE WE'RE NOT IN FULL SUPPORT OF IT. SO THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY BONUS THAT WILL BE ALLOWED IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA. THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE APPLICANT ARE HERE, AND THEY MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS, AND I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THAT, BUT UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL STAND DOWN. >>BRUCE CURY: STAND DOWN. THAT'S FROM YOUR MILITARY TRAINING? >>JOE MOREDA: NO, SIR, I WAS NOT IN THE MILITARY, BUT IT SOUNDS GOOD, SO I SAY IT. >>BRUCE CURY: IT SOUNDS WONDERFUL. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU FOR STANDING DOWN. I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE -- MR. MOREDA, I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE YOU'VE LEFT US. I THINK -- THAT WAS BEFORE YOU STOOD DOWN. THEN WHEN YOU STOOD DOWN, YOU LOST ME ENTIRELY. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>JOE MOREDA: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. PLEASE -- THANK YOU. LET ME ASK YOU THIS: MY VISION OF HOW TO HANDLE THIS THING IS THAT WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE, AND YOU -- YOU JUST ANNOUNCE BY REFERENCE TO I GUESS AN ITEM, AND THEN WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS OR WHETHER THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. I MEAN, NO SENSE HAVING CONTROVERSY IF THERE'S NONE, SO JUST TELL WHERE YOU ARE. YOU MIGHT ORIENT US BY A FEW WORDS, THIS IS WHAT THIS IS, AND WE'LL TAKE A STRAW VOTE AND WE'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE. ALL RIGHT? SO WHERE WERE YOU BEFORE YOU STOOD DOWN? >>JOE MOREDA: I WAS ON ITEM "A." THAT'S LDC 09-781. IT'S A PROPOSAL, A PRIVATE PROPOSAL, TO AMEND THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE MORE INCENTIVES BY WAY OF DENSITY BONUS AND SOME SITE DESIGN REGULATIONS. PGMD STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>JOE MOREDA: AND THE COMPONENT THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, MOST AGAINST IS THE FACT THAT THE DENSITY BONUS WILL BE ALLOWED IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA, WHICH IS NOT AN AREA THAT STAFF FINDS APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE INCENTIVES BY WAY OF DENSITY BONUS. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. SO PGM DOES NOT SUPPORT IT, PLANNING COMMISSION DOES, AND MS. HAMMER'S HERE TO ARGUE? >>JOE MOREDA: CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. SHE WANTS TO ARGUE -- >>TERRI COBB: FOR IT. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, I UNDERSTAND. SHE HAS A CONTRARY POSITION TO PGM AND CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION? >>JOE MOREDA: THAT'S CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. AGAIN, THE ISSUE IS WHERE ONE PARTY SAYS NO AND THE OTHER PARTY SAYS YES TO THE SAME ISSUE OR THE SAME SUBJECT. ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE. DO WE HAVE -- ALL RIGHT. CONFRONTING US FIRST IS LDC 09 -- ITEM "A" -- 0781. IS THERE -- IS THERE ANYONE THAT HAS ANY DIFFICULTY WITH THAT PROPOSITION? >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>HUNG MAI: I JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT -- WHAT EXACTLY THE PGM RECOMMEND TO DENY. YOU SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, DENSITY, YOU KNOW, BONUS IN THE -- >>JOE MOREDA: EFFECTIVELY WE FEEL LIKE THE INCENTIVES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY THE EXISTING REGULATIONS ARE ENOUGH INCENTIVE, AND IN FACT, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY THE -- BY THE APPLICANT PROVIDES SOME ADDITIONAL SITE DESIGN CRITERIA THAT WE FIND BENEFICIAL; HOWEVER, NOT ENOUGH ON BALANCE TO RECOMMEND INCENTIVIZING BY WAY OF DENSITY BONUSES IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA. WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH CONCERN WITH PROVIDING DENSITY BONUSES IN THE -- IN THE -- IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA; HOWEVER, IF IT WAS JUST AS SIMPLE AS SAYING NO TO THE BONUS INCREASE IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA, THEN WHAT YOU WOULD BE LEFT WITH IS A -- IS A REGULATION THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES MORE OF THE DEVELOPER WITHOUT THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN DENSITY, SO EFFECTIVELY WHAT YOU COULD END UP WITH IS ACTUALLY DISINCENTIVE IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA TO PROVIDE THE -- THE CONSERVATION-STYLE SUBDIVISION. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>HUNG MAI: I MEAN, I DISAGREE WITH THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>HUNG MAI: BUT BASICALLY THE -- THE CONCEPT OF THE CONSERVATION, YOU KNOW, SUBDIVISION, IF YOU LOOK AT -- YOU KNOW, AT THE -- >>BRUCE CURY: PLEASE, COMMISSIONER MAI, LET ME DO THIS. >>HUNG MAI: RIGHT. YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS -- WHAT YOU HAVE ALERTED ME TO IS THERE'S SOME CONTROVERSY ON THIS ISSUE. WE'VE GOT A YES AND NO. ALL RIGHT. SO MR. MOREDA, I THINK, HAS VERY ARTFULLY PRESENTED THE POSITION OF THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT. I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE HEARD -- IF WE HEARD MS. ZORNITTA RESPOND, WHY DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION BELIEVE THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE, AND CAN WE PLEASE HEAR MS. HAMMER ABOUT HER POSITION, AND THEN AFTER THAT, THEN I GUESS YOU CAN QUESTION WHO YOU CARE TO. IS THAT ALL RIGHT? >>HUNG MAI: THAT'S FINE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. YOU KNOW, ECONOMY OF LANGUAGE. YOU UNDERSTAND PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT. WHY IS IT THAT YOU THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD IDEA WHEN WE'VE HEARD FROM -- WE'VE HEARD FROM PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND THEIR POSITION SEEMS PERFECTLY LOGICAL AND REASONABLE TO ME. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: OUR -- THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF DENSITY BONUSES AND OTHER INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE THE PROVISION OF GREATER RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES. THAT'S POLICY 14.9 OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. STAFF FOUND THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ACHIEVE THE -- THE DIRECTION OF THAT POLICY. IN ADDITION, WE FOUND THAT THE -- CERTAINLY THE ISSUE OF A DENSITY BONUS IN THE RURAL AREA IS SOMETHING THAT WE LOOK AT CLOSELY. WE FOUND THAT THE SUPERIOR DESIGN THAT WOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE ENHANCEMENTS TO THE -- AND GREATER OPEN SPACE IN THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION WARRANTED THAT ADDITIONAL DENSITY BONUS, EVEN IN THE RURAL AREA. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THANK YOU. MS. HAMMER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE HEARD? THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS ETHEL HAMMER. I AM HERE THIS AFTERNOON WITH MICHAEL BROOKS, AND WE ARE THE APPLICANTS AND THE COAUTHORS OF THIS REQUESTED TEXT AMENDMENT. THE OPTION OF A CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SINCE 2002, YET DURING THAT SEVEN- YEAR TIME FRAME, THERE HAS ONLY BEEN ONE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT HAS TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION OF THE CODE. THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER DEVELOPERS THAT WE ARE AWARE OF THAT HAVE CONSIDERED THE PROCESS BUT HAVE TURNED AWAY FROM IT BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CURRENT REGULATIONS. THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS THAT THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION PROGRAM TODAY IS NOT ATTRACTIVE TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF DEVELOPERS, AS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE, AND SO WE NEED TO COME UP WITH SOME INCENTIVES BECAUSE EVERYONE AGREES THAT THIS IS A WORTHY GOAL TO DO A CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES HOW DO YOU INCENTIVIZE AND TRY TO GET ADDITIONAL PROJECTS COMING UNDER THAT UMBRELLA? WE MET WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION EARLY THIS YEAR, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP DURING OUR DISCUSSION WAS THE POLICY THAT MELISSA JUST REFERENCED, POLICY 14.9, WHICH ACTUALLY REQUIRES THE COUNTY BY THE YEAR 2011 TO COME UP WITH ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES THROUGH THE REGULATIONS TO ENCOURAGE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH DENSITY AND INTENSITY BONUSES. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CURRENTLY REQUIRES RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS TO SET ASIDE 25% OF THE PROJECT FOR OPEN SPACE, AND THAT IS PERMISSIBLE THAT YOU CAN COUNT CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION AREAS FOR THAT 25% CALCULATION. THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION PROCESS, BY THE WAY, WHICH IS THE ONLY PROCESS-BASED LAND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE OPEN SPACE, UTILIZES A DIFFERENT DEFINITION. THE DEFINITION SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION AREAS ON YOUR PROPERTY, THOSE CANNOT BE COUNTED TOWARDS YOUR OPEN SPACE, AND THEN AFTER YOU SUBTRACT THAT ACREAGE OUT, YOU MUST PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 50% OF OPEN SPACE. SO IF YOU HAVE CONSERVATION OR PRESERVATION AREAS ON YOUR PROPERTY, YOU COULD END UP WITH 70% OR 80% OF YOUR LAND AS OPEN SPACE, WHETHER IT'S CONSERVATION, PRESERVATION AREAS, OR WHAT THEY CALL ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE, WITH NO DENSITY INCENTIVE. IN RECOGNIZING THE CHALLENGING NATURE OF THE CURRENT SUBDIVISION -- THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION PROCESS, PGM HAS RECOMMENDED, AT LEAST WITH REGARD TO THE URBAN SERVICE AREA, THAT A BONUS -- BONUS BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION PROCESS WITHOUT HAVING ANY ADDITIONAL CRITERIA. NOW, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION BECAUSE WE THINK IT SHOULD EXTEND TO THE RURAL SERVICE AREA AS WELL BECAUSE THAT TO ME IS WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE VAST MAJORITY OF OPEN SPACE THAT IS WORTHY OF PROTECTION. SO THE INTENT OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT IS TO PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF MORE OF THESE PROJECTS BY GIVING THE DEVELOPER A SMALL DENSITY BONUS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE CREATION OF A PROJECT THAT MEETS EVEN HIGHER STANDARDS THAN WHAT'S IN THE CURRENT REGULATIONS. THIS WILL RESULT IN A MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE PROJECT, MORE MEANINGFUL OPEN SPACE, AND A PROJECT THAT CAN POSSIBLY PROVIDE GREATER COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING FORM OF DEVELOPMENT. WE PROPOSE TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL THROUGH OPTIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WHEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT WOULD ENTITLE THE DEVELOPER TO A DENSITY BONUS. NOW, EXAMPLES OF WHAT THESE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD BE WOULD BE, FOR EXAMPLE, PROVISION OF MORE THAN THE 50% ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE THAN CURRENTLY REQUIRED, THE PROVISION OF GREATER SETBACKS FROM CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION AREAS THAN WHAT THE CODE CURRENTLY PROVIDES FOR, ENHANCED HABITAT CONNECTIVITY FOR WILDLIFE AND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES, INCREASED SETBACKS FROM PROJECT BOUNDARIES FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY, VOLUNTARY HABITAT ENHANCEMENT, WHICH WOULD BE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED BY ANY PERMIT. IN CONCLUSION, POLICY 14.9 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIRES THAT THE COUNTY BY THE YEAR 2011 ADOPT INCENTIVES FOR PROVIDING GREATER OPEN SPACE THROUGH THE USE OF INTENSITY OR DENSITY BONUSES. THIS AMENDMENT ACHIEVES THAT GOAL. YOUR STAFF HAS FOUND THIS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. HAMMER. YOU WANT TO TAKE ABOUT A MINUTE TO REBUT WHAT YOU'VE HEARD? >>JOE MOREDA: I WANT TO LET OUR CASE PLANNER, TOM HIZNAY, WHO'S BEEN THE LEAD ON THIS AMENDMENT, REBUT ON WHAT HAS JUST BEEN PRESENTED. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>TOM HIZNAY: TOM HIZNAY, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT. YEAH, OUR OBJECTIONS TO THE AMENDMENT REALLY FOCUSES ON ONE THING, AND THAT IS THE GRANTING OF DENSITY BONUSES WITHIN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA. WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE COMP PLAN DOES TALK ABOUT INCENTIVIZING AND ENCOURAGING THE PRESERVATION OF ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE, AND IT -- THROUGH VARIOUS MEANS. IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY DICTATE THAT IT HAS TO BE DENSITY BONUSES, BUT THAT IS ONE MECHANISM THAT YOU COULD USE. AND WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT A DENSITY BONUS WOULD VERY LIKELY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO USE THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS; HOWEVER, WE ALSO FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE GRANTING OF DENSITY BONUSES BE DONE IN A MANNER THAT WE FEEL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, WHICH IS TO CONTAIN INCREASED DENSITIES WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA, AND SO THAT'S WHY IN OUR RECOMMENDATION WE SUGGEST THAT DENSITY BONUSES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF CONSERVATION AREAS BUT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO PROPERTIES WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. AND THEN WITH REGARDS TO THE EXTRA CRITERIA, WE FEEL THAT THEY ARE SIMPLY UNNECESSARY AND, IN FACT, MIGHT BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. FIRST OF ALL, WE FEEL THAT THE CURRENT REGULATIONS FOR CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS, WHICH, AS MS. HAMMER MENTIONED, REQUIRE PRESERVATION OF 50% OF DEVELOPABLE LAND IN THE RURAL AREA, AND I BELIEVE IT'S 40% IN THE URBAN AREA, IS ALREADY REQUIRED, AND THERE'S OTHER DESIGN CRITERIA, SO WE FEEL THAT THE CURRENT DESIGN CRITERIA VERY ABLY IMPLEMENT THE GOALS OF PRESERVING ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE, AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS. SECONDLY, WHEN IT COMES TO INCENTIVES, THE COMP PLAN SAYS THAT AMONG OTHER INCENTIVES THAT A DENSITY BONUS COULD -- COULD BE OFFERED TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION. IT DOESN'T SAY THE DENSITY BONUSES SHOULD BE OFFERED IN EXCHANGE FOR ENHANCED DESIGN CRITERIA. AND FINALLY, WE FEEL THAT THE ENHANCED DESIGN CRITERIA IN GENERAL APPLICATION -- ALTHOUGH IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THEY MAY PLEASE THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT WHO'S HAPPY WITH THEM, BUT IN GENERAL APPLICATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO SAY IMPOSING ADDITIONAL CRITERIA BEYOND WHAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED FOR A CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION WOULD ACTUALLY SERVE THE PURPOSE OF PROBABLY DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A DENSITY BONUS, SO REGARDLESS OF -- OF -- OF THE FINAL DECISION MADE ON THE GRANTING OF A DENSITY BONUS WITHIN THE RURAL AREA OR NOT, WE ALSO FEEL THAT IN ANY CASE THAT NO ADDITIONAL CRITERIA IS NEEDED, AND IN FACT, ANY ADDITIONAL CRITERIA COULD SERVE TO DISCOURAGE AND UNDERMINE THE WHOLE INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF -- OF CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS. SO WE FEEL THAT IT REALLY FOCUSES ON ONE QUESTION, AND THAT IS DENSITY BONUSES WHERE THEY SHOULD BE APPROPRIATELY APPLIED, YOU KNOW, IN THE RURAL AREA OR IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. WE FEEL THAT THEY SHOULD BE APPLIED IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA ONLY AND THAT, AGAIN, IN ANY CASE THAT ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA IS NOT NECESSARY OR DESIRABLE. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. HIZNAY. OKAY. UNLESS SOMEONE CORRECTS ME, WHERE I FIND MYSELF NOW IS WE HAVE -- WE HAD THE FIRST ITEM, AND I -- I -- IN CASE YOU'RE ABOUT TO PANIC, THE OTHERS WILL GO -- AT LEAST FOR MAYBE ONE OTHER -- WILL GO VERY RAPIDLY. THIS ONE WAS ONE THAT HAD SOME CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING IT, SO WE HAVE I GUESS EXPOSED THE VARIOUS POSITIONS, AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO GET A STRAW VOTE ON WHETHER YOU APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE, BUT FIRST, I HAD ASKED -- I HAD ASKED COMMISSIONER MAI IF HE WOULDN'T WAIT WITH HIS QUESTIONS, SO DID YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS? >>HUNG MAI: YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST A GENERAL COMMENT ON THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION BECAUSE I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, FIRSTHAND WHEN THE CODE COMING OUT IN 2002 -- >>BRUCE CURY: LET'S -- IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS -- >>HUNG MAI: I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION, BUT I WANT -- >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THAT'S AN ARGUMENT. >>HUNG MAI: IT'S NOT AN ARGUMENT, IT'S A COMMENT. >>BRUCE CURY: IN -- FORGIVE THE WORD "ARGUMENT." YOU'RE TAKING A POSITION WHICH WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE APPROPRIATE IF WE FIRST HAD A MOTION BECAUSE IT MAY BE THERE'S NO REASON EVEN TO MAKE THAT POSITION. IF EVERYONE -- EVERYONE MAY BE IN YOUR COURT, SO YOU DON'T NEED TO PRESENT YOUR COMMENT. >>HUNG MAI: SO YOU WANT ME TO MAKE A MOTION FIRST? >>BRUCE CURY: YOU OR SOMEBODY ELSE, UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, THEN PLEASE ASK THEM. IF YOU DON'T, THEN LET'S HAVE A MOTION, AND THEN WE'LL DEBATE WHAT IS PRESENTED TO US. WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ARGUE ABOUT AT THIS POINT. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: MR. CHAIRMAN, IT WON'T BE A MOTION, THOUGH, WILL IT? IT'S JUST A STRAW. >>BRUCE CURY: YEAH, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET TO IT OTHER THAN THE STRAW, OKAY, AT THIS POINT, SO IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT OR REJECT? >>MILLER DOWDY: I MOVE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE TEXT AMENDMENT AS CONSISTENT BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE AS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IS THERE DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER MAI. >>HUNG MAI: YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, AGAIN. THE -- THE CONCEPT OF THE CONSERVATION, YOU KNOW, SUBDIVISION IS EXCELLENT AND THE INTENT IS VERY, VERY GOOD TO ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, OPEN SPACE IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA, NOT, YOU KNOW, IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. THE INTENT OF THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION AT THE BEGINNING IS ALWAYS IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA, AND I DISAGREE WITH TOM HIZNAY SAYING, YOU KNOW, IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN APPLY THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. THE REASON I SAY THAT IS THAT WHEN THE CODE, YOU KNOW, CREATED IN 2002, IF YOU LOOK AROUND, THERE IS NO SUBDIVISION WITH EXCEPTION, YOU KNOW, ONE MAYBE, YOU KNOW, TIME PLATTED, BUT ORIGINALLY I EXPERIENCED, YOU KNOW, FIRSTHAND. WE GOT A COUPLE PROJECTS. WE COMING IN AND APPLY THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION. ONE, WE COULDN'T DO IT, PERIOD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE CODE WRITTEN. SECOND ONE WE DID GET THE APPROVAL -- WE DID GET, YOU KNOW, THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL, BUT THE FINAL PLAT, YOU KNOW, FELL THROUGH, SO THE INTENT IS VERY GOOD. NOW, IF WE DON'T ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, THAT, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE DISSERVICE TO THE CITIZENS AND DISSERVICE TO THE LANDOWNER. LET'S JUST -- AND I AGREE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND IT CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. IT APPEARS THAT I HAVE NEGLECTED TO DO SOMETHING WHICH IS APPROPRIATE, AND THAT IS TO ASK ARE THERE OTHER -- I KIND OF SET IT UP SO THAT WE COULD SEE THE ARGUMENTS ONE AGAINST THE OTHER. I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE MOST APPROPRIATE FORMAT; HOWEVER, ARE THERE OTHERS THAT CARE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS APPLICATION? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THEN WE'RE BACK TO WHERE WE WERE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL, AND WE'RE HEARING -- DEBATING THE QUESTION. >>TERRI COBB: MR. CHAIR, MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS WHEN WE SAY ADDITIONAL DENSITY -- MR. HIZNAY, MAYBE YOU CAN DISCUSS THAT. WHAT EXACTLY DOES THAT MEAN, HOW MUCH DENSITY AND WHO DETERMINES THAT? >>TOM HIZNAY: ALL RIGHT. THE DENSITY OF CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS CURRENTLY IS LIMITED TO THE DENSITY -- THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PERMITTED BY THE ZONING. NOW, GENERALLY SPEAKING, THIS IS ONE OF THE INCENTIVES THAT'S FOUND IN THE CURRENT REGULATIONS. IN FACT, ALL THE INCENTIVES OF THE CURRENT REGULATION ARE DERIVED FROM THE FACT THAT YOU ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR ZONING. AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN YOU DEVELOP A SUBDIVISION, YOU NEVER ACHIEVE THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE JUST FROM SIMPLY DOING SOME MATH, YOU KNOW. FOR INSTANCE, JUST TO KEEP THE MATH SIMPLE, A 100-ACRE PARCEL ZONED AS-1 REQUIRES ONE-ACRE LOTS. WELL, SIMPLE MATH SAYS YOU CAN GET A HUNDRED LOTS OUT OF THAT, BUT IN REALITY, BY THE TIME YOU PUT IN ROADS AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY AND WETLANDS AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF, YOU REALLY ONLY END UP WITH MAYBE 60% TO 75% DENSITY. UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO GO TO A SMALLER LOT SIZE THAN WHAT YOUR ZONING USUALLY REQUIRES, AND THEREFORE, PROVIDING -- GIVING YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY -- AND OF COURSE, IT ALL DEPENDS ON YOUR INDIVIDUAL LOT, BUT POTENTIALLY ACHIEVING A DENSITY THAT IS MUCH CLOSER TO WHAT'S ALREADY -- YOU KNOW, TO WHAT'S IMPLIED OR PERMITTED BY YOUR ZONING, AND ACTUALLY, WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA IS WHERE YOU HAVE THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY OF DOING THIS BECAUSE WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA YOU CAN SERVICE YOUR LOTS WITH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER, AND THERE'S EFFECTIVELY NO MINIMUM SIZE THAT YOU CAN GO DOWN TO AND HAVE YOUR LOTS; WHEREAS, IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA AND CERTAIN AREAS OF THE COUNTY WHERE YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED WETLANDS -- LIKE, IF YOU USE SEPTIC TANKS IN THE KEYSTONE AREA, YOU'RE LIMITED TO A MINIMUM OF ONE-ACRE LOT OF UPLAND, SO IN THE RURAL AREA SOMETIMES THERE'S SOME RESTRAINTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN DEALING WITH ZONINGS LIKE AS- 1, ASC-1, WHICH MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE A GREATER DENSITY. NOW, THE DENSITY BONUS THAT'S PROPOSED IN THIS AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY A BONUS ABOVE THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PERMITTED BY YOUR ZONING. THEY'RE PROPOSING A 25% DENSITY BONUS IN THE RURAL AREA AND A 40% DENSITY BONUS IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. SO FOR EXAMPLE, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE 100-ACRE PARCEL, IT'S ZONED AS-1, UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE IN AN AREA OF THE COUNTY WHERE YOU ONLY HAD TO HAVE A HALF-ACRE LOT TO USE SEPTIC, FOR INSTANCE, THEN YOU COULD POTENTIALLY GET UP TO 100 LOTS. WITH THE BONUS YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO UP TO 125 LOTS. SO THAT'S THE DENSITY BONUS THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT AS A BONUS ABOVE THE NORMAL MAXIMUM DENSITY PERMITTED BY A PROPERTY'S ZONING. >>TERRI COBB: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: I KNOW THE HARDEST THING IN THE WORLD IS TO SIT ON YOUR HANDS WHEN THE OPPONENT SPEAKS, BUT -- NO, PLEASE, MR. HIZNAY, BE SEATED, BUT HE IS THERE BECAUSE OF A QUESTION. I DON'T WANT TO INVITE ARGUMENT THAT WOULD GO ON FOREVER. DID -- DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED? >>TERRI COBB: YES AND NO. YES, I DID. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU WANT TO CONTINUE ASKING? >>TERRI COBB: NO. NO. I THINK THE PROBLEM IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TRAINED TO THINK IN TERMS OF NOT EXPANDING THE DENSITY IN THE RURAL AREA. THIS IS A UNIQUE PLAN. I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE -- WHAT HAS BEEN THE REASON THAT PEOPLE WHO INQUIRED ABOUT THIS DID NOT FOLLOW THROUGH ON IT? >>TOM HIZNAY: I'M NOT PERSONALLY INVOLVED IN THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS, BUT I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE TEAM LEADER ON THAT, AND THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE STARTED THE PLATTING PROCESS. I BELIEVE TWO OF THEM HAVE FINISHED IT AND ACTUALLY DEVELOPED -- I BELIEVE THERE'S TWO OF THESE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS. IT'S HARD TO SAY. HE REALLY COULDN'T TELL ME AS TO WHAT THE REASONS ARE AS TO WHY THEY'RE NOT UTILIZED. IT'S HARD TO SAY, BUT UNDENIABLY, I MEAN, THE REGULATIONS DO PROVIDE SOME VERY GOOD FEATURES FOR DEVELOPERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN UTILIZING THEM. THEY PROVIDE, ONE, DESIGN FLEXIBILITY THAT YOU OTHERWISE COULDN'T HAVE OR IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE. BY ALLOWING SMALLER LOT SIZES AND IN EXCHANGE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO PRESERVE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE, WELL, IT PROVIDES YOU AN OPPORTUNITY THEN TO HAVE SOME COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE THAT NORMALLY WOULD BE SUBTRACTED FROM THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP. WELL, HERE, SINCE YOU CAN USE A LOT SIZE THAT IS POTENTIALLY MUCH SMALLER, PARTICULARLY ONCE YOU START GETTING INTO THE ZONINGS IN THE RURAL AREA THAT ARE LIKE THE 2.5-ACRE AND THE FIVE-ACRE LOT SIZES, WELL, THEN YOU CAN USE A LOT SIZE POTENTIALLY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO A HALF AN ACRE. OBVIOUSLY THE DESIGN FLEXIBILITY THAT'S GOING TO PROVIDE YOU WHILE STILL ACHIEVING THE SAME NUMBER IF NOT A GREATER NUMBER OF LOTS, YOU KNOW, IS APPARENT. ALSO, IN SUBDIVISIONS THAT -- IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER, BY BEING ABLE TO CLUSTER YOUR LOTS TOGETHER AND HAVING IT, THEN YOU CAN SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, AND THEN AGAIN, THE LAST BENEFIT IS YOU COULD POTENTIALLY ACHIEVE A GREATER LOT YIELD. SO THOSE -- THOSE BENEFITS ARE DEFINITELY THERE. AS TO WHY THEY'RE NOT BEING UTILIZED MORE OFTEN, IT'S HARD TO SAY. >>TERRI COBB: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: IT SEEMS MS. HAMMER HAD MORE DETAILED INFORMATION AS TO WHY THIS HASN'T BEEN USED MORE. I'D LIKE TO -- >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: -- TO HEAR FROM HER. >>BRUCE CURY: I WATCHED HER. I THOUGHT I WOULD HAVE HER HEALTH AT STAKE HERE UNLESS I GAVE HER AN OPPORTUNITY. [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT. MS. HAMMER, PLEASE COME UP AND TRY TO ADDRESS YOURSELF TO THE SPECIFIC QUESTION AND NOT DEBATE THE ISSUE. >> I WILL DO SO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE RECENTLY THAT I THINK PRESENTS THE FLAW IN THE ARGUMENT THAT PEOPLE WILL UTILIZE THIS PROGRAM IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A REASONABLY SIZED PIECE OF PROPERTY IN ORDER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE AND SETBACKS. I LOOKED AT A THRESHOLD OF 100 ACRES, WHICH REALLY IS PROBABLY MINIMAL FOR A CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION. OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT, THE VAST MAJORITY, OVER 90% OF THEM, ARE ZONED AGRICULTURAL OR THEY'RE ZONED PD AND HAVEN'T BEEN DEVELOPED YET. SO THESE PROPERTIES ARE IN PLAN CATEGORIES LIKE RES-4, RES- 6, SO UNDER TOM'S EXAMPLE OF A 100-ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED AS-1 THAT COULD GET 100 LOTS UNDER THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION, WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT IF YOU COULD REZONE UNDER YOUR RES-4 PLAN CATEGORY OR YOUR RES-6 PLAN CATEGORY AND GET 400 LOTS OR 500 LOTS? IT DOESN'T MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE, AND THIS IS WHY NOBODY IS USING IT. THIS IS A TRADEOFF. IT IS CLEARLY A TRADEOFF. WE'RE GIVING A LITTLE BIT OF A DENSITY INCENTIVE -- AND LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. IF YOU HAVE 200 ACRES IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA THAT'S ZONED AGRICULTURAL, YOU WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT EIGHT ADDITIONAL LOTS. IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT EIGHT ADDITIONAL LOTS, YOU WOULD BE GETTING A FAR SUPERIOR PROJECT THAN WHAT YOU WOULD GET IF SOMEBODY PLATTED THEIR FIVE-ACRE LOTS OR THEIR ONE-ACRE LOTS WITH NO REGARD TO SETTING ASIDE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE. SO I THINK THE TRADEOFF IS WORTH IT. HOPEFULLY IT WILL PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE. AND THE LAST POINT I WANTED TO MAKE IS THIS IS OPTIONAL. THE BASELINE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED. THIS WILL BE AN OPTION THAT SOMEBODY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IF THEY WANTED TO GO THAT EXTRA LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY, SO AGAIN, THANK YOU, AND WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. MS. ZORNITTA, PLEASE COME UP. IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL PLANNING PRINCIPLE THAT I HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS WITH THIS PLANNING COMMISSION THAT WE DEVELOP FIRST IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND WE DEVELOP SECOND IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA. I MEAN, THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO EVERYTHING. I WOULD SAY EXCEPT IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES. ALL RIGHT? I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THIS IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THAT CONCEPT WHY THIS IS -- WHY THIS IS - - YEAH, JUST WHY IS -- ASSUMING THAT IS A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THIS PLANNING COMMISSION, WHY IS THIS OPTION OR AVAILABLE ENHANCEMENT NOT A METHOD OF SKIRTING THOSE -- THAT CONCEPT? >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: OKAY. YES, I WOULD AGREE THAT THAT IS -- THAT ENCOURAGING GROWTH IN OUR URBAN SERVICE AREA AND FOCUSING IT IN THAT MANNER IS ABSOLUTELY A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IN THIS INSTANCE, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO APPROVE A PLAN AMENDMENT TO INCREASE DENSITY IN THE RURAL AREA. YOU'VE SEEN US HERE MANY TIMES BEFORE TELLING YOU NO, WE'RE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THAT ABOVE A ONE-TO-FIVE-UNIT-PER-ACRE. IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE DENSITY ALREADY ON OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP APPROVED IN THE RURAL AREA. IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE MAP OVER THERE, THE LIGHT GREEN AREAS ARE ALL ONE UNIT PER ACRE. PARTICULARLY AROUND PLANT CITY, THAT AREA, THERE'S A LOT OF ONE UNIT PER ACRE. ONE UNIT PER ACRE IS NOT PERHAPS THE -- IF YOU JUST GO IN AND PLAT IT AS THE ZONING ALLOWS DOES NOT RESERVE ANY OPEN SPACE, IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST -- THE TYPE OF DESIGN THAT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR. THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION PROVIDES -- ALREADY, AS MR. HIZNAY EXPLAINED, PROVIDES ONE INCENTIVE TO DO A BETTER DESIGN BY ALLOWING FOR THE CLUSTERING, THE LESS INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITMENT PERHAPS IN TERMS OF ROADS, ALLOWING SMALLER LOT SIZES, POTENTIALLY A GREATER LOT YIELD OF WHAT YOU'RE ALREADY APPROVED. WHAT WE SAW HERE IS THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING THAT A PROJECT IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THIS DENSITY BONUS HAS TO MEET FIVE OUT OF SEVEN OF THESE DIFFERENT DESIGN FEATURES THAT INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE, MAKING SURE THAT THOSE OPEN SPACES ARE ADJACENT TO SOME OF OUR IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY LOCATED IN OUR RURAL AREA, AND -- >>BRUCE CURY: WILL -- AS A RESULT OF ACQUIESCENCE TO THIS CONCEPT, WILL THERE WILL BE GREATER NUMBER OF HOMES PLACED ON A PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAN IS PRESENTLY ALLOWED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: POTENTIALLY, YES. >>BRUCE CURY: GO AHEAD. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: YOU KNOW, IT WAS OUR ASSESSMENT THAT IN THE END, GETTING A SUPERIOR DESIGN FOR A SMALL INCREMENT OF INCREASED DENSITY ABOVE WHAT IS ALREADY APPROVED IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS A WORTHWHILE INCENTIVE BECAUSE OF THE -- THE SUPERIORITY OF THAT DESIGN, THAT IF WE CAN GET THE GREATER OPEN SPACE AND ACHIEVE THE CLUSTERING CONCEPTS THAT ARE CALLED FOR IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, EVEN -- THAT THAT -- THAT WAS A WORTHWHILE GOAL AND THAT THE MINIMAL DENSITY INCREASE WAS WORTH THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>GARY SEARS: I'VE HEARD BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT, BUT IN PLANT CITY, AS YOU ARE WELL AWARE OF, WE HAVE ANNEXED A LOT OF PROPERTY OVER THERE. THIS FITS RIGHT IN. I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THERE IS A DEVELOPER THAT'S GOING TO BE BRINGING A VERY, VERY LARGE PACKAGE. WE SHOULD GET IT IN PROBABLY FEBRUARY, AND THIS FITS RIGHT IN TO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, SO THAT WAS WHY I SECONDED THE MOTION. >>BRUCE CURY: JUST SO NO ONE WILL BE CONFUSED, IT IS NOT OUR PURPOSE TO FIT IN WITH ANY DEVELOPER, IT IS OUR PURPOSE TO FIND WHETHER THE PRINCIPLES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT I -- I DO -- I DO APPRECIATE THE SENTIMENT. ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE. I GUESS WE UNDERSTAND -- WE UNDERSTAND ALL THERE IS TO UNDERSTAND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WHO -- WHO MADE -- MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL. >> APPROVAL. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THIS IS JUST -- AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A STRAW VOTE. I'M GOING TO RECORD WHAT HAPPENS HERE, AND WHEN WE GET TO THE END, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON ALL OF THEM. I'LL ANNOUNCE WHAT WE HAVE. ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MOVING TO -- WHERE ARE WE NOW? WE'RE NOW -- JUST ANNOUNCE WHERE YOU ARE AND GIVE US -- >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "B," LDC 08-396. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO CREATE PROJECT ACCESS STANDARDS TO ESTABLISH THRESHOLDS FOR THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS AND SPACING NEEDED BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAYS TO SERVE A PROJECT, AND ALSO ADDITIONALLY TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR CONNECTIVITY AND A CRITERIA AS TO HOW STREETS WILL BE ADDED TO THE COUNTY'S SYSTEM. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, I BELIEVE CHARLES WHITE -- CHARLES -- CHARLES IS HERE TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH? >>DEREK DOUGHTY: YES, MR. CHAIR. I WAS WONDERING, CHARLES -- I SUBMITTED SOME QUESTIONS AT THE WORKSHOP OR FOR THE WORKSHOP LAST TIME. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I -- THAT I SUBMITTED LAST MONTH. >>CHARLES WHITE: CHARLES WHITE, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF. I DID TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE QUESTIONS, AND WHAT I FOUND IS THAT IN SOME CASES I KNOW YOU HAD SOME SITUATIONS WHERE IF YOU HAVE AN APPROVED DEVELOPMENT, THESE GUIDELINES WOULD NOT AFFECT WHAT'S ALREADY APPROVED THAT'S ON THE BOOKS UNLESS OTHERWISE -- SAY YOU CAME IN WITH A PROJECT AND YOU WANTED TO INCREASE THE ENTITLEMENTS. THEN YOU WOULD OPEN YOUR PROJECT UP FOR A RE-REVIEW, BUT AS LONG AS YOU KEPT YOUR PD, YOUR APPROVED CONSTRUCTION PLANS, NOTHING CHANGES. AS FAR AS THE CONNECTIVITY ISSUES AND THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS, WHAT WE LOOK AT IS -- THIS IS TO DETERMINE WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO SERVE YOUR DEVELOPMENT, AND WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT HAVING THOSE CONNECTION POINTS ON THE MAJOR COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL ROADWAYS. IN SOME INSTANCES YOU WOULD HAVE A CONNECTION ON A LOCAL ROAD. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'VE GOT A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND IT FRONTS A MAJOR ARTERIAL, THERE'S A LOCAL ROAD AND THERE'S A SUBDIVISION BEHIND THAT DEVELOPMENT. WELL, FOR THOSE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO COME AND SHOP AT THAT DEVELOPMENT, WE DON'T WANT THEM COMING OUT, GETTING ON THE COLLECTOR -- GETTING ON THE COLLECTOR AND THEN GOING BACK IN. IF THEY CAN GAIN ACCESS THROUGH THE SIDE ROAD, THAT'S STILL NOT GOING TO PROMOTE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC THROUGH THAT DEVELOPMENT, IT'S JUST GOING TO BASICALLY SERVE THEM BEING ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT. I MEAN, THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU HAD. AND I THINK -- LET ME SEE IF I CAN REMEMBER THEM ALL, BUT I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT THE OPERATIONAL DESIGN OF A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS WOULD NOT CHANGE ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE DOING NOW. THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS IN SOME CASES WHERE IF YOU HAD A WAL-MART, FOR, EXAMPLE, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO DESIGN THAT STORE TO ADDRESS HOW YOU GET IN AND OUT FOR YOUR TRUCKS, HOW YOU GET IN AND OUT FOR YOUR SHOPPERS, BUT WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO IS SAY THAT -- DEPENDING ON HOW LARGE THE PROJECT IS, HOW MANY TRIPS YOU GENERATE, THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE SO MANY ACCESS POINTS SO THAT NO PARTICULAR ACCESS POINT GETS CONGESTED FROM ALL THE TRAFFIC COMING IN. SO THIS IS JUST A WAY TO DISPERSE THE TRAFFIC TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON THE OVERALL ROADWAY. IN SOME CASES WE WOULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE IT WOULD HAVE JUST THE REVERSE EFFECT. IF YOU'VE GOT A SMALL PROJECT, YOU'RE ASKING FOR THREE DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS, YOUR TRIP GENERATION REALLY ONLY CITES THAT YOU NEED TWO, THAT WOULD ELIMINATE ONE DRIVEWAY ON A CONGESTED ROADWAY BECAUSE EVERY TIME WE PUT ANOTHER ONE ON THERE, WE JUST HAVE ANOTHER CONFLICT POINT, MORE DELAY. SO IT WORKS BOTH WAYS. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT I GUESS SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS WERE, AND THEN I DID ADDRESS THOSE POINT BY POINT, AND I HAVE THEM WRITTEN DOWN AND I CAN SEND THOSE TO YOU BY E-MAIL OR I COULD SEND THEM TO MELISSA AND SHE CAN FORWARD THOSE TO YOU. >>DEREK DOUGHTY: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE. THERE WERE SOME OTHER CONCERNS, AND I HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH PETER ALUOTTO CONCERNING THIS. WHAT DO YOU DO IN SITUATIONS WHERE -- I MEAN, THE -- THE DRIVEWAY THRESHOLDS MAKE -- MAKE SENSE TO ME FOR CREATING A NICE, GOOD TRANSPORTATION GRID SYSTEM IF YOU'RE OPENING UP A -- A LARGE UNDEVELOPED SWATH OF LAND, BUT IT -- IT BECOMES SOMEWHAT PROBLEMATIC TO ME, I THINK, IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA THAT'S ALREADY 80%, 85% DEVELOPED. IT DOESN'T SOLVE YOUR FAILED ROADWAY'S PROBLEMS. IT MAY CREATE SOME BETTER -- SOME BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW FOR THE PARCEL ITSELF; HOWEVER, IF THERE'S DEVELOPMENTS ON TWO OR THREE SIDES REQUIRING -- REQUIRING MULTIPLE DRIVEWAYS ON A COLLECTOR ROAD MAY -- MAY REQUIRE THOSE DRIVEWAYS TO BE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER, WHICH IS NOT A SAFE SITUATION. IT MAY -- IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE DRIVEWAYS REQUIRED, YOU MAY BE REQUIRING IMPACTS TO WETLANDS THAT DON'T NEED TO BE MADE. WITHOUT THIS -- WITHOUT THESE RULES, THOSE IMPACTS TO WETLANDS WOULDN'T NEED TO BE MADE. I JUST HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S -- THERE'S ENOUGH LEEWAY WITHIN THE RULE TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THE SITUATIONS THAT -- THAT MAY ARISE. >>CHARLES WHITE: WELL, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS THAT -- SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE URBAN AREA'S THE MAIN AREA WHERE WE REALLY WANT TO PUSH THIS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE -- WHERE MOBILITY IS REALLY GOING TO BE KEY. IN SOME CASES WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THE URBAN AREAS THAT WE WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARED ACCESS, WE WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CROSS-ACCESS. ALL THESE ARE GOING TO COUNT AS FAR AS CONNECTION POINTS, AND ALL THESE ARE GOING TO WORK TOGETHER TO INCREASE THE MOBILITY WITHIN THE PROJECT. YOU KNOW, KEEP IN MIND THAT EVERY DRIVEWAY WILL STILL HAVE TO MEET THE CURRENT SPACING STANDARDS. THOSE DON'T GO AWAY, SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE DRIVEWAYS RIGHT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. THEY STILL HAVE TO BE SPACED OUT, BUT WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO IS ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPER, SAY, IF HE'S GOT TO HAVE FOUR CONNECTION POINTS, IF HE CAN GAIN TWO OF THOSE FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES THROUGH CROSS-ACCESS, HE STILL MET THAT GOAL, SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO BUILD ANOTHER DRIVEWAY, IT'S JUST CONNECTING THE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES. AND YOU KNOW, A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS IS YOU DRIVE DOWN DALE MABRY HIGHWAY. YOU'VE GOT BUSINESS ALONG BUSINESS, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT CROSS-ACCESS, YOU'RE FORCING ALL THE TRAFFIC BACK OUT ONTO THE MAJOR ROADWAY JUST TO COME OUT OF ONE DRIVEWAY INTO ANOTHER DRIVEWAY, AND IF THEY ALL CONNECT, THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THAT POINT. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE PUT IN THESE CRITERIAS, THAT THERE IS A PROVISION FOR VARIANCES, SO IF YOU'VE GOT A PHYSICAL BARRIER, A WETLAND, A RAILROAD TRACK, A COUNTY PARK, OR YOU'VE GOT SOME AREA WHERE YOU CAN'T PHYSICALLY MAKE THAT CONNECTION, THERE'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE THAT BASICALLY YOU JUST POINT OUT WHAT THAT IS, YOU DOCUMENT THAT, YOU SUBMIT THAT WITH YOUR PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, AND IT GETS APPROVED. THERE IS NO FORMAL PROCESS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH, YOU JUST POINT OUT THAT I CAN'T MEET THIS BECAUSE OF THIS REASON, AND IF IT'S A LEGITIMATE REASON -- >>DEREK DOUGHTY: WELL, IS THAT REASON ACCEPTABLE FOR THAT THERE IS ALREADY A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE PARCEL THAT DOES NOT HAVE A CONNECTING ROAD THAT -- THAT YOU COULD CONNECT TO? >>CHARLES WHITE: WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IS -- THAT'S A SITUATION WHERE IF YOU'VE GOT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BUILT, HE DID NOT HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE CROSS- ACCESS, WE CAN'T REQUIRE YOU TO CROSS-ACCESS TO HIM BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE THAT PROVISION, BUT IN THE FUTURE, SAY, IF HE CAME IN TO MODIFY HIS DEVELOPMENT, THEN WE COULD REQUIRE HIM TO PROVIDE CROSS-ACCESS, BUT, I MEAN, WE CAN'T MAKE YOU SAY GO TO SOMEONE AND SAY, GIVE ME CROSS-ACCESS, YOU KNOW. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IF HE'S GOT THE REQUIREMENT, YOU'VE GOT THE REQUIREMENT, THE TWO CONNECT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PDs THAT HAVE -- THE BOARD HAS APPROVED THAT CROSS-ACCESS SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED BETWEEN PARCELS. WELL, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THOSE GUIDELINES. WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT. >>DEREK DOUGHTY: WELL, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO REQUIRE BUILDING A ROAD TO NOWHERE IN THE -- IN THE THOUGHTS THAT WHEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY REDEVELOPS THAT YOU WILL HAVE CROSS-ACCESS? >>CHARLES WHITE: I MEAN, THE ONLY TIME THAT YOU WOULD SEE A NEW ROAD WOULD BE, FOR EXAMPLE -- THOSE WOULD MOST LIKELY TAKE PLACE WHEN YOU START TO GET OUT ON THE FRINGES IN THE RURAL AREAS. IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR IN THE LONG-RANGE PLAN THAT SAYS THAT THERE WILL BE A NORTH-SOUTH ROAD WITHIN THIS AREA, WHEN THIS PARCEL -- WHEN THE FIRST PARCEL COMES IN, THEY WOULD BUILD THE ROAD THROUGH THEIR SITE, STUB IT OUT AT THEIR PROPERTY LINE. WHEN THE NEXT PARCEL COMES IN, HE WOULD COMPLY WITH THE SAME PLAN REQUIREMENTS TAKEN FROM HIS PROPERTY LINE, STUB IT TO THE NEXT PROPERTY LINE. THAT WAY THE ROAD WOULD GET BUILT AS THE DEVELOPMENT BUILDS, BUT MOST OF THESE NEW ROADS ARE GOING TO BE ROADS THAT ARE GOING TO BE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE LONG- RANGE PLAN. >>DEREK DOUGHTY: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. READY? OKAY. >>CHARLES WHITE: I ALSO HAVE ONE CHANGE -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO. MR. WHITE -- >>CHARLES WHITE: -- I WANT TO MAKE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>CHARLES WHITE: IT'S JUST THAT WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, AND THEY HAD MADE CHANGES OR RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO SOME OF THE LANGUAGE. WE'VE ADDED AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION WITHIN THE LANGUAGE. NOW, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THAT ONE IN YOUR PACKET BECAUSE WE JUST DID IT BASICALLY 2:00 THIS AFTERNOON. >> WE WOULDN'T HAVE IT THEN. >>CHARLES WHITE: YEAH. I MEAN, I DO HAVE HANDOUTS IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE THOSE. >>BRUCE CURY: THE DIFFICULTY WITH THAT IS THAT WE CAN'T GET ANY -- WE CANNOT -- WE CAN'T MAKE A RELIABLE JUDGMENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE UPON WHOM WE RELY HAVE KNOWLEDGE AND CAN COMMENT ON IT. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: WELL, I RELY ON THE PEOPLE ON THIS COMMISSION, I RELY ON THE PUBLIC, I RELY ON THE STAFF, I RELY ON THE ATTORNEYS AND OTHER EXPERTS THAT REPRESENT PEOPLE. NO, IT'S -- WITHOUT SUFFICIENT NOTICE, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE HAVE NOTICE AND A PROCEDURE, SO THAT WE CAN MAKE RELIABLE JUDGMENTS. THANK YOU, MR. WHITE. >>CHARLES WHITE: OKAY. >>BRUCE CURY: I MEAN, DO YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT AND AGREE WITH IT? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MR. MOREDA, PLEASE -- EXCUSE ME. I GUESS WE'RE READY, THEN, ON A VOTE ON 08-0396. LET ME SHORT -- WHAT I'LL DO TO SHORT CIRCUIT, IS ANYBODY OPPOSED TO IT? IF THERE'S OPPOSITION, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THEN AS -- MOVE THEN, PLEASE, TO 08-1037. >>JOE MOREDA: THIS IS ITEM "C" ON THE AGENDA, AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO CREATE A MINOR SUBDIVISION PROCESS. IT WILL REPLACE THE EXISTING PLATTED SUBDIVISION WITH NO IMPROVEMENTS. THESE REGULATIONS WILL BE APPLICABLE TO SUBDIVISIONS WITH TEN LOTS OR LESS IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA ONLY. ALSO WITHIN THE REGULATIONS IT WILL ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR A LOW-VOLUME PRIVATE ROAD. THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL ESTABLISH A PROPER ACCESS SYSTEM FOR RURAL SUBDIVISIONS AND PROVIDE THAT STANDARD OF ACCESS THAT WILL FACILITATE AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE, ET CETERA, FOR FUTURE RESIDENTS AND EMINENT SUBDIVISIONS IN AN AREA WHERE ADDITIONAL LOTS MAY BE ADDED IN THIS RURAL STYLE SUBDIVISION. RIGHT NOW THEY'RE DONE ON A SYSTEM OF EASEMENTS. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY PROVIDE FOR AN ORDERLY MEANS OF ACCESS FOR RESIDENTS AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES ALIKE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM, MR. ALUOTTO IS AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: I HEARD UNDERCURRENT NEXT. THAT INVITES THIS QUESTION. IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY -- I DON'T WANT TO CUT OFF, MR. ALUOTTO, YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SPEECHES; HOWEVER, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS AN ISSUE WITH THIS ONE? DO WE APPROVE IT? MR. MOREDA, NEXT, PLEASE. THE NEXT ITEM, "D," IS TO AMEND -- >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: THEY MAY WANT TO ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON "C." >>JOE MOREDA: MR. CURY, DO YOU WANT ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM? WE'RE ON ITEM "C." >>BRUCE CURY: OH, ABSOLUTELY. IS -- ON 08-1037, IS THAT THE ONE YOU'RE REFERRING TO FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >>JOE MOREDA: CORRECT. I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMEONE HERE TO SPEAK. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. PLEASE COME UP, SIR. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. I'M DEWAYNE HURLBURT. I'M FROM 1009 NORTH FORBES ROAD IN PLANT CITY. TYPICALLY I COME DOWN TO VISIT YOU-ALL ON THE RURAL ISSUES, AND THIS IS SPECIFICALLY A RURAL ISSUE THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED, AND THE ONLY OBJECTION I REALLY HAVE AT THIS POINT WORKING WITH THE STAFF IS IN THE AMENDMENT -- TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE 10.01.05-B-3, SUB ITEM "J." THE LANGUAGE THERE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE CONTINUANCE OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY AS WE HAVE IT TODAY OUT IN THE RURAL AREA WHERE SUBDIVISIONS ARE CREATED IN THE PAST WITH NO IMPROVEMENTS. THIS IS A BETTER PLAN. THE LANGUAGE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE PLAN SAYS UNDER "J," BUILDING PERMITS SHALL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER PLAT RECORDATION AND THE LOW-VOLUME ROAD HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND APPROVED. WITH THIS SAID, ALL MINOR SUBDIVISIONS REQUIRE THAT ROADS BE BUILT, AND IN THE RURAL AREA, AS YOU'VE JUST HEARD PREVIOUS MANY COMMENTS IN THE RURAL AREA THERE'S VARIOUS THINGS THAT GO ON. ONE OF THE THINGS IS THAT AGRICULTURAL NEEDS TO CONTINUE. EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEING PLATTED, THERE MAY BE RULES AND REQUIREMENTS THAT REQUIRE THIS PLATTING BECAUSE MAYBE TEN YEARS AGO THE CERTIFIED PARCEL WAS CUT OUT FOR GRANDMA'S HOUSE AND THE REST OF IT'S STILL A FARM. IF YOU WANT TO DO ONE MORE LOT OR ONE THING, YOU MUST PLAT, AND WITH THAT SAID, NOW WE'VE GOT TO BUILD A ROAD. WE'VE GOT TO BUILD IT BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE A NEED TO DO IT IN MANY CASES. SO I WOULD SUPPORT OR LIKE TO SOLICIT A COMMENT IN THE RESPECT TO THIS ITEM 3-J THAT THERE BE A REVISION THAT MIGHT BE COMPATIBLE NOT ONLY WITH THE BOARD, PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBLE FOR THE RURAL AREA, AND I HAVE A COMMENT TO THAT EFFECT, BUT JUST AS SHORTLY AS I CAN MAKE IT, BUILDING PERMITS SHALL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER PLAT RECORDATION, PERIOD. THAT'S COMMON SENSE. THE LOW-VOLUME ROAD WILL BE CONSTRUCTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT. THAT'S A CHANGE. INSPECTION APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CO, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THAT'S A CHANGE. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY IF NEEDED TO GET A LITTLE OPPORTUNITY OUT THERE, IT WOULD ALLOW THE AGRICULTURAL TO CONTINUE AS MAY BE IN A LARGE PIECE OF TRACT, AS THIS IS WHERE THE LARGE PIECES ARE. A LOT OF IT'S WETLANDS, A LOT OF IT IS UNUSED, BUT THAT'S MY DESIRE HERE, FOR IT TO POSSIBLY GO BACK TO THE COMMISSIONERS, AND I DID BRING THIS ITEM UP TO THEM LAST THURSDAY EVENING, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION, MR. HURLBURT. MR. MOREDA, WE LEFT OFF WITH APPROVAL OF 08-1037. CAN WE GO TO 09-0796? >>JOE MOREDA: YES, SIR. THIS AMENDMENT IS PROPOSED TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF CLEAN FILL TO INCLUDE MULCH AND CREATE STANDARDS REGARDING THE STOCKPILING OF MULCH, CREATES EXCEPTIONS FOR A BONA FIDE AGRICULTURAL USE WHEN MULCH IS BEING APPLIED TO THE LAND, I BELIEVE THAT'S UP TO TWO FEET IN HEIGHT, AND IT WILL REGULATE STOCKPILING OF MULCH WHEN IT'S ABOVE THAT LIMIT THROUGH A LAND ALTERATIONS PERMITTING PROCESS. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE THAT EITHER WANTS TO -- IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT CARES TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? IS THERE ANYONE THAT DOES NOT APPROVE THIS? NEXT. >>JOE MOREDA: NEXT ITEM IS ITEM "E." THIS WAS BEFORE YOU IN THE LAST ROUND, AND WE CONTINUED IT TO THIS ROUND TO PROVIDE SOME REFINEMENTS, PRIMARILY TO EXCLUDE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS FROM SOME OF THE REGULATION AND JUST TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO REDUCE THE NEED FOR ZONING INTERPRETATIONS WITH REGARD TO RECREATIONAL USES. IT WILL CLARIFY WHICH TYPE OF RECREATIONAL USES ARE ALLOWED IN WHICH DISTRICTS AND CLARIFY THE STANDARDS THAT GO ALONG WITH THOSE USES. >>BRUCE CURY: IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT CARES TO HAVE -- CARES TO SPEAK? COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANYONE THAT DOES NOT APPROVE? NEXT. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "F" WAS PROPOSED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. IT PROVIDES A DEFINITION FOR CHICKEE HUTS AND PROVIDES STANDARDS FOR SEPARATION FROM PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES. THIS WILL ELIMINATE ABUSING THE PERMIT EXCEPTIONS -- EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED BY THE STATE FOR CHICKEE HUTS. WHAT HAPPENS IS PEOPLE WILL GET A -- AN ALLEGED EXEMPTION FOR A CHICKEE HUT, BUT THEN THEY TURN IT INTO SOMETHING THAT INCLUDES MECHANICAL PLUMBING IMPROVEMENTS AND EFFECTIVELY TURN THEM INTO A FULL-BLOWN STRUCTURE. THIS DEFINITION AND PROCESS WILL PREVENT THAT FROM OCCURRING IN THE FUTURE. IT WILL ALLOW CHICKEE HUTS, BUT THEY HAVE TO MEET THE DEFINITION OF CHICKEE HUT. SORRY. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE THAT CARES TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE? IS THERE -- WE HAVE SO MANY OF THESE. IS THERE ANYONE THAT DOES -- IS THERE ANYONE THAT DOES NOT -- OH, WE HAVE PUBLIC -- NO, NO, I ASKED FOR THAT. IS THERE ANYONE THAT CARES TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WHO OPPOSES THIS? OKAY. THEN WE'RE AT LD 09-0788. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "G" IS A CODIFICATION OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, SPECIFICALLY POLICIES 14.4 AND 14.5, HAVING TO DO WITH THE PROVISION OF OPEN SPACE. IT WILL PROVIDE FOR A 25% OF DEVELOPMENT AREA MUST BE HELD IN COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE REC AREA, AND THAT'S FOR SUBDIVISIONS OF TEN OR MORE -- OR OVER TEN LOTS AND 5% OF THE 25% IN SUBDIVISIONS OF 50 OR MORE LOTS MUST BE HELD IN REC AREA OR CIVIC PUBLIC USE, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY JUST AN IMPROVED AREA WITHIN THAT INITIAL 25% WHICH WILL BE, LIKE, IN BIKE PATHS OR CIVIC BUILDINGS. AND AGAIN, THIS WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE IN SUBDIVISIONS WITH TEN OR LESS UNITS OR LOTS. >>BRUCE CURY: IS THERE A CITIZEN WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE? ALL RIGHT. DO WE ALL APPROVE? NEXT. >>JOE MOREDA: NEXT ITEM IS ITEM "H" ON THE AGENDA. IT ESTABLISHES A CRITERIA TO DETERMINE THE UTILITY SERVICES FOR PARCELS WITHIN SPLIT SERVICE AREA -- THAT ARE SPLIT BY THE URBAN SERVICE AREA AND RURAL SERVICE AREA. IF IT MEETS A CRITERIA, THEN IT WILL PROVIDE THE GUIDANCE FOR THE UTILITY DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE RURAL OR URBAN. AND IT ALSO CODIFIES THE COMP PLAN POLICIES 1.9. >>BRUCE CURY: MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD CARE TO SPEAK? COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSIONERS? NEXT. I'M ASSUMING WE APPROVE IT. NEXT. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "I" IS ANOTHER IMPLEMENTATION ITEM OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 20-5.5. IT WILL PERMIT PORCHES TO EXTEND 10 FEET OR 50% INTO THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD, WHICHEVER IS MORE RESTRICTIVE. IT ALSO WILL PROVIDE FOR A FRONT FACADE OF A HOME TO EXTEND INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IF THE GARAGE IS RECESSED. >>BRUCE CURY: [INAUDIBLE] MS. ZORNITTA, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS? PLEASE STAND UP, MA'AM. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: SHE KNOWS TO TRUST ME. I'M NOT GOING TO HURT HER. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF HAS OPPOSITION TO, I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT IT, OKAY. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: STAFF FOUND ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE DID NOT OPPOSE ANY OF THEM. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND OR MAKE RELIABLE JUDGMENTS ABOUT, PLEASE DO SO. >>MELISSA ZORNITTA: ABSOLUTELY. >>BRUCE CURY: MR. MOREDA. >>JOE MOREDA: ANY QUESTIONS ON "I"? >>BRUCE CURY: THAT WAS 09-0789. >>JOE MOREDA: 09-790. THAT'S ITEM "I." >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. 90. IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, COMMENT OR CONTROVERSY? OKAY. IT'S APPROVED. WE'RE AT 0791. >>JOE MOREDA: 0791 WILL CREATE STANDARDS FOR REAPPLICATION FOR APPLICATIONS THAT ARE DENIED BY A LAND USE HEARING OFFICER. IT BASICALLY REFLECTS A PROCESS THAT'S USED BY THE BOARD FOR THEIR LAND USE ITEMS WHICH ARE HEARD BY THE ZONING HEARING MASTER. THERE IS ONE CHANGE THAT WILL BE ON OUR TEXT THAT WE ARE FORWARDING TO THE BOARD, AND IT'S DEALING WITH -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST PAGE ON THE TEXT, IT TALKS ABOUT APPROVAL OF THE MODIFICATION SERVE TO RESCIND THE ORIGINAL PERMIT, AND WE'RE CHANGING THE WORD "RESCIND" TO "AMEND THE ORIGINAL PERMIT." AND THAT'S THE THRUST OF THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE, AND WE'RE MOVING SOME OF THE PROCESS LANGUAGE THAT DOESN'T BELONG IN THE CODE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT HAPPENS CLERICALLY WITH THE NUMBERS, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THE THRUST OF THE CHANGE WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE IN THE BOARD PACKAGE IS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT AN AMENDMENT OF A PERMIT IS NOT GOING TO RESCIND THE PREVIOUS ONE, IT WILL SERVE TO AMEND IT IF IT'S APPROVED. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU, MR. MOREDA. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK? IS THERE ANYONE THAT CARES TO OPPOSE THIS? SPEAK ABOUT IT. ALL RIGHT. 91 IS APPROVED. 92. >>JOE MOREDA: 92 IS ALSO AN IMPLEMENTATION ITEM FOR COMP PLAN POLICY 33.10. AS YOU KNOW, THE PLANNED VILLAGE POLICIES ALLOW FOR WAIVERS IN CONSIDERATION OF OFF-SITE COMMERCIAL. THIS WILL ALLOW THE OFF-SITE COMMERCIAL TO BE CONSIDERED WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THE SITE AS OPPOSED TO THE PREVIOUS 1.5-MILE STANDARD. >>BRUCE CURY: MEMBER -- IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD CARE TO MAKE A COMMENT? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? OKAY. 92 IS APPROVED. 93. >>JOE MOREDA: 93 IS ITEM "L" ON YOUR AGENDA. THIS IS A CLERICAL CHANGE TO THE CODE TO THE TABLE OF ALLOWABLE USES AND HOW WE HAVE CAR WASH REGULATIONS FORMATTED. RIGHT NOW SOME OF OUR CAR REGULATIONS ARE EMBEDDED IN -- IN OTHER STANDARDS OF THE CODE, SO IT'S -- AS A CLERICAL CHANGE, WE'RE PULLING THEM OUT AND MAKING IT CLEARER, AND WE'RE ALSO CODIFYING AN INTERPRETATION THAT FULL SERVICE CAR WASHES ARE ONLY ALLOWED IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND ABOVE IN INTENSITY, NOT ALLOWED IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ONLY ALLOWS SELF-SERVICE CAR WASHES. >>BRUCE CURY: GOOD POINT. THANK YOU, MR. MOREDA. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, COMMENT? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? THAT IS APPROVED, 93. 94, PLEASE. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "M," WHICH IS 09-794, IS ANOTHER COMP PLAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION FOR POLICY 21.3 TO CONVERT THE DENSITY CALCULATIONS USED FOR THE COMMERCIAL APARTMENTS AND THE FLOOR AREA. ALSO WE'VE PROVIDED SOME OTHER DESIGN INCENTIVES TO MAKE THIS MORE ATTRACTIVE FOR PEOPLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF FOR INFILL SCENARIOS. >>BRUCE CURY: ANYONE CARES TO MAKE A COMMENT? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? >>MILLER DOWDY: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>MILLER DOWDY: I HAVE A COMMENT. MR. MOREDA, I JUST WANT TO COMMENT AND APPLAUD YOU FOR THE EFFORT OF THINKING OF THIS. THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO HELP OUR INFILL AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS AND HELP OUR GROWTH-OVER AREAS THAT AREN'T BEING UTILIZED CORRECTLY, SO GREAT WAY TO THINK OUT OF THE BOX AND PUT THIS IN PLACE. THANK YOU. >>JOE MOREDA: TOM HIZNAY WAS THE LEAD ON THAT, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH YOUR STAFF AS WELL, SO I THINK IT WAS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. ITEM -- OH, I'M SORRY. >>BRUCE CURY: YOU WERE AT 90 -- >>JOE MOREDA: I WAS ON "M." >>BRUCE CURY: YES, 95. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "N," WHICH 09-795, THIS IS A CHANGE TO OUR CG ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW MAJOR MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIRS, EXCLUDING THE PAINT AND BODY WORK. WHAT WE FOUND OVER TIME IS THAT PREVIOUS CODES ALLOWED THE MAJOR AUTOMOTIVE REPAIRS IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL EXCEPT FOR THE PAINT AND BODY, AND WHEN THE CODE CHANGED, A LOT OF BUSINESSES BECAME NONCONFORMING, AND IT'S CAUSED SOME ISSUES IN TERMS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT AND ALSO IN TERMS OF PEOPLE HAVING TO GO THROUGH SOME HOOPS FOR NONCONFORMITY REVIEWS WHEN THERE'S REALLY LITTLE OR NOTHING TO BE GAINED BY THE WAY THE EXISTING CODE'S FORMATTED, SO OUR PROPOSAL IS TO EXCLUDE THE MAJOR BODY REPAIR AND LET THE OTHER FORMS OF REPAIR BE ALLOWED IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE THAT DESIRES AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ON THIS ISSUE? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? 95 IS APPROVED. 49. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "O" RECOGNIZES LOTS THAT WERE CONFORMING PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE LOT SIZE BY UTILITIES REGULATIONS AS BEING CONFORMING FOR THE PURPOSES OF PERMITTING. >>BRUCE CURY: IS THERE ANYONE WHO CARES TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? 49 IS APPROVED. 50. >>JOE MOREDA: 50 IS A -- A CHANGE TO THE CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN REGULATIONS TO CLARIFY THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS. >>BRUCE CURY: THANK YOU. ANYONE CARES TO BE HEARD? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? 50'S APPROVED. 38. >>JOE MOREDA: THE FINAL ITEM JUST ADDRESSES SCRIVENER'S ERRORS. IT'S JUST NUMBERING CHANGES. NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE IN THE TEXT AT ALL. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MOREDA. >>JOE MOREDA: THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: I AM IN ADMIRATION OF YOUR -- MR. MOREDA, I AM IN ADMIRATION OF YOUR CONCISENESS AND EXCELLENT FOCUS. >>JOE MOREDA: THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. IT APPEARS THAT WE HAVE -- UNLESS YOU CORRECT ME, I'M GOING TO SAY THAT WE HAVE APPROVED EACH OF THE -- EACH OF THE ITEMS BY A STRAW VOTE. WHAT IS LEFT NOW IS FOR US TO AGGREGATE ALL OF THEM FOR ONE VOTE. DO I HAVE A MOTION? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS, SECOND ROUND 2009 TEXT AMENDMENTS. >>MILLER DOWDY: SECOND. >>TERRI COBB: SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. IS THERE DISCUSSION? >>DEREK DOUGHTY: YES, MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>DEREK DOUGHTY: IN THE WORKSHOP THAT I WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME COMMENTS TO, I HAD SOME COLLECTIVE COMMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH MULTIPLE CHANGES TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO -- TO CAUTION EVERYBODY, PLANNING COMMISSION, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT, ET CETERA, THAT CONTINUOUS MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT TAKE CONTINUALLY BIGGER AND BIGGER PIECES OF THE DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY WILL ULTIMATELY END UP SWALLOWING UP ALL OF THE -- OR LARGE MAJORITY OF THE DEVELOPABLE LAND THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR REVENUE- GENERATING ITEMS, WHETHER IT BE COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL. MR. HIZNAY REFERRED TO IT WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION, THAT UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS YOU END UP WITH ABOUT 60% TO 75% OF THE PROPERTY AS AVAILABLE FOR THOSE REVENUE-GENERATING ITEMS AND ADDING THE DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS, ADDING THE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE, ADDING OTHER RULES THAT ARE COMING FROM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OR FROM THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. I HAD DONE A BRIEF ANALYSIS ON ALL OF THE TEXT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING SEVERAL THAT HAD BEEN -- THAT HAD BEEN PULLED FROM THIS -- THIS DISCUSSION TODAY AND HAD COME UP WITH SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 30% TO 50% OF THE AVAILABLE UPLAND SPACE IS GOING TO BE LEFT NOW. THE MORE -- THE MORE THAT THESE -- THESE AMENDMENTS TAKE AWAY, THE MORE LIKELY I SEE THE -- THE GROWTH IN THIS AREA TO SLOW. I'M JUST MAKING A COMMENT. THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. IS -- WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL, AND WE HAVE -- WE HAVE HAD THE DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOVING TO -- MOVING TO ITEM 9, REVISIONS TO BYLAWS AND POLICIES. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. IT'S BARBARA LEIBY, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THIS IS AN ITEM CONCERNING REVISION -- PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S BYLAWS AND POLICIES. AT THE AUGUST 24th GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID DISCUSS REVISIONS TO THESE ITEMS. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REVISIONS TO THE BYLAWS AND POLICIES AS WAS IN YOUR MAIL-OUT PACKAGE, AND I'LL GO OVER THOSE WITH YOU. BOTH THE BYLAWS AND THE POLICIES CHANGES REQUIRE APPROVAL BY TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY OF THE VOTING MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BYLAWS CHANGES INTRODUCED TODAY MAY BE VOTED ON AT THE NOVEMBER MEETING, IF THAT IS YOUR WISH, AND PASSED AT THAT TIME. POLICY CHANGES CAN BE DISCUSSED AND ADOPTED TODAY. I'D LIKE TO GO OVER THE CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS. IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO BE BRIEFER, I CAN SKIP THE SCRIVENER'S TYPES OF ERRORS AND JUST HIT THE HIGHLIGHTS. IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> HIGHLIGHTS. OKAY. THEN THE FIRST HIGHLIGHT WOULD BE THE ADDITION OF A DEFINITION FOR EX OFFICIO MEMBERS. EX OFFICIO MEMBERS SHALL SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS PROVIDED BY LAW. THIS IS THE FIRST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN THE BYLAWS OF EX OFFICIO MEMBERSHIP, AND IT RECOGNIZES THAT THERE ARE TEN VOTING MEMBERS PER CHAPTER 97-351 LAWS OF FLORIDA, WHICH CREATED THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT SORT OF DOMINO THROUGH THE BYLAWS AS A RESULT OF ADDING THIS DEFINITION. >>BRUCE CURY: WHAT IF IN YOUR EVERYDAY LIFE YOU CARRY THE TITLE OF CHIEF, I MEAN, DON'T YOU AUTOMATICALLY GET TO VOTE IN EVERYTHING CONSISTENT WITH YOUR CHOICE? YES. I'M SORRY. YOU WEREN'T HERE FOR THE -- YOU WEREN'T HERE FOR THE BUILD- UP BEFORE THE PUNCH LINE. MS. LEIBY, PLEASE CONTINUE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> ONE OF THOSE -- I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE, AND THEN IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE OTHER CHANGES THAT RELATE TO THE ADDITION OF THIS DEFINITION, PLEASE STOP ME. FOR EXAMPLE, IN 2.10 WORKSHOP, THIS IS A MEETING WHERE MEMBERS, INCLUDING EX OFFICIO MEMBERS, SO WE CLARIFY THAT THE EX OFFICIO MEMBERS PARTICIPATE. IN MOST CASES WHERE IT SAYS, MEMBERS SHALL, IT IS REFERRING TO THE TEN MEMBERS SPECIFIED IN THE CHAPTER 97-351. WHERE WE ELIMINATED SOME LANGUAGE IN THAT SAME 2.10, IT WAS JUST UNNECESSARY LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT -- WE HAVE A BYLAW 5.6 THAT ALREADY COVERS THIS POINT. UNDER BYLAW NUMBER 4.1, AD HOC COMMITTEES, THIS SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WHILE CHAPTER 97-351 CONFERS VOTING RIGHTS ON MEMBERS, NOTHING GIVES US THAT RIGHT TO REMOVE POWER TO VOTE FROM A MEMBER, SO IT ALLOWS A CHAIR TO SERVE AS NOT AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER BUT AS A MEMBER OF ALL AD HOC COMMITTEES. THE CHANGE TO 5.1.3 SIMPLY IS A GIVEN. WE DON'T NEED TO STATE THAT WE WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW. WE WILL DO THAT, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THE BYLAWS. SIMILARLY, IN 5.5, RATHER THAN SAY WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN ABRIDGED VERSION OF ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, WHO KNOWS, IT MAY BE ABRIDGED, IT MAY BE THE COMPLETE COPY, BUT WHATEVER, WE WILL SEE THAT YOU GET WHAT YOU NEED TO CONDUCT YOUR BUSINESS ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES, SO IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE SAID HERE. IN 5.6 AT THE VERY TAIL END OF THAT PARAGRAPH, YOU'LL NOTICE THE ADDITION OF LANGUAGE, OR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CHAIR. SOMETIMES, RARELY, FOR INSTANCE, WE MIGHT HAVE TO LEAVE THE OFFICE, EVACUATE THE OFFICE DURING THE DAY DURING A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DAY, AND OBVIOUSLY NONE OF YOU WOULD SHOW UP FOR THE MEETING, BUT SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT THERE WAS NOT GOING TO BE A MEETING, AND THIS SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE CHAIR COULD DIRECT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ADJOURN ANY MEETING. IT WOULD NOT HAPPEN. IF THERE WERE NOT ENOUGH MEMBERS, IF THERE WERE NO MEMBERS BUT WE STILL WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MEETING, WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO HAVE A MEETING BECAUSE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CHAIR COULD ADJOURN A MEETING. 5.8, ORDER OF BUSINESS AT MEETINGS, SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGES THE PREFERRED ORDER OF BUSINESS AT MEETINGS THAT WE HAVE BEEN CONDUCTING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. 5.8.4 JUST IMPROVES THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT, JUST SIMPLIFIES IT, MAKES IT FLOW A LITTLE SMOOTHER. 5.8.4-H IS A REFLECTION OF THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU HAD AT YOUR AUGUST 24th WORKSHOP REFLECTING THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE ITS CHAIR TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALTER THE TIME LIMITATIONS -- INSTEAD OF HAVING TWO TEN-MINUTE -- UP TO TEN-MINUTE SPEECHES PER MEMBER, THE CHAIR CAN LIMIT DEBATE TO A TIME FRAME THAT THE CHAIR CAN SPECIFY OR ALTER ANY OF THE TIME LIMITATIONS COVERED IN THIS SECTION. 5.9, OPENING MEETINGS, WE'VE CROSSED OUT, DURING THE COURSE OF LITIGATION, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE OTHER LEGITIMATE REASONS, NOT NECESSARILY LITIGATION, FOR YOU TO HAVE A MEETING WITH YOUR ATTORNEY UNDER ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE. UNDER 7.2, THE REQUEST FOR INFORMATION, THIS IS THE -- FOR THE AUGUST 24th PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DISCUSSION WHEREBY THE POLICIES NOW SPECIFY THERE IS SOME EXCEPTION TO RESPONDING TO REQUESTS FOR PROVISION OF NEW INFORMATION, SO THIS IS MEANT TO REFER YOU TO THE POLICIES FOR EXACTLY HOW THIS WORKS OUT, BUT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WILL PROVIDE MEMBERS WITH INFORMATION PROMPTLY AS DESCRIBED IN THE POLICIES. UNDER 8.1 THERE IS A NEED TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ADOPTING THE POLICIES THEMSELVES AND AMENDING THE POLICIES THEMSELVES. RATHER THAN HAVE ONE BE BY MAJORITY AND ONE BE BY TWO- THIRDS VOTE, NOW THEY'RE BOTH BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. AND 10.0 SIMPLY CLARIFIES THE MEMBERS, THE TEN VOTING MEMBERS WILL ADOPT IT. THAT PRETTY MUCH SUMS UP THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE BYLAWS. UNDER THE PROPOSED POLICIES REVISIONS, NUMBER 3.3 INDICATES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS MAY REQUEST INFORMATION -- >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN. >> YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: MS. LEIBY, ONE MINUTE. YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. I JUST REALIZED, YOU KNOW, LAST MEETING WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH QUORUM, AND THEN IT TAKE YOU A WHILE, YOU KNOW, TO DECLARE NONQUORUM, AND WE MAKE THE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, WAITING FAIRLY LONG, SO IS THERE, YOU KNOW, ANY PROVISION, CAN WE SAY, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 30 MINUTES IF YOU RECOGNIZE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM, THEN YOU DECLARE THAT RIGHT AWAY SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN GO HOME? YOU FOLLOW WHAT I'M -- >>BRUCE CURY: ABSOLUTELY. >>HUNG MAI: THANK YOU. >>BRUCE CURY: LET ME PLEASE SAY THIS. I ASSUME YOU WERE NOT HERE AT THE LAST MEETING, THAT MEETING YOU'RE REFERRING TO? >>HUNG MAI: NO, I WAS HERE. >>BRUCE CURY: YOU WERE HERE? OKAY. THEN PLEASE RECALL WHAT YOU SAW. FROM THE MOMENT THAT WE WERE TO MEET THEN I BEGAN TO TRY TO ASSESS WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, AND THE REASON WHY THE PUBLIC HAD TO WAIT WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NO CERTAINTY UNTIL I FINALLY ANNOUNCED IT THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE HERE OR NOT HERE, AND I DIDN'T WANT TO SHUT THE MEETING DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD COME, AND SO I MADE THEM WAIT, BUT -- BUT PLEASE RECALL ALSO WHAT YOU SAW. I MADE AN IMMEDIATE ANNOUNCEMENT OF WHAT WE WERE DOING, AND SO WE WERE RESPECTFUL OF THEM. HAVING SAID THAT, THEN, THAT IS A VERY -- I THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT THAT WE MAKE A JUDGMENT WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, BUT I -- IT NEEDS TO BE LONG ENOUGH SO THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT -- WE DON'T WANT THEM TO COME BACK A SECOND TIME IF WE CAN POSSIBLY GET A QUORUM, AND AT THE SAME TIME -- WELL, WE JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE THEM COME BACK. WE NEED TO KEEP IT OPEN LONG ENOUGH. WE DON'T WANT TOO SHORT OR TOO LONG. SO YOU THINK 30 MINUTES IS A GOOD TIME? I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO WAIT 30 MINUTES. IF I KNOW TEN MINUTES INTO IT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THEM AND IT'S RELIABLE INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, AS OPPOSED TO SOMEONE NOT HERE YET THAT WE EXPECT TO BE HERE, SOMEONE'S CALLED -- YES, SIR. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST JUST TO LEAVE IT TO THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION, LIKE YOU SAID, DEPENDING ON THE EXACT CIRCUMSTANCE. >>BRUCE CURY: YEAH -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: IF YOU KNOW TO CALL IT RIGHT AWAY, YOU'RE GOING TO SAY, WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM, LET'S ALL GO HOME. >>BRUCE CURY: YEAH. WELL, I THINK WE HAD -- WE HAD -- SOME PEOPLE HAD GIVEN US E-MAILS. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: RIGHT. >>BRUCE CURY: SO THOSE ARE CERTAINTIES, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE. SOME WE THOUGHT WERE GOING TO BE HERE, BUT WE WERE WAITING , YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY HAD AN ACCIDENT, MAYBE THEY WERE GOING TO BE HERE TEN MINUTES LATE OR SOMETHING LIKE -- SO WE KEPT IT OPEN, AND THE WAY I HANDLED IT -- THERE WERE LOTS OF PEOPLE. IT WAS VERY CROWDED, SO I TOLD THEM WHAT WAS GOING ON. I MADE AT LEAST TWO ANNOUNCEMENTS. ANYWAY, I THINK IT'S -- YOU NEED TO BE ATTENTIVE TO IT, BUT YOU -- YOU ALSO -- YOU HAVE TO BE ATTENTIVE TO BE RESPECTFUL, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IF YOU CALL IT TOO EARLY, THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE NOTICE AGAIN AND THEN THEY HAVE TO COME BACK A SECOND TIME, AND THIS IS A GREAT INCONVENIENCE. OKAY. ANYWAY, YOU'VE HEARD WHAT EVERYBODY SAID. YOU JUST NEED TO MAKE A DECISION ON IT. DID YOU -- COMMISSIONER MAI, DID YOU WANT TO MAKE PA MOTION OR SOMETHING? >>HUNG MAI: NO. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>HUNG MAI: NO, SIR. >>TERRI COBB: IT MAY NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN. THAT'S THE FIRST TIME IN 11 YEARS THAT IT EVER HAPPENED. SO IT'S SO RARE. IT IS RARE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, THEN MOVING TO THE POLICIES MANUAL, SECTION 3.3. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER REQUESTS FOR EXISTING DATA OR INFORMATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL. A REQUEST FOR DATA AND INFORMATION THAT MUST BE COMPILED OR GENERATED WILL BE PROVIDED BASED ON AVAILABILITY OF STAFF TIME AND OTHER RESOURCES. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MAY BRING A REQUEST TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BEFORE ACTING UPON IT, DEPENDING ON FACTORS, SUCH AS TIME LIMITATION, APPROPRIATENESS OR MAGNITUDE OF THE REQUEST. UNDER 3.5, MEETINGS, THE CHANGE IS MORE INCLUSIVE AND RECOGNIZES THAT WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS HEARING STAFF REPORTS, IT IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WHO IS REPORTING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: I JUST HAVE ONE COMMENT ON THAT. I THINK WE SAID THAT -- IF YOU READ THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- ON ALL SIGNIFICANT ACTION. IN MY OPINION, WE SHOULD -- WE SHOULD NOT USE, YOU KNOW, "SIGNIFICANT." WE SHOULD STRIKE THAT OUT. BASICALLY ON ALL ACTION TAKEN BY THE OTHER PUBLIC BODY. I MEAN, WHO KNOWS WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT AND WHATNOT. I THINK IF SOMEBODY GOES -- THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR -- >> SO ON THE THIRD LINE FROM THE BOTTOM OF THAT PARAGRAPH - - >>HUNG MAI: RIGHT, THE THIRD LINE FROM THE BOTTOM. >>TERRI COBB: WHAT IF WE SAID RELEVANT, ALL RELEVANT ACTION? >>HUNG MAI: BUT THEY CONTINUE WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS, SO THAT IS -- WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, IF, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING -- WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION, ANY ACTION BY ANY OTHER PUBLIC BODY, WE HAVE TO KNOW WHETHER THAT'S SIGNIFICANT OR NOT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. I'M TRYING -- MY PURPOSE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, IS ALWAYS TO TRY TO MANAGE, SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU WANT TO GO AND WHAT TO DO WITH IT. NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN IT OCCURS TO ME WE'VE GOTTEN THIS FAR. DOES THIS MEAN YOU'VE APPROVED EVERYTHING TO THIS POINT, AND IF SO -- AND IF SO, THEN WE NEED TO DO IT AS WE DID WITH THE STRAW VOTE WHEN WE HAD MANY ITEMS, SO LET'S -- COMMISSIONER, DID YOU WANT TO -- YOU'VE RAISED AN ISSUE HERE. DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION, AND THEN WE'LL -- >>HUNG MAI: YEAH, YOU KNOW. IF YOU WANT TO, I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO STRIKE THE WORD -- THE WORD "SIGNIFICANT." >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I'LL SECOND THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >>TERRI COBB: CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON THAT? >>BRUCE CURY: WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WE'RE IN DISCUSSION. YES, ASK YOUR QUESTION. >>TERRI COBB: OKAY. MR. HUNTER, WHAT KINDS OF THINGS ARE GENERALLY -- DOES IT - - ARE THEY SIGNIFICANT, ARE THERE SMALL THINGS? I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF ISSUES WOULD COME UP THAT WARRANT SIGNIFICANT. >>ROBERT HUNTER: WELL, IF -- IF YOU SAY ALL ACTIONS, IT CAUSES MORE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF WORK TO REPORT TO YOU ON EVERY ACTION. "ALL" MEANS "EVERY" TO ME, WHICH MEANS TEMPLE TERRACE, PLANT CITY, TAMPA, BOCC, HARTLINE, WHEREVER AN ACTION IS TAKEN, AND AT TIMES THEY MIGHT JUST MENTION THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I -- I WOULD FIND IT DIFFICULT ON ALL ACTIONS, COMMISSIONER MAI, AND REQUEST THAT YOU ALLOW YOUR DIRECTOR SOME LATITUDE ON SIGNIFICANT. YOU'LL FIND OUT WHEN WE GET TO MY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S ITEMS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ACTIONS BY THE BOCC SINCE MAY AND AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER RELATIVE TO OUR BUDGET, AND I HAVEN'T CHOSEN TO BRIEF YOU ON ALL THE MINUTIA, AND THERE'S BEEN ACTIONS AS IT DEALS WITH THAT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GET US TO A CONCLUSION YET, BUT IT DIDN'T REQUIRE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GET INVOLVED EITHER. SIGNIFICANT DOES GIVE ME SOME DISCRETION. IF YOU SAY ALL, IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT IS ALL I'M SUGGESTING. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY -- >>HUNG MAI: BUT SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANT TO YOU, BOB, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN TERM OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE NEED TO KNOW SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN OFFER, YOU KNOW, ANY HELP YOU MIGHT NEED, YOU KNOW, FROM US. I MEAN, THAT -- THAT -- AND THEN IF YOU CONTINUE TO READ IT, THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS, SO WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TO REPORT, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING NOT RELATED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >>ROBERT HUNTER: EVERYTHING I DO IS RELATED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >>HUNG MAI: NO, IT'S NOT. ARE YOU TEACHING, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE? >>ROBERT HUNTER: I'M NOT TEACHING. >>BRUCE CURY: NO, IT'S NOT. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. I HOPE EVERYTHING HE'S DOING IS RELATED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >>TERRI COBB: CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. YES, SIR. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MAI. I MEAN, WHAT ONE MAY DEEM SIGNIFICANT ANOTHER MAY NOT. IT'S TALKING ABOUT ACTIONS TAKEN. MR. HUNTER, YOU MENTIONED ANY TIME THEY MENTION THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOU'LL HAVE TO REPORT. IT'S NOT IF THEY MENTION, IT'S IF THEY TAKE ACTION. IF THE BOCC HAS BEEN DISCUSSING STUFF SINCE MAY THAT'S NOT CONCLUDED YET WITH OUR BUDGET, WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND WITH THE BUDGET THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW WAS GOING ON. I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW THOSE THINGS. I DON'T THINK IT TAKES AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME TO PREPARE THAT, REPORT THAT IN YOUR REPORT AT THE END OF OUR REGULAR MEETINGS. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: BASED ON WHAT MR. GIUNTA SAID, I THINK HE'S SAYING ACTIONS TAKEN ON PLANNING COMMISSION ISSUES. I BELIEVE -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: IT'S JUST WHAT I'M READING. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY OTHER PUBLIC BODIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: RIGHT. I WAS LOOKING AT ON ACTIONS TAKEN -- NOT ON -- PLANNING COMMISSION ON ALL ACTIONS RELATED TO PLANNING COMMISSION ISSUES, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I'M NOT -- >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: NO, NO, NO, IS THAT THE REASON FOR YOUR COMMENT IS WHAT I'M SAYING. YOU'RE SAYING THAT ANYTHING -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I'M SAYING IF THERE ARE OTHER BODIES THAT TAKE SOME KIND OF FORMAL ACTION -- >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: ACTION AS IT RELATES TO THOSE ISSUES. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: THAT AFFECTS US, THAT'S RELATED TO US, IT OUGHT TO BE REPORTED TO US. WE SHOULD KNOW. WHY SHOULD -- SOMEBODY MIGHT THINK IT'S SIGNIFICANT, SOMEBODY MIGHT NOT. IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT RELATES TO SOMETHING THAT I'M MORE IN TUNE WITH THAT SOMEBODY ELSE ISN'T, I MIGHT THINK IT'S MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN OTHERS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND -- >>TERRI COBB: YEAH. MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANYBODY BOGGED DOWN WITH REALLY LITTLE MINUTIA THAT MIGHT -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT OUR STAFF IS HERE FOR, AND WE HAVE TO DEPEND ON THEM TO BRING THINGS TO US THAT ARE IN ANY WAY RELEVANT, BUT NOT EVERYTHING. I'M CONCERNED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT EVERYTHING. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH STAFF TIME THAT COULD TAKE. >> CHAIR CURY. >> YES, SIR. >>MILLER DOWDY: I TEND TO CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER COBB ON THAT ISSUE BECAUSE JUST AS WE ALL HAVE THINGS THAT WE DIRECT AS EXECUTIVES IN OUR BUSINESSES, WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM OUR STAFF ON EVERY LITTLE THING THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON, BUT HERE -- I MEAN, I'VE GOT TO LEAVE SOME DISCRETION TO OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ON THAT ISSUE. WHEN IT'S GOING TO CONCERN US, IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE US, BUT IF THERE'S OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE IN PROCESS OR THINGS TO BE WORKED ON, THAT CAN BE -- THAT CAN BE PUT OFF A LITTLE BIT, I THINK, SO -- >> A GOOD EXAMPLE MIGHT BE RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT. IF THE STAFF MAKES A REPORT TO A PUBLIC BODY, THEIR OFFICIAL ACTION MIGHT SIMPLY BE TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE REPORT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. LET ME -- LET ME MAKE A -- LET ME MAKE A SUGGESTION. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE -- THAT THE CONTROVERSY HERE INVOLVES THE WORD "SIGNIFICANT" IN THAT IT GIVES TOO MUCH LATITUDE, AND THE WORD "ALL" BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO DICTATE, LOOK, YOU BETTER DO IT AND WE'RE GOING TO CATCH YOU BECAUSE IT SAYS "ALL" RIGHT THERE, SO WHY DON'T -- LET ME JUST SUGGEST THIS. WE DROP "SIGNIFICANT" AND WE DROP "ALL." THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON ACTIONS TAKEN BY OTHER PUBLIC BODIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS. >> MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: I MEAN, THE REALITY IS THIS. THE REALITY IS THIS. WE -- WE SIT -- WE SIT AS THE DIRECT SUPERVISORS OF -- >>GARY SEARS: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: MR. SEARS. THANK YOU. NO, NO, ONE MINUTE, PLEASE. WE SIT AS SUPERVISORS OF -- OF -- OF MR. HUNTER. IF HE FAILS -- IF HE FAILS TO REPORT SOMETHING AND WE HAVE THIS STANDARD HERE, THEN WE BRING IT UP. YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T -- YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE A CHILD OF HIM, AND YOU WANT TO GIVE HIM THE STATUS TO WHICH HE'S ENTITLED, SO I WOULD JUST SAY IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, LET'S DROP "SIGNIFICANT" AND LET'S DROP "ALL." OKAY. DOES THAT PLEASE EVERYBODY? >>HUNG MAI: I AGREE WITH THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: I'M NOT GOING TO EVEN GO ANY FURTHER. IF I GOT IT RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER MAI, I KNOW I MUST BE ON THE BUTTON. YES? OKAY. GOOD. YOU WERE GOING TO SAY SOMETHING, SIR. >>GARY SEARS: I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>GARY SEARS: WHAT I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND IF WE WERE GOING TO DROP "SIGNIFICANT," TO DROP "ON ALL." "ON ALL." THEN IT WOULD READ, SHALL REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS TAKEN BY OTHER PUBLIC BODIES WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS. >>BRUCE CURY: MS. LEIBY, DO YOU KNOW WHERE WE ARE? >> I DO, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. LET'S -- LET'S -- LET ME SEE. WHAT DO WE DO? WE'LL STAND DOWN AND MOVE FORWARD NOW. YES. >> CORRECT. VERY GOOD, SIR. MOVING ON TO THE 4.1, IT SIMPLY REFLECTS CURRENT PRACTICE WITH REGARD TO OUR NEWSLETTER. 7.3, EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL CITIZENS REMOVES LANGUAGE THAT DOES NOT RELATE WELL TO THE SUBJECT EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL CITIZENS. >>BRUCE CURY: MS. LEIBY, ONE MINUTE. >> YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: COMMISSIONER GIUNTA. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: YEAH, I WANT TO GO BACK TO 4.1. IF WE'RE NOT DOING THE QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER, I MEAN -- I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WOULD BE IN THIS DOCUMENT NOW FOR US TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT SOMETIME. IT OUGHT TO JUST BE TAKEN OUT OF THERE I THINK ENTIRELY. IT DOESN'T EVER PREVENT US FROM PUTTING OUT A NEWSLETTER IF WE CAN AFFORD TO DO IT IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'VE STOPPED DOING THIS FOR BUDGET REASONS. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD REMAIN IN HERE IF WE'RE GOING TO STOP DOING IT TO SAY IN HERE, HEY, WE MIGHT DO IT WHENEVER. IT'S JUST -- IT JUST DOESN'T -- I MEAN, WE MIGHT DO IT, WE MIGHT NOT. >> IT'S PART OF THE PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT PART OF DOING PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS. THAT'S WHY IT'S IN HERE. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: BUT IT'S NOT SAYING WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, SO IT SHOULDN'T BE IN HERE NOW. THAT'S MY -- >> IT SAYS PERIODICALLY. IT DOES SAY PERIODICALLY. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: SO WHEN'S THE NEXT ONE COMING OUT? I MEAN -- >>ROBERT HUNTER: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TOO PRECIOUS TO RESPOND THIS WAY. PERIODICALLY. NOW, LET ME -- LET ME JUST -- PLEASE, FOR CONTRAST, LET ME MAKE THIS ARGUMENT. I THINK THAT THE NEWSLETTER IS AN EXCELLENT SOURCE OF OUR ADVERTISEMENT, OUR PUBLICATION, OUR EFFORT TO HAVE ADVOCACY AND TO SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT PLANNING. IT APPEARS THAT WE HAVE TO WEIGH THE FACT THAT WE HAVE FEWER DOLLARS, SO RATHER THAN MANDATE IT COME OUT QUARTERLY WITH THE DIFFICULTY OF FEWER DOLLARS, WHY DON'T WE JUST HAVE IT COME OUT PERIODICALLY. NOW, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT MEANS THAT WHEN SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT COMES UP, THERE WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO GO AHEAD AND PUBLISH IT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY YOU'LL MAKE IT OUT EVERY QUARTER BECAUSE IT COSTS STAFF TIME, IT COSTS MONEY, AND WE HAVE LESS STAFF, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO DELETE IT ENTIRELY BECAUSE IT IS -- IT IS A MARVELOUS VEHICLE FOR THE ENHANCEMENT AND THE ADVERTISING OF THE WORK OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. PLEASE ARGUE AGAINST ME, COMMISSIONER. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WELL, I HAVE NO IDEA WHY WE WOULD ADVERTISE WHAT WE DO. I MEAN, WE'RE JUST A GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY DOING THE PLANNING. I MEAN, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE NEED TO PROMOTE OURSELVES IN THAT WAY IF THAT'S WHAT THE PURPOSE OF IT IS. BUT TO HAVE SOMETHING IN OUR POLICIES THAT IS NOT DEFINED WITH PERIODICALLY -- YOU KNOW, BY PERIODICALLY -- TO ME IT -- IT GIVES NO -- YOU KNOW, THIS SHOULD BE SAYING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AND WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS ANYMORE. >>TERRI COBB: MAY I MAKE A COMMENT? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. >>TERRI COBB: I THINK THE POINT IS NOT TO AGGRANDIZE OURSELVES, BUT PART OF OUR JOB IS TO INFORM THE PUBLIC, THAT -- YOU KNOW, TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING, AND SO THAT'S WHY THAT HAS BEEN A BIG PART OF IT, TO INFORM THEM, NOT TO MAKE OURSELVES LOOK BETTER. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WHERE IS IT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A WEB SITE THEN? >>TERRI COBB: WELL, THIS WAS PROBABLY DONE BEFORE THERE WAS A WEB SITE. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WE'RE UPDATING IT NOW. >>TERRI COBB: YEAH. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I MEAN, I JUST DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE IN HAVING THAT IN HERE. SOMEBODY -- >>TERRI COBB: MAYBE WE NEED TO PUT THE WEB SITE IN ALSO OR PUBLIC INFORMATION -- A PUBLIC INFORMATION BLURB OF SOME SORT. >>BRUCE CURY: IS IT YOUR POSITION -- I HEAR THE WORDS, BUT WHAT IS REALLY BEING SAID, IS IT THAT YOU DON'T -- YOU WANT TO GET RID OF THE PERIODICALLY -- NOT THE NEWSLETTER -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WELL, IF YOU GET RID OF THE PERIODICALLY -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO, NO, NO, FORGET THAT. I'M SORRY. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: SAY ANNUALLY. >>BRUCE CURY: YOU LAWYERS ARE ALL ALIKE. YOU -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: OH, I AM NOT A LAWYER. PLEASE. [LAUGHTER] >>BRUCE CURY: PLEASE FORGIVE ME LACK OF PRECISION. THE NEWSLETTER, IS IT THAT YOU DON'T WANT THE NEWSLETTER AT ALL? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: NO. SAY -- I WANT TO KNOW -- OUR POLICY SHOULD SAY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AND WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THEM AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THEM, SO SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO IT ANNUALLY, BUT CAN WE SAY THAT? DO WE HAVE THE DOLLARS TO DO THAT? I DON'T LIKE THIS OH, WHEN WE CAN. IT'S JUST INCOMPLETE. IT DOESN'T GIVE ME THE INFORMATION OF WHEN IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. >>BRUCE CURY: I UNDERSTAND. THE NEWSLETTER YOU THINK WE SHOULD DO. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: THE NEWSLETTER IS FINE. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THE DIFFICULTY IS YOU WANT MORE CERTAINTY AS WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, YES? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. SINCE WE CAN'T DO IT FOUR TIMES A YEAR, I ASSUME THAT'S THE REASON WHY THIS COMES UP, THEN IT'S GOT TO BE LESS THAN THAT. WHAT WOULD PLEASE YOU AS TO A TIME FRAME, TWICE A YEAR? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: IT'S NOT UP TO ME BECAUSE I DON'T -- I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET, AND WE'RE UNSURE OF WHAT OUR BUDGET'S GOING TO BE. WE CAN DO IT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN HERE FOR US TO DO IT. IF WE CAN'T SAY IN HERE WHEN WE'RE GOING TO DO IT ON A CONSISTENT BASIS, WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE IN HERE? WE COULD DO THE -- WE CAN STILL DO THE NEWSLETTER. I'M NOT -- DO THE NEWSLETTER WHEN WE CAN, BUT WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE IN THE POLICIES IF IT'S NOT GOING TO SET FORTH - - >>TERRI COBB: CHAIR CURY, MAY I MAKE A SUGGESTION? >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>TERRI COBB: PERHAPS WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS ELIMINATE THE HEADLINE THAT SAYS NEWSLETTER AND PUT PUBLIC INFORMATION AND SAY THAT WE WILL MAINTAIN A STREAM OF PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT WILL INFORM THE PUBLIC WHAT'S GOING ON IN SOME WAY, NOT IN THOSE WORDS, BUT SO THAT IT ENCOMPASSES OUR OUTREACH TO THE PUBLIC -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: VIA NEWSLETTER, WEB SITE -- >>TERRI COBB: -- WITHOUT BEING SPECIFIC. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: -- WHATEVER OTHER WAY. >>TERRI COBB: YOU THINK THAT WOULD -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: THAT WOULD -- THAT ENCOMPASSES IT. >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. REMEMBER THE REASON WHY WE HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THIS IN HERE IS THE SAME REASON WE HAVE ANNUAL REPORT, COMMUNITY DESIGN AWARDS. WHAT THIS IS DOING IS IT'S GIVING AN OUTLINE FOR THE PATTERN OF PRACTICE OF THIS ORGANIZATION. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I AGREE. >>BRUCE CURY: AND WHAT WE BELIEVE IN IS -- I KNOW YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE WORD "ADVERTISEMENT," SO LET ME STRIKE THAT FROM THE VOCABULARY. TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE OPERATIONS AND THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES FOR WHICH -- IN WHICH WE BELIEVE. THAT'S WHAT IT'S SAYING. IT'S GIVING A DIRECTION. IT'S SAYING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WE BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD DISSEMINATE THOSE PRINCIPLES, OKAY, SO WE -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I AGREE WITH THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: -- WE'RE ORDERING HIM TO DO IT. WHEN WE TAKE THAT OUT, WE NO LONGER FEEL IT'S NECESSARY. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: THE WAY COMMISSIONER COBB SAYS THAT, I THINK THAT EVEN BROADENS IT AND MAKES IT -- >>BRUCE CURY: I GOT YOU. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: -- MUCH MORE ENCOMPASSING. >>TERRI COBB: I THINK SO. >>BRUCE CURY: ARE WE READY TO ARTICULATE IT? YES, MA'AM. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: BUT 4.0 ALL DEALS WITH PUBLIC INFORMATION, AND WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT YOU'RE SPELLING THEM OUT IN 4.1, 4.2, AND 4.3. >>TERRI COBB: WHICH ONE WERE YOU -- >>BRUCE CURY: SHE'S SAYING -- >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: 4.0 DEALS WITH PUBLIC INFORMATION, AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN 1, 2, AND 3 WE'RE SPELLING OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO DISSEMINATE THE INFORMATION. >>BRUCE CURY: I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT, BUT NEVER LET THE TRUTH INTERFERE WITH A GOOD STORY. I DIDN'T WANT TO INCITE MORE PROBLEMS. >> MR. CHAIR, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REWRITTEN AND PROBABLY COULDN'T BE ARRIVED AT A DECISION RIGHT NOW TODAY. >>TERRI COBB: WE CAN DO IT NEXT MEETING AND APPROVE IT THEN. THERE'S NO RUSH. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. TO DEFINE OUR PRESENT POSITION, WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON EVERY ITEM EXCEPT FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION, NUMBER 4, AND SPECIFICALLY THE NEWSLETTER AS A PROBLEM, AND MS. LEIBY, WOULD YOU PLEASE STUDY WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON HERE FOR ABOUT FOUR MILLION HOURS AND COME UP WITH SOME ANSWER, ALL RIGHT, AND PRESENT -- CAN YOU PRESENT IT AT THE NEXT MEETING FOR US? >> YES, MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. 4 POINT -- PAGE 2. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: I'VE GOT IT ON PAGE 2. >>TERRI COBB: IT'S JUST A HEADING. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU DO IN POLICY, YOU HAVE A HEADING AND -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: [INAUDIBLE] >>TERRI COBB: SO WE SHOULD JUST PUT SOMETHING UNDER THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DEBATE ON WHETHER IT'S PAGE 2 OR PAGE 3. PAGE 2 THERE'S JUST A HEADING THERE. ALL RIGHT. WHAT? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >> MOVING? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, MA'AM. AS LONG AS THE GROUP IS SATISFIED. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I'M GOOD. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>HUNG MAI: WE MOVED TO THE NEXT ONE, MR. CHAIR? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: CAN I HAVE A COMMENT ON 7.3? >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: WE SAY EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL CITIZENS. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS THAT EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL PLANNING COMMISSION CLIENTS AND CITIZENS. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >>TERRI COBB: PLANNING COMMISSION CLIENTS. >>HUNG MAI: CLIENTS AND CITIZENS. WE SERVE, YOU KNOW, FOUR DIFFERENT CLIENTS, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND THREE CITIES. >>GARY SEARS: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>GARY SEARS: IN READING THIS -- STAFF MEMBERS SHALL TREAT ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THEY SERVE WITH RESPECT AND CONSIDERATION WITHOUT EXCEPTION. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>GARY SEARS: THAT SAYS IT ALL. >>BRUCE CURY: DID YOU WANT TO -- >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>GARY SEARS: COMMUNITY THEY SERVE. >>HUNG MAI: BUT THE HEADING IS EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL CITIZENS. >>TERRI COBB: BUT UNDER THAT IT SAYS -- >>HUNG MAI: I UNDERSTAND THAT. >>TERRI COBB: -- ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. >>HUNG MAI: BUT WE'RE SERVING -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE SERVING OUR FOUR CLIENTS, SO -- >>BRUCE CURY: THE QUESTION HAS BEEN RAISED HOW YOU DEFINE CITIZENS. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: WELL, YOU HAVE CITIZENS ARE NOT ONLY PERSONS BUT CITIZENS CAN BE CORPORATE ENTITIES AND OTHER BUSINESS FORMS. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. LET ME SEE. REMEMBER -- REMEMBER IT'S NOW 6:00, AND -- AND -- AND -- OKAY. IT'S 6:00. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER GIUNTA -- YES, CHIEF. COMMISSIONER GIUNTA -- >>HUNG MAI: MAI. >>BRUCE CURY: NO, I WAS ADDRESSING THE CHIEF. YOU'VE HEARD -- DO YOU HAVE RESPONSE? >>HUNG MAI: TO ME, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, CITIZEN IS A PERSON, A CITIZEN, AND THEN YOU FURTHER MENTIONED IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION. THAT MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE CITY -- I MEAN, THAT MEAN, YOU KNOW, COUNTY. SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS THAT EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL PLANNING COMMISSION CLIENTS AND CITIZENS. I MEAN, THAT -- THAT WOULD CLEAR IT UP. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: ARE YOU AWAKE? >>ROBERT HUNTER: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ONE MINUTE. THAT -- WHAT YOU HAVE PRESENTED IS AN OPINION AND SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER. COMMISSIONER GIUNTA, HAVE YOU-ALL HEARD WHAT COMMISSIONER MAI HAS SUGGESTED? ALL RIGHT. PLEASE, WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE? DO WE WANT -- I GUESS IT COMES DOWN TO YOU HAVE MADE A SUGGESTION. WHAT DOES THE GROUP THINK? ALL RIGHT. >>TERRI COBB: IS "CLIENT" THE PROPER WORD FOR THAT? >> MR. CHAIR -- >>FRANK CHILLURA: I THINK IF YOU WANT TO REALLY ADDRESS THAT, IF YOU PUT EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL, THEN THAT COVERS EVERYBODY. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: YES. >> PERFECT. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: VERY GOOD. TAKE OUT "CITIZEN." >>TERRI COBB: THAT WOULD DEFINITELY DO THAT. >>HUNG MAI: I AGREE TO AMEND THAT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. YOU LIKE "ALL"? PLEASE PUT EQUAL ASSISTANCE TO ALL, STRIKE CITIZENS. >> GOT IT. >>BRUCE CURY: NEXT. >> NEXT. I'M GOING TO SKIP 8.0 UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS. IT'S JUST CLARIFYING A LITTLE LANGUAGE, THAT'S ALL. SAME THING WITH 9.2, IT'S JUST A CLARIFICATION. 10.1.3 CORRECT AN INTERNAL INCONSISTENCY. IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PARAGRAPH IN 10.1.3, THE SENTENCE BEGINNING, TO INITIATE THIS PROCESS, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SHALL INVITE REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS. THEN YOU GET TO THE THIRD LINE FROM THE BOTTOM -- OR FOURTH LINE FROM THE BOTTOM OF THAT PARAGRAPH AND IT REFERS TO THE SAME THING AS AN INVITATION FOR PROPOSALS, WHICH IS AN ERROR. IT SHOULD SAY REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS. IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR ONGOING ADDITIONS TO THE APPROVED SERVICE PROVIDER LIST THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. YOU DON'T HAVE TO MEET A DEADLINE. IF YOU'RE NEW, YOU COME TO TOWN, YOU'RE A BUSINESS, YOU WANT TO GET ON THE APPROVED SERVICE PROVIDER LIST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS, WE'LL ADD YOU. JUST SUBMIT THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WAS IN THE LAST REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS THAT WE ISSUED. AND THEN FINALLY, IT REMOVES A BURDENSOME ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENT FOR APPROVED SERVICE PROVIDERS TO HAVE TO TELL US EVERY 12 MONTHS THEY WANT TO STAY ON THE LIST. WE'LL JUST LEAVE THEM ON THE LIST, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF THEY LEAVE TOWN, WE'LL REMOVE THEM FROM THE LIST WHEN WE FIND OUT. >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: CAN I HAVE A COMMENT? >>BRUCE CURY: ABSOLUTELY. >>HUNG MAI: ON THE LAST SENTENCE -- >>BRUCE CURY: PLEASE TELL ME WHAT PAGE YOU'RE ON. >>HUNG MAI: OKAY. PAGE NUMBER 5. >>BRUCE CURY: PAGE 5, YES. >>HUNG MAI: THE LAST, YOU KNOW, SENTENCE, AND THEN IT GOES TO PAGE NUMBER 6. WE MENTIONED PRICE MIGHT NOT BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR BUT THE RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF A SERVICE -- I AM -- I AM CONCERNED ABOUT SAYING PRICE MIGHT NOT BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE PROVIDE A BIDDING SERVICE. THAT MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE QUALIFIED FIRM HAVE TO SUBMIT SOME KIND OF LIKE PROPOSAL TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THE LOWEST PRICE IS NOT, YOU KNOW, THE BEST; HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT -- I WOULD LIKE TO STRIKE THAT OUT BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE SET THE POINT THAT WE MIGHT PICK, YOU KNOW, THE HIGHER -- >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. PLEASE TELL ME PRECISELY WHAT -- >>HUNG MAI: PRECISELY WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE PRICE MIGHT NOT BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR -- >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. YOU'RE ON PAGE -- >>TERRI COBB: FIVE. >>BRUCE CURY: YOU'RE ON PAGE 5. >>HUNG MAI: PAGE 5 AND GO THROUGH 6. AND THEN WE STRIKE UP TO BUT, AND THEN THE RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF A SERVICE PROVIDER WHO IS NOT THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER SHALL BE DOCUMENTED IN WRITING, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, AND WHY THE SELECTED FIRM IS CHOSEN OVER THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER. IN OTHER WORDS, LET'S SAY YOU GOT THREE FIRM BID AND THEN ONE COMING IN 15,000, THE OTHER ONE, YOU KNOW, 17,500, THE OTHER ONE IS 20,000. IF WE SAY PRICE MIGHT NOT BE DETERMINING FACTOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COULD PICK 17,500. AT THAT POINT I JUST WANT A JUSTIFICATION, YOU KNOW, WHY WE PICKED THAT FIRM. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. LET ME JUST RESPOND THIS WAY. >>HUNG MAI: OKAY. >>BRUCE CURY: I MAY -- I MAY BE EDUCATED DIFFERENTLY, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THE -- THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION -- AND YOU-ALL CAN CORRECT ME -- WANT PRICE TO BE A DETERMINING FACTOR. I MEAN THE SOLE FACTOR, OKAY. THEY WANT -- THEY WANT LATITUDE IN THE -- IN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. REMEMBER, WE ARE HIS BOSS. IF HE FAILS US, HE'S GONE, OKAY. NOW -- BUT THE POINT IS HE'S GOT TO HAVE THE RESPECT TO WHICH HE IS ENTITLED, ALL RIGHT, SO HE'S GOT TO MAKE THOSE JUDGMENTS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE DON'T WANT TO HAMSTRING HIM WITH IS, LOOK, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THE LOWEST BECAUSE ALL WE'RE MAKING HIM THEN IS A CLERK, TO FIND OUT WHO IS THE LOWEST. HE'S GOT GREAT EXPERIENCE, GREAT KNOWLEDGE. HE SHOULD EXERCISE HIS JUDGMENT. NOW, I BELIEVE -- THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NOW, IF YOU HAVE A DIFFICULTY WITH WHAT I'VE SAID THERE, THEN I SHOULDN'T PROCEED, BUT I'M ASSUMING YOU DON'T. ONE MINUTE. THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY -- IT GOES ON TO SAY, PRICE MAY NOT BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR, BUT THE -- BUT THE RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER SHALL BE DOCUMENTED IN WRITING, INCLUDED BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL THESE OTHER REASONS. SO YOU -- YOU STOP ME IF YOU WANT PRICE TO BE THE ONLY, BUT ASSUMING THAT YOU LET ME GO AHEAD, THEN IT SAYS, ALL RIGHT, YOU DON'T PICK THE BOTTOM, YOU BETTER GO AHEAD AND TELL US IN WRITING. NOW, THAT'S ALREADY THERE. I DON'T WANT TO -- I THINK -- I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ANCHORS AND STANDARDS FOR HIS SELECTION, BUT I THINK IT'S HERE. >>HUNG MAI: I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF -- I MEAN, YOU EXPOSE, YOU KNOW, PLANNING COMMISSION TO, YOU KNOW, THE LEGAL IF SOMEBODY CHALLENGE THAT DECISION. >>BRUCE CURY: CHALLENGES WHAT? >>HUNG MAI: IN OTHER WORDS, THAT THE LOWEST FIRM CAN MAKE A CLAIM OR, YOU KNOW, OR SUING PLANNING COMMISSION SAYING - - >>BRUCE CURY: THERE IS NO SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES THAT YOU MUST TAKE THE LOWEST BIDDER. EVERY SYSTEM PROVIDES DISCRETION. >>HUNG MAI: I DISAGREE WITH THAT RESPECTFULLY. >>BRUCE CURY: I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION. THERE IS NO MANDATE THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO TAKE THE LOWEST BIDDER. THERE IS ALWAYS -- WHETHER IT'S SAID -- THERE IS ALWAYS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. >>HUNG MAI: YOU MIGHT, YOU KNOW, ASK THE LEGAL COUNSEL. I MEAN, I JUST DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, EXPOSED TO ANY, YOU KNOW, LITIGATION. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. WELL, THE QUESTION YOU -- WHAT YOU'VE RAISED SPECIFICALLY, IS THERE A MANDATE WHICH PROVIDES WE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- OKAY -- WHETHER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUST TAKE -- MUST TAKE THE LOWEST BID. AND THAT'S THE QUESTION. IS -- IS THERE STATE LAW -- IS THERE -- EXCUSE ME. IS THERE ANY FORM OF RULE OR LAW WHICH MANDATES THAT WE MUST TAKE THE LOWEST BIDDER? >>TRACY ROBIN: MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY I MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS HERE? >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>TRACY ROBIN: I THINK I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AT THE SAME TIME. THIS SECTION RELATES TO CONSULTANT CONTRACTS WHICH ARE NOT THE TYPE OF CONTRACTS YOU ORDINARILY HAVE FIXED PRICES FOR, WHICH ARE TYPICALLY COMMODITIES AND -- AND VERY SPECIFIC SERVICES, MAYBE CONSTRUCTION OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT. THIS SECTION WAS CRAFTED THIS WAY ORIGINALLY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE LATITUDE TO -- TO LOCATE THE FIRM THAT HAD THE BEST QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERTISE TO PERFORM THE SERVICE. AND MR. HUNTER CAN EXPLAIN THIS PERHAPS BETTER THAN I CAN, BUT ONE EXAMPLE THAT I CAN THINK OF WAS WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDED TO LET A CONTRACT FOR THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF FIRMS WHO RESPONDED TO THAT RFP BUT WHO -- BUT THERE WERE ONLY ONE OR TWO OR THREE FIRMS THAT MR. HUNTER FELT LIKE REALLY HAD THE KIND OF EXPERTISE AND BACKGROUND TO GET AT THE ISSUES THAT -- THAT THIS MODEL WAS SUPPOSED TO DEMONSTRATE, AND IF THE -- IF HE HAD HAD TO TAKE THE LOWEST-PRICED CONTRACTOR, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET THE CONTRACTOR THAT REALLY HAD THE CREDENTIALS TO BE ABLE TO PERFORM THAT SERVICE, AND SO -- AND I WAS INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN CRAFTING THIS POLICY TO START WITH, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO MAKE SOME OF THESE COMMENTS, BUT THERE ARE OCCASIONS LIKE THAT, AND THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE LANGUAGE IN, THAT THE CHAIRMAN -- EXCUSE ME -- THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAD TO JUSTIFY ANY DEVIATION OF THAT SORT, AND I THINK IN -- IN PAST PRACTICE THAT'S BEEN A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD EFFORT WHEN THERE HAVE BEEN SPECIALIZED CONTRACTS THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FELT LIKE IT WAS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE AGENCY TO CHOOSE THE LOW BIDDER, IT WAS EASY FOR HIM TO WRITE UP THE JUSTIFICATION, AND IN OTHER CASES WHERE IT WAS A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD PROJECT WHERE HE COULD HAVE FOUR, FIVE, OR A DOZEN LOCAL FIRMS BRING PROPOSALS ALL WITH FAIRLY EQUAL QUALIFICATIONS TO DO THE JOB, THEN LOW PRICE DROVE THE SELECTION OF THE CONTRACT. I HOPE YOU FIND THAT HELPFUL. >>TERRI COBB: SO THAT LANGUAGE WAS MERELY TO AFFIRM THAT PRICE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR? >>TRACY ROBIN: THAT'S CORRECT. >>BRUCE CURY: AND IS THERE -- IN THIS TYPE OF CONTRACT, IS THERE ANY MANDATE -- ANY RULE OR LAW WHICH PROVIDES THAT WE HAVE TO SELECT PRICE ALONE? >>TRACY ROBIN: NO, SIR. YOU'VE GOT THE ABILITY FOR THIS TYPE OF CONTRACT TO DO IT ON -- TO CONSIDER QUALIFICATIONS AS ONE OF THE STRONG FACTORS IN SELECTING THE CONSULTANT. >>BRUCE CURY: AND QUITE FRANKLY, IF IT WAS THE BOARD'S JUDGMENT, WE COULD MAKE IT -- WE COULD MAKE IT A RULE, SO THAT'S WHAT I SAID. YOU'VE GOT TO FIRST BEGIN WITH THE -- WITH THE PROPOSITION -- YOU FIRST HAVE TO ACCEPT ME THAT WE HAVE DECIDED WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE PRICE ALONE. IF WE WANT PRICE ALONE -- AND YOU CAN DECIDE THAT -- THEN I SHOULDN'T GO ANY FURTHER, BUT IF YOU DO WANT TO HAVE FACTORS OTHER THAN PRICE, THEN -- THEN I THINK WE HAVE IT HERE. HE -- IT IS SOMETHING WE WANT, BUT MR. HUNTER, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, YOU BETTER JUSTIFY IT IN WRITING, AND THAT'S WHAT'S HERE, OKAY. >>TRACY ROBIN: MR. CHAIRMAN, THE OTHER THING -- AND I KNOW -- EXCUSE ME IF YOU WOULD, ONE MORE COMMENT. JUST TO HELP PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT TO MAKE OR PROPOSE ANY CHANGES IN, THESE ARE ALL SMALL CONTRACTS. THEY'RE UNDER $25,000. ANYTHING ABOVE 25,000'S GOT TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD FOR APPROVAL, AND SO YOU'RE DOING THE EXAMINATION, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S OR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THAT POINT. YOU'RE MAKING THE DECISION. NOW, THESE ARE ALL SMALL CONTRACTS, AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION AS WELL. >>HUNG MAI: BUT THE -- THE 10.1.2 ALLOWS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ACCEPT, YOU KNOW, 50% OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMENDMENT. IN OTHER WORDS, LET'S SAY YOU GOT $24,999 CONTRACT. YOU GOT 12,000 ON TOP OF THAT. >>ROBERT HUNTER: MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>ROBERT HUNTER: I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT. >>HUNG MAI: [INAUDIBLE] >>ROBERT HUNTER: I MEAN, WE DON'T AWARD OR WE DON'T EXTEND IT BEYOND $24,999. THAT 50% CLAUSE, IF SOMEBODY COMES IN AT 10,000 AND WE NEED TO EXTEND IT, I COULD DO 50% OF THAT, BUT IN NO CASES EACH FISCAL YEAR DO WE GO ABOVE THE $24,999. PERIOD. THAT'S IT. WE DON'T. >>HUNG MAI: BUT THE 10.1.2 -- I MEAN, I MIGHT -- I MIGHT MISUNDERSTOOD, YOU KNOW, THIS BECAUSE THEY SAY AT THE LAST SENTENCE OF 10.1.2, MODIFICATION OF AMENDMENT TO ANY CONSULTING OR SERVICE CONTRACT [INCOMPREHENSIBLE] SHALL NOT EXCEED 50% OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OR 25,000, WHICHEVER IS LESS. >>MILLER DOWDY: WHICHEVER'S LESS. >> I THINK BECAUSE WE'VE DONE THIS SO RARELY -- I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER -- I CAN'T REMEMBER AN INSTANCE. >>ROBERT HUNTER: WHICHEVER IS LESS. THAT'S THE 25,000 GUIDING PRINCIPLE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>MILLER DOWDY: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE LANGUAGE HERE IS VERY ALL ENCOMPASSING. IT ALLOWS DISCRETION TO THE COMMISSION FROM THE STANDPOINT -- FOR EXAMPLE, GOING BACK TO 10.1, WHERE PRICE MAY NOT BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR. THAT'S MAY. IF WE SO DICTATE THAT PRICE IS A DETERMINING FACTOR, YOU HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY TO DO IT EITHER WAY, SO YOU MAY OR MAY NOT, AS A COMMISSION, DECIDE THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT IN THAT PARTICULAR DIRECTION TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. IT'S UP TO YOUR DISCRETION AT THAT TIME. IT'S VERY FLEXIBLE LANGUAGE EITHER WAY THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO DO IT. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. OUR CHIEF IS LEAVING. OH, RETURNING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] >>HUNG MAI: OKAY. MR. CHAIRMAN, CAN I HAVE THE LAST COMMENT? >>BRUCE CURY: ABSOLUTELY. >>HUNG MAI: OKAY. THE LAST COMMENT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THAT WE NEED TO ADD THE PROVISION FOR DISADVANTAGED, MINORITY DBE. >>BRUCE CURY: ARE YOU LOCATED? >>HUNG MAI: THAT'S A NEW ONE. >>BRUCE CURY: NO, NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE NEW. SPEAK YOUR MIND. WHAT PAGE ARE YOU ON? >>HUNG MAI: OH, WHAT PAGE WE SHOULD BE ON. WE SHOULD BE ON -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO, WE SHOULD BE. WHAT ARE YOU READING FROM? >>BRUCE CURY: NO, WE DON'T HAVE IT. >>BRUCE CURY: OH, OKAY. >>HUNG MAI: NO, WE DON'T HAVE IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A -- >>BRUCE CURY: YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING? >>HUNG MAI: YEAH, I WANT TO ADD -- >>TERRI COBB: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT EQUAL OPPORTUNITY -- >>HUNG MAI: NO, I WANT TO ADD, YOU KNOW, 10.5. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. 10.5, YES, SIR. >>HUNG MAI: DISADVANTAGED, MINORITY, DBE, AND DISADVANTAGED WOMAN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE, DWBE. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>HUNG MAI: WHAT THE LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD RECOMMEND AND THEN FOR THE GROUP TO DISCUSS IS THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MINORITY/DISADVANTAGED, WOMAN-OWNED, AND SMALL BUSINESS TO PRACTICE -- TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSULTING AND SERVICE CONTRACT WHICH INCLUDES CONTRACTUAL SERVICE, PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICE, AND COMMODITY. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IS AUTHORIZED TO SELECT ANY SERVICE PROVIDER, INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, WHO ARE CERTIFIED WITH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OR SIMILAR PROGRAM WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. BUT I -- I THINK WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THE MINORITY, YOU KNOW, PARTICIPATION IN THE -- >>TERRI COBB: I THINK WE DO. >>ROBERT HUNTER: WE DO. >>HUNG MAI: WE DON'T HAVE A WRITTEN -- I DIDN'T SEE THAT. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: WHAT IS IT IN, BOB? >>ROBERT HUNTER: WE -- LET ME JUST READ TO YOU BECAUSE I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING CERTIFIED BY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S -- IS THAT WHAT YOU READ WHEN YOU READ IT? I DON'T -- >>HUNG MAI: WHAT I'M -- >>ROBERT HUNTER: IT SHOULDN'T BE. >>HUNG MAI: WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU CAN SELECT WHATEVER THE FIRM IS CERTIFIED BY THE DBE WITH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OR, YOU KNOW, WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. >>ROBERT HUNTER: WHAT ABOUT OUR OTHER CLIENTS? >>HUNG MAI: ALL OTHER CLIENTS. >>ROBERT HUNTER: LET ME JUST READ, COMMISSIONER MAI -- I HAVE THE REQUEST FOR -- AND MR. MAI MENTIONED HE WAS GOING TO BRING THIS UP SOMETIME TODAY. I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO BE ON THE POLICIES, BUT WE HAVE UNDER REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS, THE AD SAYS SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH GOVERNMENTAL PLANNING PROJECTS IN THE TAMPA BAY AREA AS WELL AS WOMEN AND MINORITY-OWNED FIRMS ARE ENCOURAGED TO RESPOND. THAT'S IN THE AD THAT WE PLACE. AND THEN WHEN THEY DO A PROVIDER INFORMATION, WE ASK FOR INFORMATION, AND WE SAY, IS THIS A WOMAN- OR MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESS, YES OR NO, SO WE DO IT. NOW, IF YOU WANT TO MANDATE IT -- BUT WE DO IT ANYWAY, AND IT'S IN ALL OF OUR ADS. >>HUNG MAI: MY -- GO AHEAD. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I THINK THAT'S A NICE ADDITION TO THE -- JUST TO STATE IT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS IS WHO WE ARE. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE POLICIES, THIS IS WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO, AND WE WANT TO PUT OUT THERE HOW WE DO THINGS. TO SAY THAT WE ENCOURAGE THAT I THINK IS WONDERFUL. I CAN'T SEE ANY DOWN SIDE TO IT. >>ROBERT HUNTER: I'LL BRING YOU BACK THE WORDING. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET US -- SINCE EVERYONE IS HAPPY, THEN MS. LEIBY, ARE YOU -- ARE YOU READY TO AFFECT THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION? >> I AM READY, MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: GOOD. ALL RIGHT. WE'VE GOT THAT ONE DONE. MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE. >> VERY GOOD, SIR. 11.3, EXIT INTERVIEWS, IT JUST ACKNOWLEDGES THAT EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF REDUCTION IN FORCE OR VIOLATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBSTANCE ABUSE POLICY WE WOULD BE CONDUCTING AN EXIT INTERVIEW WITH STAFF. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. IS THAT IT? >> AND THEN THERE'S ONE MORE. 11.5.6. WHILE IT HAS NOT HAPPENED IN A VERY LONG TIME, IT'S ALWAYS POSSIBLE THAT THE COUNTY MAY CHANGE ITS SERVICE PROVIDER. RATHER THAN FORCE A CHANGE TO YOUR POLICIES SHOULD THAT HAPPEN, WE WOULD SIMPLY LIKE TO REFER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF INTRANET FOR THE EXACT CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THAT REFERRAL AND TREATMENT PROVIDER. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >> THAT CONCLUDES THE POLICIES. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? >>BRUCE CURY: ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE. >>HUNG MAI: MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY I -- JUST A COMMENT. SHOULD WE LOOK INTO A POLICY FOR -- TO PUT INTO THE POLICY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>HUNG MAI: JUST FOR -- >>BRUCE CURY: YOU MEAN -- WHAT WE HAVE -- YOU UNDERSTAND WE HAVE ALL MANNER OF POLICIES FOR STAFF. WHAT YOU WANT IS -- YOU WANT SOME -- YOU WANT INSTRUCTIONS ON WHY YOU SHOULD NOT BE A SEXUAL HARASSER OF EITHER THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE STAFF, IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT? >>HUNG MAI: YES. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: I'M FEARFUL. YES. [LAUGHTER] >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: I AGREE -- I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MAI, AND MAYBE WE DON'T JUST NEED TO SAY SEXUAL, WE CAN JUST SAY HARASSMENT. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. >>VIVIAN KITCHEN: ALL -- ALL FORMS. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU AFFECT -- CAN YOU GATHER SOME WORDS WHICH EXPRESS WHAT COMMISSIONER MAI FEELS IS APPROPRIATE HERE? >> YES, SIR. IN FACT, THERE MAY BE SOME WORDING. IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE WHAT WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT IS A BYLAWS CHANGE BECAUSE IT WOULD AFFECT PLANNING COMMISSIONERS SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE HARASSMENT POLICIES FOR STAFF. >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >> SO IT WOULD BE A BYLAWS CHANGE THAT YOU'D INTRODUCE AT THIS MEETING. I WOULD ACTUALLY DRAFT THE LANGUAGE FOR YOU PROBABLY BASED ON SOMETHING LIKE WHAT IS ALREADY IN THE STAFF POLICIES, JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT HARASSMENT AND SO FORTH IS -- IS NOT THE POLICY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU IN NOVEMBER FOR YOUR FINAL ACTION, UNLESS YOU'D LIKE ME TO FIND THE ACTUAL WORDING. I WAS JUST FLIPPING THROUGH THE PAGES TO TRY TO FIND IT, BUT -- IT'S HERE SOMEWHERE. >>BRUCE CURY: NO, I WOULD PREFER YOU NOT FLIP THROUGH THE PAGES. >> ALL RIGHT. >>BRUCE CURY: WE NEED TO FOCUS ON -- YES. WE JUST NEED TO FOCUS AT THIS POINT. IS THERE ANYTHING -- >>ROBERT HUNTER: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >> I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT I BELIEVE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS -- IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON SOME LANGUAGE THAT IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN POLICIES FOR STAFF. THAT MIGHT APPLY -- >> I SEE. YES, YES, RIGHT. >> -- TO COMMISSIONERS BETTER, SO YOU COULD REVIEW THAT POLICY. >> SHOULD WE DEFER -- IF THEY HAVEN'T PASSED THEIR POLICY, SHOULD WE DEFER UNTIL THEY FINISH THEIR POLICY? >> IT MIGHT NOT BE A BAD IDEA. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, COMMISSIONER -- I MEAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HUNTER. >>ROBERT HUNTER: GO AHEAD, SIR. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: NO. THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE, I DON'T -- I DON'T WANT JUST THIS DISCUSSION TO DEEM THAT WE'VE APPROVED THIS LANGUAGE OR -- I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS LANGUAGE AT THE NEXT MEETING BEFORE IT'S JUST SET TO BE APPROVED. >>BRUCE CURY: ABSOLUTELY. THERE WERE SEVERAL AREAS -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: RIGHT. I THOUGHT SHE WAS SAYING THIS IS -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO, I SAID I DON'T WANT IT TONIGHT. I WANT NO EFFORT -- >>TERRI COBB: WE'RE NOT IN A HURRY. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: I THOUGHT MS. LEIBY WAS SAYING -- >>BRUCE CURY: NO. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: -- SHE GET SOME LANGUAGE AND COME BACK FOR OUR FINAL APPROVAL IN NOVEMBER. >> YEAH, BECAUSE THE POLICIES YOU COULD APPROVE TODAY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SOME AREAS THAT I HAVE TO DRAFT SOME LANGUAGE IN. THE BYLAWS, EVEN THOUGH WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT ADDING A HARASSMENT POLICY, YOU DO NOT APPROVE TODAY, YOU APPROVE IN NOVEMBER, AND YOU'D SEE THE LANGUAGE IN YOUR NOVEMBER PACKET. >>EDWARD GIUNTA: RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I WAS -- OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] >> ALTHOUGH IT -- AS COMMISSIONER DOUGHTY JUST POINTED OUT, IF WE WANT TO DEFER IT FOR A LITTLE LONGER, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MAY HAVE A POLICY THAT WILL BE APPLIED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT WE COULD -- NO. >>ROBERT HUNTER: COMMISSIONERS, WE CAN BRING THIS BACK TO YOU IN NOVEMBER. MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>ROBERT HUNTER: IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU'RE APPROVING OF CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS AND POLICIES TODAY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BRING BACK ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS AS PER YOUR DISCUSSION IN THE BYLAWS AND THE POLICIES FOR THE NOVEMBER MEETING? >>BRUCE CURY: YES. >>ROBERT HUNTER: OKAY. I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU ONE MORE SINCE YOU'RE IN SUCH A GOOD MOOD FOR CHANGES. >>BRUCE CURY: THAT IS AN ASSUMPTION, BUT YOU MAY MOVE AHEAD. >>ROBERT HUNTER: I'LL -- BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED ABOUT YOUR FRAME OF MIND THIS AFTERNOON -- AND I'D LIKE TO GET IT IN YOUR BYLAWS, BUT COMMISSIONERS, SOME OF YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MYSELF AND A COUPLE OF ATTORNEYS AS IT DEALS WITH YOUR CODE OF ETHICS AND THE EX PARTE SITUATION. AND IT WAS VIN MARCHETTI WHO BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS ALREADY IN YOUR CODE OF ETHICS WHERE IT WAS WRITTEN APPARENTLY THAT -- IT SAID APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. IT WAS CERTAINLY INTENDED THAT YOU ESSENTIALLY COULDN'T BE CONTACTED BY INDIVIDUALS OR CIVIC ACTIVISTS ALSO, SO I'D LIKE TO ASK THAT YOU -- WE ADD FOR NOVEMBER'S MEETING, OR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC OR INTERESTED PARTIES. >>TERRI COBB: [INAUDIBLE] >>ROBERT HUNTER: THAT'S EVERYONE. THAT INCLUDES EVERYONE. THAT MAKES IT REAL CLEAR, AND I WANT TO APPRECIATE -- EXTEND MY APPRECIATION TO VIN MARCHETTI, WHO BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION. THANK YOU, SIR. IS THAT UNANIMITY IF EVERYONE AGREES WE'RE FINISHED? NO, I'M JUST -- >>TERRI COBB: YES. >>ROBERT HUNTER: [INAUDIBLE] BRING THIS BACK IN NOVEMBER. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY -- DO WE HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN? YES? OKAY. THEN THAT WILL THEN CONCLUDE THIS ITEM NUMBER 9. >> MR. CHAIR, I BELIEVE WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE POLICIES TO BE ADOPTED TODAY. >>ROBERT HUNTER: [INAUDIBLE] >> AND TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE BYLAWS CHANGES AS DISCUSSED TODAY WILL BE BROUGHT BACK FOR NOVEMBER. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. MAY I HAVE A MOTION -- >>EDWARD GIUNTA: [INAUDIBLE] >>BRUCE CURY: WHAT'S THE MATTER? >>ROBERT HUNTER: THERE WERE SOME I THOUGHT BYLAW CHANGES THAT WEREN'T BROUGHT UP THAT I'M ASSUMING DEEMED APPROVAL IF YOU APPROVE OF THIS MOTION. IT'S NOT EVERYTHING'S COMING BACK, IT'S ONLY WHERE YOU SUGGESTED CHANGES THAT WE'RE BRINGING THAT BACK TO YOU. >>TERRI COBB: AND THEY WILL HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL ANOTHER MONTH? >> ALL OF THE BYLAWS CHANGES HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU, EVERY SINGLE ONE. >>ROBERT HUNTER: THAT'S RIGHT. >> BUT THE POLICIES CHANGES YOU MAY ADOPT EXCEPT FOR THOSE THAT WE HAVE DEFERRED. >>TERRI COBB: BUT WHEN THE BYLAW -- BYLAWS CHANGES COME BACK, DO WE THEN HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER MONTH TO APPROVE THEM OR CAN THEY BE APPROVED? >> BECAUSE WE INTRODUCED THEM TODAY. >>TERRI COBB: VERY GOOD. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. >>BRUCE CURY: THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE 30-DAY SEPARATION, SO WE'RE SAYING IT NOW. IT'LL BE BROUGHT UP FOR VOTE NEXT TIME, BUT THAT'S ONLY AS TO THE BYLAWS. THE POLICIES WE CAN ACCOMPLISH NOW. >>TERRI COBB: I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE POLICIES AS THEY WERE WRITTEN AND WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE HAVE INSTITUTED AND THAT THE BYLAWS WILL COME BACK TO US NEXT MONTH, AND THAT IS MY MOTION. >>MILLER DOWDY: SECOND. >>BRUCE CURY: OKAY. YES, SIR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED LIKE SIGN. MADAM CLERK, THAT WAS UNANIMOUS. LET'S SEE. WE SHOULD NOW MOVE TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. >>ROBERT HUNTER: COMMISSIONERS, I AM GOING TO REPORT TO YOU ON EVERYTHING THAT ALL FOUR GOVERNMENTS HAVE DONE IN THE PAST THREE MONTHS JUST TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED. NOT REALLY. IT'S -- THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL ACTIONS BY THE BOCC, ONE IN AUGUST AND TWO IN SEPTEMBER AND TWO IN OCTOBER AS IT RELATES TO THE SUBJECT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING. THAT'S ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT'S ON MY LIST OF THINGS TO BRIEF YOU ON. AND I'M TRYING TO GET YOU THROUGH THIS SO WE CAN EXCUSE THE CLERK'S OFFICE. THE FIRST THING IS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAD THEIR LAST PUBLIC HEARING IN SEPTEMBER 17th AND DID MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON YOUR BUDGET, WHICH WAS A 20% REDUCTION IN WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOU SUBMITTED TO THEM LAST APRIL. THAT WAS FINAL. BUT WHEN I INSTRUCTED OR TOLD THEM THAT THAT INCLUDED WE COULD NOT CONDUCT COMMUNITY PLANNING LAST MAY, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS AND MEETINGS GOING ON ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT APPARENTLY IS A PRIORITY OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. SO I'LL QUICKLY SUMMARIZE AND WON'T GO INTO ALL THE DETAILS OF THE ACTIONS OF THE BOCC SINCE AUGUST, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN ACTIONS. BUT WHAT IT ESSENTIALLY RESULTED IN IS THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADDED TWO PRINCIPAL PLANNER POSITIONS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING, AND THEY EVEN HAD AN AUDITOR LOOK AT IT AT THE CLERK'S OFFICE WHO RECOMMENDED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE THE LEAD ENTITY AS IT DEALS WITH COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND THAT PGM PROVIDE THE SUPPORT. IN ADDITIONAL WORDING THEY SAID THAT THE PGM WOULD BE THE LEAD IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES, AND WE HAD A LIST OF AROUND 43 ITEMS, AND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT. WE ALSO PRODUCED A TEN-YEAR REVOLVING CALENDAR OF UPDATING THE 26 COMMUNITY PLANS. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHEN THEY APPROVED OF THE TWO POSITIONS, I BELIEVE IT WAS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR $179,000 ROUGHLY. WHEN THEY APPROVED OF THE TWO POSITIONS FOR PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT, THEY APPROVED 219,000. WE'RE 9% CHEAPER ON EACH POSITION. WHY? THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S AN INDIRECT CHARGE BY THE BUDGET OFFICE TO PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR THEIR POSITIONS. JUST WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT. PART OF THE AUDITOR'S REPORT WHICH WAS RECEIVED AND APPROVED AND ENACTED UPON -- AND IT CAME BACK TO THEM LAST WEEK. THAT'S THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE COURT, NOT THE AUDITOR THAT WORKS FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. HE PUT IN FRONT OF THEM THREE AUDITS THAT THEY WOULD BE CONDUCTING THIS YEAR. ONE OF THE AUDITS WAS AS PER HIS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TWO WEEKS EARLIER OF WHICH THEY TOOK ACTION ON, WHICH RELATED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WAS THAT HE RECOMMENDED AN AUDIT OF THE ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY FOR -- OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. IT'S A VERY -- I'VE SEEN THE SCOPE. IT'S VERY COMPREHENSIVE. IT NOT ONLY INCLUDES LONG-RANGE PLANNING, SHORT-RANGE COMMUNITY PLANNING, LOCAL PLANNING, IT INCLUDES FDOT, IT INCLUDES SWFWMD, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, ALL THOSE SORT OF THINGS. I THINK HE'LL BE HIRING A CONSULTANT PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT TWO TO FOUR MONTHS, AND I'M GUESSING THAT AUDIT -- IT'S A PERFORMANCE AUDIT. THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT EFFICIENCIES AND ECONOMIES, ET CETERA, DUPLICATION, THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT FREESTANDING GIS SYSTEMS, ALL SORTS OF THINGS. I'M GUESSING THAT'S GOING TO COST BETWEEN $200- AND $400,000 WITH MY EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD, EVEN THOUGH CONSULTANTS, I KNOW, ARE HUNGRY RIGHT NOW. SO THAT -- AND I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN THE BOARD APPROVES OF THAT SCOPE AND I'LL LET YOU KNOW THE SCHEDULE, AND -- BUT WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN HERE PROBABLY OUR 12th TO 15th AUDIT. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. I FEEL CONFIDENT WITH OUR ROLE AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING AS IT DEALS WITH THE AUDIT AND THEIR FINDINGS. YOU'RE GUIDED BY 160 -- STATE LAW 163, YOU'RE GUIDED BY THE SPECIAL ACT, YOU'RE GUIDED BY THE COUNTY CHARTER. I FEEL VERY SECURE IN THAT, AND YOU'RE ALSO GUIDED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED NOT ONLY BY THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BUT EACH OF THE THREE CITIES' GOVERNMENTS, AND IN MY OPINION, WE FOLLOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. I WANT TO MENTION THAT IT WAS ESSENTIALLY A SECOND YEAR -- IT WAS A TWO-YEAR BUDGET, WHICH I MENTIONED TO YOU BEFORE, REDUCED OUR BUDGET AN ADDITIONAL 15% BEYOND THE 20% WE'RE BEING CUT FOR THIS YEAR. THERE WILL BE A MODIFIED REDUCED BUDGET SCHEDULE NEXT YEAR I THINK, BUT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REALLY STRUGGLED JUST WITH THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT IT BEHIND THEM AS THEY -- THIS TIME NEXT YEAR. I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A QUICK SUMMARY. IN '08 AND '09 WE SUFFERED A 13% BUDGET REDUCTION. I'M SORRY, '07-'08. THIS YEAR WE SUFFERED A 20% BUDGET REDUCTION. AND THE FOLLOWING YEAR WILL BE A 15% BUDGET REDUCTION. 15, 30 -- THAT'S 48% IN FOUR YEARS. I'LL JUST KEEP MENTIONING THAT TO YOU, IN FOUR YEARS THIS AGENCY HAS SUFFERED A 48% BUDGET REDUCTION, SO JUST PLEASE BE MINDFUL WHEN YOU SUGGEST WE DO ADDITIONAL THINGS. THE NEWSLETTERS, I DIDN'T SPEAK UP, WERE REDUCED -- WE'RE DROPPING THE QUARTERLY, HOPING TO STICK WITH AN EVERY FIVE MONTHS OR SIX MONTHS. I DON'T KNOW. IT DEPENDS ON WHEN WE CAN DO IT. QUARTERLY WAS VERY DIFFICULT ON THE WAY I'VE SHIFTED STAFF AROUND. I ALSO WANT TO MENTION THAT BASED UPON THE BUDGET REDUCTION, I'M MAKING SOME CHANGES AS IT DEALS WITH STAFF'S AVAILABILITY TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. I'LL BE SENDING A LETTER OUT -- YOU'VE SEEN IT ALREADY -- TO OUR CLIENTS, OUR APPLICANTS, AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES THAT WE'RE GOING TO A ONE-YEAR PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE. THAT WILL BEGIN JANUARY 1st OF 2011. THAT MEANS THAT -- YOU SAW YOUR SCHEDULE FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S PLAN AMENDMENTS THIS SPRING. WE DEPARTMENT SHOW YOU TAMPA'S, TEMPLE TERRACE'S, OR PLANT CITY'S. THAT'S COMING RIGHT BEHIND THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO A SECOND CYCLE OF ALL FOUR GOVERNMENTS AND TRY AND GET IT ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE NOVEMBER 2010 SO THAT IF THERE ARE MAP CHANGES PRIMARILY OR TEXT CHANGES, THEY CAN ALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE THE POSSIBILITY OF THE PASSAGE OF HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY. IF THERE ARE CHANGES BY YOU AND THE LOCAL GUIDING GOVERNMENTS DEALING WITH FEES, WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING THAT THEY BE MADE EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31st, 2010. THAT MEANS ANYONE THAT SUBMITS JANUARY 2011 WILL HAVE TO PAY THOSE FEES AGAIN IF THEY'RE CHANGED. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE EVERYONE A LEAD -- FAR ENOUGH LEAD OUT THERE. NOW, THE REASON WE'RE DOING ONE PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE, ALL FOUR GOVERNMENTS ARE DUE JANUARY 1st EVERY YEAR FROM HEREAFTER. THAT ALLOWS US TO STAGGER THE HEARINGS TO ACCOMMODATE YOUR SCHEDULE AND OUR -- OUR WORKLOAD AND LESS STAFF. THAT'S WHY YOU SAW FOUR DATES FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE COUNTY. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. IT GIVES US MORE FLEXIBILITY. ANOTHER PART OF THAT IS -- I THINK YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN IT - - WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH FIVE FURLOUGH DAYS JUST LIKE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION IN THAT OUR STAFF -- I BELIEVE THE FIRST DAY IS OCTOBER 30th. THEY WILL NOT BE WORKING HERE -- WORKING, AND THEY WILL NOT BE PAID FOR IT, AND THERE ARE FIVE THROUGHOUT THE FISCAL YEAR. THE FIVE FURLOUGH DAYS ARE CONSISTENT, I BELIEVE, WITH THE ABILITY OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CONSTITUTIONALS TO CLOSE DOWN THIS BUILDING. ANOTHER PART OF THAT IS, AS I MENTIONED IN THE LETTER THAT I SENT OUT LAST JUNE -- IS THAT ON FRIDAYS WE'RE GOING TO BE CLOSING OUR FRONT DOORS, BUT WE'LL BE WORKING. THAT GIVES US A LOT -- A LOT MORE TIME TO DO SOME ACTUAL WORK INSTEAD OF BEING INTERRUPTED. WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND AVOID THE PHONE CALLS BECAUSE PEOPLE GET EXTENSIONS AND DIAL IN, BUT WE'LL -- WE'LL HAVE A SIGN OUT THERE SAYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THIS TIME. WE ALSO WILL NOT BE MAKING APPOINTMENTS ON FRIDAYS AND NOT ACCEPTING PEOPLE WALK-INS. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY SO WE CAN GET WORK DONE. THAT'S, REMEMBER, ONE DAY A WEEK. THAT'S 1/20. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT OUR BUDGET'S BEEN CUT, SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE UP SOME WORK TIME FOR STAFF BY CLOSING OUR DOORS. I DID WANT TO MENTION THAT DOING THIS IS NOT DIFFERENT THAN SOME OTHER ACTIONS TAKEN BY SOME OF THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, AGENCIES, DEPARTMENTS. AND I'LL MENTION ANIMAL SERVICES, CLOSED ON MONDAYS, SUNDAYS, AND HOLIDAYS, NO LONGER RESPONSES FOR NUISANCE CALLS, NO LONGER PICKS UP DEAD ANIMALS ON ROADWAYS. THE CLERK OF THE COURT CLOSED ON -- THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT ON FLORIDA AVENUE. I DON'T HAVE A -- WE DON'T HAVE AN -- >>BRUCE CURY: SATELLITE. >>ROBERT HUNTER: -- A SATELLITE OFFICE TO CLOSE. CHILD-CARE LICENSING NO LONGER PROVIDES FINGERPRINT SERVICES, INCREASED ALL THEIR FEES. THE LIBRARY REDUCED HOURS TWO YEARS IN A ROW, BOOK RETURN LOCKED DURING HOURS OF OPERATION. IT FORCES PEOPLE TO COME IN TO THE LIBRARY. PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT CLOSED ITS PLANT CITY LOCATION. THAT'S IN MARCH, I BELIEVE. PUBLIC WORKS DUE TO THE REDUCTION IN MANPOWER, CITIZENS ARE ADVISED THERE'S NO LONGER WAIT FOR SERVICES -- SORRY. THERE'S AN EXTENDED LONGER WAIT FOR SERVICES SUCH AS POTHOLES, SIDEWALK REPAIRS, DITCH CLEANING, ET CETERA. SOLID WASTE CLOSED THE WIMAUMA COLLECTION FACILITY DUE TO LOW USAGE AND TO SAVE RESOURCES BY CLOSING THE FACILITY. CITY OF TAMPA SOLID WASTE NO LONGER SCHEDULES EXTRA PICKUP DAYS WHEN SCHEDULED PICKUP DAYS FALLS ON HOLIDAYS. SO WE'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE TAKING THIS ACTION, BUT IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE WE'VE GOT LESS STAFF, AND ESSENTIALLY THE WORKLOAD HASN'T CHANGED. IT'S -- IT'S REALLY INCREASED, AND I DO THINK IT WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE. ONE OTHER ITEM IS THAT RELATIVE TO SERVICE, WE'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR LAND USE VERIFICATIONS IN THE MORNING, PROBABLY NOT THE AFTERNOON. IT'S JUST -- BECAUSE IT INTERRUPTS STAFF AND OUR ABILITY TO GET STAFF REPORTS DONE, AND WE'VE GOT 19 PLAN AMENDMENTS COMING YOUR WAY. THERE'S A LOT OF STAFF WORK. THAT'S JUST FOR THE COUNTY. I KNOW I HAD -- OH, YEAH. THE -- REAL QUICKLY, I WANT TO MENTION THE USF GOING GREEN CONFERENCE THAT COMMISSIONER MILLER DOWDY PARTICIPATED IN, HELPED LEAD IN, AND DID AN OUTSTANDING SERVICE REPRESENTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ACTIVE ROLE IN IT. I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT SUCCESS. EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD FROM STAFF -- WE HAD FIVE OR SIX STAFFPEOPLE THIS WEEKEND GO ON THEIR OWN TIME BUT PARTICIPATED, AND IT WAS WELL RECEIVED. THERE WAS -- THERE WERE TWO OTHER ITEMS THAT I'M -- I DON'T HAVE IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW. OH, BY THE END OF THIS WEEK I WILL BE CREATING A SUSTAINABILITY TEAM OF STAFF. WE'RE GOING TO BE USING ONE OF THE SMALL CONSULTANT CONTRACTS -- I HAVEN'T PICKED THEM OUT YET -- TO HELP US DO AN ANALYSIS OF PROBABLY THE COUNTY'S AND TAMPA'S COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, SORT OF A REPORT CARD ON THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PLAN. HOPEFULLY WE WILL THEN BE ABLE TO FOLLOW UP WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON SUSTAINABILITY FOR THE TWO PLANS. I'M NOT SO SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET TO ALL FOUR THIS FISCAL YEAR, BUT SUSTAINABILITY IS THE ISSUE THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, AND IN MY OPINION, FROM A PLANNING COMMISSION, PLANNING AND ZONING OFFICIALS, PROFESSIONAL PLANNER'S POSITION, IT'S GOING TO BE IN FRONT OF US FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS AT LEAST. I THINK WE NEED TO DO A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF WHAT -- OF OUR WORK PRODUCT AND SEE IF WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER. SO THAT'LL -- I'LL BE CREATING A STAFF TEAM BY THE END OF THIS WEEK. WE'LL START THE WORK PROBABLY NEXT MONTH ON IT. COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THAT'S ALL THE ITEMS I COULD -- YES, SIR. >>BRUCE CURY: NO. >>ROBERT HUNTER: THAT'S ALL THE ITEMS I CAN REMEMBER THAT I HAD ON MY LIST, WHICH I LEFT UP THERE, BUT I DID WANT TO MENTION TO YOU -- BECAUSE A LETTER WILL BE GOING OUT TO VARIOUS APPLICANTS AND APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES NEXT WEEK AS IT DEALS WITH THE CHANGE IN WHAT I'VE JUST MENTIONED TO YOU OF PLAN AMENDMENTS AND OFFICE HOURS OF WHICH THE STAFF'S AVAILABLE. THAT'S IT, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BRUCE CURY: MR. HUNTER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OLD BUSINESS. NEW BUSINESS. >>TRACY ROBIN: MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: YES, SIR. >>TRACY ROBIN: EXCUSE ME, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'D LIKE TO BRING TO THE BOARD THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY THAT WAS PERFORMED EARLIER AND ALSO READ INTO THE RECORD THOSE PARTIES WHO ARE INTERESTED IN OFFICES AND COMMITTEES FOR THE COMING YEAR WITH YOUR ELECTIONS NEXT MONTH. I HAVE FOR -- I HAVE -- THESE ARE THE FOLLOWING -- THE FOLLOWING COMMISSIONERS ARE INTERESTED IN THESE OFFICERS OR COMMITTEES. FOR CHAIR COMMISSIONER CURY AND COMMISSIONER GIUNTA. FOR VICE CHAIR COMMISSIONERS CHILLURA, COBB, AND GIUNTA. FOR MEMBER AT LARGE COMMISSIONERS CHILLURA AND COBB. FOR THE PIC COMMISSIONERS BUFORD, CHILLURA, COBB, CURY, M. DOWDY, AND KITCHEN. FOR BUDGET COMMITTEE COMMISSIONERS BUFORD, CHILLURA, CURY, D. DOUGHTY, GIUNTA, KITCHEN, AND MAI. FOR THE RIVER TAC COMMISSIONERS CHILLURA AND DOWDY. FOR THE MPO COMMISSIONERS CHILLURA AND MAI. THANKS, MR. CHAIR. >>BRUCE CURY: WE'VE -- I GUESS THAT BRINGS US TO NEW BUSINESS. COMMITTEE REPORTS. COMMISSIONER MAI. >>HUNG MAI: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND I WILL BE VERY BRIEF. THIS IS THE MPO MEETING OF OCTOBER 6th, 2009. I WOULD HIGHLIGHT, YOU KNOW, THE ITEM. WE APPROVED -- THE MPO APPROVED THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY MPO. COMMISSIONER SHARPE MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE, AND COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER SECONDED, AND IT APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THE 2035 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN PRIORITY OF PROJECT, BETH ALDEN OF MPO STAFF GAVE A DETAILED OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRESS, AND THE -- PRESENTED THE EFFORT, YOU KNOW, JOINING BETWEEN PLANNING COMMISSION, MPO ON THE TRANSIT- ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. MR. MILLER MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE AND SUPPORT THE LRTP, AND MOTION, YOU KNOW, CARRIED. THE -- THE LAST ITEM IS THE HARTLINE. THEY MAKE A PRESENTATION ON THE ALTERNATIVE STUDY AND ALSO MS. SHAVALIER GAVE THE PRESENTATION TO THE HART EFFORT IN CONDUCTING THE ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS. I DID MENTION, YOU KNOW, ABOUT OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LETTER WITH THE HART, YOU KNOW, DIRECTOR, AND SHE RESPOND, YOU KNOW, TO THAT, AND AFTER THAT I TALKED WITH OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MR. BOB HUNTER, AND EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, CLEARED UP, AND AFTER THAT, EVERYTHING WORKING FAIRLY WELL, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. AND THE LAST ITEM IS THAT MPO MEMBER AND OTHER MEMBER OUTSIDE OF THE MPO WILL GO TO CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, NEXT FRIDAY -- THIS COMING FRIDAY TO VISIT THE TRANSIT- ORIENTED, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT UP THERE, AND WE'LL HEAR THE PRESENTATION FROM THE MAYOR OF CHARLOTTE AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER COMMITTEE UP THERE. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT TRIP AND WILL BRING BACK THE REPORT TO YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. >>BRUCE CURY: COMMISSIONER MAI. THAT THEN CONCLUDES THE REGULAR MEETING. THAT LEAVES US WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING. 1