hold this up city city council meeting Tuesday 12 like clys for the invation remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance so father God we come to you again we just thank you for this city hall meeting Lord we thank you for the the council the board members and each department here Lord I just ask you to continue to give them wisdom as they work together for the better of your kingdom and for America and for Florida and for the citizens and for their own family A place where we work uh live and play and I just thank you Lord that uh everything will be done there's a lot of things on the agenda tonight tonight so Lord I won't announce all the codes but just thank you that they all get the purchase of the vehicle they need and uh so and it's electric vehicle so thank you that we could cut down on fuel and work together as a team and I will I'll share a scripture for him so in Psalms 33:12 America will be known blessed as a nation whose God is the Lord a faithful people who he has chosen for to be blessed as we say the pledge of allegiance of the flag bless us all in Jesus name amen am to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all Madam clerk you take roll please Mayor John Eric coover here vice mayor Linda Rodriguez here councilman Tom canella here councilman David Mueller present councilwoman Cherokee Samson here City attorney Nancy Meyer here city manager Matthew cobbler here thank you uh first up approve Council minutes do two blocks on the first uh 213 2024 I have a change to point out uh if I roll down to page 11 at the bottom of page 11 you'll see where it says mayor Hoover expressed concerns about the city Paving roads that have had the reclamite process and that uh not exactly true what what I was expressing was that I had concerns about the city recling roads that were uh uh not planned to be recommit but planed to be uh paved so obviously we need to pave roads regardless of whether they're recommed or not but uh I just want to make sure that was a change in there because I I was concerned about spending the extra reite money on roads that didn't need to be recited any other comments on that subject if you guys make a motion motion to approve minutes from February 13 2024 second and that motion with the update correct with corrections with correction with corrections yes I'm sorry yes motion second all in favor five saying I I opposed motion carries obained I was not present at that meeting okay motion carries uh then if I get a motion for the other set of minutes a motion to approve the minutes from 227 2024 second motion second forther discussion all in favor 65 saying I I opposed motion carried next up comments from the general public I have three signed up first up is Danny Fields welcome actually before you start let me uh just say the set of words here we got public participation is encouraged if you're addressing a council step to the podium and state your name and address for the record please limit your general comments to three minutes for comments on action items please limit comments to three minutes on the current topic please limit your conversations while sitting in the audience during Council business and silence your cell phon so as not to interfere with everyone's ability to hear the comments of both the public and the council during that time thanks Danny welcome my name is Danny Phils 814 little kid uh again uh I know you know since I'm a minister you know I like to quote a lot of scriptures but coming here I just ask for wisdom like I did and I want to thank you for your service and you know uh as we're doing the 40 days of prayer you know it it's targeted it C it's called seven mountains influence and that's got to deal with society and government and so this whole week we're on education that's why it talks about wisdom and it says this in Proverbs 3:13 happy is the man or woman who finds wisdom those who gain understanding for it's precious better than profit than silver or gold and why do why do I say that because you we have money's good we all need money work and play and live and eat and and enjoy and leaving the par to our kids but wisdom is from from God this is why America was founded and then uh when you're sick and then you know and you need healing and help so money you could use it to spend for doctors but you know sometimes you just need faith in the Creator and then watch him heal you I'm a testimony that I was given 6 months to live and God healed me so the word of God is true so I just want to thank you and encourage you in that that's why I do ask for wisdom every time we pray and we do have that coming up in the park you know we had another church I'm working with areas around here that are getting involved uh I'm trying to get more people at the meeting I got Tim he he we run into each other today and he was dealing with stuff he works here he's got a business so he's going to come up and speak uh dealing with the issues that you guys deal with so as we hear about citizens and businesses and workplaces for redevelopment uh the more people that get online and and watch and get involved the better that we have a bigger view of everything so we could work together to fix these issues and come up with good Solutions um I'm also working with somebody cares now trying to put a team together even though we're a small area to deal with homeless uh with the Homeless Coalition Metropolitan Ministries and so I'm looking to uh try to fill these gaps to make it better for us to live here and deal with the issues that we have to deal with as a city and that helps the fire department as well and the police you know they can only do so much because there's laws and Nancy knows that that so we could then work together and resolve these problems so thank you and you have a nice day blessings thanks Jason welcome uh CH jessic 5134 Miller value Drive um I can't stay for the whole meeting but I had wind that uh the council's considering buying an electric vehicle and um myself I've had three um hybrid vehicles Gas and Electric and every time I've had three different ones I just bought a new one this past week they get 50 to 55 m a gallon you don't have to have a charger out here in the side of the building to charge it in you don't have to wor plug it in uh when you when it's low on on uh battery it charges itself with a motor um it's just a big expense I've did a lot of research on it on electric cars and I've had friends that had them and they've actually traded them in shortly after they got them because they've been paining in the buck just trying to keep them charged and uh and just for the mileage you can't go very far with them City you don't have to worry about it because we only got about three miles here to do it but just the expense I mean I just bought a brand new car and I spent less than $30,000 on it has a lot of features on it and I'm getting like I said 50 miles a gallon on it so I can't see spending $48,000 for a car that we probably won't keep more than three years it seems like we get rid of cars every three or four years um it just crazy expensive for me to see this SP City spend on so my two cents is being a hybrid person for a long time now they work great and uh gets lots of mileage and a lot cheaper and I know you can buy hybrids I like I said I shop Kia I shop uh Priuses i cho the Hyundai and actually I bought a Hyundai this time but I've had three different kinds and they've all been great so take in consideration the expense you're going to have to pay for electricity for putting a charging station out here and for the number of miles you actually use on a car thank you thanks Jen next one I have signed up is Timothy schaer shedler that's all right I I'm broken finger here so no problem my name is Timothy shedler uh 7827 Clark Moody Boulevard and Port Richie I'll keep my comments really short I just wanted to thank you all here during the pandemic when things were closed down we we ended up moving during that time and you guys really helped us to get back to business soon I also wanted to just say we really appreciate you guys working with the churches here and the homeless and all this stuff it really does mean a lot to the city and everything specifically the chief love you over there he's a good guy and that's all I wanted to say I'm not probably not going to say the whole meeting working man and I got to get home to you know kids and family thank you can I can I share something with him real quick it's okay just he got some mechanic business so if you need your car I pay the taxes to you guys anyway thanks that's that's all I signed up by show hands anyone else like to speak seeing that we'll pull it back uh comments from the city manager interal Mr copper for his comments good evening everyone um I provided everyone my written comments so I'll just kind of go through these uh pretty quickly so we can move on to business um the first one actually going to have to act upon uh the quarterly town hall meeting scheduled for March 19th will need to be rescheduled due to the conflict we'll have with the Florida's primary election which is on the same date as you may know the council chambers here are voting pre Saint so we will need to pick a new date for that uh Second uh wanted to make you aware that uh on March 14th uh staff and I will be meeting with the Pasco County Metropolitan planning organization as well as County transportation engineering department uh the meeting was scheduled to review the scope of the intersection improvements at Grand Boulevard us9 and discussed the process to formalize an interlocal agreement for the county to manage the construction Andor engineering should we be funded through saate programs and I may have mentioned at the last meeting that um we've been working with the uh no the county no to actually get the uh intersection improvements onto their transportation Improvement program list and getting it there once it's on there if it's approved um it goes to the state and the state will determine if it's worth funding and so as we know that particular um intersection and the safety enhancements that we're going to be making there um could be expensive and could be in the neighborhood of uh you know anywhere from 150 to quarter of a million dollars so the county is uh under the uh direction of the state to actually do some small projects like this so the the county is very excited about working with us and help us get funding the downside is that that it could very well mean that that the funding comes late in the year and maybe we wouldn't be able to do the project until early next year um but again I'm getting too far ahead of myself let's let's get there first um you know the plan is still to get the engineering done and see where we are from there um part of you know in our in my discussion with the the N I had asked the question if the county would consider actually doing the engineering for us so I haven't got that answer I'm assuming that answer is going to come at that meeting um so therefore we we didn't proceed with uh putting back on the agenda uh the information for your consideration for engineering we still have a couple items we need to button up as well but uh I will find out on Thursday whether it's possibility the county could help us out with that again we probably still have to pay them to do the work but uh I'm assuming that their work would be a little less expensive than going out into the marketplace so I'll keep you posted on uh the results of that uh we recently received a third quote for migrating and updating the city's website to a new provider um we're planning on bringing that recommendation to you at an upcoming meeting I don't know if it'll be the next meeting or the first meeting in April we still have a little bit of due diligence on the background to be able to show you why we think that one is better than the other the quotes that we receive range anywhere from $3,795 first year up to $7,795 all the way up to 18,000 again all the uh providers we looked at functionality of of their services are a lot higher than what we currently have and the ease of use is is much much improved over what we have so we believe that you know regardless of who we would select um you we feel that we get a better product that will serve the residents and the city a lot better than where we're at right now uh let you know we've begun the 2425 budget process the finance director myself have been meeting with the Departments to go over their requests and establishing funding priorities for the upcoming year um as we do this we'll keep in mind the goals that Council uh discussed and formulated to help us put together that spending plan that will ultimately come to you for approval uh we are in the process of finalizing the propos capital Improvement plan for the next five years once we have this directu plan completed it's a little bit out of sync maybe from your perspective but every place I've been and generally before the budget process really starts we sit down with Council and go over kind of where we see the capital Improvement priorities are and get direction from that because what what generally happens is there's a large a lot of requests um but then reality sets in because here's the operational costs and where our revenues and we don't necessarily have the ability to fund all the the department of requests so we like to have that conversation with you to prioritize what's you know in front of you so as we put the budget together it meets what you expect and you don't have to spend time you know saying well we didn't want that so it makes the the process a little bit easier um at the last council meeting on the item regarding the Florida boting Improvement the discrepancy was pointed out and the amount of match need to contribute I think my remarks early on say that there was a 50-50 funding match when you got to the actual item is stated that we were going to be uh providing a match 15% which is 84,7 so there was a little bit of confusion in um in that as it was explained to me and how IED on to you uh the facts are that we are actually providing a 15% match which is the 84,000 um the gr of does not require a match it's actually 100% but uh in an effort to put it in a better scoring position with the state staff felt it would be good to put money towards it so conceivably if we were awarded this grant um we would get away with only spending $84,000 do the same project that we submitted an application a month ago which would be a 50-50 Na and again if we're really if we're fortunate maybe we get both and that's you know part of our match and so we would limit our amount to this $84,000 so I just wanted to clear that up and then the last thing I have uh written is I know at last meeting there was a question about the benches for Water Front Park I saw an email earlier today from the public works utilities uh director stated that the park benches have been delivered and Public Works will be uh installing those benches next week thanks anything else I'll pass to my left tonight with councilwoman Samson start comments um I would just like I hope I can yeah um as everyone knows I am with the Fort Richie Chamber of Commerce and Visitor Center and we're having a meet and greet next uh tomorrow from 6 o'clock to 7:30 and everyone is welcome to attend thanks vice mayor Rodriguez um can I Mr coppler on the Nicks Park so when we voted on that it was a 5050 and so we were going to be in for maybe like $250,000 at that point when we voted yes correct the the original Grant the original yes so that's what we we approved and now it's only 15% so is this grant this has been approved no no no no this this will be submitted yeah I said was approve if it was okay yeah we um actually at the last meeting which kind of spurred this this question uh we had asked for permission to be able to sign the letter send it okay so this is still this is not approved yet this is if it should get approved hopefully this is cont contri this one I mean of the two grants this is a more lucrative one for the city that's why I want to be very clear to make sure that that okay very good um and the reports one of the things that I read was about the um for the police dogs the heat indicator is that already ordered is that done do we have something already in place for the dog or no no sorry Chief I didn't ask you I didn't yes we were awarded a grant for for the heat uh sensor and we're waiting the vehicle so we can have it installed and then then we'll have the the pictures taken so that the the grant or um can post that on their site and at our goals at our last Workshop we talked I we talked about um rules for like the audience for the city coun you know for City Council meetings have we working on that is that something we can work on or do we have to wait till all the goal setting meetings are done no we we will honestly we haven't started working on that yet been three days what's the matter no I just wanted to know if that was something that we had to wait till the end of the work to the workshop is that something that we can work on for for our residents yeah we will prioritize that because that's I mean low hanging fruit yeah that's kind of what I figured that's why I was hope we can get that done all right that's all I had thank you pass over Council thank you Mr coer for that vote grant for voting and for voting Grant approve granted that clarify so we're not on the hook for as much and potentially we could get a 100% but it's but we put money into the equation so that they see that we have a share in it in the hopes of elevating our status that's I think that's a great idea um also uh I know we used to at one time did a quarterly financial review uh maybe there's an opportunity to just start that back and try to start tracking those things like penny for Pasco where we're standing with some of those pieces of the puzzle uh and you're starting the process moving forward with the budget I really like to hear that um one of the items that I noticed in the next section that we're going to talk about is the the health insurance and potentially getting in front the curve on some of these contracts and try to move ahead rather than wait to the end where you're trapped with time and pressure and I'm wondering if there's an opportunity now to move some of those items for maybe look to see where we've got some big cost and potentially look at alternative vendors to address that and and I think again that's as you go through budget when I go through budgets you look at the large costs within the budget to see you know what flexibility you have with that um health insurance in particular one of one of the U unfortunate pieces is it's fairly well you know the time frames are are are kind of laid out contrary to what we would probably like every and other places I've been run into the same thing where you don't really get good numbers until you get closer to when the year expires and I think and I saw that earlier I think it's June is is when we're actually probably going to be starting with a call start looking at those numbers more detail but we are are getting know the background information we need to start looking at that and I think some of the you know information that we've already um you know receive through our our work you know helps organize our thoughts as we get into that you know what what can we do to help reduce you know because our goal is reduce costs but still provide the highest level of benefit to our employees and and not to injure one for the other right we don't want to have this high level benefit and cost the residents exorbitant amount of money we also don't want to go cut rate and not be able to provide the level of benefit to our employees right so it's a fine line that requires a lot of work and we're going to get into that that work apparently in the June July time frame perfect the appropriate balance is what we're looking for exactly thank you else I'm good [Music] councel I'm pleased to hear that you started meeting with the department heads for budgets I was on a webinar uh earlier and uh the city in the South East Florida they started their uh but process April and they're in it with both feet and to hear that we're meeting already I think that's going to help us a lot and and and and thank you for doing that uh reviewing the some of the uh Department reports I noticed that we're still waiting on three police cars is there something going on yes it is out of our hands actually we have been back and forth with uh the upfitter they have all of our equipment and the reality is we're small agency we have three cars and then you have an agency like a Tampa or a Hillsboro that has 50 cars and part of their contract is they have to get 10 cars a week according to the vendor um to those agencies part of that that contract so we've met with our representative from Dana and we've also had conversations the last three days with the regional director regarding delay on us receiving our vehicles he's profusely apologized um we had one that we were going to pick up yesterday it was the K9 C we get down there and the K9 car has the wrong cage in it so of course we had to leave that make contact with the regional director again and he said he's going to make it good I don't know how he's going do that but um it seems to be not just our agency that has problems it's a smaller agencies that are having these issues and unfortunately there's not too many upfitters that are uh in business and so but we are looking at maybe changing and give that another upfitter an opportunity see if they can do a better job yeah there was a question I was going to ask if if I mean we went through this last year it seems like uh the last few years as always we're put on the back burner we have brand new car sitting and our officers can't use them uh I I do hope that we were able to find someone that's going to cater to us instead of the big big CS out there um also last I I just want to on behalf of the craw for the care want to thank the city of Port Richie uh for their uh Support also to the police department fire department uh for their support uh it was another very successful uh walk um 450 plus participants uh that Sunday down at the Waterfront District all those I'm sorry all those restaurants uh it was really neat to see the line green shirts all over the place at at catches all the way up to gild dogs enjoy uh our restaurants down that area so it it it brought a lot of people to the area and uh uh uh the mamogram bus was is the second year that the crawl has done this and the crawl supported seven patients getting the mamogram that they could not have gotten otherwise so uh it it pays off this is paying off for the residents here in in West Pasco and going forward uh hope to do better but again thank you to the city for your support and uh uh the participants noticed it they were very pleased since majority of them were not City residents but to see the support the city gave uh organization like this it meant a lot to everyone again thank you on behalf of Carl for the Care thank you thanks okay couple things I got uh start with the first one we we did some modifications on the website that uh added the calendar make it easily accessible there used to be a floating link there's actually there was two floating links one for the the calendar and the other for the uh YouTube uh meetings on the leftand side I know it's now the YouTube link is gone the calendar is still there uh but there's a YouTube link underneath the calendar uh on the right hand side in Red so I didn't know if if if we could put that back on there just because maybe people or used to that may be looking for that to be able to get to the the actual meetings I I know we're changing things around or whatever but just uh because we had still one link there so I don't know why we just go ahead and duplicate it just give another spot to go since we especially going to leave the one there it takes us to the calendar um the other thing I want to mention and you alluded to a meeting with the no meeting coming up I think on the 14th you said me and mate also met with uh tenia the executive director for the no uh about the underpass project about Grand Boulevard project as well as um the n county are doing some work on the south side of grand that bridge that we put our uh our approval but uh support in for um they're doing some stuff along Grand Boulevard there to to make that better I think there's a there's opportunity for us to do our end of Grand Boulevard hopefully connect all that to the Waterfront at some point so we we put that kind in the back of our mind to kind of see if we get that on on a project list to hopefully get funded through the NF to help some of that so that's uh some stuff we talked about with them uh the other thing I wanted to mention we had submitted three Appropriations to the legislative process um it's my understanding we didn't get any of those Appropriations at all funded um I still need to reach out to Senator Hooper and representative Jer to get some insight onto onto that process but um Newar Richi uh did put in appropriation for their fire house I think there's about 2 million that they're they're getting the difference between us and Them obviously they they hired the lobbyist and from my understanding that's a very important part of that process is to have a lobbyist up there pushing for that to those Appropriations there's some stuff that happens in the in behind the scenes or whatever that U it's kind of a necessary thing so as we look at budget I mentioned to that already but uh I'd hope we we'd look at possibly doing the same same type thing most most important of that is senat Hooper's going to be the chair of the appropriation committee next year and so there's a lot of things that we could be looking to do if we get ahead of the curve here get ready for the next leg legislative process to hopefully get some Appropriations actually get some funding and I think we need to pull out all stops and try to get you know maximum uh offense here to try to get some some money for the city so something to think about let's see the the other thing I wanted to bring up is the the pnz had mentioned last meeting they weren't meeting till the 28th I don't see a meeting's been scheduled so I'm assuming they couldn't make that happen is that okay um the the other thing I want to mention um with our Newport richings having their centennial celebration this year ours is due for next year and actually we're looking at putting a committee together just to share a little bit on their side they actually I think had four or five committees one of which is an event committee um Chopper invited me to attend with him tomorrow to that we've we've had a discussion it that we thought it might be good that uh we participate some degree in their centennial celebration coming up this year and then they was reciprocate and participate in ours what we decide to do next year so I think there's some room there for some coordination with uh with our with our neighbor there but anyway I'm gonna attend that meeting with him tomorrow and and share some ideas um finally there was a an issue that happened with the opening of the Chamber of Commerce uh you guys should have got a letter I'm going to go ahead and read that into the record u i don't if you all have seen it yet but came to each one of emails uh it's addressed to the The Honorable council members dear council members on March 1st 2024 Friday I was pleased to cut the rib and officially open the Port Richie Chamber of Commerce to start off I ordered window tents that I had the logo of the Chamber of Commerce printed on and one with the Seal of city that was for the new Visitor Center I apologize for using the city seal without first receiving permission and I confess I confess in the Zeal to get the center open I overlooked that the following day on March 2nd 2024 I was cited for the infraction of using the city seal as well as being notified that my sign coverage exceeded the Min maximum 25% coverage I complied with the order and removed the seal and destroyed the signs I just purchased as far as violating 25% rule I was following the standards that were set by the dozens of businesses that are on Ridge Road and even surround the city hall itself in my three and a half years of living for Richie I had seen these window coverings and have never seen them removed I would like to know what sighting new for Richie chamber within one day of operation was not due to selective enforcement or possible animous against the chamber myself I firmly believe that chamber is a real benefit to the City and surrounding areas by keeping by helping keep local business strong warmer guards Ron McDonald president so I I read that and I I want to talk a little bit about code in general but specifically signed because I think this is a great use case you I I for one since being elected have pushed that we get together and we we visit some of these codes we've pushed some down Planning and Zoning where we're necessary hopefully going to bring some of those back that don't need to go to Planning and Zoning but I want to use this an example just to show you um what can happen and we hear a lot about we've heard some from the podium about selective enforcement I get emails I'm sure as you guys as well that people feel that they're being selectively enforced and you know I'm not faulting anybody within the city for enforcing codes you're going to have that and and actually you're going to have instances where people are going to feel like they're selectively enforced but this is a good example to cover and so I'm going to talk about the the Fort Richie Chamber of Commerce one window that was based on a 25% uh conversation so the window itself is 77.5 square inches okay and 25% of that would be 19.38 square inches I have here a uh a 19% version of that window and what was put on it this is an active code enforcement case where is this at in the process is this a an acted case it's been filed it's an we haven't gone back to look at we haven't been notified that they're compliant so we haven't gone by there to look at it yet but I believe it is on the calendar for tomorrow I would ask if you want to talk about the code in general that's good but active case that we're going to be prosecuting I would caution you not to get to facts case okay that sure let me let me me wind that back a little bit so I can talk about the actual issue if you wanted it's possible to talk about the the ordinance the code itself if you have an issue with that generally I think that would be fine but if we get into this anything specific with that case I would caution not to do it okay the let me rephrases so this particular um uh thing I want to discuss is window sign okay and so I guess my concern is is that when we have something um that's broadly violated which is what we have here um the there signs out there that um taking aend a sign you stick it on the window is that covered a certain amount or not what our code States is a window sign by Def means any sign placed in a window or displayed so as to be seen through a window and displayed on a temporary basis for not more than four weeks so a window sign in its uh broad sense is only to be there from a temporary nature anyway so up to four weeks and so you really be should be taking it down putting it back up and of that the other section of code talks about window signs signs are specifically prohibited um in section 121-3 item number 15 window signs which in aggregate cover more than 25% of the total window surface and as we look at window signs obviously when we we we drive around the city we're going to see a good majority of signs that exceed that 25% and so when somebody gets cited for a a sign or anything else and we have a grossly overused we have a lot of people that are um violating that that particular entity is going to feel like they're being selectively enforced and so what I want to bring it up and we can talk more detail about the specific sign code and I believe we actually need to revisit the sign code because there was a Supreme Court case that we haven't addressed it since then so there's some parts of that that we need to do anyway so when we bring this back we can talk more about what we think we should allow or not and this particular thing it's it's kind of new technology has been around I don't know how long but for a while but it is newer probably way newer than when our code was force is this stuff is like window tenning that you put on the the building and your logo and words are in it but if you take the words and logo off which make it a sign it's really just window tinting at that point so at what point I guess does the window tinting become part of the window and not part of the sign I think there's some there's some there's some rules in the code that are up for interpretation based on some of that stuff so OB we can bring that back and talk about what we want to allow going forward forward but I want to bring that up more so on the selective enforcement side so what I would like to see is if in the day-to-day duties that code enforcement um sees something if they see that it's a you know it's more than just a one off or two off here instead of just citing one individual that they bring it back to city manager and say you know we've got several uh things that violate the Cod and so at that point I think as a council we need to understand that do we want to start and one thing we need to do is when we do decide we're going to move forward and and correct that we need to correct it across the board and in this case we're talking about signs and we have 50% of the city that are out of compliance we site one that's really not and if we site one and then you know a couple weeks later site another one if somebody complains site another one we really need almost a campaign in that uh aspect to identify all the ones that are out of compliance um one if we're going to keep the code the way it is uh and we we're going to enforce that then we need to be aware of that and there needs to be significant effort put forward that all those are cited within the same time frame so it's been a day or two citing all those so that you don't have one saying well I got a citation why didn't he why didn't he so and I think there's you know there's certain instances and this is just a case in point where there's there's a lot more out there that um is out of compliance probably more so than not to be honest with you so that's all I wanted bring up um couple of things first of all reviewing codes was brought up by me way before you were in office so I totally agree the codes need to be reviewed what codes get reviewed will stuff I'll leave that to us as a group um so I totally agree that codes need to be reviewed and revised or left alone whichever is appropriate um selective enforcement um I was cited for a trailer myself um I was might have been before I was on Counsel but I was here all the time anyway so I don't know if it was the beginning me being on Counsel or not um all you have to do is pick up the phone which is what I did and call I end up speaking to Veronica and it was on the side of my house and it was raining it was it was Springtime and they it was there it was there and all I had to do was say look it's really wet if I go to move it now I'm going to break my water line so can I wait till it dries up so I can move it the answer was yes and that was the end of that was the end of it so um just because and the guy across the street had a boat halfway in the thing but I didn't go around C and saying how come he's not cited but he could have been that of fact I find out many months later he was but I don't know that so just because everybody's going 100 miles an hour down a 65 M hour road doesn't mean the one person who gets stoed how come you didn't get that guy it's just we need to look at the codes in general but I I just think we need to support our code enforcement because one of the biggest complaints when you look on Facebook is code enforcement code enforcement we need to have code enforcement this looks terrible that looks terrible I have been hearing that for seven years as I sit out there so now to stay that selective enforcement as one person doing it we need to have a little Grace in in that one person's job he's also getting up to par into what's being done so I think that's out of line yeah no I goad I I certainly agree with you I think the first approach you get some kind of flag on your house or some issue going on call the city and the city ought to be able to work that out let you know what the rules are point you in the right direction rather than and that's what they did with me absolutely exactly and and that's the way to handle it rather than okay let's just write a piece of paper hang it on somebody's wall or mail it to them and now they get this they mailed it to me I got a mail I got the official thing nobody came and knocked on my door right I got I got a citation that I had a find but all I had to do was call them and tell them what the and make sure that the plan I had was appropriate and they agreed and that was the end of it I'm certainly in agreement with you violently that we somehow need to communicate that to folks I mean that's how I would handle it but not everybody thinks that that way everybody handles issues like that differently some of them get upset I heard of issues that people aren't having okay the point being is call talk and try to understand what the situation is and more importantly get guidance on hey how do I remedy this thing in most cases they give you seven days to correct the situation or three days or whatever it is move a boat U the other day I was hearing uh somebody here uh he moved from another place because they wouldn't allow him to keep his Bo boat in his yard they had a a weekend rule for boat trailers and he didn't like that so he moved up here he got a bigger piece of property put it behind a fence so it's a nonissue but those are the kinds of things that I think we as a council uh and staff too try to embrace these situations and let the community know maybe be through our website or Facebook page that hey if if if you're one of the lucky ones to get a violation give us a call we'll figure out how we can you know get it resolved because everybody's on the same page we want a goodlook city we want uh things to work good good communication lines and I think that's one of our main goals anyway so I certainly agree we need to try to knock down some of those bearings and and I'm not here to knock code enforcement at all that's not my point here my honestly that's Theory it appears right now well I'm sorry appears that way what what concerns me though is that if we're going to if we're going to en Force code right we just don't uh we don't pick something out of the the code that's maybe not been followed by anybody right and then start sighting one or two people and then kind of leave all the other ones on the Wayside espe I mean from the aspect of the signs there's been sign I mean all around city hall in even much worse of a over that 25% than the act one it was cited and there's been no citations and there's more to the story um I won't share that here but my point being is is that there's a lot of code out there that is older um and if you really wanted to and I'm not saying this is anybody's motivation you could probably go out and and find vault in just about any property here when I get stopped for a traffic violation well he did it too that's not that's not defense if I could jump in I think I can probably wrap this up sure your code ordinance needs to be reviewed absolutely doesn't matter why it needs to be reviewed Supreme Court case came out has not been reviewed since then I've had one of my colleagues look at it very briefly you have First Amendment issues you have due process issues I would ask that you direct my firm to review it and this conversation can and and'll come back to you and at that point specific things if they're still in there because they're still legal to be there the specific things that someone may have issue with can be addressed I think that would be the best way to handle this moving forward thank you totally agree with that and just just say something here uh shortly after Mr Alexander came to the city was working here at the city uh there was a lot of bitching that was coming about code enforcement because at the time we didn't have anybody out there and suddenly we hire somebody they're out there enforcing and and and Mr Alexander flat told this council at the time that look this is what the ordinance reads it's in violation if you don't like it the council needs to change it right and and again it's been years that we've talked about reviewing we haven't done much about it so they're still doing their job let them do the job at the same time shame on us for not doing what we're supposed to do reviewing the ordinances and making the changes and by the way very dear friend of the family he got sided he has businesses on 19 in the city here he got sighted for signs too and he did what he had to do I didn't come complaining here to the the council saying we're being picked on the fact is he was in violation he corrected it he made contact and the issue was resolved so we just got to keep moving forward yeah and you make a good point that uh the onus is really not on our building department or code Force officer they're just doing what the code says and totally support that absolutely the only Point like you said that's really our fault and so I guess I what I wanted to get out of this is one as things come up if we could be made aware of that because there may be a Hot Topic to say signs is a Hot Topic um with well it's a hot topic for one one business well it could be a very hot topic if it was enforced across the board as well and that's I guess what I'm getting to here is if we if we start enforcing that which I think that's hly they're probably there's things that they e and flow they may be doing boats and trailers one day and and siding the next and maybe signs but I mean there's there's a concered effort obviously to do all that and we're low staffed right so it's um you're going to have some time frame in between enforcement and that's that's that's fine but if there's a glitch ing issue like signs I feel is um and obviously there there's other things as well that we need to cover um because I'm prepared to actually start calling special meetings to talk about certain items of code so we we don't continue to go on and on and on and not do anything because we're we're putting things we're letting these things go and the residents and businesses they're suffering the consequences of when it comes their time to be enforced uh and in actuality um we could be looking at this stuff proactively and fixing some of the stuff so they don't end up like that so and also would help the load of Code Enforcement because they wouldn't have to enforce so many things if there was changes made or what have you so I really want to drive home the point here is just please be diligent about getting these things on the agenda or or special meeting or Workshop or whatever to start going through this it's it's not going to be it's not sexy work we're going to have to put our heads down and actually put a lot of time and thought into this and it's going to it's going to cost some some attorney fees but we we desperately need some some codes addressed and we're just we're not doing a very good job of that and so I said I prepared if if need be I call special meeting that we kind of force along but that's all I'm really asking this is really let's make an effort to get some of the stuff done I would encourage the residents if you get a citation call the B the building department and work out a plan with them exactly I had one other comment sure um I heard that the Planning and Zoning group was not able to meet this month um oh the 28th we're meeting the 28th the end of the month they're meeting oh they're meeting at the end of the month okay that's good because I where I heard it I didn't think yeah we asked was going to try to get an earlier meeting but that's the point uh we need to get this stuff on their agenda if they're going to be champions of that particular thing and move things along I know some of these committees haven't met in a long time and that one has started back up and they did miss a meeting a couple months back but that's good thank you yeah that's on it um I forgot something sure um so I have been questioning some of the citizens about the zoom idea and quite a few people like if they could call in and have their three minutes of time and I've had quite a few people of all age ranges okay so I've had 77 year olds and 23 year olds who would absolutely love that so I just wanted to note that for Council that there are people who would absolutely love to sit at home be able to have their three minutes potentially and maybe we could eventually work some way to to add that yeah I future I can actually add a little bit to that Matt after we mentioned at the last council meeting I guess did some testing I think there's even a test out there um I think it's it's doable G let you address that a little bit we think about maybe do using it as a town hall as kind of a a beta to see how that goes yeah we we were kicking around thought just to see how it would work not in a regular council meeting but do it at a town hall meeting because I think the one gives us ability to see how it's going to work um so with that as a thought we said well we should be doing some tests to see how this all works together because there really is some issues like you know right now with way that Zoom is used within the council chambers the camera is is over there somewhere right um yeah currently when somebody calls in Via Zoom there's no visual it's all audio um with the setup that I have right now it would be like a webcam um there are ways to utilize the camera in City Hall but that's going to require a little bit of work and I think that's the best option besides it a webcam to to view so that way both sides see very clearly the goal and I think not trying to be an obstructionist doing this I just think that you know whether you're on the zoom in your home on a computer or you're here the the end uh you know the end product that goes out to all the public should be the same they really shouldn't be able to tell whether they're here or at home right and that's I think what the limitation we have right now with the the zoom setup is that it's not all going to be going through the same final all goes to the same final Source but it's going from different points that would you know be very clear that that you know they're not as good not as clear as the other and so I think if we're if ultimately we do decide to start doing that for regular Council meetings we have to you know make some improvements to our our system to get there but I think the first step was let's try it with what we have to see what that product actually looks like and and how it worked because I think again you know we're need come up with set of rules on you know how people are to behave on that um you know I I during during the covid period up in Michigan when we went to zoom meetings etiquette was a uh was lost and um there were some embarrassing things in cities around where I was at um because people didn't behave properly or didn't know how to behave I should say um and so we don't want to you know go go through those experiences um so you know there's there's a number of things that need to be done to make it right but let's start with a trial to see how it would work and see if you think it works because I mean you know we may go through this and you'll say you know it was a good try but it just isn't where we need to be and we need to do more awesome thank you and uh with that we do need to reschedule that uh Town Hall so if you guys look at your calendar real quick to see what might it was set for the 19th um the the 18th I believe is a debate scheduled with West Pasco Chamber um 25th was it 25th it's the 25th it's been moved to the 25th for Newport Richie and Port Richie okay so then it would possibly be the 18th which would be Monday instead of Tuesday another board meeting uh I know the 21st is another election thing that uh there would be some people possibly missing um the 22nd is a Friday I don't know if it's if Friday is a bad day and then we of course we push it to the following week um what about the 20th that's a Wednesday I can't do Wednesdays you can't do Wednesdays that's a c meet your neighbor meet okay thank what if you do it after the election well just it's a quarterly meeting and this is it's time I don't really want to push it past March you choked our calendar I know um the 28th and the 29th are free for me if it works for anyone else Sunday you know the 28th Friday Good Friday oh I'm on I'm on April I'm sorry I apologize I apologize yeah what what do you think what do you guys think about Thursday 28th it's wide open I'm goodes that work yep what do we want to book from 6:00 to 11: p.m. no 6 to 6 to8 do your weapon stay longer are we going to have pizza at this one you we'll eat what you bring mat mention so everybody go to the 28th so we're schedule resched Town Hall from 19th to 28th and I know we hadn't which is actually a good thing we hadn't put out any kind of uh I I reminded S I texted him today and let him know that there was something on the website showing town hall meeting yes it's on the calendar but yeah was there well no it was on the on the front of the page could changed welcome for Town Hall oh it is yeah if you guys could make that change and then appropriately advertise it of course maybody share it or whatever but if you guys could put out like a little whatever yes perfect okay moving on to comments from boards and committees do we have any did you have anything um we had a meeting however we didn't have a quorum on um our last meeting so we do have three vacancies so anybody who would like to join please feel free to um submit your letter to Ashley so we can get more people onto the committee that's all I had to actually and on that speaking Quorum I know it's specific to the I reached out to you I to clarify that it's five is a quum for that nine person committee resolution is that is that kind of normal or can because actually as as a nine person committee we have seven now I think is that right we have three vacancies three vacancies so usually a quum is a majority of whatever the board board makeup is so when you have large group makes it harder sometimes to get a quorum which is why I suggested going shorter than not small but okay the majority can you is it something you could adjust the Quorum based on the active membership a commit like that active members yeah you um I I would I verify but I think I have seen situations where the code talks about the active members versus the seats I'll verify that though we normally don't have a problem with quum so I mean once every two years right a lot but with three vacancies let's just say again this this lives on for a long time if you can't it yeah if you can't fill those three vacancies you know guess you have one absent is it down to one I think oh it has to be two up we have we have six people if one one is absent we still have a form of five yeah let's say five you only got four members then you're kind of stuck you can't do anything so I guess some we just the council would have to just point it without it was it was a resolution that we just passed about three months ago well I'm saying if you got in an issue where you couldn't have Quorum some like if we on the council don't have Quorum I think what the governor has to appoint or something it depends on your numbers but if you're um there's Provisions in your code that let you call whoever's left to appoint people to BR everybody's on the government I just don't know if we need to look at that or not might not be an issue if we get those just we got right now that would be great if you just check see what that is and we could always write in there that you have to have at least three for quum and then if you whever you fall based on your active membership something like that see what the options are any other boards of committees okay moving on to the consent agenda for motion motion to approve the consent agenda motion second further discussion any want talk about comments so I move to vote all in favor signify by saying I I oppose motion carries first up is Council B business um the there was an amended I need to State this I think by Statute right there was Amendment on this on three and four the agenda was amended the reason behind that those amendments is when the uh the intent was is to have it the way it is now with the second reading and in the first reading um how however the original agenda that came out was discussion topic and that was because Matt needed he wanted to get it on the agenda and get the information out to us as quickly as possible with the intent that he could amend that on Monday to go back with the original intent of actually making those readings so that's why the the amendments were put in place is there that accurate yeah okay so that's why it's been amended that's so that number three second reading ordinance number 24- 695 amending section section 12747 of article 3 of chapter 127 the City Port Richie code to allow for recreational vehicle parts in the agricultural zoning District before I pass it to M Meer for the second reading it's also my understanding that this particular second reading we don't need to do this anymore with the Pud um and I think the staff's recommendation is that we don't I could please so um can turnning back to the clock to our last council meeting um before we get to these to we get to the discussion on the Pud I actually me started I had a quick conversation with our planning consult and at the time um she had said that after reviewing um what we were going to be doing with the Pud she had a couple questions for me um but she also said these key words that you will also have to change the future land use of any properties in the city to be able to do that jph say you can go ahead and and adopt it and and I I kind of wait a minute this this may be a large issue or may be a small issue but I know it's an issue and I didn't want to go forward thinking that everything was fine when there may be an issue um and so my thoughts were after you know let me Nancy deal with it to find out what's going on and what needs to happen and the thought was that next day that we'd be able to be in a position tonight to do you know second reading of the A1 as well as do the first reading of the Pud as as we got into the conversation about it it became clear and I'm G to now just focus on the A1 piece these are both kind of lengthy discussions un so in in our conversation with the the planner regarding the A1 portion she said it really is irrelevant putting the ability to have an RV park in any of the existing zoning uh categories because ultimately you have to look to the Future Landing plan is it a use that's allowed within the future land use plan so of course we consolidate our future land use plan and uh that particular area in the future land use plan or at least the one that's going to be proposed is a um it's Recreation open space um and then as you look at you know what it's very clear that that what we're talking about in the Pud is not allowed there because of the density and lot coverage and some other issues um and so we know that that putting that in an egg one ultimately is irrelevant not necessary again I think she she indicated you could do it but it really isn't necessary to do it it just probably be ultimately something that gets someone confused later down the road um and now the attent to put in the A1 was more sight specific than anything else but um we also thought from the standpoint that that you know those areas are are you know larger lots more coverage or less coverage of of hard surface so they made they made sense um and so that was thinking really why the A1 District uh was made more sense in putting it there than than putting it in a residential or commercial um and you know the other pieces you know any potential conflicts because again um even though they they may be great neighbors uh any commercial use within a a neighborhood is not the greatest um so we we kind of thought that you know this wouldn't go in any of the other uh zoning districts only in A1 so my bigger comments are for the next one but at this point uh I would recommend that Council not approve this because in the end it's peress to uh having an RV part the attorney wishes to say anything or not correct me in any way um no I think I think you covered it um the planner in my opinion when we spoke to her made it clear that this was not necessary and she recommended we not do it um and to do what we're going to talk about in a few minutes um because the the bigger picture is um changing the ne's map um and that will help dictate where these happen should they meet the requirements um of these ordinance we're going to talk about in a minute so this is not necessary so so denying this voting this down would not allow an RB par in an A1 area is that correct what what it would not allow is how do I say that it would not it wouldn't by right be a permitted use in the A1 District it doesn't mean there would not be an RV park allowed in an A1 District based on what we will talk about later the future land use map's going to have to change for AR Park to happen in the city it's a bigger conversation it's my understanding that the Pud could go anywhere in any zoning right it would overlay that right well commercial industrial yeah so the in theory yes but would it would it Go in residential Would It Go in certain places that it has to be compatible with the areas around there's a lot of Provisions so I don't want to say that in the the grain scheme to make people nervous that there's going to be an RV park showing up in there single family residential area I know that's that was one of the concerns the Pud r p rvv PUD and whatever ultimately becomes the future land use designations will help dictate where can actually go it still may end up in an A1 you just don't need it to St so in the A1 Zing okay the controlling controlling issue here is not what the current zoning is the controlling issue is what the future land use and and that is the piece that that again there's a number of layers to that which we get um so because again um parcel of land that that is in A1 now in the future land use is in open space Recreation and that particular designation is a very low intensity um usage and I think when you ever have a chance to read the the comprehensive plan as it is um you'll see that that you know that designation really is intended for um very passive somewhat active recreational probably looking more towards a public rather than private use of re of space Recreation um but it does allow for some commercial activity there but a very low intensity uh type use and in fact it's I think uh the uh density is one one unit per AC so again we wouldn't we wouldn't be able to do anything we're talking about with the Pud in that area as the current land use plan data would it be um use of time to have the planner available for questions at Future meetings so that we can ask her questions or not you mean for any anything or regarding regarding zoning changes and stuff like this I mean because we kind of did this ourselves and without having an expert here you know we at the workshop we relied on on the specific people but having an expert of the the the land planning what was what's her name I forgot her name Tammy B yeah having that young woman that lady here to answer our questions I think so we get accurate answers yes yes yes yes um I I agree I mean let me just say I think that's a very useful tool I I think again it wouldn't necessarily be every meeting it would just be that yeah um I think you know that that competency is very important to any Community that's trying to develop you know we we operate on a daily basis without a certified planner working for us and only as a consultant right and and it's something that you know concerns me because we are we are starting to see not only in the city but around us as well development occurring and to have good development that is compatible with the existing uses and and our residen is is going to be a huge conflict going forward and so having that ability to have someone that we can rely upon to guide us through that is very important so I agree 100 per. yeah I totally agree as well um this has all been very confusing um and and and it's troubling because over a month ago we sat here and we had pictures and it was very defined saying this is the only piece of property that's going to be be affected today we're talking about the entire city and and I just don't understand how we go from here to here I I don't understand that part but also isn't the city right now are we paying for L use study we paid 15 grand to a consultant a consultant on on the well we are you talking about what's coming up on the agenda yeah that's one yeah yeah is this something that we could pass on to that study to help us move along making the the appropriate decisions so we also we also have um so another we have not you but um we have the the land use plan uh committee that's going and the city went through I can't remember what it's called MEAP or something like that where the state reviewed our our comprehensive land use plan and identified uh certain elements it within the plan that don't meet the standards that they currently require and so the city is going through that with with um ver Consulting right now as well and so the the club C the club committee is starting to work on those elements so we can prepare what's necessary to go to um the state before July uh to meet the uh deadlines they had given us so yes but this this particular piece is not something that was considered as part of that so um I believe that number was around 10,000 I think is what was engaged at that point I I don't remember the call on yeah so um so that to be a part in and I guess where I would say that that you know we have that one going on uh we have what uh is on the agenda later for the uh Waterfront overlay District which again potentially could go as a change Tex change to uh the state through the the comprehensive land use and then you'd have this now again I was going to get in these the these comments were going to be in the next the next one but I'll say it now um in in talking about you know the the phasing for the next thing so if you develop these rules and regulations that allow somewhere in the city uh in RV park you still have to make the changes to the land use plant to Define where you allow it and there's a couple different approaches to that you know you could easily say well you know we're going to allow it in in any District that has a density level that meets what the the the code you adopted say I mean that's one way to go about it now the unfortunate thing with that my my perspective is it opens up the door to exactly what what you said is it could be anywhere because you know we have residential districts that that have 18 units per per acre and you know what what you have in in the Pud coming up you know only speaks of 15 so it could fit in there and you could probably fit it in you know some commercial areas I don't think long term for the city that type of use in those districts would be the right thing to do and so I would Advocate that we we do it in a way that opens it up to all the areas in the city we can through the the land use that destion in the the comprehensive plan identify a use category that would allow RV parks but the only way that it would get implemented is a developer would have to come forward and go through the process to actually get that area rezoned so we would we would be doing maybe the text Amendment piece but the map Amendment piece we wouldn't be doing and and you know if you look at at our fees there there is a application and fee associated with doing those those zoning map amendments and so we would be able to recoup the cost of what's necessary to get it to the state go through the approval process to get that zoning map approved it gives a lot more control to the city in terms of where it can go because in the future land use you would not only say that we're going to allow RV parks in this type of use land use but but it can only go in areas that you know have greater than x amount of Acres or you know have certain land characteristics that you know would be conducive to to having this so you know again you start eliminating that ability to go in residential areas um or commercial areas and only in areas that that you know maybe have a low intensity develop potential to begin with um but this would be a lower intensity usage at least from the development perspective maybe not the usage but the development piece would be lower intensive and you would protect some of the natural resources um and so I think that that ultimately is the better way to go about doing that is not necessarily identifying land that like we've done in the the future land use plan now saying this area is going to be Recreation open space saying you know effectively you're going to need need a lot of space and you have to have unique characteristics before we're going to even consider aot you know allowing this use to be designated on a a parcel within the city let the the developer come forward with that that rationale and that justification before you assign it you go through that process there's you know at least I think three public hearings in the process um you know we'd be noticing all the surrounding Parcels so people would know that that's going on let me ask a question because we talk about the future land use which is Recreation open space when the future arrives whenever that is right now it's it's A1 all right so when the future arrives and it's Recreation open space what's the what's the underlying Zoning for that is it still a one is it some is it I'm not a planner and I cannot answer your question so so so what what the future land use map does is guide you towards creating those type of zoning regulations today to achieve that plan that was you know originally adopted in 2002 or whatever it was right so you you in your decision making today are reaching or you know setting up the the guidelines to achieve that future land use um well so is that say that future land use is agriculture MH so is it is it safe to say that um with the recreation open space future land use that we want to keep that A1 zoning is that plausible that it has to change to something else I I think you would you would most likely if if the planner were here I think what she would say I'm channeling my inner planner here um she would say you would need to make a change to your future land use plan to identify that as a future land use what zoning what zoning is Recreation open space today well we have no I don't think we have I don't think so we have an open space yeah so on outside the city what is a what would that mean from a z perspective I'm not a planner I can't what do you mean outside the city well we don't have a recreation open space zoning is that a is that a actual Zone that would maybe the county would have or Rich would have well there there probably is I mean there there are places that have it but again what what what this you know the the future land use is supposed to do it's you know first all you know from one perspective it's aspirational this this is what you see the zoning in in in the area so it's not it's not specific specific to a type of Zone it's specific to the elements that that you want to achieve in terms of density or land use and the intensity of the density and you all these characteristics I always like saying that for intensity of the density but it's it's again it's aspirational so as you make decisions today for zoning you you guide towards that so you know Agricultural and I hly don't know how far back that land was Zone a or cultural but it could be it was probably at least 2000 I think it was that way in in in zoning map we have goes back a long ways need updated um working on but so I think it probably was zoned agricultural when when the when when the land use plan comprehensive land use B was created again I think they looked at it and said you know an agricultural land is relatively low density development right and and if you read how the the wording is on the comprehensive plan it it kind of mirrors what you would consider be agricultural land you know there isn't you know there's one one resident or one resident unit per acre you the farm house on the farm um you know it's not intensive uh a lot of car trips coming in and out you know it's it's agricultural uses I mean these are things that that again make it very easy to see that connection to open space and and um you know basically it's it's a conservation concept as it relates to the Future land use you know again another another area there's there's two other areas in the city that have that same open space Recreation designation one of them actually there's three Parcels owned by the city which is high well fil and the third side is is the state park and so I think that gives you pretty good indication of what they thinking was that that you know they want areas to be preserved not developed now again I think the trouble they had back when this was being put together is that some of those lots already had uh commercial uses whether it was a nursery or I don't know exactly all all the history but I think or some other type of things going on there so they couldn't necessarily discount the ability to have commercial use so they make allowances for that but it would have to be again zoned as an agricultural use that's what is zoned today but you can't you know go outside the parameters of what that future land use is so you couldn't have you know most likely a farmers market there because now all of a sudden it's a higher intensity use higher development level than than a nursery would have so would I'm sorry I the trouble I have with all this obviously is that uh we we talk about this future aspirational use but again that doesn't apply to today but it does apply today because you can't do anything today based on this aspirational use so I get the the concept that we have to change that aspirational use to be convinced of what we want to do on it which seems asinine to me seem well and the same issue is what we we confront with the water overlay District I mean again there the you have height restrictions you have you have density that is contrary to what potentially development could occur there and you have to go through a process so you can make a determination whether you want to change that future land use to accommodate higher densities higher intensities and and higher Heights um so it's it's very similar and and similar in a way that that ultimately you have to make that determination whether you know you want to have that future or not you know when when it was put together back in 2000 again no one conceived of the possibility that you can have 50 units per acre in in the Waterfront District right you know is possible if you want that or not that's the next question and same thing goes hearings that you know ultimately you you are those that have been called forward make this community decision that you know do you want an RV park in the in the city and if you do you know what are the the guidelines that you want to establish for those people that would want to put that in there and ultimately you're going to have to decide not only what the guidelines are and if you want an RB Park but you have to decide where that RB Park can go and so to follow up on that which is probably a later discussion obviously when we start talking about what we're going to do on the comprehensive land use plan side to accommodate that so let's say that we we take that future land use and we change that from uh Recreation open space to an RV park that still is that one of the options I mean yeah you could do that CH well I mean I think the the path that I've recommend is a little different than either of those okay well and the reason I asked that because I think we're all in agreement that um if we're going to have an RV park this would be the place to have it um but we have the RV part PUD obviously is going to not be restricted to any certain area because it's it's based on the density if it fits in the density you know be there so in my opinion and I know it doesn't work this way but it seems to me that if we change the underlying z a one to specifically make that the use that would provide the intent that that's where we want that in the only place we want it and OB we need to address the future land use as well to make that match up I just it seems like we would need it somewhere in underlying zoning that's that's the part that I don't connect I guess yeah well the answer is no you don't I know is strange to me and I agree not a but the planner has expain and I guess it's it's because so here's here's here's the answer as to why that's the case is so we we were going down the path that we were going to make a change to the A1 District to allow allow allow RV parks in the A1 District so what you ultimately would be able to allow would be R1 or RV parks RV parks they they are not campgrounds right you know they're not mixed use developments where you have let's say cabins and campgrounds and you know Recreation it's an RV park so you would be limited to as what ultimately you would be allowing and you would have to look at the full city code what's allowed within the A1 District to see what's there and again that was the path that we were heading now after uh you know I had met with the the owner of the property and the developers and they kind of explained what their their concept was it wasn't an R&V I I know that's the term we're giving it but there's a lot of other components to it and the other components really are are more in line with a landed unit development that it's going to be an RV part because there's a lot of pieces to right and so what could have happened if we went down the A1 district is they come in and they' have they'd have to peac Mill everything they were doing because you would say okay get have RVs there well we want to do this we can't do that because campgrounds aren't allowed in agricultural districts so now you'd have to also change A1 to allow campgrounds right and so you have to go through that change um and since there really isn't a lot of regulation on either RV parks or campgrounds what standards are they going to be building it to there's there just there's not a lot of Standards within there that address that you know is it is it similar to a mobile home park well you know we don't allow mobile home parks you know in those areas so now have ISU that that again could could be barriers to development in land and and maybe barriers are a good thing maybe you don't you don't you know want you know anything other than RV par there so that's that's what youd go with but again I don't think that was the spirit of what what the developers were putting forward and so it it just became clear my understanding once back I could du walk I could up it's a PUD and and really that's going to be the best zoning way to go about it and then creating but again you know they could do that today you know they could walk in um proba anybody can walk in that has more than five acres and say I want to do an RV park anywhere in the city and you know they would at least have to go through all these processes that we're laying out but you wouldn't have guidelines as to what is an RV park and what what are the standards that you want to um do and so you know puds are are at a certain level negotiations that you do you know it's okay you required this I can do this here but I can't do this there I can do this here and I can't do that there and so they their plan would be presented to you and explained you know how it meets the the code that you have and how it doesn't meet the code and they're asking you to say okay to those areas that don't meet the code and and why again you don't have any standards though to base that on and and that's what we're trying to establish are a set of standards that will help guide the development process as best as possible so when it goes to the Planning Commission they can look down and say oh yes you know they have to have a road an internal Road that's either asphalt concrete or in this case you know the the crushed Limestone or you know the road has to be 15 feet wide if it's one way or it's 24 feet or 22 feet whatever it is if it's two-way and you know it has to these have to be set off the the roadway by a certain amount of feet and all these guides that that then give the developer an understanding of what they need to do to comply to be able to get here and say this is what we want to do so there isn't negotiation going on and and you know negotiation is never a good thing for the community or the developer but having a good set of standards that you know help instill good development practices within the community are a very good thing and and so that's my thinking with why we need to develop a PUD RV concept so we have a good set of Standards to move forward with um you know say that you know in going through it the the changes that that the planning consultant wanted to make were primarily there were a couple that we felt we we need to make in that but the ones that she felt that we could make were primarily redundancies within the code because it's covered somewhere else in our code um but I I think our approach was yes but we want to make sure they understand that when they look at it because you know the problem a lot of the problem with with planning codes is that it's all over the place and there's no one place to look you have to look in the parking standards for this and you have to look in the the tree standards for something you have to look in the lighting standards for something it's not always in one place and and we wanted to make sure you know for light lighting you need to look at our lighting standard to meet it you know in the tree section you have to look at our trees and you know you have to meet that and you know in the bu off you have to go back there do we have to say that no because they have to comply with those things but we make sure that they know that they have to comply and so there there are redundancies and that was really the the biggest things I mean there's a couple issues that we'll bring up when we get there that we feel that we do need to change um but majority of it is you know pretty good um so did you have a comment I had a question um would it so would it be beneficial to have the comprehensive land plan complete before we go and make these changes because are we putting the car before the horse again so I I mean because I mean you're saying we're we're not meeting the the comprehensive plan but we need to do that to do this but we don't have it and we have to have it done and it's just are we going to be spitting our Wheels again I I I don't I I don't think we need to start chasing our tail I we need to have a plan so so my my answer is not going to be very um comforting to you because what what I'm going to say is it depends um I think one it's a a perspective on how process needs to go um because I we we've had this smiling yeah we've had this conversation quite a bit that that you know it it would seem from a a process standpoint that you you know you go a then you do B then you do c and then you do d one of one of the the downsides doing that in this case is that that you know there there is no guarantee in the end that if you do all this that there'll be a development I mean again I Anything could happen between now and the day at development occurs I mean I I I may have said to you I I can't tell you how many hours of my life I spent on different development projects but it's a lot many years um that never went anywhere and you know when when you start you you don't think of it from that standpoint you think that you know this is going to work out but there are a lot of reasons why things don't work out um and so you don't go into it thinking that well my time's gonna be wasted um because there's always potentially a second one that could come along um and you're prepared for that and that's kind of the difficulty I think with a lot of things here with with our city is that we're not prepared for the development that's coming down the road and and that worries me because it gets us into the situation where we're reacting to the potential development and well that's what I feel like we're doing here we're reacting and because of the current plan is not up to date by any stretch of imagination and that's why this is this is why this has happened because the comprehensive plan is so outdated so to me in in my brain it says that we need to get the comprehensive plan up and running like immediately and so that we can make plans for this because I'm I'm I'm positive I I I want an RV park that's great I don't think there's any problem with it but I think we need to not put the cart before the horse we we we need to do this in the right way so that this can get done because this you know we're spitting our Wheels here everybody not just us thing I got are you trying to m itask and and are recommending for you mentioned that the next thing we were going to be talking about is that going to try to move the ball forward in a way that we should we can proceed them both yeah and so that that is and that's why I say you know my answer is going to be less than satisfying or comforting this because I I do appreciate a good process that it goes along L linearly um but it's also true that in this case you don't have to do that I mean and again you know last the last meeting um you know as I spoke briefly to the the planner about this you know she said but you can go ahead and approve it and I think she's still of the mind that you can still do that but you just have to be aware that you approve these regulations there just there's no place in the city right now according to our future land use that you can actually apply it um and so that's kind of the next step and so when when you look at what that time frame is um you know there's there's really two pieces to that future land use there's the text changes that have to happen and then there's the map changes right so there's two different two different actions that again could happen simultaneously okay um one takes 60 days to get approved maybe longer depending upon what the state does um and that's the text change um you know the map change is is a lot more straightforward I think it's like a 30-day process but you know you can't do the map because again you don't have a you know you don't have a use out there that allows for you know this type of development at this type of De uh uh density in the city and so again you could change the land use map but you wouldn't be able to do anything because you don't have the the the definitions within the land use plan to be allowed to use it and so the way that my Approach is on this is that you know we can we can still put these these guidelines together that may or may not ever be used if depending upon what happens next but but we do become a little bit because we're already reactive I mean I agree 100% we're reactive and and we're going to be that way for a while because you know we're doing it with a WOD as well we're being reactive there and until we get these things in place we're going to be reactive but I think that um the the you know the piece of doing the text change and the the land use map are really going should be triggered by the developer not by what we do because again I think it's something that that even though we may have rules to do an RV park you know we're not the ones that are going to be doing the development we're not we shouldn't necessarily be out there picking which properties should be able to do it and what properties shouldn't right you know the the owners of the property should be able to come forward and say I think you know my my property is you know this is the highest and best use of my property and I want to do this development here um and then we go through that process to determine you know one you know what is the appropriate land use for an RV park and again jumping into the end you know would be probably an RV park you know designation and you would have all these other pieces that kind of line up then with the the regulations that you would adopt as part of the Pud changes we're recommending um and then you know you could simultaneously do the the the text change as well as the um the the map change in unison one time and get that out of the way and so I I think that is a process that protects the city's interest more than us going and trying to make the change on the Tex first then wait for the the land you know the the map change um for the develop to come forward um but again you're not wrong that what you're saying in terms of the process is another version of the process and well I vote for that and and I'm not I'm not you know if you want to go that way more than happy to I think we need to definitely get let's not delay the this whole land land use process let's get that going like to Sweet I mean let let let's get that going because if this if that if this or that if the RV Park RV park stands alone irregardless of the land use let's just get the land use going we can still work on this simultaneously is what you're saying yeah but let's not delay the land use because that might dictate what we do with the RV park correct well if I could so confused something answer that question because I think it's important to answer that question so in the end a lot of what is going to be necessary to make that that text change is going to be based upon the guidelines that you want to see in the land use plan right so what what happens is the Pud and the way you create that serves as the the text changes that you need then to make in the future land use so so again you know what are the big the biggest single biggest issue with this is the density right so if you don't decide what that density is then we can't do you know the the things necessary to change the tax land use because we don't know what that is so we can't submit it to the state that we want to change we can't we can't submit something that says we want to change the density but we don't know what it is so right that's again why I think that why this seems to be out of order I think in fact what you're doing is creating an easier path for the work that we need to do to make that that change in land use the other thing that that I fail to say why I felt this was a good way to go is that that you know this part even though we've used a little bit of of the Consulting planers timing doing this we didn't use a lot of time when we switch over to doing the land use changes is all their time you know we're not going to be doing much um and so there is a cost to it and you know we can see that what we're doing for the WOD that's $155,000 probably don't need to go to that that extent we know for the changes or um to meet what the state says are our plan supposed to say in those elements that's $10,000 so you know this cost to get the planner and joined to be doing this is going to be somewhere between 0 and $10,000 we haven't asked for that yet but that's where it's probably going to be you know we probably aren't going to do you know charettes and you know all these other things on that particular piece but it's going to be an amount of time in terms of writing what what that future land use is going to look like and all the different elements that go into it it's going to be somewhere between zero and 10 again it's not that I'm a cheap individual but I think you know I would rather spend that money after I know you want to do the RV part and best way to do that is adopt the codes that will ultimately lead to the text that we'll be submitting which may reduce that cost um as well so that's why I think I know it's disjointed but I think this actually is a a better path to go down so is the is this process done at city council or workshops I how does this um I you know honestly I think that um you know if we do let's say you do the first reading to the next next one so we have to advertise that and you need to do a public heing or you know have the public speak before you do the second reading right um I think it would be worth it in between when that happen to have that meeting with the planner to go over all this I mean I think you know under under one scenario last week when I was trying to get the agenda you Ashley was trying to get the agenda out I don't think I was helping her in any way um you know I I contemplate and you know and agree with City attorney on this is that we do need to get together and talk about these things um the question is the timing you know when do you need to do it is it is it mandat story before you start down this road or not and and I don't necessarily think that we we have to do it for the first reading I think do the first reading can talk with the planner that kind of gives that bigger piece because you said okay we want to get moveing on that that future land use change well she's going to need the company's going to need input from you to say here's what we're thinking about what that future land use looks like and again this this PUD RV part regulation is a good way to convey what what you think it should look like but still you know be able to talk to her about you know things that that you know you feel maybe are important that aren't in there because you know a part of the you know you look at the Pud what we have in there you know you have to make a decision as Council and Planning Commission will have to make decision themselves you know does this meet those those goals does it meet you know the land type you know what are the the different things that you want you know you want large large acreage you well what is large acreage you know um you know we want certain you know topography features because we want this to be a beautiful area and we want to keep it you know natural as much as possible so all these things to be put into that future land use that you know don't go into the code but you put it in there so it helps again guide Council in the future as to what what you know what the zoning needs to be to achieve that that aspirational usage this has already been I'm sorry I apologize I have a lot of questions I apolog the original int the original actually both both of these have been to uh cleaning zoning different times I want to say it was probably November but this is a change now so this is a change right so does this need to go back to them there's no change no well there there's going to be well when we get to number four we're going to recommend a few minor changes per planner but remember pz's role is to review and recommend you can ignore everything they told you know and the council it's not anything that needs to go back that's that's why I was asked I wasn't I didn't I didn't want I I think that that you know even after what council did in terms of any of the changes they weren't substantial changes that would trigger in my mind hey let's start that process over again so we we have more review I think again if you if you make a lot of changes then I would I would be saying you these are pretty substantive and and if you want to live up to the spirit of what what you think you want to do and keep the Planning Commission involved you would set it back to them and say hey we made some significant changes take a look at it um but again I I don't think that's where we're at with this um and again the the whole PUD changes went there uh you know I presented it to them uh didn't had had some questions like who I was but uh there really was any substantive questions or uh changes that they they wanted to make to it the point is we need to say no number three what yes what you're encouraged recommending is recommending and then go on to figure out number four and five what're going five five although it sounds similar has nothing to do with either of these okay five is a much easier less stressful three four so hopefully the the land use feuture land stuff that's not even on tonight that's just something we have to do so if I could oversimplify this help answer your question you what do we do first what we do second so if I want to write a letter right I need a piece of paper and I need a pen does it matter if I buy the pen buy the paper first really is making a difference I need both of them to actually do something and so if we look at the uh the Pud as the paper you know it defines how many lines are on the paper right and all the different things how big the paper is and so we put that in place and and one thing I want to advate understand for that obviously we had a workshop and we we did a lot of diligence on that it's fresh in our minds we go ahead and get that in place because you need it right and then the future land use the pen we go after that and then once we have that then we do the execution of the letter so that's really what we're trying to do here we got two separate things we have to deal with Y I thank you doesn't really matter which one I make a motion that we reject I need to read it one second sorry for reading number 24695 an ordinance of the city of Port Richie Florida amending section 12747 of article 3 of chapter 127 of the city of Port Richie code of ordinances to allow for recreational vehicle parks in the agricultural zoning District providing for severability providing for cacation and providing for an effective date make a recommendation a motion motion out of the city man's recommendation that we kill this item three y motion second further discussion anyone for po like to speak see Hands I bring it [Music] back 8301 Congress Street Port Richie I want to thank everybody for their time and their input on this um it's somewhat frustrating um and I I I understand this my whole goal is to do something good for the city and for the residents and I actually trying to make this process happen to actually gift money to the city to do infrastructure for the city because me and my wife was blessed with our finances over the years the thing it's kind of confusing and a little bit don't even know kind of like when I get to thinking about this I get crossy syndrome and it's just and I don't mean to be disrespectful to any anyone of you the process that we went through just to get it to this point we looking at almost three years okay um and I can't thank you enough for it getting to this process part that's confusing of it is is the developers need some kind of guideline to go by basically to walk this through they even got to lay out $100,000 to $150,000 for engineer sight plan so that can go back to Planning and Zoning so the part of it is is is what we're asking is if you would have went ahead and helped us with the Pud it would actually gave us some kind of footprint to work off of but um at this point it's just like people that want to come and invest into the city you know they're watching these meetings and it's like I don't I don't mean to be disrespectful and and you all have your reasons and I and I respect that um it just seems like the can just keeps getting kicked down the road and down the road and down the road and it's just like the same where it comes with the comprehension plan there's seven developers that want that property right now for 10 times the money okay which I came to the city and I wanted to give the city 3 million of a 6 million milon deal another time I came to the city out of a $7 million deal I wanted to give them half of it I don't need the money the thing of it is is I'm trying to do something good for every single one of you here but the thing of it is is how do we get to this point to this the city manager and the City attorney they've been they've been great and it's just um at this point it's just like um you know I go and went through the developers and then the state stat says anything under 50 acres as of July July 1st 2021 the city or any City municipality or local government can use their discretion if it's under 50 acres or less and they changed that law if you I think it's subsection 163 d77 31 um May my wife yield her time to me please take your name and address Kathy Todd 8301 Congress Street for and I yield my time I'm try to make this as short as possible because I'm not trying to drag your meeting out and again thank thank you all for your time I uh I'm just trying to figure this out I I'm not trying to be argumental with anybody or what have you and I again I cannot emphasize thank you for your time at least getting into this point I'm trying to figure out the State statue says one thing and then I hear something totally different and I don't mean to be disrespectful but it's very confusing when the state says if it's it doesn't have to go to a state review on any level if it's under 50 acres or less I I even sent that a copy of that to to some people so the thing of it is is I asked each and every one of you to look it up on the website don't take my word for it look it up on the website that's all that's all I'm asking you but I was just hoping we could get some kind of grounds for the developers to feel okay with the city that going to get support and move this in the right direction that's that's all we're asking I mean literally that's all we're all we're asking out of the whole the whole the whole transaction so I mean it's just like at this point I don't here's another meeting and we go nowhere with it and it's just like thank you for your time I appreciate it there was a lot of talk up here during this stuff and it's probably confusing to a lot of people even us times right so there's two things on the agenda tonight around this the first one which is we're we're acting on now is the the change to the A1 zoning which we don't need anymore so that's what we're going we're we're going to vote on now then the next item on the agenda is actually for the Pud for that structure that the developers would need to see what what I could put in there whatever we're going to act on that next okay and then the other part that you heard in there was about the change in the future land use which is not going to be action on tonight and that's where you get into you know after we make that change does it need to go through the state uh or not you mentioned about the 50 acres the my understanding is is when we make a change to that future land use if it's just a map only change that probably applies it might not need State approval but when you make a textual change which will Oly talk more about as far as density or whatever that's where it needs to go to the state approval process but all that is is not on on on point for tonight this first action we're going to vote on now is just to basically undo the the a one change that we don't need anymore and then we'll move on to the next item just to clarify that I know there's a lot of talk up here it's probably confusing for a lot of people listening um but it's a multi-step process so um that being said I'm gon put this to vote all in favor see I was saying I I oppose motion carries next up item number four will be our first reading of ordinance number 24696 amending section 12758 of article 3 chapter 127 the City Port Richie code of ordinances to allow for recreational vehicle parks in a planned unit development zoning district and I will pass that to Nancy for her first thank you ordinance number 24696 an ordinance of the city of Port Richie Florida amending section 12758 of article 3 of chapter 127 of the city of Port Richie code of ordinances to update a code section cited therein and to allow for recreational vehicle parks and planed unit development zoning District providing for separability providing for codification and providing for an effective date okay with that I I'll open up for motion and or discussion I do have a discussion Point real quick on this and I've mentioned it before and I I think there was going to be some additional research on it the only all the changes we talked about in our Workshop are all in here um the only thing that I didn't see change and I'm going to refer to that now is on page 41 um under D internal roadways of circulation item number three uh it goes on at the end of that it says shall consist of concrete asphalt or Crush Limestone and I'd made the the uh the point on that that were're limited to those three uh materials if you look up a page on page 40 when we talk about concrete pads under B maximum density layout item number three it states concrete pad or constructed with an adequate base I would recommend that we carry that adequate base down to the roadway as well or some flavor of that so and I I use the example uh actually I thought we we recommended that at the time well I think Linda you asked it some research about something that we're g to look into about what roads or something there some questions be answered ideally the consistency of the language ought to flow in one section to the other since it's well the the only thing with that though is is that we're we're talking about two different uses so the the parking space and the road is different right right and the road is different and there's going to be different equipment on those two things and and again where where we feel very strongly about the the makeup of this is that we know the likelihood our fire apparatus are going to be driving through there we want to make sure that that the the roadway is such that in so we don't have to you know be digging our our vehicle out of you know a wet area potentially um you know the reality is that you know you you could have different materials that that make it up and again during the you know PUD process they could they could make those you know those requests of council to to waiver that um why set why set us up for that I mean we know now that roads can existem I mean I just use an example of millings crushed asphalt millings um that's that's a pop I mean it's about of Campground so it wouldn't be unheard of to see that gravel you wouldn't be heard to see that again the point was made that you know you can have potholes and stuff as it rains whatever it start to be not maintained but again this would be the place where we would say do we want to be specific on materials um and leave off uh the maintenance thereof because concrete asphalt or course Limestone if not maintained is just as bad as as unmaintained Millions right so I thought we took off the crush Limestone as well because I mean we spent a lot of money on a fire truck and our job this is this is a general rule for s Court ring and we have to make sure our investment of fire trucks and our new police cars that we get all the time are maintained and they're not breaking out running into things and being on not main I'm not saying this developer is not going to maintain it but this is for all of Port Richie and we have to make the code for the weakest link this is possibly the strongest link but our code has to fit for the weakest link I think Crush Li that was one of the things I circled I think the crush limestone is not appropriate for our fire trucks and our police vehicles going in and out uh it's it's it's it's our investment we the citizens paid for these very expensive vehicles and we need to protect them and our men and women in these vehicles have to go and absolutely go to the calls and be safe and I don't and our vehicles are not safe either so I I thought we were we said no Crush Limestone I thought conversation these motor coaches have to are similar to a fire truck maybe even bigger and they have to trans trans uh travel on the same structure as well so it behooves the developer to utilize a a a product that is going to be sufficient to accommodate the weight of one of those Vehicles as well so um yeah but right now we can't take the word of a of a developer because we're putting this together we got to look out for our investment what the city has done com yeah so the reason so why why crushed Limestone um that should be the question you know why why not some other so the rationale on that is that most Road bases are you have a sand you have a crushed limestone a base and it's a material that can be compacted and you know meet the the requirements of of a good road base in the future so when when you know you see that it's not as good as asphalt or concrete which what I would prefer to see for our equipment and and I think we need to put what we prefer to say that's what we want but you can you can build a road with crushed Limestone where you don't get necessarily you know the compaction on you know uh uh mil old millings because it depends upon you know how long they've been sitting around for and there's a number of reasons why you don't get the same compaction with that and other types of stone you don't get the same compaction factors that again create a base that can put equipment on I mean honestly originally if you remember the first version of this didn't have fresh Limestone was actually I think you had brought up right now other other materials and you know I did look at that I I looked at what other codes um for RV parks said and there were some that had this type of language again although I don't know a lot about road construction unfortunately over 30 years you learn a thing or two so I understand the the concept behind it why they say specifically crushed Limestone I come from a limestone area large Limestone quy so limestone's a great product sure um but uh and I'm not recommended we reduce it by any stretch so again let me let me just say though with that is that there may be situations in in a development where they come forward and say listen you know the main roadway is going to be made of asphalt or concrete we have this dead end area that you know is going to be used for I don't know I'm just just making this up this area is going to be where we're have a campground and you know we're not going to have a lot of traffic and and so we don't need to have you know there's not going to be any large RVs there we still want the ability to put a ve one of our vehicles on there but they can have it at a at a lower level so I I wouldn't you know think that you would see in the whole park you know all all you know all crushed Limestone but this does allow for areas that make sense that you don't need um you know concrete or asphal the first 50 ft will be concrete and the rest will be Limestone that's what that's what that's what we're telling them the internal asphalt for the first 50 feet yeah AST right first 50 feet but then after that it could be all Limestone it could be yes yeah so you're not talking about just a dead end you're talking about this is right I understand that and that's that's I guess you know again you have to understand that the Pud process is one of of potentially give and take and and that's why originally you know the language we had had this as a hard surface non poorest with the understanding at least in my mind I had understood it maybe I didn't convey it but with the understanding that there could be those situations where they could request something less because because you know whatever the reason they could do that and so that's why I didn't think it was a far a big leap go to the language there now however I think putting other types of materials there would be from my perspective I mean I couldn't recommend that this this is probably the limit of what I could recommend to you um you know ultimately you you make that decision but I think I wouldn't go beyond what what I put there another thing to that obviously if I'm a developer coming in and I'm developing an R Campground one thing to keep in mind is and I don't know what the speed limit is on those Parks 15 M hour would be the fastest I would think you ever see in a campground so you're not talking about high rates of speeds I I I understand that I'm not I'm not saying they're speeding around the using it as a drag track that's what I'm saying yeah you're not goingon to have you're not going to have the the deterioration that you you would have on a regular Road and so you say I mean if it's not maintained the weakest link not maintained we got we got paved roads over in November and December that H that are paved that have huge Pooles in them right so you can't tell me limestone is not going to have huge and we're paying to have those redone appropriately so that our equipment can go on safely and that's why we're Paving those so now we're giving a forest surface that could also end up like that if not maintained correctly because we have to make this to the weakest length that we're going to drive our equipment on that we have paid good money for that if we lose a fire truck axle on a bad Road we're out of fire truble I to get your point and and the intent of this is to have roads that are maintained and navigable that will not tear up equipment that's the this is a private road that's right so you can't go in to fix theole exactly and if it's concrete or asphalt with a Poole you can't do that either my point and so I'm going to further that because if I'm developing an RV park or whatever in order to get that RV park up and running and actually be generating Revenue um with this code requires if you know let's just say we took Crush Limestone off or we gravel is not an option I can tell you I've been to several campgrounds and gravel is is probably the def facto standard right and there's there's some I've been to that weren't maintained very well and others is it's it's a gravel road right just but the point is is we we really strict here it makes it difficult for somebody coming in that may be um needing to get part of that up and running to start off C cost so they can develop it if we were so rigid on the actual material we use for the roads with the intent that real intent is is to make sure they're functional and they're not uh you they're maintained well all we're doing is forcing a a higher level cost material from the onset um which may be cost prohibitive for a developer to come and actually do this type of development um when at the end of the day that whatever they put down there if they don't maintain it they're right back into the same scenario or maybe worse because in in my opinion poorly maintained uh asphalt or concrete road is worse than a poorly maintained Gravel Road because the way you know it breaks apart you Bally have these sink down into it quickly whereas graph with you'll have that so that's my only Point obviously it's not a it's not a huge issue but I don't like I don't like writing laws that are overly strict than what the attent is to but it's not overly strict when we're looking out for the interests of our city equipment so I I'm looking out for the city I don't know what direction you're going but the thing is is that you spent a lot of money and and and if I could the the opportunity for the lack of the maintaining or or the improper roads is is going to put a lot of wear on our equipment so I'm looking out for the interest of the city I I am as well and if I want to put a a a yellow brick road through my Campground I can't do it and so my point is is we we talk about the materials no matter how good or how bad they may perceived we're we're we're boxing people in and so like I said there's better materials out there than concrete and asphalt and they technically can't do it so that's why I don't like the wording of the law but I'm that's you know just be clear here I don't like to write laws I look I like to look at uh what's the intent and put the least restrictions possible to achieve that intent and so that's the only comment I'm making if you guys are comfortable with the with materials as they are we can move forward but um and I'll support that but I think we're being overly strict here and and not because I don't want maintain road because I do there's nothing in here says it must be maintained free apol I would rather put that verbage in here and reduce materials because that's that's the goal we're trying to receive to to achieve here is not what the actual material is but that the road is maintained and it's it's drivable and whatnot so that's the point I'm trying to make I'm not trying to put any City equipment in Jeopardy uh I'm not trying to break axles and all that I'm actually saying that we we lack we lack the uh the the verbiage to make sure that the road's maintained because we're focused on the materials that it's made of is that makees sense no doesn't make sense okay I have a question for you Chief um so I've been looking at COD red Consultants they do a lot of different um fire department related um surveys and investigations and stuff so one of the things that they talk about is that loads imposed by jacks Outriggers and stabilizers for aerial ladder trucks is often overlooked so I want to know about your alls you all have have an aerial ladder truck no we don't okay Newport does and they respond that to us automatically so if for instance there were many different types of Roads inside of an RV park or any part of the city right is is the truck that you have capable of tipping at any point based on the load that you all have well let's back up a little bit of typical RV 30 foot RV is probably I just Googled it I was curious is 10 to 12,000 lb fire trucks 30,000 lbs I carry almost that much weight in just water yeah never mind all the equipment and then the weight of the actual truck itself so it's almost three times heavier than a typical 30 foot motor home so um when you talk about adequate uh to support a firetr it would to me I'm a fireman I'm not an engineer and a road engineer and how much weight can can handle and you know I I that's out of my leak I can just tell you that you know it would require some sort of engineer to make sure that whatever they're doing to get their RVs and needs to be able to support the fire truck the Outriggers uh your typical textbook is going to tell you in fire service that they don't they don't recommend putting them out on anything other than a hard paved surface yeah that's what it says here so but sometimes we we have to do what we have to do um the reality is the chances of me needing an aerial truck in an RV park is very slim you know what I mean but that may be the only piece of apparatus that's available at the moment to respond in there so again the reality of us using an aerial device inside an RV park for an RV fire know maybe the actual house or structure that's back there that's a different story but uh and those typically have a 12 to 16 foot wingspan where those actually go out and again it's it's it's frowned upon for us to put those on anything other than hard paved surfaces they don't even like us to put them on sidewalks um but uh again sometimes we have to do what we have to do okay so personally mean I think that we should make sure that any place that has a private roadway that they should be making sure that they maintain it properly so that and adequately so that our our police chief our fire if we have to borrow something from NPR or Pasco County or anything that all of those would be able to be on those roads um so I I I agree kind of with you about that verbiage maybe adding that so that it falls back on the people who are making the the changes to those roads that they have to by law make sure that they are passable and that they're not going to have potholes or they're not going to be too porous or they're not going to have waves and Etc so that we can make sure that our emergency vehicles are properly taken care of of and it kind of doesn't restrict what they can use because anything that they use has to be maintained irregardless right that's my opinion one of the one of the aspects in the design phase here the Design's going to have to take into that 30,000 pound requirement right so essentially in the process of developing that site plan that design won't those assumptions be factored in and shouldn't um the plans dictate that yes this is of a sufficient material to be able to accommodate that kind of weight uh requirement so in effect at the end of the day whatever they designed is going to have to Encompass that requirement and it would behoove us to assume that I don't know next year they come up with a new product we've never heard of before the point being is they should be able to design it around current materials that meet those requirements so yeah but we need to give them the guidance of it and and assuming that they would do it is is it mean means nothing but we have it specified that it is a pay Road for that purpose then there it is we control the master plan the detailed master plan has to be uh produced to the building department and building department is going to have to be able to confirm that the uh requirements meet our specific let put it in right now that that the requirements uh have to meet uh uh design adequate cover uh 30,000 lb V right at least yes to meet those requirements so they'd have to sign off on that is the building inspector got any comments on this my my history with codes is you hope for the best you plan for the worst it's up to the developer to meet the requirements that you guys set in these puds for example if if this was lar building a 100 100 home subdivision would the roads be would we be discussing the roads as this because you're still because it's a lot cheaper to put a house or a car on a road in a subdivision than it is a 30 or 40 foot motor coach so my my suggestion to you guys is is they're going to have to meet the criteria of basically whatever it is for the biggest piece of equipment needs to get in there I fire truck what whatever um will there be a lighter truck out there sometime I know there's projections of a possible Treehouse there's where your lighter truck's going to come in just depends on the height of what they put it in there so you guys should sit down and think about how you want this to be you want to hope for the best but plan for the worst and then leave it up to the developers to come in and put in what it is they will meet your criteria it could be Limestone it could be crushed gravel it could be concrete could be as one thing you have to look at this little small city of ours is a flood flood system you're flooded everywhere there's a few little spots here and there rocks millings is going to get washed out concrete can yeah it will after time but not after every s single storm you want to talk about the wave action in your road you're going to get that from Rushing Water so it's up to you guys to choose what's in there and it's up to the developer to meet that plan do I have I I know it's probably not the answer you wanted to hear but whatever the developer brings into I'm going to match it to whatever your P do codes are and whatever the Florida building code and do and everybody else has something to say about sure I just G I had a brief we had a brief conversation with the chief before the meeting and you had mentioned wanting to include some language that the roadways must meet the Florida fire prevention code fire sorry Life Safety Code and the current mfda standards do any of those address what we're talking about right now they they address apparatus access um it's one way street they have this a two-way street they have to have that uh Captain Quinn couldn't be here tonight he had the he was sick so he had the more details on that particular that might help Encompass some of things we're concerned about does that talk about material again he was the one that had research but he he had 104 fever couldn't make it so I think it's important to understand that road development is not done in the vacuum so when they come in you know any developer comes in and says hey we're going to be putting a road here it's not just okay put a road there there you know it has to be reviewed they have to build the road not particular in this case where it's going to be a private road but if it was going to be a road turned over us it would be built to our specifications right so you know we would we would have a lot more control over what it is however they still would have to build the road to a certain set of specifications they can't just say I'm put a road in and there it is it's a road um you know they're going to have to build it to meet whatever the requirements of are for that road and again generally you know you have within within your code a guideline for what those Road specifications are generally you have this cross-section that shows you know if it's going to be a 20 foot you know pavement you know it's going to have so much gravel uh concrete or what the base is going to be made of so so many inches what the compaction requirements are you know what what you know the amount of asphalt or concrete is going to be you have that spelled out so again it's not done in vacuum it's not left to them to decide what a road is it's left to us to decide what that road is and what our requirements are for that road is that what we're doing isn't that what this is requirements for what that needs to be this this is a portion of it you again as I said before that you know there are parts and pieces of our development code all through the land use development code and what we tried to do is put important things here to call them out but they're still going to be responsible for filling that whole code so if if you have just a regular PUD that's going to put 40 houses on on five acres or whatever you know again it's going to be different because they're probably most likely going to be turning them over the city but you know some some developments they don't they still have to build that road to the standard that we have um I think uh that's with this this yeah that's the standard this a piece of the standard because what this isn't getting into is the technical details of of what a road is you know what is the the base that has to be put in there what is the the the asphalt you know requirements you know the testing that needs to be done to make sure that if you put a concrete Road in it's going to have the density and you know the different tests that you do to show us that this this piece of concrete is actually going to last like a piece of conc those are all kind of done as part of the development process is our road code talk about what materials we use because I know we have gravel roads in City maybe not from a not not from a well no not new development but I mean driveways longer driveways private roads example so if I was going to put one of those in I could I could do that I guess well that would be grandfathered in then that's already in exist I'm saying is Well I mean we're we we are not developing New Roads ourselves no private roads right so again if you go into the development code and I see Nancy pulling this up probably looking for it off the top of my head can't tell you I wasn't I wasn't prepared for this particular conversation unfortunately but again if if you are doing a subdivision or you're doing you know a you know like AIA Bay put a road in that road was constructed to whatever our standards are for that road construction and you know as a PUD the Pud doesn't say it's going to be made of this or that um it just refers back to what our our road construction standards are originally I'm I'm guessing because I didn't memorize it I looked at it but you know it's a hard surface it's not gravel it's not dirt it's not grindings it is you know concrete or asphalt or you whatever that that uh um product is called I I think there's there's specific names for that other than concrete or asphalt but a paved B Forest Road system well should should we be referencing that as opposed to calling out certain things here ref whatever that is I mean you can again it was something it was one of the few things we probably didn't rever back to you know in some place in our code let me ask another question since it's a private road how does Code Enforcement interact with so Campground exists right it's got their roadways back in there they're all concrete um you wouldn't Patrol back in there looking for issues I was how guess if you on the property how's that work for c for a private subdivision at private roads I don't okay unless you're invited back I guess so so let's say that you you take your camper out you pull in as a as a client and you notice that there's a Poole on their their concrete road are you able at that point to write that up way things are now I would think not because it doesn't require you to do anything with that but if we had something in here that said must be maintained pothole free whatever the verbage would be that that'll fall back on the the way the Pud is set up then that'll fall under the Land Development part of it yes I can but just going in as a private ownership like going out to the Todd property now I I I don't have privileges we as a city now law enforcement if they have agreement with them they do same thing with you know fire that fire called in they could do that but me or code enforcement just willy-nilly and going out there cracking open his gate going in there and checking violations no that's trespassing no but if you're invited on you see if I invite if I'm invited on then yes I can make that correction or if you get a complaint yeah somebody pulls their RV out and said man than I'll have to defer to my legal counsel for that one I I don't have all the third party can't give him permission to go on private property so if I say to him you need to go see the mayor's seaw wall that he can't see from anywhere but going on your property I don't I can't give him that permission you could not do that based on a complaint the only thing that falls under Florida statute is is if it's if it is a public access road if if that road is open for public to come in there and and do what they need to do I can go in there on that road and if I notice a violation from there as long as I don't enter the property notes really is a public access most part you drive in the office yeah shopping center par shopping center correct to to an extent yeah yeah so yes and no it's it's It's Tricky I don't have the whole statute is it fire would you fire department be inspecting that property in any capacity we don't have the authority to inspect private property so when somebody wants to call 911 business it's a business there to be inspecting the roadways we don't think we would inspect not the roadways the the property for whatever you you know we would expect the public portion of it so if he has a building out there that he mentioned a tree house or something that would be open to the public we would inspect that but the actual RVs themselves we don't have access to so we just general store say little yes a general store exactly right so in your capacity of driving to the General Store inspecting that if you notice a poth hole how does that come into play I mean you talked to your buddy over here he says hey you know I think we've got a but hole issue it wouldn't work that way but I want to point out try to bring us back a little bit um maybe I don't know with you miss cre I don't know um there is a provision under D4 that says the roadways will be maintained probably maintain it says maintained it doesn't say how there's a you know um in my world I know what that means you know the city has to maintain it right away the city has to maintain it sidewalks city has to maintain its streets so I think there's an argument that that's what that would mean but if you want to be more specific that's somewhere you might might do that if you wanted to maintain P hole free I have another question change the subject have we beat this one to that time frame for how long these RBS can stay there that is covered by State Statute so the beginning sign apartment lease for six months that's my permanent residence hold on I got to find the language it's one of eight days that's not really the very on sub subsection 1 a it talks about commercial transient guest lodging yep and I don't have the statute in front of me we had that last time do you remember I'm sorry I was still looking up the roads here so I couldn't there it's six months no you we talked about that last time I just don't have that statute again but it does I just think that's a little long for an all the park a recreational park that's that's living that's a that's a mobile home park that's not a you know what I mean that that's a residence I I would go for less time on that that's one question I had and can I ask what's the how far back from the property line can a shed be or what what's our code say for that I think it's 5et is it 5et from the side sides five foot Weir I don't know they got him right on the canal in my my yard okay okay I was just curious because that after we discussed this I was thinking I was looking at my shed going I had to have that so many feet from my thing I just didn't I didn't measure it so okay I had a question on uh page 41 under recreational vehicle park shall have a maximum density of 15 but in the summary it says 16 on page 37 and in my notes I went back in my notes and I thought I I had written down 16 so did that not get moved over to page 40 or did we it was 15 where you say 16 at it says 16 on the front page summary 37 down uh four uh four sentences from the bot yeah that that's probably my mistake on 16 whatever it is I just pointed that out yeah no 15 is what we talked about it's 15 all right so if this gets approved tonight how does that play into the land use plan because we've now got we've set guidelines for an RV park in Port Richard how does that so you started that I mean all this is tonight is the first reading that triggers the the notice in the the paper that you're planning on approving this or you're going to be acting on it seeking public input uh before you vote on it um how how it would work in practice if what you said earlier is what you want us to do we would start that work with the planning consultant getting the scope understanding what the cost is and getting them to go ahead if if you know we can do it without coming to council to get approval for the expenditure if we have to come to council we come to council do that but we would start that process in creating that future land use by using these guidelines yeah so these are the guidelines so this is what the I I think it would be a part of that um again what I suggested is if you do complete the first you know vote on the first reading um to go forward we recommended that yes we bring in the planning consultant to have that conversation so they would have you know a broader understanding of anything else that you might want to see in that future land use uh designation and and have that conversation whether you again I'm I'm recommending a course of action to do it as a site specific change she can you know explain to you what the different options are and maybe you you'll like one of the other options better and and so you'd be able to give her that direction that no you know coppler is in his own world we like this let's do this um so I think again that's why there's value in bringing her in so you can see what all those options are and make the best one um based upon what you believe my question is let's just say we prove this and then we have the planner can we go back and remove things if she says oh no that's not a good idea second reading could change yeah you could change it you could you could deny it start over you could put it off forever and ignore it I mean there's not do that not a good not a good method it's not until second reading passes this is this is just this is the your your first reading let's people know here's here's what we're talking about let's just have this conversation then we'll have to notice it in the paper 10 days so more people can can know what's coming and have a chance to come talk about it before you make that final decision the density concerns me in this it it seems to be very compressed um I know we talked about it um just just so that y'all know that that that does concern me because it looks like it's going to just be boom boom boom boom boom boom when this first came to us it was going to you know this plan for this for the specific one that this is being geared towards was you know highend so on and so forth and and I don't think half million dollar rigs want to be on top of each other and that's where these pads are and that that the density because of the um the lake and the amount of land to be used this is per gross acre that includes the entire um parcel which includes the lake so it's going to be not this grandio spacious thing where somebody's going to want to put a half million dollar thing where they can pass the sugar next door so right the density does concern me as well as long as the LI as well as the Limestone and the six month remember we were talking last time she there's other requirements um about setbacks and all that other stuff that that will come into play and just because they can have that many they could does I mean they will and that's what this is scario this this this is for the weakest L they might not do it this way this is for the weakest link so one things that we saw when we when Mr coppler had the various Crystal River right that very last one it had three sites per acre but when you took a look add it they were on top of each other because majority of the property was all Wetland so thus they end up having like 30 per acre but but it said three per acre because of the density plan but there again all that Wetland property there it then suddenly became on top of each other I think the the important part to notice about this is not necessarily the density it's the setbacks and how you construct that on because you're going to have variables you're going to have in this particular case it's 15 acres and seven is a lake or whatever but it could be 15 acres and no Lake and it's all 15 acres is usable in that case it could be very spread out right so you really don't know until you lay out with the setbacks and all that and the roads and all put it together you know you're not really necessarily going to have a compact thing based on that density because that density number is really IR irrelevant the only time it comes in into play is is the max I can get into an acre is 15 RVs and if if our setbacks don't allow for that I don't even know if we drew this up with an acre of just a full acre of land how you would lay out with our setbacks and all that if we can even get 15 in that I I don't even know the answer to that but well well at the end of the day it's really not us to decide we've just put some guidelines out here ultimately it's whoever owns and develops this property is going to want to develop so that they can maximize their return on investment right so they're not going to put everything on top of one another along with our setbacks and remember we still get to prove the master plan they're still going to have have uh an opportunity to that maximize their revenue is not going to be uh put in a vehicle as densely as possible they're going to have restrictions on the roadways on the setbacks on the lake on any other buildings on the property uh any other recreational activities so when you start subtracting that it's going to really limit the amount of vehicles that are on that property and they're going to want to do it in a way that attracts people it's I'm not like I said I wouldn't want to have everything stacked on top top of so it would be someplace that I would think they' take that into consideration and keep in mind too that our residential uh is 18 right so if it was an acre of houses you put 18 on it so we're actually less than than houses would be right and so again it's it's kind of a a goofy number because if you make it too low then when you have all this space you can't utilize it effectively because it's 3 per acre or four per acre I think the original was eight right if you get an acre of usable land and you put eight units on it you got plenty of space and you're you're well allow of yourself setbacks whereas when you've got unusable land that has a potential to tighten things up because it's unusable land and that's that's that you're you're taking that density from the lake and you're moving it to the usable land but again you've got the setbacks the setbacks are the most important part of this you could probably just leave density off of it in my opinion as long as you're within the setbacks you're good but if it's you know if those setbacks are in a way where you could get 25 an acre well then you would that would be important right so I think we went less we went three less than actual houses and we've got the things in place I don't see a 15's a problem my whole argument on the eight was is that's in a ideal scenario when you've got a full acre r view and you put eight on it that may be a little un evening that's what's my point acre is 28 ft by 208 ft 28 ft by 28 feet is an acre you were asking what how the M that's I look that up right if you again taking that that acre and actually with our setbacks putting RVs on it how many Could you actually get in there I don't know the answer I didn't do that yeah so if if I could real quick so if if uh our cing salt was here what she would say is that putting the density in this is irrelevant because in the end it's based upon what your comp plan says now again I know I I agree and I disagree I agree that the comp plan as we've talked about is kind of the deciding factor is what the density should be but again I think in an effort to try to be user friendly having it here as a guideline is beneficial for any developer comes in because they'll be able to see oh it says 15 oh and and the comp plan says 15 as well because they match up um it just again is another you know way to inform anybody coming in what what our plan requires so they don't have to look this up and then go to the uh the comp plan to verify that that's what it is that is since we're speaking of her and I don't know if this helps at all um but we do need to make a change to the setback box um I don't it's on page [Music] 41 it currently has 15 feet for the wetlands and your U Land Development code already um requires it to be 30 ft I think that might be a Swift Mud did she say that I think she she indicates that that is is based upon what typically an average Swift Mud requirement is and so the the way that would work is you know they're not necessarily going to say it has to be 30 foot all around but the average away from this has to be on because there may be some areas where you know it's a less intensive use is going to happen and it can be 27 ft and over here it really is going to be 40t so that average you know has to be at least 305 so that's what's in our comprehensive plan for protection of of know jurisdictional Wetlands um so that was one of the areas that we did say that we recommend to you to make that change it's already covered in another section was a Swift Mud thing the original code that you pulled was 25 yeah which are less than 30 yeah again I I don't know what their what their requirement is speak to Swift mod I'm only going by what the city planner indicated on that so she said it has to be 30 that's what our our our comp plan says and does comp plan say that because it has to or the comp plan says just because complain say is that something that we can change she had indicated and correct me if I'm wrong but she indicated that's what Swift mud's requirements were and just that's what they used to reflect what Swift Mud had said understand that that you know we we may have 30 foot there but when Swift Mud comes in and does their review they could easily say no that's that's 50 feet there and and that again these are and I get the bigger Gap when you get a fixed structure but when you've got something that you can hook up and pull out of there at any time I don't know why that would be as rigid for that use I is that specific to residential structures or does it apply across the board for yeah so so they they look at any development that you would be doing so if if you're going to disturb land that's that's where the development is so so wherever you're disturbing land has to be whatever their requirement is for the distance between Wetland and that again different different disturbances are going to be viewed differently you know if if you're going to build a house that's a more intensive development than if you're putting um you know a uh you know a bike rack as crazy as possible you know they they may say oh you can put that bike rack you know 10 feet away because you're not really disturbing anything but because you're going to be digging and putting different materials into this Wetland we want to protect it so there are no negative impacts to it so you have to be 35 feet away well in this case we'd be putting a concrete or other suitable material parking pad within 15 foot that need to be 30 based on her right now based on your landan development code it does because right there it has to be 30 if you maybe the Land Development code doesn't because we don't have any RV stuff right right but that's a definition in Your Land Development code so that you want this to be different this has to change and you still have to deal with Swift Mud so still be a question is Swift Mud you ever are they ever going to let 15 feet maybe maybe not I don't know the answer to that um but right now if you pass this with 15 you already have a contradiction that you're going to definitely have to address which we got to address anyway because but I my recommendation this this if you want to pass this you need to be consistent with what you have and then come back chang if if you end up changing that after more change that that makesense that would make more sense sure and ultimately like we said Swift Mud could come in and say nope 75 feet for you right you know no that makes sense and I listen to the planner because she's planner she knows more about this than I do so we change that to 30 that needs to be changed to 30th if you want to do that and the only other thing I wanted to mention or you can just eliminate it yeah yeah I mean that was her recommendation was just to eliminate and defer to whatever the compl says put an X to that last box I like that okay um and the other thing I mentioned a little bit ago when we talked to the chief um in the road section he had asked that we include a statement that roadways must meet fortifier prevention code Life Safety Code and current mfda standards and as in Nancy think I would get that right um and if you're okay with that I can add that thing so repeat that again please it's going to go in the um internal roadways and circulation section section D P1 the bottom on page 41 and the language added to be added would be roadways must meet the Florida fire prevention code the Life Safety Code and current nfda gosh n Fire prot ass NFPA PA standards I was going to make a whole new standard and none of us knew what it was the [Laughter] mfda sounds like you know what you're talking about I does I sounded good didn't I WR a note and everything any other changes that was the only two that brought to my attention so the fire stuff and then the 30 foot we're going to do away with the uh that whole GL box no Wetland setback just it doesn't need to be have to refer to whatever any other discussion yeah I'm still not happy with the density and and the uh the material for the roadways also on this particular I mean we're talking about the RV Rec vehicle Parson in a p district overall by doing this this particular section 12758 this will apply to any 5 acre parcel this could apply to any 5 acre parcel within the city limits it could so I mean we're focusing on a specific piece of property that Mr Todd owns but in reality this could be right there in Bay bulevard outside of Sand Pebble this could be on the south side of of uh the river by America Marina that vacant land back there so technically so that that's why recommending the course of how to change the comprehensive plan to eliminate that possibility and and why I originally said that we don't necessarily fix this to any place in on a map that we create the text do it and then creating the text it would eliminate the possibility of it going in an undesirable area that that's how you would we do that I mean yeah you have to do that we do pass this and this could go across the lake from my house and be a mobile home park exactly that that that's what we're saying so you can have it next to any one of your houses you can have um a mobile home RV an RV park we have at the gild dog site right off 19 right but remember right now there's even if even if this was meing and you passed this because of your your comprehensive plan this cannot be built in the state because there's no place to put it on with the future map so nothing can be built or happened until you guys address and I'm not saying to do it or not do it until that second piece happens no RV park can be built right so when we say yes there's an RV park that can be built these are the rules for that RV but that second piece will help you determine where it can be right I understand that so won't idea that it can pop up anywh you can help limit four people can decide that it can go across the lake from my house and I will have an RV park right there with on top of each other with no with no road with Limestone thing and the density on top of each other if it meets that's if it meets all the requirements of everything you pass yes y yes but let let me just point out that regardless of having these regulations and regardless of of that future land use plan today someone can walk in and say on any of those properties I want to do an RV part through a PUD and I want you to change the the zoning text to accommodate that so that that can happen regardless it has to be approved you just don't go change it right that's what I'm saying the same thing here is you would be doing the same thing and and doing it kind of the way that I'm recommending you would still have control over whether you allow that to be that property to be determined to be an RV park and not just you know allow it by rank so I'm having a difficulty digesting this because originally when we started this over a month two months ago whenever we started we were focusing on one specific uh Mr Todd's property that's all suddenly now this is Citywide that's what I'm having a difficulty trying to digest here I then I I can jump in again when we started this I know it was hard to to hear me because you know Mr Todd's here and we know exactly what what kind of initiated all this what you're deciding and what you've always been deciding is do does do you want this city to have the ability to have this use not about not about Mr Todd about his property I know that's kind of been the focus because everyone knows that's kind of what triggered the conversation but the question isn't just his property it's do you want to allow this in the city if you do what do you want the rules to be and then where do you want it to go and the where we want to go is not is the next step it's not this step it's the next step I get I get it I get I understand what you're saying but I want to make sure that this is I've tried real the whole time to make sure you know the city not a particular person or particular developer and that's that's where I'm having a difficulty is that this is Citywide right I don't have a problem with with a campsite I don't have a problem it it sounds beautiful but we're opening a door that this could go anywhere within our city limits I mean we could say this could go in any commercial area and if you live next door very close to a commercial area then this is going to go there but theoretically say well I don't live near Commercial area you know I mean so yes it's it's opening it up to anywhere but it wouldn't because it would still have to come before city council and we would still have to approve it or not so we could all we can't agree on Limestone crush crush Li Crush Limestone I was in agreement with the Limestone no I don't want it you do see we can't agree exactly okay okay um yeah next yeah if there's another way to go about this I feel we should go that other direction but given this broad blanket I'm having problems with that if I may I don't know if this if this will answer the question or help anybody I think okay well I guess one one one way don't do it stop it here don't allow it deny the first reading and it's done the other way other than what we're doing and what U Mr coppler has suggested I think the only other way to do it is to pause what we have today and do it collectively which we talked about a little earlier sometimes the process is collective sometimes it can be peac meed with the planner so perhaps her explanation of this step and the Second Step as we've kind of described it um provides the anwers you need the explanation you need it would delay obviously because we wouldn't be doing anything today but at this point that's your only options it's don't do it do what's in front of you or perhaps have a a session with the planner to explain the Pud RV language along with which what would need to happen next and how that would affect the the city as a whole and the parts of I would like to see us having that session with the planner to get allowing us to have a better understanding over to the whole thing and and if there's a possibility of an alternate way of doing this where it doesn't affect the rest of the city I I agree I I would yeah I think that's the piece that we missed at the very beginning this is the plan so that's why we had to make changes because we didn't involve her so well I think we have all the information and we we move forward with this tonight that part goes in the paper starts to get put in place it's not like we're talking about changing a comp plan two years from now it's going to be right behind us Ian sequential so you know you can you can postulate what could possibly happen all day long but in reality that's not going to happen because we're we're we're we're doing this while not at the exact same time they're right behind each other and we've got to do we've got to modify the C the comence L you plan anyway um so this is you know it's it's timely again all all we do is is is is by not moving forward is not moving forward and just more delay I don't just I don't I mean you guys bring issues to the table that I think are not even in a realm of possibility because and again we're not a perfect world this city has never been a perfect world and and unfortunately there's a lot of assumption here there's a lot of what El that's not the reality of the city of Port Richie so if we're going to do this we have an obligation to our citizens are the taxpayers let's do this right so so it's not egging our face later on down the road let's make sure that that we do our due diligence which we're not doing and and let's bring the planner to assist us in making this right so going forward make us feel better what what the come in two weeks well there's no harm in it and she's going to do that because we'll be talking about the other stuff anyway but what what Comfort level is she going to give you that you don't already have now I don't know I've spoken to her I don't have a comfort level because I don't I mean right now this moving forward do it's open up to any other place in the city of Port Rich do you all think that she's going to magically say something different than what the city manager City attorney who has been dealing with her all this time on this actual thing and putting this thing in front of us is going to say anything different could be because I didn't talk to this person I have no clue maybe a better understanding I mean I I understand it I don't know why there's there's what what is it that you don't understand I just said by approving this this allows after after this is approved we could do this any place in the city limits and I disagree with that is this is that true because that's not what I'm hearing I I think there is a possibility of that because again anything can be changed by a future Council so just like you're talking tonight wanting it only in a specific area five years 10 years from now a new council could be sitting here saying well why why don't we open it up to another I'm not I'm that's not the question that's that's obvious right obviously a different different Dynamic up here can do absolutely anything right so you you never can plan and get anywhere if you if you constantly look to the Future um of who's going to be sitting here what decis it make but that's a reality no matter what we do I mean a future Council can say we don't want any more RV parks they're gone or we want we want to we want a City full of RV parks we have a City full of RP Parks I mean that's that's the way it works fellas uh so but what we're talking about here is if we pass this first reading tonight one thing it doesn't do anything until the second read passes so let's fast forward we pass a second ring of this structure of the RV park when we do that that doesn't mean that they're GNA be knocking down and we're going to have one right outside the Sand Pebble it could no it can't because we got to do the other piece first you'd have you'd still have to create the tax change in the land use plan to allow it by we by us passing this we can't put an RV park anywhere because we have to do the other piece I can't write a letter and again just like this P whoever is sitting up here at the time could go any direction but you're allowing you're opening up a door to go in that direction that's true and I and and I disagree with that until we have more information on this Tom do you want to RV park or not as a question in some way shape or form do you want to allow it because if the answer is no I don't you don't want RV park not according to the opening it up to Citywide no well let me let me rephrase my question if you could have an RV park in the city somewhere obviously there's places you don't want an RV park we get that but do you by not passing this you won't ever have RVP RV parking anywhere including that property or any other partty so what you're saying is if you don't pass this there is no RV Park in any scenario and that's the reason why I believe we should have the planner to give us more information what other avenues do we have what what are our options under than this make a motion I can I call question look for a motion on this I think I think we've beat this enough so if somebody could make a motion to move forward or not I make a motion that we pause on this and that we bring a planner in to discuss this further so we have a better understanding uh going forward second I have a motion second forther discussion anyone for public comment Mr Todd welcome Matthew Todd 8301 Congress Street again we're getting nowhere the thing of it is is I understand every single one of y'all's concerns as far as the fire trucks and all that stuff I got semi trucks that come in there that are 880,000 lbs that make deliveries I got excavators that are 75,000 lb so these RVs that are coming in there they're million doll $2 million Ricks so last thing you last and foremost we're not going to have any issues with worried about that because you have insurance requirements that you have to meet all we're asking is give us some kind of guideline so we can go and draft up some kind of plan bring it back and present it to you guys is all we're a that's all we're asking at this point because regardless one without the other you can't do it either way so the bottom line of it is it's it's that's all we're asking I mean so we can go and take it to a planner an engineer and design all this and come back and a lot of the sitbs and the density it's it isn't going to matter because the way the lake sits and the the streams and stuff where it says 15 we're just trying to have a some kind of guideline it could be way less than that that we don't disagree on that we don't want stuff piled on top of one another we want it to be a high-end tourist destination is is is what we're looking at so but if you could just give us a little oomph to kind of you know help help the project a little bit because at this point it's just like we go nowhere from we go nowhere from this point I I I I understand maybe some of you are confused but the thing it is is you it it even if you approve this and you approve it at the second thing is we still can't do anything over there till the comprehension plans changed Point Blank the thing of it is is worried about someone else opening up somewhere else they would have to go through the same process that I'm going through right now for that to allow so my point of it is is not trying to be smart or ignorant please and if I I I don't try to disrespect any of not the greatest speaker it's if you could just give us some kind of footage to just kind of work with we have nothing if this gets kick down again here it is we're it's just like we're all wasting time I mean as many times as this has still got to go back to Planning and Zoning with the site plans we got to follow State guidelines we got to find we got to we got to follow insurance regulations fire hydrons are all going to be put through there and it's and again the density that's going to change with the fire hydrant and and every single bit a lot of that stuff that you guys are worried about I understand but the thing of it is is for the insurance to write the insurance on that property to have that it we have to meet guidelines so it's just like thank thank you for your time can I can I say something and I know I'm not supposed to we're not doing this for you this is because you are the strongest L we have to make cach weakest so do not take offense to this m I'm not ma'am this is this is because we have to protect the entire city so I this is not against you sir at all so please please understand that I'm not taking it offensive I'm looking out for the weakest link because that that chain will break someplace along the line and it's probably not going to be that property but if somebody else does it it could be someplace else and it could be next to any one of our homes that's I I know that's supposed to do that so I apologize there's nothing there for you to apologize you made a lot of intelligent comments and stuff like that and I appreciate I appreciate all you all's input all all we're asking is is if you can just give us we're trying we're trying just to give us something to try to work with and here's the thing of it is is it's what we're asking for doesn't mean it's going to that's going to be It Rock Solid this probably going to have to come back to you about 10 different more times to see if this works for you you know so the thing of it is the only way this is going to work is it has to be a partnership with with the developer and you guys and that's we're willing to whatever makes you happy with the road base whatever makes you happy with the amount of fire hydrant we're fine with that so but but again thank thank you for your time I appreciate it thank you I got a question he pointed you want hear rest a comment before I bring it back I open let me anybody like to speak okay I bring it back um he mentioned this is going to we could eff with these guidelines this could be replicated anywhere in the city that would meet certain criteria and how many pieces or Parcels would meet that criteria now and then they would also have to come before this Council and address a PUD with their particular requirements and if they wanted to create an RV park they'd have to do the same thing that he's mat and they would have to do although we we would have the text completed they wouldn't have to go through the you know request of text change right but they would have to again if it's any place else in the city they would still have to get that well they have to do that but they'd also have to get a map change that would allow the RVP in in that location yeah so essentially this creates the Pud for an RV part this doesn't really attach to his property this this is just the guid so subsequent to this U eventually it will attach to that property when a zoning change or something the zoning map is updated right so essentially what this does is allows framework um anybody else wanting to put a RV Park in a particular place would still have to go through the process request this and this doesn't and again I I I know this is a little bit confusing all this is doing is laying out where when when and where if you bring It Forward these are the guidelines you have to follow again the the piece that determines where it's going to go is going to be the next step which is the comprehensive plan T change which will Define where or what it would look like if they came in and requested that zoning change land use change right like right now they nobody could put an RV park in unless I mean again I think you have flexibility within the p UD right now to do it but you would go in areas that you probably wouldn't want it to go we would have we can aine on that yes exactly so we have the right to cancel those situations and because we don't view it as a compatible right right structure or whatever yeah and and again when when again assuming that you adopted the guidelines assuming you went for with the text change that creates an RV zoning District or RZ RZ RV park land use in the future then it would have to be applied to a piece of land and that application is the owner of the land comes in and says I want to create an RV park I want to put it on my land it it doesn't have the proper zoning it doesn't have the proper land use fut land use so here's my application my 750 plus whatever the the other thing is and here's my site plan for the Pud and I want it change that's how a subsequent party would address it and in theory this property is already in the process um has defined to this been attached to this they still have to come in and do that as well and I I refer back to what the City attorney saying is that we're not talking right now about any particular site in the city this is in general this is is a guideline that should someone come in for an RV park they have to go through the Pud process to do so and this is the guidelines that are going to help them develop the master plan that they will present ultimately to the planning and zoning and you for approval questions discussion okay so I've got a motion to table basically right so I'm since this may be a a close vote I'm gon to ask for a roll call vote to we take oh my goodness I apologize yes motion dies I'll entertain another motion motion to pass the first reading of ordinance number 24-96 those modifications I believe right um with the Amendments mentioned with the Amendments me mentioned second I have motion second for discussion ask for roll call vote again my trusty notepad sorry Council tomel n Council David mu I councilwoman Linda Rodriguez no councilwoman Cherokee Samson I mayor fine motion cares um before we move on to the next IIs we'll take a small bio break let's do five minutes and come back thank you that was my fault sorry guys r no that's been going for a little while just turn off your microphone [Music] please oh that's good though nice good know know move [Music] we get there 2 than PR respect [Music] just I give you a depart I will show okay this is somebody cares it's still got the time we got two fers CU I so this is what we did so they're they're the same thing just two different fers we're resume the meeting so next up is item number five second read 299 item number five second reading of ordinance number 24697 amending chapter 109 article 3 division 5 section 109 d424 of the city of Port Richie code of ordinance to clarify when temporary placement of recreational vehicles is allowed I'll pass that to miss Meyer for her second reading thank you ordinance number 24697 an ordinance of the city of Port Richie Florida amending chapter 109 article 3 division Vision 5 section 109 424 of the city of Port Richie code of ordinances to clarify when temporary placement is allowed providing for separability providing for catification and providing for an effective date um you want me to talk or you want to do it go okay I was just gonna go ahead and um this is a second reading um this was this did go to Planning and Zoning um we thought there may be a discrepancy between the number of days um RVs could be um parked within the city um because other Provisions allowed for different time frames but what that conversation led to is this is for a specific purpose um and it's supposed to be after um um states of emergency and that kind of thing it's it's the the requirements are FEA based requirements so all this is doing is clarifying that this particular placements only um in flood flood Hazard areas after the city declares a state of emergency and it is in compliance with FEMA motion stand or discussion motion to approve the second reading of ordinance number 24- 697 second motion second discussion anyone from public like comment SLE hands I bring a back or vote all in favor signify by saying I I oppos motion carries next up item number six approval of resolution number 24-5 Statewide Mutual Aid agreement I'll pass that to Mr copper for introduction yes in the event of an emergency that overwhelms our fire department's abilities we may request the state's assistance to assemble emergency resources from across the state the re reverse is true as we agree to supply resources if available support others across the state upon request the obligation of the state is only to the extent that reimbursement is funded by the state state legislature um and we reference an article to look at this agreement is a reciprocal emergency aid and assistance in case emergencies too extensive to be dealt with unassisted chapter 252 of Florida statute authorizes such agreements Florida statute 252 fur is a one year agreement which the city can opt out of on 60 days notice it will renew automatically for a year so the opt out must be done for the term ends for motion or discussion resolution 24-5 resolution of the city council the city of Fort Richie adopted the Statewide Mutual Aid agreement and providing for an effective date motion to approve resolution number two 2405 Statewide Mutual agre a second a motion second for discussion I I have question um it's authorizing the mayor signature as opposed to the city manager I I'm I'm curious I mean we did the law enforement that was the uh city manager and this is requiring a mayor I what's what's I don't understand resolution I mean that's doesn't you can I guess you can have the city manager sign there's no right there's no Rhyme or Reason behind it well I would have to start sign a resolution resolution May the mutual agreement I think is does that get signed as well oh I see two different things this is the appr resolution for that I think it's yeah but it's allowing the mayor to enter into the Statewide Mutual Aid let me look at the agreement Asos to the city management I'm just curious I mean we need we need this good question and I would imagine nobody signed a resolution button myself or vice mayor we just asking on the resol this the signature on that or we talking about the agreement later on well the agreement says that the mayor would signed according to the we have the motion if you look at the attachment Statewide Mutual a Aid agreement 2023 doesn't doesn't have a separate place to sign the agreement I can see go all the way back page 73 City I I'll speculate but before I speculate the city has signed this before if I'm not mistaken correct did who who signed it then that should be document we did we did have it I'm looking for because I'm not mistaken City attorney re I we had it and that's why I I need agreement but my speculation is that for emergencies if I'm not mistaken I think even does the charter refer to it that that for emergency purposes the the mayor has some interaction with the state yeah May City Manager yeah I can't remember how that worded usually usually with the state it's always the elected Chief elected official that they require but again I'm I'm new to Florida so I can't I'm not going to speculate that much but that would that would be the only reason I would think that would be the case since we've signed it before be interesting to see what we've done really it's annoying to some people well looking at that I wanted to mention that 60-day auto renewal notice are you guys tracking those Ral notices on our contracts like that that have Auto renewals in a calendar so that these things just don't get awarded by lack of time the right answer is yes good but let me check that to verify that right answer so is this question Tom just a curious question or you actually have a problem no no I'm more curious because did the law enforcement side of it it was city manager and well this that was that was the that was the county MMA this is the state different different level of government we're dealing with just just curious on it I mean regardless we need it 2021 did you may sign mayor did sign it mayor did resolution yeah the mayor signed it previously the previous mayor signed it previously prev and a resolution would be signed by the mayor to like sign both the actual agreement and just I think it's like this one let me it's similar but it's formatted different that's the one thing that I think we all noticed yeah yeah they're not specific on the state L it's just it just want Authority for the city to do it I mean terms of disaster he makes decisions for the city but if you're you're signing the original for either one of you will the prior the prior 2021 the resolution and signed by there's a typo with the p 58 that's already been fixed that is not a typo the digital copy is up to date I just noticed that too so to answer the question the previous both previous agreement and previous resolution were signed by the previous mayor and so a lot of times you'll have agreements come through the city manager will sign resolutions sign know I won't charge any extra for that so I've got motion second is there any further discussion anyone com public comment signal hands I bring it back for a vote all in favor signify by saying I I I oppos carries uh next up is item number seven approval of resolution number 24-6 adopting a sponsorship policy for the city of Fort Richie I'll pass it to Mr CER for introduction thank you um at the last meeting I presented this uh policy to that stems from uh the budget discussions regarding Fireworks program Council wanted the staff to start seeking sponsorships to help expand the the show and make it a better production staff was believing that we needed to have some type of policy to revert back to as we reached out to businesses seeking for them to uh give money to the city to help sponsor that the City attorney was going to be working on that I I kind of interceded found uh a number of different policies uh recommended one from a City Ohio that I felt covered a lot of the different items that we needed did it fairly straightforward she agreed that was a pretty decent one to work with we have amended it to meet the needs of our city and again as I said we presented it to you for your review at the last meeting um and now we come for you asking for approval tonight passor miss Meer for her reading resolution number 24-6 a resolution of the City Council of the city of Port Richie Florida adopting a sponsorship policy and providing for an effective date I'll open up for motion and our discussion motion second for discussion public I comment hands I'll bring it back for a vote all in favor signify by saying I I oppos motion cares next up is item number eight approval of Consulting proposal for Imagine Cody River Landing Community engagement Vision scope of services in the amount of $15,000 I'll pass it to Mr C for introduction thank you um as uh everyone knows we talked a little bit about it earlier tonight uh we are in the process of looking at changing the comprehensive land use plan for areas covered under the Waterfront overlay District this consideration is caused by the potential redel development of the Waterfront area which could which could be prevented by existing density and height requirements found in the zoning code and the city's comprehensive land use Plan before the city council would consider such changes gaining the input inside today's City residents on the Redevelopment of the area is critical to forming a coherent strategy and policy to that end ver Consulting Inc the city's planning consultant for such matters prepare the scope of services gather C and input for a vision of the Cody River Landing area the proposed of services offered by veran audience considered by the comprehensive land use plan committee at its two meetings based upon dialogue during the first meeting the final draft scope of services as presented was discussed scope of services broken down in three T project understanding data Gathering Discovery assessments and third one feedback and recommendations the most important part of this project will be Tas two during task two the consultant will be conducting a Community Vision Workshop that will bring stakehold stakeholders together to discuss conditions Trends viewpoints and ideas related to the Redevelopment of the Cody River Landing the workshop will take place over four hours offering an openhouse style where residents businesses and other interested parties can speak with City Representatives about the Cody River Landing following this interactive Workshop consult will place the results on a web page that will be created to facilitate postworkshop review as well as law further input from residents and businesses that were not able to attend the city will also provide opportunities at City Hall for visitors to provide feedback similar to what we have been doing with CRA Plan update based upon the scope of services presented by ver Inc the cost would be $155,000 is Pros that funding for this project come from contingency line item and Penny for password open up for motion and or discussion can I ask a question absolutely is it possible to put a question about RV parks into this thing since we're asking the residents and we're already paying them just one single light item um I think the easy answer is yes we can do it I don't know if that it it shouldn't cause any changes in cost but if it were to make any changes it' probably be a minimal you know impact but um I think it' possibly yes I I mean I think be a we're already doing the information I think of one single light item I think that would be a good idea this the only thing with this is is you know the offic scope they're talking about doing visualization stuff like that are you talking about including all that as well yeah yeah yeah do whatever they're going to do and then just is a separate single light item for the residents is this something that you would like to see in the city of Port Richie but going again there's there's there's a couple different phases here public involved do you want that same level of presentation if if they if they agree to do that I would think I would leave that up to the professionals to make that decision as to where that would be the most appropriate depending on the depth of what you want out of that that probably would increase the cost yeah because you're talking about messing with technology be able to virtualize this or whatever so I'd also point out this is a 10-week plan um what we talked about earlier would probably be done done in well I guess the comp will take more than 10 weeks so yeah forget it IGN what I saying and let me also add that obviously this is this is being put in place for the other large project much much much much much larger than than the other and so um I I think we we had the first reading the public could be here tonight the public could be here for the second reading the public could be here for all the different aspects of the RV park to voice their concerns we had asking the public their question if this is already going out why would you be but I'm just saying that obviously you're again you're you're CL you're You're compacting Something in to provide another point of public engagement on something that uh it's complicating it I don't necessarily have a problem with it um there probably will be some more cost there probably will be some time delays and again this this other project is what this is focused on to muddy the water with that just for the sake of public comment we've got plenty of opportunity for public comments so I don't think we're gaining anything by putting that in here but it is costing the city money to do that and we don't know that we've not asked them well it depending on the the the depth that you want to get involved in looking at the potential of RV parks and all that they're not going to do it for free I wouldn't well we don't know we did that so I I I think again I I would look at it really is as two different projects and if we can get input at the same time when we have an audience there um I mean I think it would so if you looked at and said well we're we need to do something similar for RV parks but not quite the same to replicate that in that process you know it would be more expensive unless we could and somehow utilize that time that we were there in that so I mean there's going to be a cost I mean I I know there will be a cost um if we try to do it at the same time I'm not saying that this is even feasible I mean we have to ask the question like we said I'm just that's all I'm saying is can we ask the don't don't we have a Consulting arrangement with yeah that individual so that we can uh certainly engage them at a different level yeah and the level that may be more appropriate for that and and maybe at a better cost right rather than taking the focus off the main thing yeah and there's I mean there is a dramatic difference I think at the level of what we're doing that you wouldn't see for that question right there's not a lot of a lot of visioning that needs to be done to RV park I mean we all know what they are question is poll the present whatever I don't know if this is the the avenue to to do that because this is more as to you know we're talking about that Waterfront development what that could be uh if it was going to be an RV park it would be just an RV park there's not a lot of imagination that goes into that right right um but this obious this particular project we paying these guys for is to Envision what development would look like down there with you know multif family housing with Shops and and all so that's a that's a huge difference from just an RV part so again I I mean I'm not opposed to public comment I love public comment matter of fact when I got elected I I asked for more public comment and created the quarterly Town Halls we're going to have one this month put it out to uh bring your concerns about RV parks on the might not be concerns overwhelming yes that's that's all I'm saying that's all I'm I'm not saying concerns you will never hear a disagreement on that but I don't necessar want to muddy this and spend more money to get potential for public comment on that it's not really what this is the focus on this is this is this is a very important piece of the Waterford overlay District project I'm aware I know that I don't think that's in correct I don't think that's what you're suggesting you're saying hey since we're doing this is it an opportunity to engage on this other so let me stupid idea ask no it's a great idea no it's not that's not true Linda now don't I'm all about public comment but again this this has a cost to it right and so we can ask a question and we can opine on it when it comes back if it's going to be it's going to be 100 bucks I'll throw it out of my pocket to get them in here so question is fine I got a question on this um I believe believe penny for Pasco is only allowed for Capital expenditures I'm not sure whether I believe it said it had to have a life of of five years is what we had for the definition of expenditures under penny for Pasco and I believe this to be an Opex expense unless we're attaching it to some bigger thing and it's just a an ongoing so I my recommendation is breaking this out of the CRA since that's where the funds were going to be to drive this project and also that there's an extra zero in the total cost of the project not to exceed $15 million I think we need to back that down to 15,000 yeah what do you think big projects need big money I get but I think we we kind of looked at that and felt that there is there there is the avenue to use studies that ultimately would lead to Redevelopment in that so we would capitalize that and not and not expense that expenditure right no I don't have the resolution in front of me for Penny for Pasco but it does um say as long as it's like a public purpose the land you use it for studies as well so I believe that because I had that question when I was sitting out here and I was told we can't use it for this or we can't use it for that and and discussion came back that no it had to be a capital expenditure with a life of estimated of five years that's one of the stipulations but there's multiple I think there's four different items that it can be used for okay but there again I think this ought to come out of CRA instead of pting for Pasco I don't believe it was one of our estimated line items in in it was probably a contingency yeah it's a contingency where do we have the most money but the concern about CRA and we didn't look into that but that has to be in the plan for that type of expenditure I I know we started to look for for things but I don't know if the plan actually allows for that that type of expenditure and are we talking about the plan of 2009 that's out there I know it's getting Rewritten now right yeah and we have to go by what's already adopted and I don't know I looked up this particular project when we were talking about it but it was our plan was very big on finding parking parking and parking and parking and more parking um I don't remember what else it referenced expenditure for I'd have to look at that referen fire trucks and drudging and police officers and water and sewer which we're doing in streets and sidewalks when ites reference because the plan itself talks about a lot of different things but it doesn't it doesn't and I'm not saying the ones you're mentioning are aren't specifically the plan um to work on it but a lot of the the plan was very interesting The Way It Was Written because it kind of would talk about oh we have parks and oh we have these things and we have all these amenities but it wasn't a plan to do anything to them right it was just numbers on a piece of paper it needs to be a plan to do something right so that was one of the one of the things I'm sure is being corrected with our lack of substance yeah gotcha is your concern you don't want to come out P for Pasco is that you want take that yeah I I think it ought is that something we could spend some har money on in other words if we were planning on spending money here down in the Waterfront District and this is with CRA funds and this is a plan to Define that what we think is going to fit there I think it's more appropriate match to CRA rather than pting for pass that's all I'm saying we can we can take it back and take a look at it and see what what the different options are for it regardless I think the thing needs to move forward but the reality is where do you charge it and what's the most appropriate place to to book it to right I held up the resolution for Penny for Pasco probably what you're reading to you she she and I read a lot of the same things I'm noticing that but it does say um one of the things that can be used to far as public improvements of a VAR of of of a varying nature designed to improve Public Safety are to improve cultural and recreational opportunities for the residents of the city I think that's what this is right this is I may be wrong maybe I what a development this is but I think that's for the Waterfront District right I think it would fall under those guidelines personally based on the verbiage that they at Penny for Pasco were saying so I think that it is good I'm so tired well one it's a very small amount of money yeah compara like and so by changing that it's going to obviously delay it and this is very important to get this out and get get them started and have get that public infut session so we can continue to move forward with Waterfront development right whatever whatever that is um so I you know I I guess procedurally if we wanted to change that we would have to roll this two weeks out to get it on CRA agenda or or do we we can't prove it here right I follow you there so at the end of the day whatever happens with CRA money um that CRA money let's just say I mean it proves blight right and all different things so we could we can use CRA money for say we spend us 15,000 out of Penning for Pasco couldn't couldn't buy a car thing truck or anything with with CRA but to try some things in for Pasco infrastructure wise that we could spend either or Pasco like this is use boat ramp Improvement so we can we can offset that $155,000 later down the line by paying for something out of CRA and plan ahead for that that wouldn't hold us up so again we're not talking about a huge amount I'm okay I'm okay with it is I just was Raising I think R come out of there for sure but you know if somebody decides later on do some little research after the fact and say oh by the way we need to move it to here to there that can be done at a future meeting I make a motion to uh approve uh item number eight motion to approve uh ran Consulting for the image uh the imagin Cody River Landing Community engagement en Vision scope of services second motion second forther discussion any public comment hands I bring it back for a vote all in favor signify by saying I iOS motion carries next up is item number nine purchase of 2024 Nissan ARA engage electric crossover SUV for bilding department and surplus 2009 Honda FIT I'll pass it to Mr ca for introduction sorry uh the building department is requesting the purchase of a 2024 Nissan area engage electric crossover SUV vehicle would be purchased using the Florida sheriff's Association Cooperative purchasing program contract FSA 23- L 31.0 head of process for this procurement contract end May of 2023 proper purchasing program sent direct notification to 716 Prospect biders to disate as well as advertising in Statewide publication in the end 19 qualified bids were submitted final award was for three Lo biders per item per zone of the Florida State of Florida the requested vehicle is a 24 2024 Nissan area engage Electric crossover SUV purchased from Terry Taylor's the land Nissan Inc for a base price of $ 48,2 three the purchase is highlighted and the attached information for this item quote was received on February 22nd 2024 from the dealership I believe we also had an update to that number that lowered it by $4,000 pass it over right yeah oh take oh I'm sorry this replacement vehicle was provided for in the fiscal year 2023 24 budget in the pen for pass fund same time the building department is requesting the council to Surplus the vehicle that this purchase Ro place a 2009 Honda fits open up for motion and or discussion yes I have you have the Floor N I have some issues uh I'm glad you picked up the new number because that's what I was able to pull off their website but that's not the big issue the big issue is this is about twice the price of the Toyota Corolla that would be same kind of scenario but I get some other questions um do we know what the actual mileage is on the terrain and the fit on the current vehicle that's getting traded the fit the fit was 58,000 58 change and and the terrain we don't know that all right and then who is this vehicle for and how will it be used well it it's used for daily operations in the building building department could be the could be the business tax uh person that goes out visits a business for business tax receipts it's used by Administration as well because they do not have fleet vehicles so they utilize these vehicles so do we have mileage logs on these vehicles on our current Vehicles so we know who's using them how often it gets done by with their gas card goes by their employee number gas up and stuff like that but do we have an in-house reimbursement policy with the regard to personal use of vehicle reimbursing fuel or mile like 50 60 cents a mile yeah okay um I've already uh Illustrated looking at other vehicles that are non EVS have we addressed um what the cost of an EV plug is to install yes I'm just waiting back Duke if I applied with Duke on our behalf and they will come in and put it in and maintain it for free we just have to pay for the whatever we charge it for um we would be a host for the city it may not just be one may be multiple but I'm just waiting to hear back them but I applied for them and that's pretty much what kind of like the same thing that newport's got except they have a whole parking lot full of them so that's that's one of the uh one of the things I looked at is that infrastructure contingent fund this purchase just is that contingent upon this purchase no no it's just in general okay because even if we don't get it we could still be a host for residents no that's good I'm glad I'm glad you're pursuing that and then uh I've heard from a coast guard guy that uh we're in Fort Meyers that they've had these electric vehicles that are 100% versus a hybrid um they've had issues with extensive corrosion in in Coastal Community so that's something of concern as well um are we I noticed that we're always using the pass or uh the sheriff's office for some of these vehicle quotes is their ability to use Pasco or the State of Florida uh program or anything like that we can it's just I've always when I came in here that's what they use with the Pasco sheriffs but I mean we would have to go out to the bid process I think the way that they're doing equipment stuff put it out on the bid program and have people get on it you're buying it off their contract yes U essentially not bidding it it's already been bid and authorized so we're piggybacking on that but I'm thinking that the state of might have a better one than Sheriff's Office I think there's more volume there I would think but anyway back to the back to the cost at a 23,000 versus a 43,000 uh that's a significant difference and even if you add in the dollars for the for the U for the fuel you know you're talking 35 versus you know 45 you're still 10,000 over and that's after a 10-year life uh I'm just wondering uh if we don't have any logs to represent how much and who's using this vehicle uh I know you guys have trucks so who else is driving this thing and we have two vehicles uh the terrain uh that's an administrative vehicle in the building department so everybody we also we also have people who go to if we have somebody who's got to go to a conference or they're going to a training or something that vehicle's out of the way I can't have the city manager driving people around in the fit so we don't we don't turn Vehicles out every once in a you je the 15 the the fit's 15 years old the terrain is almost 10 years old so it's not we're not flipping V the terrain is a 2018 20 I was told 2017 okay okay um I mean that's just what I'm going by with the records okay so six years okay and I'm driving a 2009 vehicle now with 150,000 miles on it runs great top drops I mean it goes all right so the point is is I think we can better spend our money maybe and defer this till the point of it uh that we maybe accumulate some data that shows a need rather than uh you know don't want and I don't think the EVS are the way to go I mean personally I know Chad I had a thorough discussion with him before and I was actually surprised to see him up here um but he uh he recommends a hybrid so there is a hybrid solution for a coroa and it was around 27,000 I was able to get into that website look at all the prices of all the vehicles uh and I just think that we need to move on from that and wait yeah I I came up today to look at the fit let get an idea what we had um clean car I mean it's not you know it's not everybody wants the best and the greatest right but it's clean car it started right up um it uh seemed to run fine I didn't take it for a drive but it has 58,000 mies on it I don't imagine that it's necessarily used daily is there rough idea how often that fit I didn't take the other one that thought another car that's only six years old I didn't even look at because that's not really in play here but that's a that's a car there if we didn't have the fit at all you know would we need another car how that look that so no like like I said if we if we Surplus the fit you know and we have the terrain left somebody goes to a conference Matt or somebody else in administration need vehicle not another vehicle right so in case some that's what happens when you have somebody go to conference for say a week that car is missing for the week and so then you're down to one basically for administration so if did you look at what's the value of the the fit that we'd be getting if we sold itus I think it's between five and seven I I I gave it to city manager I can't remember I thought my like 5 seven something like that Kelly thousand or 100 a thousand so I mean from my perspective we can always buy vehicles um I don't know that the need necessarily is is pressing it is it is a vehicle that runs and it's you know like Dave said he drives over night I my truck's 2007 it's got 90 some thousand miles on it and I take it anywhere so again I think that um there's a lot of pressing things we need to spend money on as opposed to vehicles I get it I'd like to have the the new and sharpest Fleet in the state but um unfortunately we got to make tough decisions on on how we deploy those resources because we have such few so I would I would recommend that we continue with the fit as it is and then re revisit this at another time when it's more impressive record on it repairs I'm sorry maintenance records repairs there is um I I don't have off top my head I know that we put we just put brand new tires on it in the last budget season it was all oxidized we put uh brand new paint job on it it did have to go to Farmer I don't remember I think it was around $1,200 for for work for the motor just off on my head I don't know pass prior to that those are just the ones that I run off for recognition and just comment on going to conferences and what not I mean that was it what's the 68 and half what's the 67 and a half cents a mile or something what's the yeah yeah so even if they use the fit right they use their own personal vehicle we you know you're talking couple hundred pen that I mean you can you can do that too but you're just you know it's gonna take a lot of trips to get 43,000 so so um I have a similar question to Tom so when it comes to Honda fits it looks like one of the most common issues is a starter problem have you all ever had that not that I recall in the two years I've been here but it could have been I don't know okay and then so personally this is my personal opinion I have many mechanics in my family um they don't recommend having cars over a certain age right now because the parts since 2022 since the pandemic have have really become so scarce so I just foresee having a 2009 Honda FIT that breaks down tomorrow let's just say it does do we have the ability to find a mechanic a who's going to be able to work on it because right now all of the different mechanics that are coming out of their schools they're usually working on electric vehicles um hybrid vehicles and the more modern vehicles now I can open up a 2010 or I'm in 1991 Ford and I know what I'm looking at I open up 2020 Mini Cooper I have no idea but those parts might not be available anymore my only concern is is that if we did keep the 2009 Honda FIT would we be able to have all the parts for it would we be able to order those parts would we be able to and if we were able to order them I just look like we're ordering them from out of the country so would I mean that would be an extra cost and and would say if it was a mission critical vehicle I don't know if it reaches that status would you say it's Mission critical well yeah it could be used for every everyday stuff I mean I know uh grants people take people out we have I know Sil taken Engineers around the city BTR can use it I know PD is evidence and records of use our vehicles so am I going to sit here and say it's going to be used every single day I can't guarantee that but you know you have I have three conferences a year that are could be State could be in the state could be out of state btrs uh they have two a year I have zoning girl who has to go to classes I have permit Tech who has classes we all have continuing education stuff so it could be I mean we could have that vehicle on the road six seven eight months out of year just depends they could use their own vehicle and we reimburse them for their for their uh mileage well I can I mean that's the way it was done I'm not driving my vehicle to do business for the city I'm I do that now I drive an hour and 15 minutes One Way each way I've done it for two years now am I going to drive that vehicle to Miami to do City business absolutely not and I I don't think that we should ask our staff to do that either but that's just my opinion as is it I I'll have to say like I I think that we should definitely have vehicles for our staff to use and we should make sure that they have the access to those vehicles and vehicles like maybe yeah we don't need a brand new 2024 Etc but maybe even one that's only two years old maybe everyone that is an electric vehicle hybrid vehicle I approve of that because I'm very eco-friendly and I think that's amazing but I I I think that we we should definitely Surplus Thea fit and look for a vehicle that that isn't so old and that is mechanically repairable and that we can find mechanics who can repair it you know like we have to consider all of those different things let me just uh make a note here that particular vehicle has a 200 mile range can't make it to Miami so now what do you do spend the night charge it up continue to drive to Miami I don't think the EV is the way to go I think there's other options and they need to be considered um you can almost acquire two vehicles for the price of that and I don't think it's the most economical way as uh chat mentioned the vehicle that he bought was a Hyundai he paid 26 Grand he's getting 56 mil per gallon it's a it's a hybrid so I think we need to do a little more work on this I don't think this is um the right solution um and I'd like to make a motion to table this I'll take the motion to table but before we get a second if you want to make comment yeah just I just want to I guess get a consensus here is it that you don't want to replace the vehicle or is it you're willing to replace the vehicle with a lesser cost vehicle possibly yeah I think I think somebody needs to do a little more work who came in with one item didn't even consider a hybrid didn't even consider a gas solution uh and I'd like to obviously know the use we talked a lot about going on trips or whatever again I agree with Dave that's I would not want to if I C I wouldn't want to jump in a hybrid and have to go 200 miles and charge it up for however long it takes how long it takes I don't have a hybrid I mean a hybrid but electric but uh it's not really conducive to long travel so if that's the use case that's probably not the vehicle for that now if it's something the vehicle that to drive around town or whatever that makes some sense right um but uh and then maybe they take the the other one it's six years old on their trips or whatever so I think we need to line out what we're what we're what our use is going to be for this and if it's a secondary vehicle or if it's primary vehicle and what's going to be used for and I'd like to see it compared to what we have now again I we can always buy vehicles and I would say this doesn't sound like it's Mission critical if it was to die and we couldn't get it fixed or whatever we could relatively act on that pretty quickly I would even say keep it keep it as a budget line item and at any point we need to Mo for to purchase the vehicle we we can do that I don't know now is the right time I like to see getting an idea what the hybrid would cost as opposed to yeah absolutely and and and compare but continue with with that that that SUV type I I think it's important as opposed to little sedan uh but uh take a look at what the hybrid would cost so motion to table does anyone to second the motion to table I'll second the motion to table but can I make it sure but I would like to definitely Surplus the 2009 just because of my mechanic family because I know that there some of them are watching being funny I don't think we can Surplus right away until we find a replacement but we should find a replacement that is a hybrid that can definitely go long ways but also has the electric capabilities and maybe doesn't cost that much so got motion to table second okay any further discussion anyone public like comment bring it back for a vote all in favor 65 by saying I I oppose carries that's the last item of business moving on to discussion old business is there any discussion of old business okay and look for a motion second Mo second all favor by saying I I me jour