CAPTIONING NOVEMBER 13, 2008 BOCC PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 09-03 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS - 2nd CYCLE 2008 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS - ROUND 2 2008 ***This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the ***following meeting. It should be used for informational ***purposes only. This document has not been edited; ***therefore, there may be additions, deletions, or words ***that did not translate. >>KEN HAGAN: WELL, GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. TONIGHT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL BE HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE FIRST TWO OF THE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS WE'LL CONSIDER ADOPTION OF PLAN AMENDMENTS TO FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. FIRST THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT AND THEN CONSIDER THOSE AMENDMENTS THAT PART OF THE SECOND CYCLE OF PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR 2008. AFTER HEARING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, THE BOARD THEN WILL CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. PRIOR TO GIVING IT TO MR. STEVE GRIFFIN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO PRESENT THE BOARD AN OVERVIEW, I'D LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER BRIAN BLAIR, I REGRET THAT I WILL NEED TO ARRIVE AT THE HEARING THIS EVENING LATE DUE TO ATTENDANCE AT A FUNERAL. I EXPECT TO ARRIVE BY 7:00 P.M. PLEASE READ THE REASON FOR MY ABSENCE INTO THE RECORD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING IN THIS MATTER. WITH THAT, I'LL PASS THESE OVER MR. GRIFFIN FOR A BRIEF INTRODUCTION. >>STEVE GRIFFIN: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING IS TO CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, THE OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION, AND COMMENTS REPORT ISSUED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ON THE SECOND CYCLE OF PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR 2008. THE BOARD WILL DECIDE TO EITHER AMEND OR NOT AMEND THE PLAN FOR EACH ITEM. THE PUBLIC HEARING TO TRANSMIT THE SECOND CYCLE OF PLAN AMENDMENTS TO DCA WAS HELD ON JULY 24th, 2008. FIRST, THE BOARD SHALL CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS TO THE ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT. THE BOARD WILL THEN TAKE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, AFTER WHICH THE BOARD WILL TAKE THE VOTE TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE WHICH WILL ADOPT THE AMENDMENT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, AND THAT PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED. THE BOARD WILL THEN OPEN A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE SECOND CYCLE OF PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR 2008. THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF WILL REVIEW THE COMMENTS FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ON THOSE PLAN AMENDMENTS. DCA DID RAISE AN OBJECTION TO ONE OF THE THREE PLAN AMENDMENTS ON THE SECOND CYCLE OF PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND THAT OBJECTION WAS RAISED ON THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. STAFF WILL DISCUSS THOSE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY DCA ON THAT ITEM, AFTER WHICH EACH AMENDMENT WILL BE BRIEFLY SUMMARIZED FOR THE COMMISSIONERS. THE APPLICANTS MAY MAKE A PRESENTATION IF THEY WISH AND IF IT'S DESIRED OF THE BOARD. THE PUBLIC WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO EACH ONE OF THOSE ITEMS. AFTER HEARING THE AMENDMENT, THE BOARD WILL TAKE A VOTE TO ADOPT OR NOT TO ADOPT THAT SPECIFIC AMENDMENT. AFTER COMPLETION OF THAT ACTION, THE BOARD WILL TAKE A FINAL VOTE TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL ADOPT THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE VOTED ON EARLIER. ITEMS A-1, A-2, AND A-3 PROPOSE CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THOSE ARE CHANGES THAT MUST BE APPROVED BY AT LEAST FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THE STATE STATUTE PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERESTED CITIZENS TO RECEIVE COURTESY INFORMATION STATEMENTS REGARDING THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS' NOTICE OF INTENT. THE NOTICE OF INTENT IS THE FINAL ACTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AFTER THESE AMENDMENTS PROCEED COMPLETELY THROUGH THE AMENDMENT PROCESS. ANY CITIZEN WISHING TO RECEIVE THIS INFORMATION STATEMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS SHOULD PROVIDE THEIR NAME, ADDRESS ON THE SIGN-IN SHEET LOCATED WITH THE RECORDING SECRETARY. WITH THAT, I WILL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE COMMENTS FROM DCA ON THEIR OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS REPORT. IN YOUR BACKUP ON THE GOLDENROD PAPER, COMMISSIONERS, THAT IS THE COPY OF THE ORC REPORT RECEIVED FROM DCA. THEY DID REVIEW THESE THREE AMENDMENTS AND ONLY RAISED ONE OBJECTION, AND THAT IS WITH AMENDMENT DEALING WITH THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. DCA FOUND THAT THERE WAS A LACK OF DATA AND ANALYSIS TO DEMONSTRATE THE MITIGATION OF ANY TRAFFIC IMPACTS RESULTING FROM THIS PLAN AMENDMENT. ON OCTOBER THE 9th, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF, ALONG WITH THE STAFF OF THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, HELD A CONFERENCE CALL WITH DCA TO REVIEW THAT OBJECTION. IN YOUR BLUE BACKUP, THE BLUE SHEETS ARE THOSE RESPONSES THAT WE GAVE TO DCA. WE GAVE DCA INFORMATION SHOWING AND DOCUMENTING THAT FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAD COORDINATED WITH THE COUNTY STAFF IN REVIEW OF THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE ADEQUATE CAPACITY AND ADEQUATE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. DCA DID DO A FORMAL REVIEW OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE TRANSMITTED TO THEM AND WERE SATISFIED THAT THAT INFORMATION WOULD REMOVE THEIR OBJECTION FROM THAT PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST. AND THEREFORE, WE'LL BE PROCESSING THIS AMENDMENT AND SENDING IT UP TO DCA BASED UPON THE BOARD'S ACTION. AND THAT WAS OUR RESPONSE TO DCA'S OBJECTION TO THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. I CAN MOVE ON TO THE FIRST PLAN AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD BE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AMENDMENT. MR. WILL AUGUSTINE WILL GO THROUGH THAT WITH YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING, MR. AUGUSTINE. >>WILL AUGUSTINE: GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M WILL AUGUSTINE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM BEFORE YOU IS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S CAPITAL -- COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 09-03, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT ANNUAL UPDATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 TO 2013. ALSO WITH US THIS EVENING FROM THE COUNTY STAFF, WHO'S ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, IS MR. BILL McCALL FROM THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADOPTED THE FISCAL YEAR 2009 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ON SEPTEMBER 18th OF 2008. THIS LIST DIFFERS FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 2009 HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM BY INCLUDING ONLY THOSE PROJECTS DESIGNATED AS HAVING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE CIP, THOSE RELATING TO THE LEVELS OF SERVICE. THIS ANNUAL UPDATE OF THE SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS IS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 163, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND ARE INTENDED TO IMPLEMENT THE CAPITAL PROGRAM OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ALSO INCLUDED AS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ARE THE ADOPTED FISCAL YEAR 2008 HARTLINE TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECTS, THE ADOPTED FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WORK PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009, AND PROJECTS PROPOSED TO BE COMPLETED BY PRIVATE DEVELOPERS. THESE PROJECTS ARE ALL RELATED TO MEETING THE LEVEL OF SERVICE STATED IN THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE STATE STATUTE DEFINES FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY AS ACHIEVING AND MAINTAINING ADOPTED LEVELS OF SERVICE THROUGH THE SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS. IT'S STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE EXISTING DEFICIENCIES IN MEETING THE LEVEL-OF-SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPORTATION. EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS PLANNED IN THE ADOPTED CIP, IT APPEARS THAT THERE WILL BE CONTINUING INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING ISSUES INVOLVING ITS ABILITY TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN THE ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE. THIS STATUTE ALSO INCLUDES ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS FOR NONCOMPLIANCE AFTER DECEMBER 1st OF THIS YEAR. THE ATTACHED REPORT FROM THE COUNTY CONTAINS EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND DATA AND ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT THIS PLAN AMENDMENT. THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD DELETE THE CURRENT SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS WITHIN THE CIE AND REPLACE IT WITH A SCHEDULE OF PROJECTS TABLES 5, 6, 13, 17, 21, 23, AND 26. THE REPORT ADDITIONALLY PROPOSES THE ADOPTION OF NEW CIE OBJECTIVE 3 AND FOUR NEW CIE POLICIES, POLICIES 3.A, 3.B, 3.C, AND 3.D, ALL TO ADDRESS THE LEVEL-OF-SERVICE DEFICIENCIES. OBJECTIVE 3. IT SETS THE OVERALL COURSE OF ACTION THAT THE COUNTY WILL PROVIDE NEEDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING SOLUTIONS THROUGH ITS LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES BY THE YEAR 2011. POLICY 3.A ESTABLISHES THE COUNTY'S SUPPORT OF THE TAMPA BAY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY'S IMPLEMENTATION OF A MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IN AN EFFORT TO ELIMINATE TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCIES. POLICIES 3.B IDENTIFIES THE COUNTY THROUGH ITS TRANSPORTATION TASK FORCE WILL DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS TO FUND, DEVELOP, AND IMPLEMENT MULTIPLE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION BY 2011. POLICY 3.C STATES THAT THE COUNTY WILL BY 2011 IMPLEMENT THE MPO'S LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTO ITS LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES. THE LRTP IS TO SERVE AS A GUIDE FOR INTERJURISDICTIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING. AND POLICY 3.D STATES THAT THE COUNTY WILL CONTINUE TO IDENTIFY AND PRESERVE TRANSIT RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND WILL COORDINATE AND IMPLEMENT ACTIVITY CENTERS AS SHOWN IN THE ACCOMPANYING -- IN THE THREE ACCOMPANYING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAPS. FINALLY, THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ADMINISTRATION IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND CAPITAL -- COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 09-03 HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CIE ANNUAL UPDATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 TO 2013 CONSISTENT WITH ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RECOMMENDED ITS ADOPTION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. AUGUSTINE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE COUNTY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT? CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO ADOPT THE PLAN AMENDMENT BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. AND OUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, SECOND CYCLE 2008. MR. GRIFFIN. >>STEVE GRIFFIN: THE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR THE SECOND CYCLE OF 2008 IS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 08-16. THIS IS A FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGE. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT RACE TRACK ROAD AND LINEBAUGH AVENUE, AND IT'S A PROPOSED CHANGE OF APPROXIMATELY 27.78 ACRES FROM THE CURRENT DESIGNATION OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE-6. THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND THIS PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND DCA DID NOT REGISTER ANY OBJECTION FOR THIS PLAN AMENDMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: IS THE APPLICANT WITH US TODAY? GOOD EVENING, MR. SCHIFF. >> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS. GORDON SCHIFF, 1211 NORTH WESTSHORE BOULEVARD, SUITE 401 FOR THE APPLICANT. WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER FERLITA. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >>STEVE GRIFFIN: THE NEXT PLAN AMENDMENT, COMMISSIONERS, IS PLAN AMENDMENT 08-17. THIS IS ALSO A FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGE. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT COUNTY ROAD 579 AND PRUETT ROAD. THIS IS A PROPOSED MAP CHANGE OF APPROXIMATELY 38.29 ACRES FROM THE CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL-1 AND RESIDENTIAL-4 TO THE NEW LAND USE DESIGNATION PROPOSED OF RESIDENTIAL-2. THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND THIS PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST INCONSISTENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST. >>KEN HAGAN: IS THE APPLICANT WITH US? YES, MA'AM. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS AMY DRYER. THE ADDRESS IS 906 U.S. HIGHWAY 41, RUSKIN 33570. LET'S SEE HERE. WE APPRECIATE YOUR PRIOR VOTE FOR APPROVAL FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND ASK THAT YOU ADOPT THIS VERY REASONABLE AMENDMENT. MR. HORNER IS AT A CITY HEARING TONIGHT, HOWEVER, AND COULD NOT BE HERE, SO WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU ADOPT IT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? COME ON DOWN, SIR. >>JIM NORMAN: YEAH, WE REMEMBER YOU. [LAUGHTER] >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING. >> TO THE CHAIRMAN AND TO THIS PRESIDIUM. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY IN -- FOR YOU TO GIVE US YOUR VOTE OF CONFIDENCE IN WHAT IS OCCURRING. WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE HISTORICITY OF THE PAST, BUT WE WANT TO DEAL WITH OUR PRESENT, AND AS WE LOOK AT OUR PRESENT, WE CANNOT HAVE A FUTURE UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT OUR PRESENT. AS YOU LOOK AT THE WAY THAT WE COME IN TO OUR COMMUNITY THAT DEVELOPMENT IS TAKING PROGRESS, WE REALIZE THAT WE HAVE SOME UNREADINESS WITH SOME PEOPLE, AND ANYTIME THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SUCCESS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME UNREADINESS. AND NOTHING CAN BE MADE EXCELLENT WITHOUT CHANGE, SO, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY IS ASKING FOR CHANGE. I ASK THIS BOARD TO PLEASE LOOK AT THIS CAREFULLY CONCERNING OUR HISTORY, OUR PRESENT, AND IF WE DO NOTHING ABOUT OUR PRESENT, THEN WE WOULD HAVE A VERY EMPTY FUTURE. WE HAD A BANK ONE TIME. BEFORE THE BANK AT 579 AND MARTIN LUTHER KING WE HAD A BANK AT I BELIEVE MAIN STREET AND 579. THAT BANK HAD TO GO OUT SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE WERE NOT ENOUGH DEPOSITS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT'S BECAUSE WE DIDN'T LOOK LIKE A PROGRESSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I SAY TO YOU WE DON'T WANT THINGS TO BE AVERAGE BECAUSE TO BE AVERAGE IS LIVING IN A DANGER ZONE BECAUSE IF YOU REMAIN AVERAGE, YOU CAN ONLY DIGRESS AND NOT PROGRESS, SO WE WANT TO BE ABOVE AVERAGE. WE WANT TO EXCEED, ACCELERATE, AND BECOME A COMMUNITY THAT THE AESTHETICS REALLY DISPLAY THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY, WHO AND WHAT WE ARE, SO I'M ASKING YOU AS BEING ONE OF THE LARGEST LANDOWNERS IN THAT SITE THAT YOU WILL RECOMMEND THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> SIR, MAY I HAVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> FOR THE RECORD, REVEREND J.H. SMALLEY AT 6450 COUNTY ROAD 579. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CAM OBERTING, AND I LIVE AT 11318 EAST SLIGH AVENUE, WEST OF COUNTY ROAD 579. I'VE LIVED HERE FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND I REPRESENT THE TAYLOR ROAD CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND NUMEROUS MEMBERS THAT LIVE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS PROPOSAL. I WAS A MEMBER OF THE THONOTOSASSA LAND USE PLAN. I ATTENDED EVERY MONTHLY MEETING FOR OVER THREE YEARS. IT WAS A MAJORITY VOTE THAT APPROVED THAT ONE UNIT PER ACRE. THAT WAS THE PLAN FOR THONOTOSASSA TO KEEP THONOTOSASSA RURAL. THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE THONOTOSASSA LAND USE PLAN. IF THIS PLAN IS APPROVED, WHAT AN INJUSTICE, A WASTE AND ABUSE TO CITIZENS THAT VOLUNTEERED THEIR TIME TO KEEP THONOTOSASSA AGRICULTURAL, RURAL, AND COUNTRY. THIS COUNTY IS RAPIDLY BECOMING AN ASPHALT AND CONCRETE JUNGLE. AS FOR THE TRAFFIC, I TRAVEL ON COUNTY ROAD 579. I LIVE THERE, FOLKS. AND THE TRAFFIC IS NOW ALREADY TREMENDOUS. IT'S A DISASTER. TRAFFIC -- YOUR OWN TRAFFIC ENGINEER HAS STATED THAT COUNTY ROAD 579 IS NOW OVERCAPACITY WITH NO PLANS TO WIDEN 579 IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. I DO NOT LIE, I DO NOT MAKE UP STORIES. I HAVE, HOWEVER, HEARD SOME UNTRUTH BEING TOLD. ONE SHOULD PRACTICE WHAT WE PREACH. COMMISSIONER BLAIR -- AND I SEE HE'S NOT HERE -- AND COMMISSIONER SHARPE HAVE TOURED THIS AREA AND WITNESSED THE SEVERE PROBLEMS THAT NOW FACE THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE. HOPEFULLY SEEING IS BELIEVING, AND I HOPE THAT YOU HAVE SEEN AND YOU HAVE BELIEVED, COMMISSIONER SHARPE. SEVERE WATER SHORTAGE IS ALSO IN THE PICTURE. LISTEN TO SWFWMD. TO CONTINUE TO OVERDEVELOP THAT AREA IS GOING TO CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS THAN WE ALREADY HAVE. WE DON'T NEED THEM, AND BY THE WAY, THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS DO NOT APPROVE THIS PLAN. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. OBERTING. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. TERRY FLOTT, SEFFNER COMMUNITY ALLIANCE, AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS APPLICATION. FOR THE GREATER PART, I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT THE DISMANTLING AND THE SLOWLY TEARING APART COMMUNITY PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE. I THINK WE'RE TREADING ON SHAKY GROUND AGAIN IF WE START PIECEMEALING THESE THINGS, RIPPING THEM APART, OR DOING IT SPECIFIC TO A SITE, AND I THINK IT'S A BAD POLICY TO START IMPLEMENTING AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME, SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY PLANS AND NOT APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT TONIGHT, AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL STAND STRONG ON COMMUNITY PLANS AS WE GO FORWARD AFTER TONIGHT NO MATTER WHAT YOUR VOTE IS. IT'S AN IMPORTANT PART. YOU'VE PROMOTED IT AMONGST YOURSELVES AS WELL, AND HERE WE HAVE ONE TONIGHT BEFORE YOU THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PICK APART, SO IT'S NOT SENDING A GOOD MESSAGE, SO I HOPE YOU WILL NOT APPROVE THIS TONIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. FLOTT. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? OKAY. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? >> MOVE THE ITEM FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I WANTED TO SPEAK BOTH TO CAM AND TO MRS. FLOTT, AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT CAM HAS GIVEN ME ON NUMEROUS INSTANCES TO COME OUT TO THE AREA, TOUR THE AREA. I AGREE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES IN THAT AREA, SIGNIFICANT, TRANSPORTATION BEING ONE OF THEM, THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S OUT THERE. AND NORMALLY I RESIST WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER TO BE SPRAWL, BUT IN THIS CASE, HAVING READ THIS CAREFULLY, I ACTUALLY BELIEVE, AS I STATED BEFORE, THIS WILL HELP THE AREA AND WILL IMPROVE THE CONDITION OF WHAT IS A VERY CHALLENGED PART OF OUR COMMUNITY, SO I KNOW THERE ARE THOSE WHO WILL BE DISAPPOINTED, BUT ON THIS ONE I HAVE TO MOVE APPROVAL, SO I WILL MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I BELIEVE THIS IS THE ITEM THAT I ASKED FOR A SEPARATE VOTE ON IN TERMS OF TRANSMITTAL. I HAVE REVIEWED THE INFORMATION AS -- AS ALL OF US HAVE, I'M SURE, AND I BELIEVE THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE A HARDSHIP TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY'RE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF IT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I CAN IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM SUPPORT, SO I WILL STAND FIRM WITH MY POSITION BEFORE, AND I WILL NOT BE APPROVING THIS -- SUPPORTING THIS. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-1. COMMISSIONER FERLITA VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>STEVE GRIFFIN: THE FINAL ITEM, COMMISSIONERS, IS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 08-19. THIS IS ALSO A FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGE. IT'S FOR THE RIVERVIEW DOWNTOWN DISTRICT AT U.S. HIGHWAY 301 AND RIVERVIEW DRIVE. THIS IS A PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGE OF 45.51 ACRES FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE-6 TO THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE- 12 AND 4.64 ACRES FROM RESIDENTIAL-6 TO RESIDENTIAL-9. THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND THIS PLAN AMENDMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AGAIN, DCA DID RAISE OBJECTIONS TO THIS, AND STAFF HAS GONE OVER OUR RESPONSE TO THOSE OBJECTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? GOOD EVENING, SIR. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS PAUL DE GUENTHER, AND I LIVE AT 10420 PINE AVENUE IN RIVERVIEW, AND I JUST WANTED TO COME OUT TONIGHT. I'VE LIVED DOWN THERE ALMOST 40 YEARS, AND I LIVE BESIDE ONE OF THE PARCELS BEING CONSIDERED. YOU HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN ORDER TO MANAGE CHANGE. YOU CAN COME UP AND PICK APART PLANS AND DO THINGS, BUT I THINK COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IS VERY IMPORTANT WHEN YOU'RE PLANNING THE CHANGE IN YOUR COMMUNITY. I'VE BEEN PRIVILEGED TO ATTEND THESE MEETINGS. I WANT TO SAY TONIGHT THAT I CONCUR AND I SUPPORT THIS RIVERVIEW PLAN, THE DISTRICT. WE'LL BE BACK WITH LAND TEXT -- LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXTS IN THE NEAR FUTURE, BUT I REALLY WANTED TO COME TONIGHT AND COMMEND THE STAFF THAT HAS REALLY PERSEVERED IN LIGHT OF BUDGET CUTS AND CHANGES IN PERSONNEL AND EVERYTHING. THIS SO FAR HAS GONE ABOUT 20 MONTHS. IT STILL HAS FAR TO GO, BUT BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF HAVE BEEN EXCELLENT, AND I WANTED TO COMMEND THEM TONIGHT, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. ANYONE ELSE? YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M VINCENT CRANE. I LIVE AT 10804 CEDAR STREET IN RIVERVIEW. I HAVE BEEN AT THAT ADDRESS FOR 22 YEARS. I LIVE IN THE AREA AFFECTED BY THE DOWNTOWN RIVERVIEW PLAN AND HAVE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF WORKING ON THIS TASK FORCE OVER THE LAST YEAR. I GAVE SOME DISCUSSION AT THE LAST MEETING WHERE THIS WAS DISCUSSED AND JUST WANTED TO REITERATE MY SUPPORT. THE TEAM HAS WORKED WELL TOGETHER AND I THINK COME UP WITH A WORKABLE PLAN. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: ANYONE ELSE? CAN WE HAVE A MOTION. >>ROSE FERLITA: MOVE FOR APPROVAL -- >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: -- OR ADOPTION, I GUESS. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO VOTE SEPARATELY ON THE ORDINANCE, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME? BREAK THEM UP SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE. >>ADAM GORMLY: BREAK THEM UP. >>ROSE FERLITA: YES, PLEASE. ABSOLUTELY. >>KEN HAGAN: CAN WE HAVE A MOTION FOR ADOPTING ORDINANCE 8-16 AND 08-19. >>JIM NORMAN: SO MOVE. >> SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: AND THEN A MOTION APPROVING CPA 08-17. >>JIM NORMAN: SO MOVE. >>KEVIN WHITE: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. HAGAN. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-1. COMMISSIONER FERLITA VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: THAT CLOSES OUT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING. NOW WE'LL GO TO OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS. MR. GRIFFIN, DO YOU KNOW WHO'S GOING TO BE INTRODUCING THIS? >>STEVE GRIFFIN: THIS WILL BE DONE BY THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: IS MR. MOREDA MIA? >>PAULA HARVEY: I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM. HE WAS SITTING RIGHT THERE A MOMENT AGO. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'LL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS UNTIL THE GENTLEMAN WHO'S GOING TO PRESENT THE ITEM SHOWS UP, SO PLEASE BE PATIENT. WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK. >> JOE'S IN TROUBLE. [RECESS TAKEN] >>KEN HAGAN: WELCOME BACK FROM OUR BRIEF RECESS. MR. MOREDA, GLAD YOU COULD JOIN US. REMEMBER YOUR PLEDGE TO ME EARLIER THIS EVENING TO KEEP THINGS MOVING? >>JOE MOREDA: YES, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: AND PLEASE PROCEED. >>JOE MOREDA: WE'LL MOVE RIGHT ALONG. WE'LL GO RIGHT INTO ITEM "A." THIS WAS REQUESTED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TO PROPOSE A STREAMLINING OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS. >>KEN HAGAN: DOES ANYONE HERE FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? IF NOT, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "B" WAS TO CORRECT THE DEFINITION OF REGULATED SUBSTANCES -- >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, SIR. >> HUGH MARTHINSEN, SAXON GILMORE FIRM, 201 EAST KENNEDY. NO OBJECTION TO THIS ITEM. JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT WE'LL BE WORKING WITH STAFF WITH REGARD TO THE NEXT ROUND WITH SOME LANGUAGE TO CLARIFY THE ISSUE THAT'S COME UP IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN DELETED WHICH IS REMOVAL OF THE REFERENCE TO THE REPORTABLE QUANTITY UNDER THE SUPER FUND STATUTE WHICH IS WHERE THE DEFINITION FOR REGULATED SUBSTANCE CAME FROM. THE CONCERN THAT ARISES IS AT THAT POINT UNDER CURRENT LAW IN SOME CASES THAT HAVE BEEN INTERPRETED, FEDERAL AND STATE, YOU COULD HAVE A NATURALLY OCCURRING SUBSTANCE LIKE ARSENIC, WHICH OCCURS RATHER FREQUENTLY IN THE GROUND HERE. A FARMER COULD GO OUT AND TILL THEIR GROUND, MOVE SOMETHING, SOMEONE COULD EXCAVATE AND MOVE EARTH. YOU COULD BE HANDLING A REGULATED SUBSTANCE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE REPORTABLE QUANTITY THRESHOLD AS PART OF THE DEFINITION. I DON'T THINK IT'S A PROBLEM, AND PERHAPS THERE'S JUST -- I KNOW WE'VE TALKED WITH STAFF, AND STAFF AGREES THAT WAS NOT THEIR INTENT TO SORT OF BE CAUSING THAT ISSUE AND PERHAPS STAFF COULD JUST MAKE THAT STATEMENT ON THE RECORD, AND WE'LL WORK WITH STAFF IN THE NEXT ROUND IN TERMS OF LANGUAGE THAT WOULD HELP TAKE THAT CONCERN OUT, BUT JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM "C." THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO MODIFY THE FREQUENCY OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE PHOSPHATE MINING PROCESS. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? CAN WE HAVE A MOTION. >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE TO APPROVE. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "D" PROPOSES TO ESTABLISH A DEFINITION OF SHADE TREE FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE TO APPROVE. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "E" PROPOSES TO CLARIFY THE PLANTINGS REQUIRED UNDER OVERHEAD POWER LINES. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "F" ADDRESSES THE STREET TREE LOCATION WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ACCOMMODATE THE WIDER SIDEWALK WIDTHS REQUIRED BY ADA STANDARDS. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER NORMAN. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "G" -- >>JIM NORMAN: EXCUSE ME. >>JOE MOREDA: I'M SORRY. >>JIM NORMAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM IS REQUESTING A REMOTE BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO LEAN UP AND -- DO YOU THINK ANYBODY COULD ACCOMMODATE HIM? >>ROSE FERLITA: YEAH, I'M GOING TO ACCOMMODATE HIM. [LAUGHTER] >>KEN HAGAN: PLEASE CONTINUE, MR. MOREDA. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "G" ESTABLISHES A CONSISTENT UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR TREES IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS PUBLIC -- THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "H" MAKES THE LDC REQUIREMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE FOR HANDICAP PARKING. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND COMMISSIONER NORMAN. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: I'M SORRY. COULD YOU PLEASE REREGISTER YOUR VOTES. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "I" DEALS WITH APPROVED FINANCIAL GUARANTEES FOR OFF-SITE CONSTRUCTION. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO ROUND ONE OF 2009. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM "J," TO REFINE THE INCENTIVES FOR THE GREEN ROOF OPTION TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE TO ENSURE IF THAT OPTION IS SELECTED THAT IT'S FOLLOWED THROUGH. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEVIN WHITE: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-1. COMMISSIONER FERLITA VOTED NO. >>ROSE FERLITA: I AM SO SORRY. CORRECT THAT. I MEANT TO SAY YES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: OKAY. I'LL CORRECT THAT FOR THE RECORD. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU. >>JIM NORMAN: YOU NEED THE REMOTE. [LAUGHTER] >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "K," THE PROPOSAL IS TO STREAMLINE THE APPLICATION WITHDRAWAL PROCESS. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "L" PROPOSES TO REVISE THE LIST OF ALLOWABLE USES IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO SPECIFY WHERE STANDALONE CREMATORIUMS AND ALSO ACCESSORY CREMATORIUMS -- WHICH DISTRICTS THEY'RE ALLOWED IN. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >> MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "M" IS A CLARIFICATION PROPOSED TO CROSS-REFERENCE THE REGULATIONS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLINGS, ACCESSORY KITCHENS. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "N" IS A PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE STREAMLINED ZONING AND PERMITTING REGULATIONS FOR EXCAVATIONS WHICH CREATE AGRICULTURAL RESERVOIRS. TO QUALIFY FOR THIS PROCESS, IT WOULD REQUIRE A CONTRACTUAL PARTNERSHIP WITH SWFWMD AND USDA. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER NORMAN. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "O" PRESCRIBES MINIMUM SAFETY STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR PAINTBALL FIELDS IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS TO REQUIRE NETTING ALONG THE FRONT YARD ALONG THE ROADWAY. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "P" PROPOSES TO ELIMINATE OUTDATED TEXT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ADD INTENT STATEMENTS FOR EACH STANDARD ZONING DISTRICT. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "Q" IS A PROPOSAL TO REQUIRE THE MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR OF A RESIDENCE TO FACE THE REAR YARD. I BELIEVE THERE'S AMENDED LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN HANDED OUT TO YOU, AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S HERE TO SPEAK TO THIS AMENDMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, SIR. >> GOOD EVENING. SCOTT ANDREASEN, 909 TERRA MAR DRIVE, TAMPA, FLORIDA. CAN I USE THE PROJECTOR? >>KEN HAGAN: YES, SIR. >> ARE WE GOOD? I'M NOT SPEAKING AGAINST THIS. I'M SEEKING CLARIFICATION IN THIS CONDITION. AS IT STATES NOW, IT STATES THAT THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES' FRONT SHALL BE ORIENTED -- SHALL NOT BE ORIENTED TOWARDS THE REAR YARD. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS FROM ONE PARTICULAR CASE. WHAT I JUST WANT TO DO IS JUST GIVE SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME EXISTING PROJECTS WITHIN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND HAVE THIS OCCURRING, AND I HAVE SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT MAYBE NEEDS SOME ADDITIONAL WORDSMITHING ON THIS, BUT THIS IS IN WESTCHASE, THE VINEYARDS COMMUNITY. THE ORANGE UNITS SHOWN HERE FACE THE LAKE, WHICH IS HERE. ON THOSE UNITS THE FRONT DOOR IS CLEARLY FACING THE LAKE. THE BACK BACK HERE, ALTHOUGH YOU MIGHT PERCEIVE IT AS AN ALLEY, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A STREET BECAUSE IT HAS ADDRESSING ON IT AND MAILBOXES, AND IT IS THE ONLY ADDRESSES FOR THOSE UNITS WHICH MAKES IT DIFFERENT THAN AN ALLEY. IF THIS CONDITION AS IT EXISTS NOW WOULD BE PUT IN PLACE, THAT PARTICULAR THING WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED. ADDITIONALLY IN THIS COMMUNITY THEY ALSO HAVE WHAT ARE CALLED MUSES OR GREENSPACES WHERE THE UNITS ACTUALLY FRONT THAT GREENSPACE. THE DOORS ARE LOCATED THERE AND NOT ON THE STREETS ON THE BACK SIDE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS SOME NEW PRODUCT THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON. I MYSELF AM A LAND PLANNER. WE'RE CALLING IT CURRENTLY A COTTAGE PRODUCT, WHICH IS KIND OF SHOWN HERE AS A PLAN VIEW EXAMPLE, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE HAVE A COMMON GREENSPACE THAT THE LOTS FRONT WHILE THEY HAVE A COMMON PARKING AREA LOCATED HERE AND DON'T REALLY EVEN ADDRESS A STREET PER SE. IT'S A NEW PRODUCT THAT I THINK IF THIS CONDITION WAS PUT IN PLACE WOULDN'T EXIST. SOME EXAMPLES OF HOW THAT LOOKS, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY NOT WITHIN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND ADDITIONAL EXAMPLE IS THIS ONE TOO, WHICH I THINK HAS AN ATTRACTIVE LOOK AND CAN MEET NUMEROUS THINGS. AND THE ONE LAST THING ON THIS IS THIS IS WATERSET, WHICH WE CURRENTLY HAVE CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL ON. THE ORANGE UNITS HERE WOULD ALSO FALL UNDER THIS, ALTHOUGH THEY ACTUALLY ARE ON A STREET, AND IN THIS TYPE INSTANT WE'D BE LOOKING AT TWO-FACE ARCHITECTURE WHERE THERE WOULD BE A FRONT DOOR LOCATED ON THIS SIDE AS WELL AS ON THE BACK SIDE, AND I'VE GOT COPIES OF A TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WE ARE PROPOSING THAT I CAN GIVE TO I GUESS THE CLERK. ALL RIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANKS. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD STAFF LIKE TO ADDRESS HIS CONCERNS? >>PAULA HARVEY: I WOULD. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO SEE HIS PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT BECAUSE I CAN'T BEGIN TO TELL YOU IF IT WORKS OR DOESN'T UNTIL I'VE SEEN IT. THE SECOND THING IS, COMMISSIONER, FOR THOSE PROJECTS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THAT HAVE THE SPECIAL DESIGN FEATURES THAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE ACTUALLY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. AS YOU KNOW, WHEN WE LOOK AT SITE PLANS THAT ARE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICTS, WE GIVE A LOT OF FREEDOM TO THE DESIGNER OF THE PROJECT TO CREATE SOMETHING UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THEY DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE SIMPLE WAY TO CHANGE THE AMENDMENT WITHOUT HAVING REVIEWED THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE OFFERED BY THIS GENTLEMAN IS TO SIMPLY ADD UNDER "K" WHERE WE SAY, THIS REGULATION SHALL NOT APPLY TO SAID STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF FIVE ACRES OR MORE, TO ALSO ADD, OR WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICTS. AND THEN THE PROJECT DESIGNER STILL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE THE TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HE JUST SPOKE TO AND SHOWED ON THE OVERHEAD. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. DEWAYNE "HERB" HURLBURT, 109 FORBES ROAD, PLANT CITY, FLORIDA. I SPOKE TO THIS BEFORE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE, THE ACREAGE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY IF THERE IS A PROPOSED CHANGE, MAYBE A CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THE OLD MATH USED TO BE DIVIDING UP OF A SECTION, AND WE GOT DOWN TO 165 FEET. WELL, IF YOU TAKE A 165-FOOT ROAD FRONTAGE OUT THERE, THAT'S A HALF A MILE BEFORE YOU CAN GET TO FIVE ACRES. NOW, UNUSUAL AS THAT MAY SEEM, THE UNUSUAL CAN HAPPEN WITHIN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, SO WITH THAT SAID, NO OTHER COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE'RE SETTING REGULATIONS THAT REQUIRE THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF A RESIDENT FACE THE STREET? >>PAULA HARVEY: ESSENTIALLY, YES. I MEAN, THEY CAN'T FACE THE REAR YARD. FOR THE MOST PART THEY WOULD BE FACING THE STREET OR THEY COULD POTENTIALLY FACE THE SIDE YARD. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. SHOULD WE REQUIRE THESE FOLKS TO PUT IN A ROUND AND A SQUARE WINDOW AS WELL? I'M BEING FACETIOUS WITH YOU. >>PAULA HARVEY: I UNDERSTAND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE REGULATION. ARE WE GOING TOO FAR? I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT, BUT I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT ARE WE JUST OVERSTEPPING AND ARE WE GETTING TOO INVOLVED IN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TELL HOMEOWNERS THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO? >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MOTION TO DENY. >> MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT PAULA INDICATED, ADDING WITHIN PD DISTRICTS. >>PAULA HARVEY: YES. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>KEVIN WHITE: THAT WAS WITH THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE? >>KEN HAGAN: YES. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER NORMAN. THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIED 4-2. COMMISSIONERS HIGGINBOTHAM AND NORMAN VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM "R." THE PROPOSAL IS TO REINSERT THE TERM "JUNK YARDS" IN THE USE MATRIX, CLARIFY WHICH DISTRICT THE JUNK YARDS ARE ALLOWED IN, AND THAT WOULD BE IN THE MANUFACTURING DISTRICT. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE THE ITEM. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: BRINGS US TO ITEM "S." THIS PROPOSAL WILL ALLOW FOR AND DEFINE COMMUNITY IDENTIFICATION SIGNS IN COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING AREAS. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>ROSE FERLITA: MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JIM NORMAN: YOUR STOMACH'S GROWLING. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "T," THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO CLARIFY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO MAKE IT EASIER TO READ AND HOPEFULLY GET PEOPLE TO USE THE COMMERCIAL APARTMENT OPTION IN THE CODE TO PROMOTE MIXED-USE. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER NORMAN. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-0. >>JOE MOREDA: BRINGS US TO ITEM "U." THIS PROPOSAL IS A MODIFICATION OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO ELIMINATE THE TWO-ACRE THRESHOLD FOR PD APPLICATIONS. IT WILL CLARIFY THE TIME FRAME FOR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND ALSO CLARIFY THE VARIANCE CRITERIA THAT IS USED IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. BY THAT, I MEAN IT WOULD ALLOW THE BOARD TO HAVE THE ULTIMATE APPROVAL AUTHORITY IN VARIANCES. RIGHT NOW THE CODE IS CONFIGURED TO ONLY -- IT WOULD REQUIRE THE ZONING HEARING MASTER TO FIND AN APPROVAL FOR THE BOARD TO DO THAT, SO THE BOARD WOULD HAVE TO CONCUR WITH THE HEARING OFFICER. THIS WILL ALLOW THE BOARD TO HAVE A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION OR FINDING FINAL APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM. >> TERRY FLOTT, SEFFNER COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AS WELL AS UNITED CITIZENS ACTION NETWORK, U-CAN. FIRST COMMENT I HAVE TO MAKE IS TOMORROW WE'RE MEETING FOR OUR SECOND MEETING WORKING ON INFILL AND NEW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CODES ALONG WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS MANY OF THE DEVELOPERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ARE IN THIS ROOM TONIGHT ARE GOING TO BE THERE AS WELL. I THINK THIS IS PREMATURE TO START MESSING WITH THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW WHILE WE'RE ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OF LOOKING AT WHAT PROVIDES FOR INFILL AND WHAT DOESN'T. THAT BEING SAID, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT -- I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE MIXED-USE ISSUE IN HERE. WHEN IT SAYS THAT THE APPLICATIONS HAVE TO BE GREATER THAN TWO ACRES IN SIZE, WHAT -- THE WORDING IN THIS DOESN'T TOTALLY MAKE SENSE TO ME IN THE SENSE THAT WHAT HAPPENS WITH LESS THAN TWO ACRES? WE'RE SAYING WE'RE ELIMINATING THE TWO ACRES, SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE WORDING. IN THE PRESUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A MEETING IF REQUESTED BY CITIZENS, THEN THE LEAST WE CAN REQUIRE IN THE NOTICE WOULD BE TO REQUIRE THAT AN E- MAIL BE PROVIDED SO CORRESPONDENCE CAN BE DOCUMENTED BETWEEN THE PARTIES. IN HERE IT SAYS "AND/OR." AND THEN AS YOU GET DOWN TO THE VARIATIONS AND THE VARIANCES IN THE PROCESS, I AM CONCERNED THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW IN THE PD PROCESS VARIATIONS TO PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS, LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION. THESE THINGS AREN'T GOING TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED. TYPICALLY THEY'RE USED TO LIMIT WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO. I JUST THINK IT'S THE WRONG WAY TO GO ALONG THIS WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE OUR COMMUNITIES. THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO GO, AND IF WE'RE GOING TO START INFILLING ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE LESS THAN TWO ACRES, THEN THE VERY ABSOLUTE LEAST YOU CAN DO AS COMMISSIONERS IS REQUIRE THAT THEY SUBMIT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC INSTEAD OF JUST LEAVING IT OPEN. THEY COULD HAVE A BUBBLE PLAN, THEY COULD HAVE WHATEVER THEY WANT IN THIS THE WAY THAT IT'S WORDED, SO IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT, WE SHOULD -- HERE AGAIN, ANOTHER OPTION IS TO SAY IT HAS TO BE A PD SPECIFIC. I PERSONALLY HOPE THAT WE WON'T START FIDDLING WITH THIS TONIGHT. LET'S GET THROUGH A PROCESS THAT WE'RE ALREADY IN WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY RATHER THAN DEAL WITH THIS. THIS WAS PUT FORWARD BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR AT THE FIRST LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE MEETING WHERE HE COMMENTED TO PAULA ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHERE WAS THE PROCESS ON THIS PD ORDINANCE. WE RECEIVED NOTHING TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT HARDSHIP REALLY EXISTED. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. FLOTT. >> THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT, PLEASE. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: PAULA, ADDRESS THAT WHEN THEY'VE COMPLETED -- >> AGAIN, DEWAYNE "HERB" HURLBURT, PLANT CITY, FLORIDA, 1009 NORTH FORBES ROAD. CLARIFICATION IS WHY I'VE COME FORTH, AND AGAIN, AS MS. FLOTT JUST SPOKE TO, BUT A MANUAL MUST BE ABLE TO BE INTERPRETED, AND ONLY ONE INTERPRETATION MUST STAND. IF AN INTERPRETATION CANNOT STAND BY ITSELF AND I CAN INTERPRET IT, YOU CAN INTERPRET IT, SHE JUST DID AN INTERPRETATION FOR YOU, THEN IT'S NOT A GOOD AMENDMENT. I'M SORRY, BUT THAT'S WHAT A GOOD MANUAL DOES, AND WHY DO WE WANT TO DO IT AND DO IT AND DO IT AGAIN? YOU TELL ME IT DOESN'T COST YOU, BUT ANYTIME YOU DO SOMETHING OVER, IT'S COSTING US. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> DAVE KULOW, BOYETTE SPRINGS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, 12312 YELLOW ROSE CIRCLE, RIVERVIEW. I HAVE A FIERY FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION. WHAT IS BROKEN WITH THE PRESENT PROCESS? WE HAVE THE ZONING HEARING MASTER, WE HAVE ADEQUATE KINDS OF PROCESSES IN PLACE THAT PROTECTS BOTH DEVELOPER, SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, GIVES PEOPLE A CHANCE TO INPUT. WHY SHORTCUT, SABOTAGE THE PROCESS BY CHANGING IT? IF IT ISN'T BROKE, WHY TRY TO FIX? AND I THINK THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF THAT. TWO-ACRE PARCELS CAN BE VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANT, AND THAT TWO-ACRE THRESHOLD REALLY BOTHERS ME AND MY HOMEOWNERS BOARD BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT ON A TWO-ACRE PARCEL, A LOT OF THINGS CAN BE PUT UP, AND YES, WE WANT INFILL, YES, INFILL'S DESIRABLE IN MOST CASES, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE A ASSURANCE THAT IT BLENDS IN WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, THAT IT ISN'T JOE'S BEER JOINT THAT APPEARS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND SO FORTH, AND SO YOU GET THE GIST OF MY -- MY THOUGHTS IS THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE TURNED DOWN OR SENT BACK FOR SOME VERY, VERY CAREFUL REVISION. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M JUDY JAMES, 325 SOUTH BOULEVARD. I BELIEVE THAT AS PART OF YOUR BACKUP YOU HAVE A REPORT FROM STAFF REGARDING THE TWO-ACRE THRESHOLD. WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES RIGHT NOW, IF I HAVE A PARCEL THAT'S 1.8 ACRES AND I WANT TO FILE A PD ZONING, I HAVE TO FIRST FILE A VARIANCE AND GO THROUGH THE LUHO PROCEDURE PROCESS, WHICH TAKES TWO TO THREE MONTHS. AT THAT POINT, IF IT'S GRANTED, THEN I CAN FILE A PD. YOU'VE LOST NO PROTECTIONS BY ALLOWING US TO FILE A PD FOR THE TWO-ACRE -- WITH LESS THAN TWO ACRES. ALL IT IS DOING IS ELIMINATING A HEARING IN FRONT OF A LUHO. I THINK THE STAFF REPORT SHOWS THAT EVERY SINGLE VARIANCE APPLICATION BEFORE THE LUHO WAS APPROVED BUT MAYBE ONE, AND THIS WAS INITIATED, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BY STAFF. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER IT. IF IT'S A PD AND YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU CAN ALWAYS VOTE IT DOWN; HOWEVER, IT SAVES A STEP OF GOING TO A LUHO JUST TO HAVE A VARIANCE TO FILE LESS THAN TWO ACRES. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. JAMES. NEXT, PLEASE. >> VIVIAN BACCA, 413 EL GRECO DRIVE IN BRANDON, AND I SUPPORT TERRY FLOTT'S POSITION THAT IT'S -- WE'RE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INFILL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS, THAT THIS IS PROBABLY NOT THE BEST TIME TO MAKE THIS MODIFICATION. I ALSO QUESTION CHANGING -- WHY ARE WE INCORPORATING CHANGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENTS IN WITH THE PD ORDINANCE MODIFICATION ITSELF? I THINK THEY'RE REALLY TWO SEPARATE THINGS, AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY HOW THE FINAL VERSION OF THIS IS GOING TO WORK, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE FIRST MEETING ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE WAS TRYING TO FIND ALTERNATE WAYS THAT PEOPLE COULD ACCESS INFORMATION AND NOTICE ON PROPERTY APPROVALS, WHICH IS A GOOD THING, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT TECHNOLOGY'S NOT AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE, SO I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED WITHIN THE PD NOTICE MODIFICATION, AND I THINK THE WHOLE THING'S A LITTLE PREMATURE. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. BACCA. ANYONE ELSE? PAULA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS MS. FLOTT'S CONCERNS? >>PAULA HARVEY: I'LL TRY TO ADDRESS ALL OF THEM, IF I CAN. WHEN THE PD ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS OCCURRED TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO, THEY HAD AN AWFUL LOT OF INPUT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND THE CITIZENS. AT THAT TIME, WE ADVISED THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT AFTER WE HAD HAD SOME EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH THE NEW REGULATIONS THAT WE WOULD BE BACK BEFORE THE BOARD TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS WHERE WE THOUGHT THEY WERE NEEDED. WE BELIEVE THESE ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEEDED, AND I'LL TRY TO REMIND YOU, IN FACT, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD ABOUT SOME OF THEM ALREADY. ONE OF THEM HAD TO DO WITH THE ISSUE OF THE ZONING HEARING MASTER MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT VARIANCES THAT WERE -- I MEAN THE TYPE OF VARIANCES AND THE NEED FOR THEM, THAT'S NOT CHANGING, JUST THE FACT THAT PROCEDURALLY THE ZONING HEARING MASTER MAKES A RECOMMENDATION. THAT PROCESS WILL STILL BE THERE, BUT WHAT COMPELLED THE BOARD TO ASK US TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITUATION WAS THAT IF FOR WHATEVER THE REASON THE ZONING HEARING MASTER RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THE VARIANCES, YOU LOST ANY OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER IT YOURSELF. IT WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU. YOU WANTED TO HAVE THE SAME ABILITY TO CONSIDER THE VARIANCES THE SAME WAY THAT YOU CONSIDER THE REZONING ITSELF. YOU REVIEW THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ZONING HEARING MASTER AND IT COMES BACK TO YOU. YOU ARE THE FINAL DECISION-MAKER, AND YOU ASKED THAT THE VARIANCE CONSIDERATION BE IN THAT SAME STATUS, SO THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT ACCOMPLISHES IN PART. SECONDLY, WE'VE RUN INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD SOME APPLICANTS WHO, FOR WHATEVER REASON, NEVER RECEIVED ANY NOTIFICATION FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY WANTED A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THE APPLICANTS WANTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THAT MEETING AND BE ABLE TO HAVE IT STAND AS A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WANT TO FACE A SITUATION OF COMING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE SOMEBODY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOW UP AND SAY, WELL, WE NEVER HAD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. APPLICANTS ARE PARTICULARLY GOOD IN THIS COUNTY ABOUT KNOWING WHEN THEY'RE DEALING WITH A CONTROVERSIAL REZONING, AND SOMETIMES THEY WOULD PREFER TO GO AHEAD AND BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD AND BE POSITIVE AND AGGRESSIVE ABOUT HAVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING RATHER THAN WAITING FOR THE REQUEST FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE HAVE PROVIDED FOR THAT. IN TERMS OF THE TWO-ACRE THRESHOLD, MS. JAMES -- WHAT MS. JAMES SAID WAS CORRECT. WE BUILT IN A DELAY PROCESS WHEN WE PUT IN THE REQUIREMENT THAT IF YOU WANT TO DO A PD OF LESS THAN TWO ACRES, YOU'VE GOT TO GO ASK FOR A VARIANCE IN FRONT OF THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER FIRST. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICERS ARE NOT IN ANY WAY AT ALL LOOKING AT THE SUBSTANTIVE NATURE OF THE REZONING REQUEST, WHETHER IT'S A GOOD IDEA OR NOT. THEY'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE ISSUE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY WITH LESS THAN TWO ACRES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A PD. THAT'S VERY LITTLE FOR THEM TO EVEN BE ABLE TO CONSIDER, SO, YES, FOR THE MOST PART THEY'VE GRANTED ALL OF THEM. THEY GIVE THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO THAT SMALL LAND PROPERTY OWNER AS THEY WOULD FOR THE LARGE PROPERTY OWNER THAT IF THEY WANT TO PROCEED THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT, AND THEY CAN PROCEED THE BEST WAY THEY CAN. WE IN NO WAY HAVE MODIFIED THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE SITE PLANS. THEY STILL HAVE TO DO THE SAME DETAIL THAT THE LARGER DEVELOPMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO DO THAT YOU REVIEW EVERY LAND USE MEETING THAT YOU SEE, SO NOTHING'S CHANGED ABOUT WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE. MAYBE THEY WANT TO DO A PD-S, BUT QUITE FRANKLY, A PD-S IS SOMETHING THAT A DEVELOPER, IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO IT, THEY'RE MOVING INTO THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW PROCESS THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REZONING. THE DETAILS OF INFORMATION ON THE PLAN ARE SET OUT IN THE PD ORDINANCE. THE SAME ONES WOULD APPLY WITH THE SMALL ZONINGS JUST LIKE THEY DO TO THE BIG ONES. THEY DON'T GET ANY SPECIAL FAVORS AS A RESULT OF IT. AND THE QUESTION ABOUT THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT COULD GET - - A PD APPLICANT COULD GET A VARIANCE FOR, WELL, THEY ARE THE SAME TYPE OF THINGS. WE ALWAYS SAID THEY WERE THE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, AND THEY ARE THOSE ITEMS IN SECTION 6 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING PARKING AND LOADING AND LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING, AND YOU WILL -- OCCASIONALLY YOU'LL SEE THOSE ITEMS COME UP. WE ARE NOT TAKING AWAY SOMEBODY'S OPPORTUNITY OF LESS THAN TWO ACRES TO BE ABLE TO REZONE. WE NEVER HAVE. IF YOU HAVE THAT KIND OF PROPERTY, YOU ALWAYS HAVE HAD THE ABILITY TO REZONE, AND IN FACT, YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD THE ABILITY TO REZONE TO A PD IF YOU WANTED TO, YOU JUST HAD TO GO GET A VARIANCE FIRST BEFORE YOU COULD PROCEED WITH YOUR REZONING APPLICATION. SO I'M CONCERNED THAT THE GENTLEMAN THAT SPOKE TO YOU THOUGHT THAT SOMEHOW WE WERE GIVING THE TWO-ACRE PEOPLE SOME KIND OF OPPORTUNITY TO REZONE THAT THEY NEVER HAD BEFORE. THEY'VE ALWAYS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REZONE, SO -- >>KEN HAGAN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MS. HARVEY. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>KEN HAGAN: GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>KEVIN WHITE: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 4-2. COMMISSIONERS FERLITA AND SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: ITEM "V" HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO ROUND 1 OF 2009. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM "W." THIS IS KNOWN AS THE CPTED OR CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES. THIS PROVIDES FOR DESIGN TECHNIQUES TO HOPEFULLY REDUCE CRIME ON SITES THROUGH SITE DESIGN. >>KEN HAGAN: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JOE MOREDA: THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM "X." THIS WILL PROVIDE A METHOD TO ISSUE PERMITS ON UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >> MOVE THE ITEM. >>KEN HAGAN: YES, SIR. >> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN. DEWAYNE "HERB" HURLBURT, PLANT CITY, FLORIDA. ACTUALLY I HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT I'D LIKE TO SHOW ON THE OVERHEAD, BUT I WOULD NEED ASSISTANCE FROM SOMEBODY TO DO THAT AND BE ABLE TO TALK. AND I'LL GIVE YOU A NOD WHEN TO CHANGE IT FROM SLIDE NUMBER ONE, OKAY. FIRST I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS, LDC 1047, AND AS IT COMES UP ON THE SCREEN WHERE WE CAN SEE IT -- IT'S A LITTLE HARD, BUT THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S AMENDMENT AND THE INTENDED PUBLIC PURPOSE AND BENEFIT. IT STATES THAT IT'S FOR THE NONIMPROVED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY. CURRENTLY A CONNECTION MAY BE ISSUED ONLY TO AN IMPROVED OR MAINTAINED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. NOW, THOSE ARE THE PROBLEMS. THE SECOND ITEM THERE, OF COURSE, DEALS WITH THE COMPARATIVE SUMMARY AND ESSENTIAL CHANGE ELEMENT, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONSTRUCTING A NEW ROAD TO COUNTY STANDARDS, AND THE COST MAY PLACE A HEAVY FINANCIAL BURDEN ON A SINGLE LOT OWNER. NOW, THERE'S A MODE TO MY REASON FOR BRINGING THESE UP. THE ANTICIPATED COST, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, IS INSUFFICIENT -- WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR FIRE TRUCKS AND AMBULANCES AND SO FORTH, AND THAT TELLS ME THAT IT'S GOT TO BE TO COUNTY STANDARDS, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ENGINEERING COSTS. YOU NAME IT, WE GOT IT. THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES -- THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT 5, AND AS IT'S PROPOSED, THE FIRST PARAGRAPH KIND OF LEADS INTO EVERYTHING, BUT BOILING IT DOWN, IT SAYS THE COUNTY ROAD IS A PUBLIC ROAD, AND WITH THAT COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT. THAT IS ONLY ISSUED WHERE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY PROVIDES SUFFICIENT INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR FIRE TRUCKS, AMBULANCES, POLICE CARS, AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES. AGAIN, I BRING YOU BACK TO THAT COST FACTOR, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL LOT OWNER HAVING TO PUT THIS PRICE UP THERE. NOW, I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE STAFF'S GOING, AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM, BUT LET'S CONTINUE ON DOWN AND GO TO "A," "B," "C," AND TRY TO DIRECT IT A LITTLE MORE FOCUSING. THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO A HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY-MAINTAINED ROAD, AND THE ROUTE OF ACCESS TO AND FROM THE PROPERTY IS NOT MAINTAINED BY PUBLIC FUNDS. NOW, THAT LANGUAGE BY ITSELF IS ALMOST DIRECTING INTERPRETATION TO PLATTED SUBDIVISION, NO IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE THE PUBLIC ROAD MUST BE THERE WHETHER IT IS MAINTAINED OR UN -- OR OWNED BY THE COUNTY, BUT THE NO IMPROVEMENT ROAD IS A PRIVATE ROAD. AND THE CURRENT PLATTING PROCESS, THE DEDICATIONS AND SO FORTH, SINCE ABOUT THE EARLY 1980s, IT HAS READ THAT THAT PARCEL IS UNDIVIDED AND THE INDIVIDUAL LOT OWNERS WOULD MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THOSE ROADS AT THEIR EXPENSE. SO WE'RE TAKING INTERPRETATION GOING BACK TO A PLAT THAT WAS IN HISTORY TO A PLAT THAT IS TODAY, AND AGAIN, I UNDERLINED THE BOTTOM DOWN THERE -- >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> -- FIRE TRUCKS, AMBULANCES BECAUSE OF THE COST AND SO FORTH, AND TO THAT, I WOULD ASK YOU TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. >>KEN HAGAN: NO, SIR. YOU'VE GONE WAY BEYOND YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. PAULA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS HIS CONCERNS THAT HE -- OR MR. ALUOTTO. >>PAULA HARVEY: MR. AWE ALUOTTO AND MR. CAMPBELL ARE HERE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU FOR THE TIME FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST. >>KEN HAGAN: YES, SIR. >>PETER ALUOTTO: COMMISSIONERS, PETER ALUOTTO, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ADDRESS SUBDIVISIONS THAT WERE DONE MANY YEARS AGO IN THE '20s AND '30s WHERE THERE IS A PLATTED RIGHT-OF-WAY BUT THE COUNTY HAS NOT -- WAS NOT DEDICATED OR CONVEYED THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO MAINTAIN. WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO OWN PARCELS IN THESE OLD SUBDIVISIONS, AND WE CAN'T PREVENT THEM FROM BUILDING A HOUSE IF THEY HAVE LEGAL ACCESS, BUT IN SOME CASES THEY HAVE NO PHYSICAL ACCESS, SO THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT, AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT ANYBODY WHO HAS A LOT ON A ROAD THAT'S UNIMPROVED, THERE'S NO STREET THERE, THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHEN THEY PURCHASED THAT LOT THAT THE COUNTY HAS NO OBLIGATION OR RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT THAT ROAD IN, AND WE'RE ALSO SAYING THAT IF YOU HAVE TO -- YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN ACCESS TO YOUR OWN PROPERTY IF YOU WANT TO BUILD IN THOSE LOCATIONS. AND WITH RESPECT TO THE STANDARD, WE PUT THE MOST MINIMAL STANDARD THAT WE COULD PUT IN THERE SO THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES COULD ACCESS THE PROPERTY. WE'VE MET WITH MR. HURLBURT AND WE'VE EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT THIS DOES NOT AFFECT, YOU KNOW, EASEMENTS AND ANY OTHER AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE. THIS IS FOR PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND WE'VE EVEN HAD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY SEND HIM A COUPLE E-MAILS TO THAT EFFECT, SO WE'RE PRETTY SATISFIED WITH IT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? >> MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER FERLITA. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: THIS BRINGS US TO ITEM "Y." THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT WAS TO STREAMLINE THE RECORD SUBMITTAL PROCESS FOR THE "R" CATEGORY FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. IF AN APPLICANT SEEKS AN "R" CATEGORY FOR A RESTAURANT, THERE'S A REPORTING REQUIREMENT TO VERIFY THAT THERE'S 51% FOOD SALES. WE GOT INTO SOME DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD AT THE WORKSHOP ON THIS ITEM, AND COMMISSIONER NORMAN REQUESTED SOME FOLLOW-UP FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND ALSO FROM PGM STAFF TO PROVIDE A SURVEY OF SEVERAL OTHER RESTAURANTS TO SEE IF THEY HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSAL IN TERMS OF THE REPORTING REQUIREMENT, AND ALSO THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME CLARIFICATION, I THINK, THAT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION HAD AT THE WORKSHOP ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE RESTAURANTS AND ALSO ABOUT SPOT CHECKS THAT MAY BE DONE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. COMMISSIONER NORMAN, I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU STILL WANT THE FOLLOW-UP EVEN THOUGH WE'RE IN AN EXPEDITED PRESENTATION MODE TONIGHT, AND WE'RE PREPARED TO GIVE IT, BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT THAT FOLLOW-UP, THEN -- >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>JOE MOREDA: SIR? YOU'VE SEEN IT? >>KEN HAGAN: HE'S SEEN IT. OKAY. THANK YOU, JOE. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER FERLITA. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: THIS BRINGS US TO ITEM "C." COMMISSIONERS, THIS WAS A PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT FROM TINA ROSENBERGER AND FRANK COSTANZA TO ADOPT CONDITIONAL USE REQUIREMENTS WHICH WERE ADMINISTRATIVE -- ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PRESCRIBING STANDARDS FOR SETBACKS AND HOURS OF OPERATION AND DIFFERENT THINGS OF THAT MANNER TO REGULATE THE USE OF DIRT BIKES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY IN AGRICULTURAL ZONES. I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION, AND STAFF OBVIOUSLY HAS TO SPEAK TO IT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSAL, SO HAVING SAID THAT, WOULD YOU PREFER TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, THEN US RESPOND AFTER THAT? >>KEN HAGAN: SURE. >>JOE MOREDA: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: IS THE APPLICANT HERE? GOOD EVENING, SIR. PER BOARD POLICY, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. >> GOOD EVENING. FRANK COSTANZA, LIVINGSTON AVENUE, LUTZ, FLORIDA. FIRST I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED REVISED AMENDMENT LANGUAGE, WHICH BASICALLY EXCLUDES MOTOR HOMES, TRAILER HOMES FROM THIS CODE. OKAY. OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, OUR COMMUNITY HAS BEEN VICTIMIZED BY UNCIVIL BEHAVIORS WITH MRVs, WHICH I'LL REFER TO AS POLLUTANTS. WE HAVE PLACED OVER 40 CALLS TO THE SHERIFF, EPC, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER AGENCIES TO TRY TO REMOVE THIS POLLUTION IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE ALSO SENT MANY CORRESPONDENCES TO THOSE PARTIES, WHICH INCLUDE SWFWMD AND ATTORNEYS. WE ARE HERE BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO JUST DON'T CARE ABOUT THOSE WHO LIVE AROUND THEM, NOR DO THEY CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT WE LIVE IN. RIGHT NOW MRVs, POLLUTANTS, MAY BE USED AT ANY TIME AND ON ANY RESIDENTIALLY AND AGRICULTURALLY ZONED PROPERTIES IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. PMG HAS ADVISED THAT THEY MAY LIKE TO RESTRUCTURE THE CURRENT NOISE ORDINANCE WHICH IS OUT OF DATE BUT WOULD STILL ALLOW RIDING ON ANY LOT SIZE NO MATTER HOW SMALL. ALTHOUGH WE GREATLY APPRECIATE PMG EFFORTS AND THEIR WONDERFUL WORK ETHIC, A NOISE ORDINANCE WILL NOT ADDRESS ALL THE ISSUES RELATING TO MRVs, BEING NOISE POLLUTION, DUST, ODOR, AND VIBRATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. WE ARE HERE BECAUSE ADAM LAMB OF CODE ENFORCEMENT, WHO WORKS IN THE FIELD, IS PROACTIVE AND HAS DILIGENTLY TRIED TO HELP OTHERS AND US WITH SIMILAR ISSUES NEED THIS CODE IN ORDER TO HAVE SOME ENFORCEMENT. THE EPC CHAPTER 1-10 NOISE STATES A NOISE NUISANCE IS A SOUND WHICH, "A," IS OR MAY BE HARMFUL OR INJURIOUS TO THE HEALTH OR WELFARE OF ANY PERSON. "B," UNREASONABLY INTERFERES WITH THE ENJOYMENT OF LIFE, PROPERTY, OR OUTDOOR RECREATION OF A REASONABLE PERSON WITH NORMAL SENSIBILITIES. "C," IS OF SUCH CHARACTER AND LEVEL AS TO BE DETECTABLE BY A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF PERSONS SO AS TO INTERFERE WITH THEIR HEALTH, REPOSE, OR SAFETY, OR TO CAUSE SEVERE NOISE, INTERFERENCE, OR DISCOMFORT. THESE PROVIDE ALL OF THE ABOVE. BEFORE I PLAY AN EXAMPLE OF THE DIRT BIKE NOISE THAT I AM REFERRING TO, I'M SURE IT YOU WILL AGREE IT MEETS THE NOISE. THESE POLLUTANTS COME IN A VARIETY OF MOTOR SIZES AND ALL OF DIFFERENT AMPLITUDES AND FREQUENCIES, AND THEY ARE ALL ANNOYING NO MATTER HOW SHALLOW THE NOISE, AND THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE YOU TO BELIEVE. NO MATTER HOW LOW THE NOISE, THIS IS JUST ANNOYING. GO AHEAD AND PLEASE PLAY THE 22-SECOND FILE. [AUDIO PLAYED] NOW, I COULD HAVE PLAYED THAT REALLY LOUD, BUT THE POINT HERE IS THAT IT'S ANNOYING AT ANY NOISE LEVEL. THIS IS ONLY A 22-SECOND SOUND CLIP. WE HAVE HAD TO LISTEN TO THIS SEVERAL HOURS AT A TIME AT 110 DB, SOMETIMES SEVERAL CONSECUTIVE DAYS AT A TIME AND SOMETIMES TWO OR THREE OF THESE VEHICLES AT A TIME. THESE POLLUTANTS ARE INTRUSIVE TO OUR WELL BEING, HEALTH, AND HOME LIFE. THEY DEGRADE OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. PLEASE GET THEM OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND BACKYARDS. THIS IS A PROBLEM IN OUR COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. COSTANZA. MR. MOREDA. >>JOE MOREDA: COMMISSIONERS, AS I NOTED BEFORE, PGMD STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROPOSAL. ALTHOUGH WE SYMPATHIZE WITH THE APPLICANT, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE APPROACH BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL ATTEMPTS TO PROHIBIT A LAND USE THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A NUISANCE PROBLEM, I.E., BEING THE NOISE AND DUST, AND BY DOING IT THIS WAY, EVEN IF IT IS APPROVED, THE REGULATIONS WILL NOT BE RETROACTIVELY APPLIED BECAUSE THE ACTIVITY EXISTED PRIOR TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE. WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT, AND WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO, YOU KNOW, GET IN THE SAME ROOM WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WITH EPC ON THE NOISE, AND ALSO THE AIR QUALITY, AND ALSO CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND WE WERE TRYING TO STEER THIS IN A DIRECTION OF TRYING TO POSSIBLY AMEND A NUISANCE ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT. IF IT'S DONE IN THAT MANNER, THE GOOD THING ABOUT THAT IS THAT ONCE THAT STANDARD IS ADOPTED, THEN ANY KIND OF FUTURE ACTIVITY THAT OCCURS, IT CAN BE ENFORCED UPON AND MEASURED IN A WAY THAT COULD, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY STOP THAT ACTIVITY IF IT IS AS ANNOYING AS IT APPEARS TO BE. THE SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT WE COULD GET INTO BY REGULATING THESE TYPES OF LAND USES AS A LAND USE IN A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS REALLY, IT'S THE -- IT'S THE NUISANCE ACTIVITY THAT'S THE PROBLEM. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO GO OUT THERE AND DO A BARBECUE OR HAVE A RADIO THAT WAS PLAYING TOO LOUD OR A POOL ACTIVITY, BASKETBALL, SOMEONE PLAYING WHIFFLE BALL IN THEIR BACKYARD AND STARTED MAKING NOISE AND DECIDED THEY WANTED TO DO THAT EVERY DAY, THEN CONCEIVABLY WE COULD START LOADING UP OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY REGULATING WHIFFLE BALL OR REGULATING WHEN YOU COULD HAVE A BARBECUE, SO ASIDE FROM THE OBVIOUS ENFORCEMENT ISSUES FROM SOME INTERMITTENT ACTIVITY, WE'VE TRIED TO STEER THIS, WE'VE TRIED TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT IN THE DIRECTION OF TRYING TO CREATE SOME TYPE OF NUISANCE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OUTSIDE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME, OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO TRY TO GET THIS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND WE'RE NOT SUPPORTING IT FOR THE REASONS THAT WE JUST SAID, AND PRIMARILY, IF THIS DOES GET IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, EVEN IF IT IS, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW ENFORCED, THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO THEM, WHICH OBVIOUSLY THIS ACTIVITY HAS BEEN GOING ON, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO ANY CHANGES, AND I BELIEVE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY CAN SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, THE RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF A LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION, AND ASIDE FROM THAT, I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. MOREDA. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS. PAM CLOUSTON, 1621 THOMPSON ROAD IN LITHIA. AS ANNOYING AS THOSE LITTLE DARLINGS ACROSS THE ROAD FROM ME ARE WHEN THEY GO UP AND DOWN THE ROAD ON THEIR FOUR- WHEELERS ON A NICE QUIET SUNDAY AFTERNOON, IN A RURAL AREA THEY ARE RIDING ON THE STREET, AND THAT IS ILLEGAL, AND THAT CAN BE TAKEN CARE OF BY THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AS FAR AS ATVs AND DIRT BIKES. THEY ARE NOT STREET LEGAL. BUT IF YOU DO GO AGAINST STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS, THIS IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR ME. I HAVE A FOUR-WHEELER, A BIG HONKING FOUR-WHEELER. IT IS RATHER QUIET, AND SINCE MY ONE DAUGHTER RAN MY OTHER DAUGHTER OVER, WE DON'T REALLY GO FAST ON IT ANYMORE, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THE FARMING WORK THAT I DO WITH IT. I PULL A DUMP CART BEHIND IT, I PULL MANURE SPREADERS, I PULL THINGS LIKE THAT, AND I USE MINE, AND I DON'T HAVE SIX ACRES, SO IF THIS GOES INTO EFFECT, I GUESS I MIGHT BE IN VIOLATION OF SOME KIND OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SO I'M ASKING YOU TO PLEASE GO WITH STAFF. I KNOW THAT WILL AFFECT MORE THAN JUST ME. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE RURAL AREA THAT ACTUALLY USE THESE FOR WORK AS WELL. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE? MR. GORMLY, DO YOU CONCUR WITH MR. MOREDA AS FAR AS EVEN IF THIS WERE TO PASS, IT WOULD NOT SOLVE MR. COSTANZA'S PROBLEM, IT WOULD NOT BE ENFORCEABLE? >>ADAM GORMLY: YES. AND I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT ASPECT OF THE REQUEST THAT MR. COSTANZA HAS MADE, AND IT'S PART "D" OF HIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT THE NONCONFORMITY PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE SHALL NOT APPLY. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY COULD SUPPORT. I DON'T THINK IT'S A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE RESTRICTION IF SOMEBODY HAS LEGALLY COMMENCED A USE ON THE PROPERTY TO THEN GO BACK AND MAKE IT ILLEGAL AND HAVE THEM STOP THAT USE THAT WAS LEGALLY STARTED, THERE COULD BE SOME LEGAL -- LEGAL DIFFICULTY WITH ENFORCING THAT, AND THERE COULD BE SOME ISSUES WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE USES ON THE PERSON'S PROPERTY, SO I WOULD -- I WOULD SUGGEST THAT A RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD BE RATHER DIFFICULT TO SUSTAIN. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE ISSUE I HAVE WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THIS IS THIS APPEARS TO BE REALLY THE WRONG VENUE, AND I AGREE WITH MR. MOREDA, THIS IS REALLY NOT A LAND USE ISSUE, IT'S A CONDUCT ISSUE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S EXHAUSTED SOME EFFORTS OR ENOUGH EFFORT, MAYBE PERHAPS, TO WORK WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT THIS IS CLEARLY IN THE WRONG ARENA HERE, AND I CERTAINLY CANNOT SUPPORT IT FOR THAT REASON. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION? >>ROSE FERLITA: SO MOVE TO DENY. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION TO DENY COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: THIS BRINGS US TO ITEM "AA." THIS WAS REQUESTED BY GALAXY FIREWORKS, AND IT'S ANOTHER PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO REVISE THE SIGN REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY VENDORS. HAVING SAID THAT, I'LL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK, BUT MR. HARRY HEUMAN OF OUR STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. PATRICK COOK, 204 EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33603. WE'RE ASKING THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. WE'VE WORKED WITH STAFF TO WORK OUT ALL THE WRINKLES. WE FEEL THAT THIS DOCUMENT AS IT'S AMENDED WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE VENDORS AND CODE ENFORCEMENT TO COME TOGETHER ON THIS AND MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY. WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO CREATE A LOT OF PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF SPEAKING ABOUT THIS AS A TEMPORARY -- TEMPORARY BANNER TYPE ISSUE. I THINK IN SOME CASES THE APPLICANT WAS -- WAS -- ALMOST WAS BETTER OFF LETTING STAFF WRITE THIS FOR HIM. I THINK IT'S TOO BROAD, I THINK THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH RESTRICTION ON IT IN TERMS OF EXTERNAL ILLUMINATION, IN TERMS OF SIZE. I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THIS AS A TEMPORARY BANNER THING THAT'S REASONABLE AND GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-1. COMMISSIONER FERLITA VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: THIS BRINGS US TO ITEM "BB." THIS IS ANOTHER PRIVATELY INITIATED APPLICATION REQUESTED BY JIM PORTER. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO CREATE PERFORMANCE- BASED STANDARDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS OF CELL TOWERS ON PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS. HAVING SAID THAT, I'LL LET MR. PORTER SPEAK AND THEN STAFF WILL FOLLOW WITH THE REASONS FOR THE -- FOR OUR NONSUPPORT OF THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING, MR. PORTER. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS. JIM PORTER, RUDEN McCLOSKY, 401 EAST JACKSON STREET. AT YOUR LAST MEETING WE DISCUSSED WHY WE WERE DOING THIS, AND THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN LOOKED AT SINCE 1998. WE'RE PROPOSING TO CREATE STRINGENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO ALLOW THE ERECTION OF CELL TOWERS ON SCHOOL CAMPUSES IF THEY'RE MET. IT CREATES A REVENUE STREAM FOR THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS. IT BENEFITS SOMETIMES UNDERPERFORMING SCHOOLS, AND THE CRITERIA THAT WE SET FORTH IN THE CODE PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE WON'T DO A LENGTHY PRESENTATION, BUT WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. PORTER. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? >>KEVIN WHITE: MOVE APPROVAL. >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND COMMISSIONER NORMAN. NO OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >> [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>JOE MOREDA: NEXT ITEM IS "CC" ON THE AGENDA. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REGULATION IS TO REVISE LAND EXCAVATION REGULATIONS FOR REVISION AND CLARIFICATION OF SPECIAL USE CRITERIA, INCLUDING LOCATIONAL CRITERIA, SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS, HOURS OF OPERATION, SETBACKS, PERMIT EXPIRATION, AND WAIVER CRITERIA. MR. TOM HIZNAY OF OUR STAFF HAS A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THE KEY ISSUES THAT GO ALONG WITH THIS AMENDMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING, SIR. >>TOM HIZNAY: GOOD EVENING. TOM HIZNAY, PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF. AS JOE MENTIONED, THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE REVISION OF THE LAND EXCAVATION REGULATIONS. THE PURPOSE IS TO BETTER PROTECT ROADWAYS, RESIDENTIAL USES, AND GENERAL COMMUNITY WELFARE FROM THE ADVERSE IMPACTS POSED BY LAND EXCAVATIONS. IN THE INTEREST OF BREVITY, I'M JUST GOING TO FOCUS ON TWO OF THE MAJOR CHANGES THAT WILL PROBABLY BE THE PRIMARY TOPIC OF DISCUSSION TONIGHT. ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM SEPARATION REQUIRED FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES FROM THE CURRENT DISTANCE OF 100 OR 150 FEET TO 500 FEET, INCLUDING ALL RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES. CURRENTLY THE CODE REQUIRES A SEPARATION OF 100 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL -- PROPERTY THAT'S AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USE OR UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH A RESIDENTIAL USE, AND THAT DISTANCE INCREASES TO 150 FEET IF THOSE PROPERTIES HAVE A DENSITY OF GREATER THAN TWO UNITS PER ACRE, SO IN MOST OF THE RURAL AREAS WHERE THE EXCAVATIONS ARE FREQUENTLY LOCATED, THE SETBACK -- MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIRED IS A HUNDRED FEET. TO HELP EVERYONE VISUALIZE WHAT THIS EXISTING SETBACK REQUIRES, I WENT INTO OUR GIS SYSTEM PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND I MEASURED THE BLOCK FACE HERE OF THIS -- OF THE BLOCK WHERE THE COUNTY CENTER'S LOCATED, AND THIS BLOCK FACE ALONG KENNEDY BOULEVARD IS ABOUT 210 FEET, WHICH MEANS THAT UNDER THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, SOMEONE'S HOUSE COULD BE ON ONE CORNER OF THE BLOCK, AND THE EXCAVATION WOULD BE ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN THE BLOCK, SO YOU CAN SEE IT'S NOT A REALLY SUBSTANTIAL SEPARATION, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN VISUALIZE HERE ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE. I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THAT SETBACK IS NOT A BUFFER AREA AND THAT UNLESS THE PERMITS ARE SPECIFICALLY CONDITIONED TO PRECLUDE THE USE OF THAT SETBACK, THE CODE ALLOWS THE HEAVY MACHINERY THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXCAVATION TO OPERATE WITHIN THAT 100-FOOT SETBACK AREA. STAFF, AS PART OF OUR EFFORT HERE, WE LOOKED AT OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN FLORIDA AND WHAT THEY REQUIRE SETBACKS FOR EXCAVATIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AND WE FOUND THAT OUR CURRENT SETBACKS APPEAR TO BE ON THE LOW SIDE, WHEREAS, THE ONES THAT WE'RE PROPOSING WOULD BE ON THE HIGH SIDE. SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTIES -- LET'S SEE. I'VE CONTACTED AT LEAST SIX OTHERS. FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES, CHARLOTTE COUNTY, THEY REQUIRE A 1,000-FOOT SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND 75 FEET FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE VACANT, AND THAT'S FOR MAJOR BORROW PITS. FOR EXCAVATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH APPROVED CONSTRUCTION PLANS, THEY REQUIRE THEM 150 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND 75 FEET FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY. PASCO COUNTY REQUIRES A 500-FOOT SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIALLY DEVELOPED OR ZONED PROPERTY. HERNANDO COUNTY REQUIRES A 300-FOOT SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS AS WELL AS AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS. LAKE COUNTY REQUIRES A 200-FOOT SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND 100-FOOT SETBACK FROM PROPERTY WITH OTHER ZONINGS THAT ARE DEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. POLK COUNTY REQUIRES A 200-FOOT SETBACK FROM PLATTED OR APPROVED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS AND 200 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. AND ALACHUA COUNTY REQUIRES A 150-FOOT SETBACK FROM PROPERTY DESIGNATED URBAN OR ESTATE RESIDENTIAL IN THEIR COMP PLAN AND A 100-FOOT SETBACK FROM PROPERTY DESIGNATED RURAL OR AGRICULTURAL IN THEIR COMP PLAN. ALSO, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT SOME OF THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS WE SURVEYED REQUIRE GREATER SETBACK FROM ROADS OR OTHER FEATURES THAN WE DO. FOR EXAMPLE, ALACHUA COUNTY REQUIRES A 250-FOOT SETBACK FROM CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION AREAS; WHEREAS, WE REQUIRE A MAXIMUM OF 50 FEET. HERNANDO COUNTY REQUIRES A 100-FOOT SETBACK FROM ROADS WHILE WE REQUIRE ONLY 25 FEET FOR LAKE CREATION AND EXCAVATION. SO EVEN WITH THE INCREASED RESIDENTIAL SETBACK, STAFF IS PROPOSING THE NET SITE AREA THAT CAN BE MINED IN MANY CASES SHOULD COMPARE FAVORABLY WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS. I'D ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE EXISTING SETBACKS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF EXCAVATION SITES IN RURAL AREAS WHERE THE PROPERTIES ARE AGRICULTURALLY ZONED WITH MINIMUM LOT SIZES OF ONE ACRE OR MORE. FOR EXAMPLE, EVEN IF THE MAXIMUM SETBACK NOW REQUIRED OF 150 FEET IS PROVIDED AROUND AN EXCAVATION AND THE SITE IS ZONED ASC-1, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO DEVELOP THE REMAINING AREA WITH BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE FUTURE. THIS IS BECAUSE AFTER SPACE IS SUBTRACTED FOR AN ACCESS STREET, THE LOTS WOULD HAVE -- WOULD BE 100 FEET DEEP, AND BECAUSE OF THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, THEY'D HAVE TO BE 435 FEET WIDE, WHICH OF COURSE IS AN ABSURD LOT PATTERN. ADDITIONALLY, BECAUSE OF THE FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS, WHICH ARE 50 FEET, THOSE SETBACKS WOULD MEET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT, AND THERE WOULD BE NO PLACE TO BUILD A HOUSE. AND SO OUR -- THE SETBACKS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING OF 500 FEET ARE MUCH MORE CONSISTENT IN ORDER TO DEVELOP RURAL STYLE LOTS. TYPICALLY, IF YOU HAVE A LOT THAT'S 150 FEET WIDE, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM WIDTH REQUIRED IN THE AG DISTRICTS, LIKE ASC-1, AND THEN THE LOT DEPTH OF APPROXIMATELY 290 FEET IS REQUIRED FOR A ONE-ACRE LOT, AND THEN YOU ADD IN THERE AN ACCESS STREET, WHICH IS TO SAY A RURAL CROSS-SECTION, WHICH WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 90 FEET IN WIDTH, THAT MEANS THAT NEARLY 400 FEET -- 400 FEET OF SPACE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT. I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT FINALLY THAT THE -- THE NEW REGULATIONS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING WILL NOT BE RETROACTIVE TO ANY EXISTING PITS, THEY WOULD ONLY APPLY TO NEW APPLICATIONS THAT COME IN IF THESE REGULATIONS ARE ADOPTED. IN THE INTEREST OF BREVITY, I'LL HOLD OFF ON ANY FURTHER REMARKS, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? PLEASE LINE UP. I KNOW THERE'S A NUMBER OF YOU. >> I HOPE THEY GIVE YOU GUYS COMP TIME FOR MEETING AT NIGHT. [LAUGHTER] >>KEN HAGAN: IT'S A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU DURING THE EVENING, MR. BROWN. THANKS FOR COMING DOWN. >> MY NAME IS DAVID BROWN. I'M FROM SUN CITY CENTER. NORMALLY I APPEAR BEFORE YOU IN THE CAPACITY OF FIGHTING THE ABOVEGROUND BACKFLOW VALVES THAT ARE BEING FORCED ON THE ELDERLY IN SOUTH COUNTY. FOR A CHANGE OF PACE, I'M HERE TONIGHT TO URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT AS IT STANDS. MY CONCERN IS ABOUT THE AIRBORNE PARTICLES THAT RESULT FROM THE HAULING AND THE DIGGING OPERATIONS OF BORROW PITS, PARTICULARLY IN SOUTH COUNTY AND PARTICULARLY ON WINDY DAYS. WE HAVE A KITTY CAT, AND HE HAS BESTOWED THE HONOR ON ME OF BEING IN CHARGE OF HIS LITTER BOX. I TRANSFERRED THE LITTER FROM THE STORE BOX TO AN INTERMEDIATE CONTAINER THAT I SCOOP FROM AS THE NEED ARISES. THIS MORNING AS I POURED THE LITTER FROM THIS BOX INTO THE CONTAINER, A CLOUD OF DUST AROSE, AND I GOT TO THINKING THAT IF YOU MULTIPLIED THAT CLOUD BY 10,000 TIMES A DAY, THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT IT'S LIKE TO LIVE NEXT TO ONE OF THESE BORROW PITS OR ALONG THE ROAD THAT LEADS TO IT. LAST YEAR FRIENDS OF OURS IN SUN CITY CENTER DECIDED TO MOVE OUT TO ARIZONA BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THE DRY CLIMATE WOULD BE BETTER FOR HER RESPIRATORY AILMENT. THEY MOVED BACK WITHIN A FEW MONTHS. WHAT THEY FAILED TO ANTICIPATE WAS ALL THE AIRBORNE SAND CAUSED BY THE EARTH-MOVING OPERATIONS THAT ARE PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION BOOM IN NEARBY PHOENIX. THE SAND MADE HER CONDITION WORSE. ADELL SAID THAT THE ONLY DAY SHE COULD SEE THE MOUNTAINS OF ARIZONA WAS ON SUNDAY WHEN THE EARTH-MOVING OPERATIONS TOOK THE DAY OFF. YOU KNOW THAT I LIKE TO BRING SHOW AND TELL WHEN I TALK ABOUT ALL THE BAD THINGS ABOUT BACKFLOW VALVES. MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT FOR TONIGHT WAS TO BRING A BOWL FULL OF TALCUM POWDER AND A TANK OF COMPRESSED AIR AND TO SPRAY IT TO CREATE A CLOUD THAT WOULD FILL THIS ROOM; HOWEVER, I SETTLED ON JUST BRINGING THE EMPTY LITTER BOX. [LAUGHTER] UNFORTUNATELY, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE NEXT TO THESE BORROW PITS AND ALONG THE NEARBY ROADS DON'T HAVE THE OPTION OF SUBSTITUTING AN EMPTY LITTER BOX FOR THE CLOUD OF AIRBORNE PARTICLES ALL DAY LONG. I URGE YOU TO LISTEN TO YOUR STAFF AND CONSTITUENTS AND VOTE FOR THIS AMENDMENT AS IT STANDS. AND COMMISSIONER FERLITA, AS YOU SAY, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU. >>MARK SHARPE: CAM. >> MY NAME IS CAM OBERTING, AND I LIVE IN AN AREA THAT IS SATURATED WITH BORROW PITS. I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU ON THIS BOARD HAS LIVED NEXT TO A BORROW PIT, SO YOU MAY NOT KNOW WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT, BUT THE NOISE AND THE DUST AT TIMES, THEY'RE JUST -- IT'S UNBELIEVABLE. WE WOULD PREFER NO BORROW PITS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, BUT, HOWEVER, WE WILL ACCEPT THIS SETBACK, AND HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY IN THE NEAR FUTURE THIS BOARD WILL BE MORE PRUDENT IN ALLOWING AND NOT ALLOWING THOSE THAT ARE BREAKING THE RULES, THAT YOU WILL BE MORE STRINGENT ENFORCING THEM TO DO BETTER. THANK YOU. >>MARK SHARPE: THANK YOU. MS. JAMES, ARE YOU NEXT? >> GOOD EVENING. JUDY JAMES, 325 SOUTH BOULEVARD. I MADE A PRESENTATION LAST TIME, BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW DIFFERENT ITEMS. WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BORROW PIT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY OF VACANT LAND 40 ACRES WITH A 500-FOOT SETBACK, THAT MEANS YOU CAN'T DEVELOP 85% OF YOUR SITE. YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO DIG 15%. THIS -- THE VACANT LAND -- THE PRESENTATIONS YOU'VE HEARD EARLIER IS AS IF THE BORROW PIT WAS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO A PROPERTY OWNER. AS ONE OF THE OTHER FACTORS IN THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW, IT SAYS THAT WHEN YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED LAND EXCAVATION, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER THE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENCES. IT'S NOT AN ABSOLUTE THAT YOU HAVE TO BE 100 FEET MAXIMUM AWAY, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO DIG EXACTLY A HUNDRED FEET AWAY, BUT A 500-FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM, SO WE'RE ASKING YOU THAT YOU NOT CONSIDER THE 500 FOOT. I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IF YOU'RE OPERATING A MINE, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT SETBACK IS FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY? IT'S 200 FEET. SO WHY CAN I MINE PROPERTY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AT 200 FEET AND HAVE A 500-FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR A LAND EXCAVATION? THE OTHER TWO ITEMS THAT I BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED. IF I HAVE AN EXISTING STOCKPILE ON MY PROPERTY OF MATERIAL THAT I WANT TO REMOVE, HOW COULD I REMOVE THAT STOCKPILE IF I'M REQUIRED TO HAVE A 500-FOOT SETBACK? ALSO, IF I'M A PD ZONING AND I'M DOING A SUBDIVISION WITH A LAKE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT AND I WANT TO REMOVE THE LAND FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE LAKE, ALL OF TOM'S CALCULATIONS MEAN NOTHING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE LOT. IF I'M THE ONE PUTTING 100-FOOT LOTS AROUND THAT EDGE OF THAT LAKE OR WHATEVER, I DON'T HAVE THE 500-FOOT BACK AT THAT POINT. IT WON'T WORK FOR A PD. THAT WASN'T TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. JAMES. NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING AGAIN. PAM CLOUSTON, R-LAND, 1621 THOMPSON ROAD, LITHIA, FLORIDA. I THINK THE 500-FOOT SETBACK IS OKAY. LET ME PUT IT IN THESE TERMS. ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN COMPARED IT TO THE BLOCK HERE. HERE'S ONE THAT I KNOW ALL OF YOU WILL GET. IT'S LIKE IF YOU RAN AROUND THE BASES AT A BASEBALL FIELD, THAT DISTANCE. THAT'S NOT VERY FAR. IT'S A LITTLE BIT FARTHER THAN THAT. I'VE ALSO HEARD OF -- WHEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SETBACKS BEFORE, I'VE HEARD FOLKS SAY THAT IT'S LIKE A TAKING OF THAT PERSON'S LAND, BUT IF YOU LIVE IN A PROPERTY THAT IS NEXT TO ONE OF THESE BORROW PITS, YOU'RE HAVING SOMETHING TAKEN FROM YOU. YOU'RE HAVING YOUR LIFESTYLE TAKEN FROM YOU, YOU'RE HAVING YOUR PEACE AND QUIET, YOU'RE HAVING THE CLEANLINESS. I CAN TELL YOU I LIVE ON A DIRT ROAD, AND JUST WHEN IT'S DRY LIKE THIS TIME OF YEAR, JUST GOING SLOWLY UP AND DOWN THE DIRT ROAD RAISES ALL KINDS OF DUST LET ALONE IF YOU'RE DIGGING, AND LIKE THEY SAID, THIS WON'T BE RETROACTIVE FOR WHAT'S ALREADY APPROVED, THIS IS FOR WHAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING TO APPROVE, AND I THINK THAT IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE RIGHTS OF ALL THE CITIZENS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THIS IS REALLY GREAT. OTHERWISE YOUR STAFF WOULDN'T HAVE BROUGHT IT FORWARD. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. CLOUSTON. NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING. VIVIAN BACCA, 413 EL GRECO DRIVE IN BRANDON. I SUPPORT THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SPECIAL USE CRITERIA FOR LAND EXCAVATIONS AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED. SOME PROPERTY OWNERS MAY SUGGEST THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS CONSIST OF A TAKING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS. I SUBMIT THAT THE PRESENT REQUIREMENTS CONSIST OF A TAKING WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION OF THE RIGHTS TO ENJOY THE PROPERTY OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. FURTHER, I WANT TO POINT YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 11 OF THE MODIFICATION, SECTION "C," WAIVERS, PART THREE, WHICH ALLOWS, QUOTE, WHERE THE APPLICANT PROVIDES AFFIDAVITS OF NO OBJECTION FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, PECULIARLY AFFECTED BY A PROPOSED WAIVER, SUCH AS REDUCED SEPARATION BETWEEN AN EXCAVATION AND NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES; HOWEVER, IN NO CASE SHALL WAIVERS BE GRANTED WHICH SERIOUSLY ADVERSELY IMPACT HEALTH AND SAFETY. THIS PROVISION ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND POTENTIALLY COMPENSATE THEM SHOULD THEY DESIRE TO REDUCE THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THESE PROPERTY OWNERS DESERVE PROTECTION AND JUST COMPENSATION FOR THE TAKING OF THEIR RIGHTS. IF THE LAW WERE FAIR AND EQUITABLE, PROPERTY OWNERS SEEKING TO PROFIT FROM LAND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHOULD HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN THE SAME SETBACK REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY SEEK TO IMPOSE ON THEIR NEIGHBORS. UNTIL THAT PROVISION IS INCLUDED WITHIN THIS SECTION, I THINK ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE SETBACK AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS RING HOLLOW. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. BACCA. NEXT, PLEASE. >> TERRY FLOTT, SEFFNER COMMUNITY ALLIANCE AND U-CAN. I DO HAVE A LETTER THAT SOMEBODY LEFT THAT I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD JUST SO YOU GUYS HAVE IT [OFF MICROPHONE] ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS. BUT I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT. I'M BOTHERED BY HEARING THAT -- THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING SETBACKS ON A SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT EXCEED THE 100-FOOT OR 150-FOOT LIMIT THAT WE NOW HAVE IS A TAKING OF ONE'S PROPERTY, AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY FALSE. IT'S NOT A TAKING OF PROPERTY, IT'S A SPECIAL USE. THERE ARE GUIDELINES FOR ALL THAT WE DO. WE HAVE -- IT'S -- WE HAVE SETBACKS FOR HOMES, WE HAVE SETBACKS FOR A LOT OF OTHER STUFF. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE CODE IS. TO -- WE NEED TO HAVE SOME MORE STRINGENT POLICIES IN PLACE. THIS DOESN'T EVEN BRUSH THE SURFACE AS FAR AS A LOT OF US ARE CONCERNED, BUT IT'S A MOVEMENT FORWARD THAT PROTECTS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INUNDATED WITH THESE PROJECTS WITHIN CERTAIN COMMUNITIES OR ANY COMMUNITY THAT HAS A PIT THAT'S IN THE PROCESS. IT'S -- IT'S AN EMOTIONAL THING, AS YOU CAN WELL TELL, AS YOU HEARD THE LAST TIME. BUT I'M ASKING YOU TO LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND GET OVER THIS PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE AND MOVE ON, AND LET'S PUT SOME PROTECTIONS IN PLACE FOR THE NEIGHBORS THAT ALREADY LIVE THERE, HAVE LIVED IN THE AREA FOR MANY YEARS. IT'S NOT LIKE PEOPLE JUST MOVED IN. THESE THINGS ARE HORRENDOUS TO LIVE BY OR NEAR, AND IT AFFECTS THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, SO I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS, AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. FLOTT. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING TO OUR COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS VIRGINIA RUTLEDGE. I LIVE AT 16001 COLDING LOOP. AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, WE ARE AN AGRICULTURAL AREA, AND WE USED TO HAVE A LOT OF BEAUTIFUL FIELDS OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES GROWING ALL AROUND. TODAY THEY HAVE MOSTLY DISAPPEARED AND ARE REPLACED BY BORROW PITS. WE HAD NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT IT. IT DOESN'T SEEM QUITE FAIR, BUT THAT'S THE WAY A LOT OF THINGS ARE IN THIS WORLD ANYMORE. WE THANK YOU, BUT YOU WOULD THINK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. WE NEED FOOD TODAY, AND IT GETS LESS AND LESS. MORE PLACES ARE -- QUIT GROWING, AND WE HAVE TO HAVE FOOD TO LIVE. ANYWAY, WE HAVE -- WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE SAY-SO ABOUT WHAT'S NEXT TO US, AND THERE IS A BORROW PIT 100 FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE, AND THEY HAVE TO -- THERE'S NO REAL ENTRANCE TO IT FROM THE ROAD. THEY GO BY PART OF MY PROPERTY BEFORE THEY GET TO THE ROAD, AND WHEN THESE HUGE DUMP TRUCKS GO IN AND OUT, IT WILL BE NOTHING BUT A FOG OF DIRT EVERYWHERE. THERE WILL BE NO FREE AIR, NO CLEAN AIR FOR ANYONE THAT IS OUT OF DOORS. YOU CAN'T GO ANYWHERE OR DO WORK OUTSIDE OR DRY CLOTHES ON YOUR CLOTHES LINE. THAT IS NOT SO GOOD, AND IF THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE AFTER DOLLARS RATHER THAN OTHER THINGS, THEY MIGHT CHANGE THEIR MIND. LET'S SEE. ANYWAY, WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL THINK ABOUT WHAT INVOLVES ALL OF THIS, SO -- AND TO MR. HIGGINBOTHAM, HE ASKED WHEN HE WAS RUNNING FOR ELECTION FOR US TO VOTE FOR HIM. NOW WE HOPE HE FULFILLS HIS PLEDGE AND HELPS US IN VOTING FOR THIS AMENDMENT. THAT WILL HELP US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND GOD BLESS EVERYONE. >>KEN HAGAN: THANKS FOR COMING DOWN AGAIN, MS. RUTLEDGE. APPRECIATE IT. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. NEXT, PLEASE. >> I REALLY DON'T LIKE FOLLOWING THAT. [LAUGHTER] I'M STEVE ALLISON, AND I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THE AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME. LIKE OTHERS IN OBJECTION, I THINK THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE 500-FOOT SEPARATION. I'M KIND OF NEW TO THE PLANNING FIELD. THIS IS ONLY MY 30th YEAR, BUT NEVER HAVE I SEEN A STAFF PROPOSE A FIVEFOLD INCREASE IN ANY REQUIREMENT EVER, AND LIKE I SAY, I'M NEW, BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT, HAVE SOME JUSTIFICATION FOR IT IS ALL THAT I ASK. THE ONLY JUSTIFICATION I'VE HEARD IS THAT, WELL, WE FOUND ONE OTHER COUNTY THAT HAD A 500-FOOT REQUIREMENT, SO MAYBE -- YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE CAN BE MORE LIKE PASCO. THAT'S NOT SUFFICIENT. TO MY KNOWLEDGE -- AND I SERVED ON THE STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE FOR THIS -- THERE'S BEEN NO ANALYSIS OF, WELL, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THE 500-FOOT SETBACK WOULD HAVE MEANT HISTORICALLY TO THE OTHER BORROW PITS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED OR LET'S CALCULATE HOW MUCH LESS YIELD OF FIELD -- OF FILL MATERIAL WE MIGHT HAVE HAD HAD WE IMPOSED THIS SETBACK, HOW WOULD THAT HAVE LED TO ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY TO THE BENEFIT OF ANYONE. MANY OF THE POINTS BROUGHT FORWARD BY MR. HIZNAY TONIGHT, THOSE ARE THE FIRST TIME WE'VE EVEN HEARD THAT LEVEL OF ANALYSIS, AND AGAIN, WE HAD A STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE ON IT. THERE ARE CONCERNS OTHER THAN THE 500 FEET. THEY INVOLVE ALLOWABLE ZONING DISTRICTS, SEPARATION FROM CHURCHES -- YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE -- CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, I THINK THE MISUSE OF THE SPECIAL USE PROCEDURE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT AND THE SPECIAL USE EXPIRATION, WHICH IS ALSO WITHOUT PRECEDENT. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WILL ARE POSITIVE ELEMENTS TO WHAT THEY'VE PROPOSED. STAFF HAS DONE A GOOD JOB IN CLEANING UP SOME OF THE LANGUAGE. SOME OF IT HAS BEEN VERY POORLY WRITTEN. BUT AT THIS POINT, THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT READY TO BE APPROVED. I'M NOT SAYING THAT AN INCREASE IN SETBACKS IS COMPLETELY A NEGATIVE THING, BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE ANALYSIS THAN WHAT HAS BEEN DONE TO JUSTIFY IT AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY. SOME OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT THERE'S AN ONGOING ALTERNATIVE EFFORT REGARDING DENSITY CREDITS ASSOCIATED WITH LAKE CREATION. THAT COULD LEAD TO COMP PLAN AND LDC CHANGES IN THE FUTURE. IT MAY BE THAT ALL OF THESE CHANGES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THAT CONTEXT AND AT THAT TIME, DO THEM ALL AT ONCE INSTEAD OF PIECEMEALING IT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. ALLISON. NEXT, PLEASE. >> HI THERE. MY NAME IS KELLY CORNELIUS. MY ADDRESS IS 18732 DORMAN ROAD, LITHIA, FLORIDA. I'M HAPPY TO SAY IT'S STILL BYPASS FREE AND, AFTER LISTENING TO TWO OF THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS, VERY HAPPY THAT IT IS BORROW PIT FREE. I CAME DOWN TONIGHT, TURNED DOWN REDWING/LIGHTNING TICKETS BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS THAT IMPORTANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY IN BALM. THESE CITIZENS ARE BEGGING FOR YOUR HELP AND YOUR PROTECTION, AND IT'S MINIMAL. IT LOOKS LIKE SEVERAL COUNTIES DO A BETTER JOB THAN WE DO, AND WE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THAT. A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT MS. JAMES SAID MADE MY EARS PERK UP WHEN SHE SAID THAT MINING OPERATIONS ARE ALLOWED TO DO THIS WITHIN 200 FEET. MAYBE WE NEED TO OPEN UP OUR REGULATIONS AND LOOK AT THOSE FOR MINING. MAYBE THEY NEED TO BE SET BACK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TOO BECAUSE THAT SEEMS OUTRAGEOUS THAT A MINE CAN OPERATE 200 FEET, AS DOES A BORROW PIT FOR 100 FEET, SO I JUST CAME DOWN TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN TO YOUR CITIZENS. I THINK YOU'VE SEEN A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN YOU IGNORE THE CITIZENS AND FAVOR A SPECIAL INTEREST, SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO STEP AWAY FROM THE DARK SIDE AND OVER TOWARDS THE CITIZENS AND GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. CORNELIUS. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING. >> I'M LAUREN O'GRADY, 660 BRYAN TERRACE DRIVE IN BRANDON, FLORIDA. I WANTED TO SAY FAREWELL TO COMMISSIONER BLAIR. HE'LL BE LEAVING SHORTLY, AND GOOD LUCK. >>BRIAN BLAIR: THANK YOU. >> I JUST WANTED TO GET ON RECORD TO SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION -- SORRY -- IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >>KEN HAGAN: THANKS FOR COMING DOWN. NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> HELLO. I'M KERMIT OSTEEN, 15133 CARLTON LAKE ROAD. NOW, THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE I CAME BEHIND MRS. RUTLEDGE AND SHOWED YOU PHOTOS OF HER. I THOUGHT OF DOING THAT AGAIN BUT CHANGED MY MIND AFTER I GOT HERE. I WANTED TO TELL YOU A LITTLE PERSONAL STORY. I RETIRED EIGHT YEARS AGO AND I LEFT TAMPA, LEFT HYDE PARK, SOLD OUT AND MOVED OUT TO BALM WITH MY WIFE AND I RETIRED, AND ALMOST IMMEDIATELY WE WERE -- WE GOT INTO THIS THING WITH THE DIRT PITS. I SAID I'M STUMBLING BECAUSE I CHANGED WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. SO WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING THAT NOW, AND I'M SURE THAT YOU ARE TIRED OF LOOKING AT MARCELLA'S FACE MAYBE, AND I KIND OF WANT HER BACK SO WE CAN RETIRE. [LAUGHTER] AND I'VE -- I MEAN, YOU MIGHT BE TIRED OF LOOKING AT MY FACE, I'VE BEEN DOWN HERE TOO, AND ALSO MY DAUGHTER HAS BEEN HERE AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN HAVE BEEN HERE. SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS DISAPPEAR MAYBE IF -- AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT US, AND THEN MAYBE -- JUST HELP US OUT TO GET OUR PEACE OF MIND BACK AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. IT HAS -- IT'S REALLY BEEN BLASTED THE LAST EIGHT YEARS, AND SO JUST PLEASE SUPPORT THIS AS IT STANDS I ASK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. DENNIS CARLTON, 601 SOUTH FALKENBURG ROAD 33619. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU. THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT COME TO LIGHT ON THIS PROPOSAL, AND ONE OF THEM IS -- WE TALKED TO STAFF ABOUT IT. EVIDENTLY IT DIDN'T MAKE ANY HEADWAY, AND I WOULD LIKE FOR EITHER THE COMMISSION OR STAFF AT SOME POINT IN TIME TO TELL ME WHAT THE RATIONALE WAS, AND IT DEALS WITH CHURCHES. I'M A CHRISTIAN. I GO TO CHURCH ON SUNDAY MORNING, SUNDAY NIGHT, AND WEDNESDAY NIGHT. I WILL SHARE WITH YOU THAT UNDER THE OPERATIONAL PERMITS THERE'S A SETBACK REQUIREMENT HERE THAT SAYS -- I'VE GOT A COLD -- 1,000 FEET FROM ANY SCHOOL, HOSPITAL, OR CHURCH PROPERTY LINE. YOU CAN'T HAVE A BORROW PIT IN OPERATION ON SUNDAY, AND YOU DON'T HAVE -- THEY'RE NOT IN OPERATION WEDNESDAY NIGHTS, SO WHILE A SCHOOL OBVIOUSLY IS OPEN, NEEDS TO BE A THOUSAND- FOOT SETBACK, HOSPITAL CERTAINLY SHOULD, I DON'T SEE THE RATIONALE BEHIND A CHURCH BECAUSE DURING THE TIME THE SERVICES ARE WHEN THE CHURCH IS ACTIVE, BORROW PITS ARE SHUT DOWN. AND THE SECOND THING I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU, TOM HIZNAY WAS TALKING ABOUT THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT UNDER THE -- IF IT WAS A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PIECE OF PROPERTY. SAID IF IT WAS AT THE CORNER, ONE-HALF OF THIS PROPERTY ALONG THE FRONTAGE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH, AND HE'S RIGHT, BUT IF IT WAS IN THE MIDDLE YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH ANY OF IT, AND THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. YOU KNOW, IT'S A PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE TO ME. ANYTIME SOMEBODY COMES TO THIS BOARD -- IF I WAS TO COME TO YOU AND ASK YOU I WANT YOU TO FIVEFOLD INCREASE THE AMOUNT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY ME, YOU'RE GOING TO TAX ME, OR ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THAT'S PROBABLY PRETTY EXCESSIVE, AND AS I READ THIS, IT TALKS ABOUT RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND TALKS ABOUT IN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. ALL OVER HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THERE'S LAND. I HAVE BOUGHT AND ZONED LAND JUST TO CREATE VALUE. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF SELLING IT. IT'S IN STRAWBERRY FIELDS TODAY, BUT THE REALITY IS IF THIS WAS TO PASS, MY NEIGHBOR, I CAN TELL HIM -- OR HE WOULD, HE'D HAVE TO BACK UP 500 FEET. HE'S GOT A STRAWBERRY FIELD TOO. THERE'S NO RATIONALE BEHIND THAT. THERE NEEDS TO SOME PROTECTION AGAINST -- ON -- WITH RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, BUT IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN PROBABLY THROUGH THE OPERATIONAL PERMIT, MAYBE THE TIMES THAT THEY CAN WORK, POSSIBLY A DIFFERENT SETBACK, BUT JUST TO ARBITRARILY SAY 500 FEET I DON'T THINK MAKES ANY SENSE, SO THE CHURCH ISSUE I WOULD -- YOU KNOW, MAYBE STAFF COULD TELL US WHY THAT, AND I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN REFERENCE TO THE 500-FOOT SETBACK. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BERYL FERNANDEZ. I LIVE AT 13501 BURNETT ROAD, BALM. I'M SPEAKING NOT ONLY FOR MYSELF THIS EVENING BUT ALSO FOR MY 94-YEAR-OLD MOTHER, CATHERINE BURNETT. IT IS OF GREAT EFFORT THAT SHE IS HERE WITH US TO SHOW HER SUPPORT FOR OUR SMALL COMMUNITY. THAT'S MOTHER IN THE MAROON SUIT BACK THERE. OUR FAMILY HAS LIVED IN BALM OVER 100 YEARS. SHE AND I SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE FOR ONE THING, IT DOES GIVE A MORE APPROPRIATE SETBACK FROM PEOPLE'S HOMES. IN THE LONG RUN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LASTING EFFECT IS GOING TO BE. WILL WE HAVE LAKES FULL OF WATER OR HALF-DRIED MOSQUITO HOLES? WOULD YOU LIKE THIS UNCERTAINTY? WE FEEL THAT A 500-FOOT SETBACK IS NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK. WE HAVE FOUR BORROW PITS WITHIN A HALF MILE OF OUR HOME. ANOTHER BORROW PIT HAS BEEN PERMITTED WITHIN THE SAME AREA. WE ARE TOTALLY SURROUNDED WITH PITS. IT IS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND WHY ALL OF THE PITS HAVE TO BE ALLOWED TO EXCAVATE AROUND CREEKS AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS. MRS. JAMES' 40-ACRE ILLUSTRATION SHOWING THE EFFECT OF A 500-FOOT SETBACK WAS A JOKE. MOST OF THE BORROW PIT SITES IN BALM ARE 200 ACRES AND UP. THE TWO THAT ARE CLOSEST TO US ARE 220 AND 479 ACRES. BIG DIFFERENCE; RIGHT? THE PITS ARE LARGE AND CAN BE 40 TO 50 FEET DEEP. IN RESPONSE TO MR. ALLISON'S RECENT E-MAIL TO YOU, THE BOARD, AND MS. OSTEEN, HE SEEMED TO RESENT OUR PRESENTATION AT THE OCTOBER 16th MEETING. I WAS NOT GIVEN A SCRIPT FROM ANYONE. I SPOKE FOR MYSELF, SIMPLY VOICING MY OPINION AND CONCERNS. MR. ALLISON DOES INDEED KNOW ME. HE HAS BEEN IN OUR HOME TWICE REPRESENTING LAND GROVES TO DISCUSS THE 479-ACRE TRACT WITH MY FAMILY AND NEIGHBORS. PROPOSED HOUSES WILL SIT ON TOP OF ONE OF THREE NATURAL CREEKS THAT RUN THROUGH MY ADJACENT PROPERTY. MR. ALLISON IS WELL AWARE OF THIS. THE BORROW PIT OWNERS WANT THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO. BIG MONEY FROM DIRT SALES, WINNING HIGH-DENSITY CREDITS AROUND THEIR PIT, AND I GUESS EVEN DAMMING UP A CREEK BED FOR THEIR PERSONAL GAIN. WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE GOLDEN RULE? THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS NOT ENTIRELY ADEQUATE, BUT IT IS MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY. WE STRONGLY URGE YOU TO APPROVE IT WITH NO CHANGES. BY THE WAY, NOT ONE OF THE BORROW PIT OWNERS WORKING IN OUR AREA LIVE IN BALM. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M MARIELLA SMITH. I LIVE AT 108 JANIE STREET IN RUSKIN. WE HAVE HAD BORROW PITS AND EXCAVATION PROJECTS IN MY COMMUNITY, AND WE WILL HAVE -- THERE ARE MORE PLANNED IN THE FUTURE -- IN THE NEAR FUTURE. THERE'S A CONTINUING DISCUSSION GOING ON. HILLSBOROUGH IS GROWING. MORE PEOPLE ARE COMING INTO OUR COUNTY, MORE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING, AND IT MAKES SENSE AT THIS POINT TO LOOK AT INCREASING OUR PROTECTIONS BETWEEN THE KINDS OF ACTIVITY IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. IT MAKES SENSE TO THINK OF BRINGING HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S PROTECTIONS IN LINE WITH THE OTHER COUNTIES. CHARLOTTE AND COLLIER COUNTY HAVE A 1,000-FOOT BUFFERS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND THIS KIND OF EXCAVATION. 100 FOOT FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY JUST ISN'T -- ISN'T ADEQUATE ANYMORE AT THIS TIME. IT ALSO MAKES SENSE IN TODAY'S ECONOMY WITH WHAT OUR HOMEOWNERS ARE FACING, WITH WHAT COMMUNITIES ARE FACING, THE ECONOMIC PICTURE TO -- TO PROTECT THE SMALL HOMEOWNERS FROM THE DEVALUATION OF THEIR HOMES THAT THESE KINDS OF EXCAVATION PROJECTS CAN CAUSE, AND IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL HOLE AND THE HOME, IT'S THOSE TRUCKS GOING BY IN -- WITHIN THAT BUFFER AREA, SO THE MORE OF THAT BUFFER AREA YOU HAVE, THE MORE PROTECTION YOU HAVE FROM THE DIRT BLOWING, THE NOISE, THE -- EVERYTHING THAT DEVALUES THE PROPERTY VALUES FOR THE SMALL HOMEOWNERS IN THESE TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES. THIS IS A -- THIS IS A PROPER TIME TO CONSIDER THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AND I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. SMITH. NEXT, PLEASE. >> DAVE KULOW AGAIN FROM BOYETTE SPRINGS. THE GENTLEMAN THAT SPOKE PREVIOUSLY REFERRED TO CHURCHES ONLY OPERATING ON SUNDAY. THE GENTLEMAN IS SADLY UNAWARE OF WHAT CHURCHES DO WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, AND MANY OF THE CHURCHES OPERATE ON 24/7, AND MOST OF THEM OPERATE 12 HOURS A DAY SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, AND SO CHURCHES WOULD BE AFFECTED MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, FRIDAY, AND SATURDAY, AND SUNDAY, AND I THINK HE WAS VERY CULTURALLY UNAWARE. BESIDES THAT, THERE ARE CERTAIN DENOMINATIONS THAT DO NOT - - THAT WORSHIP ON OTHER DAYS THAN SUNDAY. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BRIEFLY STATE THAT THE STAFF HAS WORKED VERY HARD. THIS IS A GOOD AMENDMENT. IT'S REAL PROGRESS. IT'S BADLY NEEDED. LET ME GIVE YOU AN ILLUSTRATION. THERE'S ABOUT 30,000 OF US THAT HAVE TO USE BOYETTE ROAD. RIGHT IN PHASE II THERE WAS A BORROW PIT THAT WAS DUG WITHIN THE 50 FOOT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE OLD BOYETTE ROAD. INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO PUT A SIX-LANE ROAD WHICH WE NEEDED, THERE WAS ONLY ROOM TO SQUEEZE IN FOUR LANES, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE 30,000 PEOPLE THAT ARE INCONVENIENCED BY THIS. IT'S TIME THINGS WERE CHANGED. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, LADY AND GENTLEMEN. GEORGE NEIMANN, DOVER, FLORIDA, MEMBER OF UNITED CITIZENS ACTION NETWORK. I COME TO YOU TONIGHT TO SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS AMENDMENT, AND I WOULD -- I WANT TO GIVE YOU A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE YOU'VE HEARD FROM MANY OF THE CITIZENS, YOU'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE BUSINESS INTERESTS. HERE'S WHAT I WANT TO PRESENT TO YOU. I VIEW THIS -- WE'VE BEEN VERY EXCITED AFTER LAST WEEK. WE'RE VERY, VERY EXCITED. WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS A NEW ERA FOR THE BOARD. THIS IS A NEW ERA, BUT I JUST WANT TO CAREFULLY CAUTION YOU, I WANT TO MOTIVATE YOU, THAT THIS -- WE WANT YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE CITIZENS. YOU'RE SITTING HERE TONIGHT ON THIS AMENDMENT. YOU'VE GOT CITIZEN INTERESTS ON THIS SIDE. THEY'RE SUFFERING. IF I WERE LIVING ANYWHERE NEAR A BORROW PIT I'D BE ASKING FOR A THOUSAND FEET. YOU'VE GOT A PROFESSIONAL STAFF THAT KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING. IF THEY DON'T, THEN I WOULD SAY WE SHOULD REPLACE THEM, BUT YOU HAVE A STAFF THAT ARE EXPERTS, AND THEY RECOMMEND 500 FEET. YOU HAVE THE BUSINESS INTERESTS THAT ARE MOTIVATED BY PROFIT, AND THEY WANT TO DO THINGS EASIER, CHEAPER, AND GET MORE OF IT DONE AND CRAM IT IN. SO YOU'VE GOT TO FACE -- YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THIS, DO I WANT TO HELP THE CITIZENS AND LESSEN THEIR BURDEN OR DO I WANT TO BENEFIT THE BUSINESS INTERESTS? SO WHAT I TELL YOU IS IN THIS NEW ERA STARTING ON THE 18th, WE'RE GOING TO PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION, AND THIS SYMBOL -- WE'RE WATCHING YOU. [LAUGHTER] WE'RE WATCHING YOU, AND I WANT TO TELL ALL THE CITIZENS THAT CAME DOWN TONIGHT, PLEASE TAKE NAMES AND NUMBERS BECAUSE THE REST OF YOU WHO ARE GOING TO RETURN ON THE 18th, YOU'RE GOING TO BE UP FOR ELECTION, AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO PAY ATTENTION AS TO HOW YOU'RE VOTING, AND THEY'RE GOING TO THINK TO THEMSELVES, AS WE SAW LAST WEEK, IS THIS PERSON VOTING IN MY BEST INTERESTS OR ARE THEY VOTING IN SOMEBODY ELSE'S BEST INTERESTS? SO EVERYONE THAT'S WATCHING ON TELEVISION AND EVERYBODY THAT'S HERE TONIGHT, PLEASE WATCH THIS BOARD. LOOK AT EACH OF THEM. AND WHEN THEY VOTE AND THEY CAST THE VOTE, IF IT'S AGAINST YOUR INTEREST, REMEMBER THAT WHEN THEY COME UP NEXT ELECTION THAT THEY'RE BEING REELECTED, OKAY. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. NIEMANN. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] WELCOME. >> IS IT LIVE? OKAY. SORRY FOR THE DELAY. MARCELLA OSTEEN, 15133 CARLTON LAKE ROAD. I'M PRESIDENT OF BALM CIVIC ASSOCIATION, AND I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. WILL ALL OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE WHO ARE ALSO HERE TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT PLEASE STAND. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, MANY OF US CAME DOWN TO THE FIRST HEARING, AND I THINK THAT YOU HEARD US LOUD AND CLEAR, GAVE YOU A LOT OF BOOTS-ON-THE-GROUND INFORMATION, AND I KIND OF FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT HOW THE VOTE'S GOING TO GO, BUT JUST IN CASE, I'M GOING TO BRING SOME MORE NUTS-AND-BOLTS DATA FOR YOU ALSO. I WANT TO REFUTE SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS YOU MAY HAVE BEEN HEARING TELLING YOU THAT THE SETBACKS ARE WAY TOO BIG OR THE COST OF DIRT WILL RISE TO THE POINT OF IT BEING FISCALLY UNWISE TO HAVE THIS AMENDMENT, THAT IT MIGHT EVEN HURT THE COUNTY'S OWN POCKETBOOK. WELL, I SAY HORSE FEATHERS TO THAT. TRUE ECONOMIC IMPACT WOULD BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE, BUT I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME FACTS AND FIGURES NOW. I ASKED STAFF FOR SOME DATA THAT I NOW WANT TO SHARE, DATA THAT WILL SHOW THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AT THIS TIME PLENTY OF ALREADY PERMITTED UNDUG DIRT TO LAST US FOR A GOOD LONG TIME FROM THE EXACT PITS WE ALREADY HAVE NOW PERMITTED. CHECK THIS OUT. ON THIS THING HERE -- CHART, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT THAT WELL, BUT THIS REPRESENTS THE PITS THAT ARE ALREADY PERMITTED IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. THERE'S 21 OF THEM, AND ACTUALLY, I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE THAT WERE LEFT OFF THIS LIST, BUT NEVER MIND THAT. YOU WILL NOTE THAT NINE OF THEM ARE FROM BALM, AND OF THOSE NINE FROM BALM, THAT REPRESENTS 64% OF THE DIRT, SO -- FROM OUR LITTLE, SMALL AREA. OKAY. STICK WITH ME HERE. I KNOW THAT EYES GLAZE OVER WHEN YOU SEE A CHART, AND MINE DO TOO, BUT THERE'S A STORY BEHIND THESE NUMBERS. COLUMN ONE REPRESENTS THE CUBIC YARDS THAT HAVE BEEN PERMITTED, AND THAT'S 76 MILLION AND CHANGE. COLUMN TWO AND THREE, THAT REPRESENTS THE DIRT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DUG. COLUMN -- THE LAST COLUMN IS THE DIRT THAT HASN'T BEEN DUG, AND THAT'S 36 MILLION 362 AND CHANGE. NOW, THIS DOWN HERE SHOWS THE CUBIC YARDS OF DIRT REMOVED BY YEAR STARTING IN '98, ENDING WITH THE MOST RECENT TWO QUARTERS, AND THAT TOTALS 38 MILLION AND CHANGE. DIVIDE THAT BY THE 11 YEARS, AND YOU GET 3,474,663 -- OH, NO -- YARDS PER YEAR, AND THEN YOU DIVIDE THAT BY THIS UP HERE, AND YOU GET THE FIGURE. WE GOT TWO -- 10.1 YEARS OF DIRT LEFT. BUT IF WE NEVER DIG ANOTHER BORROW PIT, WE'VE GOT -- IT'LL LAST US TEN YEARS, AND THAT'S NOT EVEN COUNTING THE DIBBS PIT, WHICH HAS JUST BEEN -- IT'S ALMOST BEEN PERMITTED FOR TWO MILLION POINT FIVE, SO THAT WOULD EVEN BE TWELVE YEARS, WHATEVER. OH, MY GOSH. CAN I HAVE A LITTLE MORE? >>KEN HAGAN: QUICKLY. >> OH, MY GOODNESS. NOW -- OKAY. ANOTHER ARGUMENT THAT'S BROUGHT FORWARD BY MS. JAMES SHOWING A PARCEL THAT WAS 40 ACRES AND HOW THE 500-FOOT SETBACK WOULD RUIN THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOTS THAT SHE COULD HAVE. WELL, GUESS WHAT. MAYBE 40 ACRES IS NOT -- SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL ZONING IS NOT THE RIGHT PROPERTY FOR A BORROW PIT. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT ALL. YOU EITHER HAVE A BORROW PIT ON YOUR 40 ACRES OR YOU HAVE HOUSES. YOU CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING. SO THAT'S NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. OSTEEN. >> OH, MAN. [APPLAUSE] >> OKAY. THIS IS OVERDUE. YOU KNOW WHAT YOU SHOULD DO, SO DO IT WITHOUT CHANGING IT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: ANYONE ELSE? WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS CHART, THE REQUIRED EXCAVATION SETBACKS FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, AND I -- IF I COULD ASK YOU A QUESTION. I SEE WE USED SEVERAL COUNTIES HERE THAT WERE MORE RURAL IN NATURE. WHY DIDN'T WE USE A COUNTY LIKE ORANGE OR BROWARD OR DUVAL COUNTIES THAT HAVE MORE OF A COMBINATION OF -- AND REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR COUNTY. >>TOM HIZNAY: I TRIED TO PICK COUNTIES THAT WERE LOCATED CLOSE TO US. I CERTAINLY DIDN'T TRY TO CHERRY-PICK, YOU KNOW. I JUST TRIED TO PICK THE COUNTIES THAT WERE AROUND US, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE COUNTIES, YOU KNOW, ARE SIMILAR IN CHARACTER TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND OTHERS ARE NOT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND THEIR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. BUT DO YOU HAVE MAYBE AT YOUR FINGERTIPS, SINCE ORANGE AND DUVAL ARE REALLY REPRESENTATIVE OF US, THE -- THESE COUNTIES? >>TOM HIZNAY: NO, SIR. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR. >>BRIAN BLAIR: WELL, I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT IN GENERAL SINCE THIS IS MY LAST MEETING HERE. MS. OSTEEN, YOU SAID IT RIGHT, THE ECONOMY'S VERY IMPORTANT, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, AND RIGHT NOW PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING. MY DAD'S A CARPENTER. I'LL NEVER FORGET THE TIME THAT THEY WENT ON STRIKE, AND I WAS ABOUT 12 YEARS OLD. HE WAS BUILDING THE AIRPORT, AND WE STARTED GETTING BOXES IN, AND PRETTY SOON I LEARNED I WAS GETTING FOOD STAMPS. GOT CAUGHT TAKING FOOD STAMPS, NEVER FORGET THE HUMILITY THAT I LEARNED FROM THAT. YOU OFTEN CALL THE BUILDERS SPECIAL INTERESTS. YOU-ALL LIVE IN A HOME THAT A DEVELOPER BUILT, MOST OF YOU. YOU GUYS NEED TO REALIZE THAT DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTES -- AND I'M SAYING THIS VERY PEACEFULLY AND CALMLY SO YOU REALIZE SOMETHING THAT'S FACTUAL. 65% -- ALMOST 65% OF OUR ECONOMY IS AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT AND -- GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT'S A FACT. IT TAKES ALMOST 90 DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES AND OCCUPATIONS TO BUILD ONE HOME, AND THINK OF THE ANCILLARY OCCUPATIONS FROM THE GUY THAT MOWS LAWNS, THE POOL MAN, THE PERSON THAT CLEANS GUTTERS, A PERSON THAT TRIMS TREES, THE BANKER, THE GUY THAT MAKES A NAIL, THE ROOFER, THE CARPENTER, THE ELECTRICIAN. YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE HOMELESS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMY AND HURTING AND SUFFERING, AND MANY OF THIS -- MUCH OF THIS HAS HAPPENED -- NOT ALL OF IT. WE'VE GOT SCANDALS, WE'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF THINGS, BUT I'M TELLING YOU SOMETHING. WHEN YOU OVERREGULATE SOMETHING OR WHEN YOU OVERDO SOMETHING -- AND LET ME SAY FIRST, I WOULDN'T WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO A DIRT PIT, AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN ONE SECOND. THERE'S NO WAY I'D WANT TO LIVE IN A DIRT PIT -- NEXT TO A BORROW PIT, BUT WHEN YOU TAKE AWAY AND YOU KEEP MAKING -- WHEN -- I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. WE'VE GOT THE HZM, THE PROCESS, THE HZM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT, THEN YOU'VE GOT EPC, SWFWMD, DEP, ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. WE'VE GOT TRAILS, PARKS, WE'VE GOT ELAPP. WE'VE GOT LOTS OF THINGS, AND OUR ENVIRONMENT IS OUR MOST IMPORTANT RESOURCE, IT'S OUR MOST IMPORTANT ASSET, AND WE DO HAVE TO PROTECT IT, BUT EXTREMISM IS NOT A VIRTUE. WE'VE GOT TO FIND A BALANCE BETWEEN-SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS ARE FOLKS LIKE -- THAT GATHER AND THAT ARE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRIAN BLAIR: THE -- THE BUILDERS -- THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE BUILDERS PROVIDE JOBS, THEY PROVIDE EVERYTHING THAT MAKES THE DOLLAR GO AROUND. I FEEL ABSOLUTELY SORRY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT TO THE BORROW PITS RIGHT NOW, BUT IF THIS IS GOING TO INHIBIT AND OVERPROTECT AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY DONE A STUDY ON THIS -- AS FAR AS RIGHT NOW GOES, THERE'S -- I GUESS THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO, BUT IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO PUT A BUSINESS OF ANY KIND, WHETHER IT BE A BORROW PIT OR ANYTHING AND THERE'S NOTHING AROUND THEM AT THE TIME, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SCIENTIFIC PROOF TO SAY THIS 500 FEET'S PERFECT, THIS IS THE PERFECT NUMBER, THIS IS A GREAT NUMBER, LET'S JUST PULL THIS OUT OF THE HAT, AND IT'S DONE TOO OFTEN IN GOVERNMENT. IT'S KNEE-JERK REACTIONS BECAUSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE TIME TO COME HERE AND TAKE THE TIME TO COME HERE INFLUENCE STAFF, AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS, MY KIDS, THE KIDS I MENTOR AND THE KIDS THAT YOU -- YOU ARE RAISING RIGHT NOW ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE OUT OF THIS STATE TO FIND A JOB. GROWTH HAS GOT TO BE WHERE GROWTH SHOULD BE, BUT DON'T -- DON'T -- EXTREMISM IS NOT A VIRTUE, AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY. IT'S NOT, AND IF YOU -- IF YOU DON'T HAVE ACCURATE SCIENTIFIC BACKUP OR FACTUAL BACKUP TO JUSTIFY MAKING ANYTHING MORE DIFFICULT, THEN IT SHOULDN'T BE DONE. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLAIR. COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: MS. HARVEY, IF THERE IS A SITUATION WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL WANTS -- IF THIS IS -- IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND THERE'S A SITUATION WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL -- IT'S DETERMINED THAT THE 500-FOOT SETBACK IS TOO EXTREME, WOULD THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK IN FOR A VARIANCE OF SOME SORT AND ASK FOR A REQUEST OF A WAIVER OF THIS AMENDMENT? >>PAULA HARVEY: THEY WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO COME BACK IN. IN A SEPARATE ACTION VARIANCES FOR SPECIAL USES ARE HEARD AT THE TIME OF THE SPECIAL USE, SO IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION. >>MARK SHARPE: SO THEY WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY? >>PAULA HARVEY: YES. >>MARK SHARPE: AND LISTEN, I -- OF THE FOUR YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD, I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING LONG AND HARD FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY WE EMPLOY INDIVIDUALS, THOUGH, AND I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS OBVIOUSLY ON THE HIGH-END QUALITY BIOTECH JOBS, BUT FOCUSING ON THIS ISSUE HERE, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A GOOD BALANCE. IT PROVIDES PROTECTION FOR THE CITIZENS, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO CONTINUE EXCAVATING DIRT, AND FOR THAT REASON, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS AMENDMENT. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND WITH DISCUSSION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. SHARPE, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH YOU. I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE SOMEBODY THE OPINION THAT WE'RE NOT FOR GROWTH. WE ARE FOR GROWTH, BUT -- JUST AS MR. BLAIR SAID, BUT I'M TAKING THE OPPOSITE SIDE, GROWTH SHOULD BE WHERE GROWTH SHOULD BE, AND I THINK THAT PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES BECAUSE THEY CAN'T JUST UP AND LEAVE BECAUSE THE ECONOMY IS AFFECTING THEM TOO NEED SOME EXTRA PROTECTION, AND I THINK THAT 500-FOOT BUFFER AT LEAST GIVES THEM SOME OF THAT PROTECTION NOW AS OPPOSED TO IN THE PAST, LIKE THIS LADY AT THE FIRST -- IN THE FIRST ROW. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO FOR HER, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY GIVE SOME PROTECTION TO NEIGHBORHOODS AS WE GO FORWARD, AND THE VERY GOOD POINT THAT MR. SHARPE MADE WAS THAT DURING THE PROCESS, IF WILL THERE IS A HARDSHIP, IF THERE IS A REASON THAT THIS SHOULD BE LOOKED AT AND RE-REVIEWED, THE PROCESS ALLOWS THE DEVELOPER, THE PETITIONER TO SPEAK TO THAT ISSUE, SO I CERTAINLY AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS, AND I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE ALREADY SECONDED THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH, AND I WAS NOT FINISHED WHEN COMMISSIONER BLAIR STARTED. I WAS JUST GETTING THE REST OF MY NOTES. I HAD SOME OTHER QUESTIONS THERE. I CERTAINLY SEE THE BENEFIT AND SUPPORT OF A 500-FOOT SETBACK AND HAVE BEEN OUT THERE IN THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS, I GUESS IT WAS FRIDAY, SATURDAY, AND I HAD MY STAFF GO OUT AND LOOK AT IT, AND, YOU KNOW, THE BIG PROBLEM OUT THERE IS THE DIRT AND THE DUST AND THE NOISE, AND IT'S THE TRUCKS, AND IF THERE WAS A BETTER WAY TO REGULATE THE ISSUE WITH THE TRUCKS -- AND I THINK THE FIRST TIME I WENT OUT THERE AND MET WITH MRS. OSTEEN -- I THINK YOU'RE BACK THERE -- OKAY. THAT WAS YOUR MAIN COMPLAINT WAS THAT THE TRUCKS WERE LOUD, NOISY AND DIRTY AND DUSTY, AND I GET IT, AND I LISTENED, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I WORKED WITH YOU-ALL ON THIS DENSITY CREDIT ISSUE AS WELL AND BRINGING THAT IN TO A QUESTION, BUT ONE OF THE -- WE HAVE THIS QUESTION ON WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE BORROW PIT TOO CLOSE TO A HOME AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT CASE, AND I THINK EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT. THEY'RE THERE AND WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT, AND YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD NO, BUT THE BORROW PIT'S THERE AND THE HOME'S THERE. WE CAN'T -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE STUCK WITH THAT, BUT TO PREVENT THAT IN THE FUTURE WITH THIS -- THIS 500-FOOT SETBACK, THAT WOULD PREVENT SOMEONE ELSE FROM HAVING THE HEARTACHE THAT YOU DO, BUT WHEN WE HAVE VACANT LAND AND WE'RE GOING TO IMPOSE A SETBACK ON VACANT LAND, THEN I'VE GOT A CONCERN, I'VE GOT A QUESTION ON THAT, DO WE NEED ON THE VACANT LAND TO HAVE THAT? AND I KNOW THAT I'M LOOKING MORE AT THE LAND THAT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL, AND MAYBE YOU CAN COME UP HERE AND -- AND I'M NOT READY TO TALK TO YOU, BUT COME ON UP. I WANT YOU TO, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS THAT, BUT ARE WE ELUDING SOME COMMON SENSE HERE ON LAND THAT DOES NOT HAVE A HOUSE ON IT BUT MAY ONE DAY HAVE A HOUSE? IF WE PASS THIS, WHAT HAPPENS -- AND I JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH SOME QUESTIONS -- WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT IF YOU'VE GOT RESIDENTIAL ZONED LAND AND YOU GOT THE BORROW PIT NEXT TO IT? RIGHT NOW YOU CAN'T HAVE A HOUSE 500 FEET IF WE PASS THIS. IN THE FUTURE A HOME DEVELOPMENT COMES IN, THEY CAN'T -- WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE BORROW PIT AND THE LAND THAT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND THEY START BUILDING? WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT BORROW PIT? DO THEY HAVE TO FILL IT IN OR -- >>TOM HIZNAY: NO, SIR. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: RIGHT. IN THE FUTURE, IF WE GO WE HAVE LAND AND THEY WANT TO PUT A BORROW PIT IN THERE, WE'VE GOT THE RESIDENTIAL, THEN WHAT HAPPENS TO -- WHEN THEY WANT TO DEVELOP THAT? >>TOM HIZNAY: WELL, IT WOULDN'T -- WHATEVER SETBACKS WERE APPROVED AS PART OF THE SPECIAL USE WOULD REMAIN IN EFFECT. I MEAN, IF -- AND THE REASON THAT WE RECOMMEND INCLUDING RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY THAT'S YET NOT DEVELOPED, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM OUR REGS TODAY, IS IN VIEW OF THE LENGTH THAT BORROW PIT PERMITS CAN LAST. AFTER SPECIAL USE APPROVAL YOU HAVE TWO YEARS TO REQUEST YOUR OPERATING PERMIT, AND THEN WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR OPERATING PERMIT, YOU HAVE TEN YEARS, SO THAT'S A -- POTENTIALLY A 12-YEAR PERIOD THAT IF A BORROW PIT IS ONLY SETBACK AS UNDER TODAY'S REGS, LET'S SAY A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE IT SHARES WITH VACANT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, WE FELT THAT THAT ACTUALLY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A NEGATIVE INFLUENCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FOR QUITE A LENGTH OF TIME, 12-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME, AND THAT'S WHY WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY BE INCLUDED IN THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE HAVE THE 500 FEET, IT WOULD MAYBE ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE WANTING, AND IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO GO IN THERE AND BUY IT, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, WE DON'T WANT THE -- TO LIVE NEXT TO A BORROW PIT, SO LET'S NOT -- LET'S LEAVE THAT AGRICULTURE AND LET'S LEAVE IT VACANT UNTIL THAT PERMIT EXPIRES. >>TOM HIZNAY: I DON'T SEE WHERE -- THE 500-FOOT SETBACK, AGAIN, I BELIEVE WOULD BETTER ENABLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. I -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ALL RIGHT. I SEE SOME OTHER LIGHTS ARE ON. I'M INTERESTED BEFORE WE MAKE -- BECAUSE MY CONCERN REALLY IS ON THIS -- THIS SETBACK ON LAND THAT'S VACANT THAT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL. DO WE NEED 500 FEET THERE OR SHOULD IT BE 200 FEET? I MEAN -- BECAUSE I HEARD SOMEONE EARLIER TODAY SAY ON THAT -- THAT ATV ISSUE WHERE THEY HAVE A SMALL SIX-ACRE FARM, AND THAT COULD POSSIBLY IMPEDE THEIR FARM BUSINESS. ARE WE UNNECESSARILY IMPEDING THIS ENTERPRISE, THIS -- I CONSIDER THIS AN AGRICULTURAL ENTERPRISE, ALTHOUGH IT'S DEALING WITH DIRT, BUT ARE WE IMPEDING THAT BUSINESS LIKE WE WERE WITH THIS SMALL SIX-ACRE FARM? AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S AS MUCH THE PITS AS IT IS ALL THE TRUCKS, BUT I SEE SOME OTHER LIGHTS. I'D LIKE TO HEAR SOME MORE DEBATE BEFORE WE CALL THE QUESTION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: THANK YOU. I WAS ACTUALLY HAPPY TO SECOND THE MOTION ON THIS, AND I THINK IN MY TENURE SITTING UP HERE I'VE BEEN VERY, VERY PRO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH, AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE AUDIENCE AS WELL AS JUST PEOPLE ALL OVER OUR COUNTY AND OUR COMMUNITY, THAT WE WANT TO ADD ONE OTHER WORD TO THAT. WE WANT SMART GROWTH AND WE WANT SMART DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND I THINK WHERE WE'RE LOOKING HERE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A QUALITY-OF-LIFE ISSUE AS WELL AS A HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE ISSUE. MR. BROWN CAME UP AND SAID IF HE THREW UP TALCUM POWDER -- AND YOU KNOW, I'VE DRIVEN THROUGH THE AREAS WHERE A COUPLE OF THESE BORROW PITS ARE, BUT YOU KNOW, WE REALLY DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GO THAT FAR. IF YOU GO RIGHT DOWNTOWN -- I'VE BEEN GETTING CALLS AND E- MAILS AND WE REFER THEM TO D.O.T. AND THE CITY, ABOUT YOU RIGHT DOWN HERE WHERE WE HAVE THE INTERCHANGE EXPANSION RIGHT AT HOWARD AND ARMENIA -- AND THIS IS A SMALL AREA, THIS ISN'T EVEN A BORROW PIT. THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE LIVING RIGHT NEXT TO THE INTERSTATE -- THIS NEW INTERSTATE IS COMING UP 50 FEET TO A HUNDRED FEET FROM THESE PEOPLE'S BACK DOORS, AND THEY'RE SAYING, I TAKE MY CAR AND I GET IT WASHED, AND I WAKE UP IN THE MORNING AND I GOT A HALF INCH OF DUST ON MY CAR AND IT'S RUINING MY PAINT, AND OF COURSE, THAT QUALITY OF LIFE, I CAN'T EVEN LEAVE MY WINDOWS OPEN DURING THE DAY. HERE WE ARE GETTING INTO THE FALL SEASON WHERE I SHOULD BE ABLE TO LEAVE MY WINDOWS OPEN THAT TECO JUST TOOK UP THE ENERGY BILL 25%, AND I SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENJOY SOME COOL BREEZE COMING THROUGH, BUT MY WHOLE HOUSE IS GOING TO BE DUSTY. I CAN'T -- LIKE MRS. RUTLEDGE SAID, I CAN'T EVEN HANG MY CLOTHES OUT ON THE LINE. BUT IT COMES DOWN TO -- I THINK, MS. OSTEEN, FOR ONE THING, WE DON'T AGREE ALL THE TIME, AS I'VE TOLD HER, BUT I SAW THE CHART THAT SHE HAD, AND I HAD NEVER BROKEN IT DOWN QUITE THAT EXTENSIVELY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S 100% ACCURATE, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MAKES ECONOMIC AND FEASIBLE SENSE. I'LL GET WITH STAFF, AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS, BUT I'LL GET WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH THEIR ANALYSIS OF YOUR CHART, BUT ON -- >> [INAUDIBLE] >>KEVIN WHITE: WELL, NO. I MEAN, I REALIZE THAT THAT WAS THEIR NUMBERS, BUT I'M SAYING ON THE ECONOMICS OF IT AND THE PRICE, BUT I GUESS THE LAST THING THAT I WANT TO SAY, I WANTED TO SAY THAT I AM TOTALLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AND I LOST MY LAST TRAIN OF THOUGHT ON THE LAST STATEMENT, BUT ANYWAY, I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT, AND I THINK YOU-ALL HAVE MADE A VALUABLE INPUT. YOU'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH STAFF, AND I THINK YOUR VOICES AND YOUR CONCERNS -- THAT'S WHAT I WANTED. MR. NIEMANN, I DON'T KNOW, IS HE STILL HERE? THERE HE IS. YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO AGREE WITH YOU TOO ON ONE POINT, AND I DON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH YOU EITHER, AND I'LL TELL YOU WHEN I AGREE AND WHEN I DON'T, BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE WATCHING US, WE'RE WATCHING THE COMMUNITY TOO BECAUSE WE WON'T ALWAYS AGREE, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE SEVEN OF US UP HERE, AND JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T SIDE WITH WHO IS STANDING AT THE PODIUM AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S AN ADVERSARIAL POSITION OR THAT THE PARTICULAR COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE -- WE'RE NOT LISTENING TO YOU. MAYBE WE -- MAYBE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION, BUT I THINK IT'S OUR JOB TO RELATE OUR SIDE A LITTLE BETTER TO YOU OR IT MAY BE A BETTER EXPLANATION OF WHY WE'RE VOTING THE WAY WE'RE VOTING. THAT WAY WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT EACH OTHER, YOU CAN SAY, WELL, MAYBE THAT COMMISSIONER OR THOSE COMMISSIONERS DIDN'T DECIDE ON AN ISSUE THE WAY I WANTED IT DECIDED ON, BUT AT LEAST I SAW THE RATIONALE OR AT LEAST I COULD LOOK AT THE RATIONALE, SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I SOMEWHAT AGREE WITH YOU, AND BOTH SIDES ARE WATCHING, AND I THINK EVERYONE UP HERE ON THE DAIS REALLY WANTS TO DO THE VERY BEST JOB WE CAN AND MAKE OUR COMMUNITY GROW IN A HEALTHY AND HAPPY WAY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: I ACTUALLY STRUGGLE WITH A LOT OF THIS BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT DOES IMPACT CITIZENS AND THE FOLKS THAT ARE FACING THIS TODAY, AND I GUESS WHAT KEPT TRIGGERING A LOT OF PEOPLE BEING DOWN HERE IS THE WAY WE HAVE MANAGED THE SITES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED. I THINK IF -- ONE OF THE ELEMENTS, IF WE WOULD HAVE RESTRICTED IN ANY OF THE BUFFER ZONES NO TRUCKS, THEY CAN'T TRANSPORT, THEY CAN'T -- NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL -- IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE CAUSING A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE'S REALLY UNCOMFORT IN THEIR LIFESTYLE IN THE WAY WE'RE APPROVING AND MANAGING THE APPROVAL OF SITES, AND A BIGGER PICTURE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EVER A POSSIBILITY, BUT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME TRADE-OFFS THAT THESE PEOPLE COULD NOT HAVE ANY ACTIVITY WITHIN, YOU KNOW -- IS IT 300 OR 500, WHATEVER FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL, OPERATE ALL YOUR STUFF AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SITES BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF -- IT SEEMS TO ME A LOT OF THE NIGHTMARE THAT'S BEING CAUSED HERE. MARCELLA, LET ME JUST SAY ABOUT THE NUMBERS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YES, THEY'RE COUNTY NUMBERS, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT -- THINKING ABOUT LONG-RANGE, YOU HEARD OUR -- IN THESE EARLIER PRESENTATIONS, THERE'S GOING TO BE A $6-BILLION INVESTMENT IN ROADS AROUND HERE. MY POINT IS IF -- YES, I KNOW YOU'VE GOT THE EQUATION OF THE TEN-YEAR THING AND WHATEVER, BUT LUTZ-LAKE FERN AS AN EXAMPLE AND THE NIGHTMARES THAT'S CAUSING AND THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EXPANSION OF THE VETERANS EXPRESSWAY THERE AND ALL THAT, WHAT I -- WHAT I HOPE DOESN'T OCCUR -- AND I'M LEAVING THIS WITH STAFF BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN ALL THIS STUFF IS GOING TO START EXPLODING, I WON'T BE HERE, BUT WHAT I'M HOPING IS THERE'S JUST NOT A WHOLE LOT MORE SMALLER PITS BECAUSE WE COULDN'T -- SOONER OR LATER THE VOLUME'S GOING TO BE GONE, AND IF -- YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BIG COUNTY. I KNOW WE SAY THERE'S A LOT OF GROWTH. THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN SPACE TOO, AND IN THE NEXT 50 YEARS NOT A LOT OF US WILL BE HERE, MAYBE COMMISSIONER FERLITA, BUT OTHER THAN THAT -- [LAUGHTER] -- >>KEN HAGAN: IT'S GETTING LATE. >>JIM NORMAN: MY POINT IS HOW DO YOU MANAGE A LOT OF SMALLER PITS FOR THE SAME VOLUMES THAT YOU'LL NEED IN THE FUTURE, AND -- AND AGAIN, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING FROM STAFF ON HOW THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SITE -- THAT I THINK IS 50% OF OUR PROBLEM BECAUSE IF YOU -- YOU CONTINUE -- SOMEBODY SAID IT VERY WELL. EVEN IF YOU HAVE A 500-FOOT BUFFER AND TRUCKS START GOING BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH IN THAT 500-FOOT BUFFER, YOU GOTTA GET THEM OUT OF THAT SOMEHOW. YOU GOTTA GET THEM MOVING -- IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, HUGE PARCELS, YOU'VE GOT TO GET IT AWAY FROM THAT CITIZENS' SIDE OR YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE AND MORE AND MORE ANGST OVER THESE THINGS, AND THIS 500 ISN'T GOING TO FIX IT. SO I HOPE YOUR NUMBERS ARE RIGHT. I HOPE OUR LAND -- OUR ROAD COSTS AND THINGS OF OUR BUILDING OUR ROADS AND EVERYTHING ARE NOT SKEWED NOW HOW WE MAY GO INTO THE FUTURE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH, AND MY CONCERN IS THE SAME, THE TRUCKS AND THE OPERATIONAL SIDE OF THIS THAT CONCERN ME. I SAID IT'S NOT THE 500 FEET, I SEE AND GET THE BENEFIT OF THE PROTECTION ON THAT, AND THE VACANT LAND IS A QUESTION. I'M REAL CONCERNED OVER YOU NOT USING VALID COMPARABLES OR COMPARABLES THAT ARE MORE LIKE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND THAT'S STILL KIND OF A CONCERN OF MINE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD -- AND PAULA, THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR YOU. I KNOW WE'VE GOT THE DENSITY CREDIT ISSUE. SHOULD THIS BE TIED IN TO A PACKAGE? I FORGET -- I DON'T REMEMBER WHO THAT WAS THAT BROUGHT THAT UP. SHOULD WE TIE THIS INTO ONE QUESTION -- SO WE HAVE ONE DEBATE ON THE WHOLE PROCESS? >>PAULA HARVEY: WELL, COMMISSIONER, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY HAVE TO BE TIED TOGETHER. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, IF THE BOARD WANTED TO DIRECT THAT, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO AND BRING IT BACK AT THE SAME TIME, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE PROCESSING SEPARATE AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THE ISSUES ARE REALLY SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THE AMOUNT OF DENSITY THAT YOU WOULD GET FROM A DIG AND THE STYLE OF THE DIG ITSELF. THE LAND EXCAVATION BUSINESS WILL CONTINUE FOR ITS VERY REASONS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HERE TONIGHT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SURE. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR. >>BRIAN BLAIR: WELL, THERE'S A COUPLE ISSUES. WHEN I HEARD THE -- I'M SORRY, THE -- MY -- THE YOUNG SENIOR LADY UP FRONT. WHEN I HEARD HER ISSUE, I -- YOU KNOW, I FELT FOR HER. YOU ONLY HAVE TO. WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE RIGHT THERE IS QUESTION ONE. THEN I'VE GOT A THREE-PART QUESTION. NUMBER TWO IS WHEN -- TRUCKS ADD TO THE POLLUTION, BOTH THE AIR AND THE -- AND THE NOISE, SO THE LONGER YOU TAKE THEM, THE MORE PEOPLE YOU'RE IMPEDING. YOU'VE GOT FOLKS -- LET'S TAKE NEW TAMPA, FOR EXAMPLE. I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO HAVE DIRT TO BUILD THE ROADS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE FILL DIRT. THAT'S WHY ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING, AS COMMISSIONER WHITE JUST SAID. YOU'VE GOT TO GET IT SOMEWHERE. IS IT WORTH TRUCKING ALL THE WAY DOWN AND BRINGING IT FROM POLK OR PASCO AND TEARING UP OUR ROADS? BECAUSE INEVITABLY YOU NEED DIRT. AND THEN THE OTHER PART OF THE QUESTION, IF THEY CAN PETITION TO WAIVE THE 500 FEET, AS COMMISSIONER SHARPE HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, WHY DO YOU PUT IT -- WHY DO YOU PUT IT IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE? BUT BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THE QUESTION. I HOPE EVERYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING -- GOING WITH ME HERE. WHAT CAN WE DO FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BEING AFFECTED NOW? HOW CAN YOU HELP THESE PEOPLE, LIKE THIS LADY SITTING UP HERE? HOW CAN YOU HELP THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY THERE. THEY KNEW -- YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THERE RIGHT NOW, AND I'M SURE THEY WERE THERE BEFORE THAT BORROW PIT CAME, A LOT OF THEM. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A CHOICE, IT'S -- WE'RE AGAIN GOING BACK TO WHERE HIGGINBOTHAM DYING COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, MR. AL, SAID THAT YOU'VE GOT -- WHY DO YOU RESTRICT SOMETHING WHERE NOTHING'S TAKING PLACE YET AND MAKE THEM PAY MONEY TO CHANGE SOMETHING IF IT WAS IN AGRICULTURE, AS WAS MENTIONED? AND THERE'S NOBODY THERE. IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANYBODY THAT'S ACTUALLY LIVING THERE YET, AND IT'S GOING TO ENHANCE BUSINESS AND IT'S GOING TO BE -- ANY COSTS THAT ARE -- IS -- THE DEVELOPERS HAVE IS PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER, AND EVERYBODY WANTS TO OWN A HOME. WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THAT'S ALMOST LIKE AN OXYMORON TRYING TO -- SOMETIMES I SEE, YOU KNOW, CREATING OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT, YOU KNOW, DON'T BUILD THIS HERE, AND WE CERTAINLY HAVE A COMP PLAN THAT WE ABIDE BY, AND THAT'S WHY THIS ISSUE IS SO IMPORTANT. EACH ISSUE IS IMPORTANT, BUT THERE HAS TO BE A BALANCE. THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S FAIR. AND SOMEHOW I WISH THAT THERE WAS A WAY THAT WE COULD FIND TO HELP THE PEOPLE THAT ARE -- THAT ARE SUFFERING THAT ARE A HUNDRED FEET AND THE TRUCKS ARE GOING RIGHT THERE, RIGHT BY THEM. I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO BE -- WHETHER IT WAS A WALL OR SOMETHING RIGHT THERE, I DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST SOMETHING FOR THOUGHT, BUT AGAIN, THE FARTHER YOU TRUCK SOMETHING, THE MORE YOU HURT THE ROADS, THE MORE POLLUTION THAT YOU HAVE, AND THE MORE PEOPLE THAT YOU EFFECT, AND YOU DO NEED DIRT, SO IT WAS SAID THAT THIS -- THERE WASN'T A WHOLE LOT OF STUDY GIVEN TO THIS, IT WAS JUST -- WENT THROUGH SIX COUNTIES. I'M AT A POINT WHERE IF I MAKE A DECISION ON 500 FEET, I'M NOT MAKING A DECISION WHERE -- I DON'T KNOW IF I'M MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION BECAUSE IT'S A DECISION WHERE WE DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT THE OTHER COUNTIES, WE DIDN'T HEAR ANY SCIENTIFIC DATA, ANY HARD FACTS THAT MAKE THIS NUMBER THE RIGHT NUMBER. MAYBE -- MAYBE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY RELIEF BECAUSE AS WAS MENTIONED, A TRIP AROUND THE BASEBALL BAGS, 90 FEET, THAT'S 360 FEET. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR, WE NEED TO KEEP MOVING. WE GOT A WHOLE 'NOTHER ITEM AFTER THIS THAT'S GOING TO BE AT LEAST AN HOUR. [APPLAUSE] COMMISSIONER SHARPE -- >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I BELIEVE -- >>KEN HAGAN: -- THEN WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION. >>MARK SHARPE: I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE AMENDMENT. IT PROVIDES THE PROTECTION -- IN FACT, IT SAYS, THE PURPOSE OF THESE REGULATIONS IS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH. I BELIEVE THE 500-FOOT SETBACK FROM A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY IS VERY REASONABLE, AND IT WILL PROVIDE FOR THE FUTURE PROTECTION OF OUR COMMUNITY WHILE ALLOWING US TO CONTINUE - - AND MS. OSTEEN, I WILL -- I DO COMMEND YOU ON THE DATA THAT YOU PROVIDED WITH REGARD TO THE AMOUNT OF EXCAVATEABLE DIRT THAT IS STILL LEFT AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS AS WELL AS THIS DOES NOT STOP THE BUSINESS OF LAND EXCAVATION. IT WILL CONTINUE. IT WILL JUST PROVIDE REASONABLE -- AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR -- REASONABLE PROTECTIONS IN A COMMUNITY WHERE WE WANT PEOPLE TO COME AND LIVE, AND IT WILL PROVIDE -- IT WILL PROVIDE THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT THE CITIZENS DESERVE, SO I THINK WE SHOULD -- LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] >>JOE MOREDA: THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM DD. THIS PROPOSAL'S TO CLARIFY THE EXTERIOR LIGHTING ORDINANCE. COMMISSIONERS, THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING APPROVED TONIGHT, THE EFFECTIVE DATE WILL BE FEBRUARY 1st. THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST TO EXPEDITE THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT IF APPROVED, AND ADAM IS GOING TO ADDRESS THAT AT SOME POINT, I BELIEVE, DEPENDING ON HOW THE ITEM GOES. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM, MR. BOB CAMPBELL OF OUR STAFF HAS BEEN LEADING THIS, AND HE IS AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO IT. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? OKAY. COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: COMMISSIONERS, I WANT TO TELL YOU SOMETHING. I WENT TO THE SCHOOL LINE DIVIDING THING UP IN LUTZ LAST NIGHT. NO LESS THAN 20 PARENTS CAME UP TO ME ABOUT WHEN ARE WE GOING TO PUT THE LIGHTS UP AT OSCAR COOLER PARK, AND THAT'S WHAT DROVE THESE FOUR PARKS -- THIS AMENDMENT. PEOPLE OUT THERE ARE HACKED THAT THEIR KIDS DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE PLAYING FACILITIES AND PARKS, AND THEY SAID IT'S BEEN FOUR, SIX, EIGHT MONTHS. WE'VE MADE THE PURCHASE, WE MADE THE INVESTMENT OF DOLLARS, AND WE'RE SITTING ON OUR HANDS, AND THIS GETS US THERE, SO PLEASE SUPPORT THIS. I'LL MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MARK SECONDED IT. THAT'S FINE. MR. NORMAN, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK THIS IS REALLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO FOR OUR KIDS AND OUR PARKS, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT I DO SEE SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE THAT HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS OUT IN THE AUDIENCE, AND I HOPE ONCE WE GET THIS GOING FORWARD, THERE'S STILL OTHER THINGS WE NEED TO DO TO TWEAK THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LIGHTING ENGINEERS, ET CETERA, AND ARCHITECTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS AND DO THIS BETTER, BUT IN TERMS OF SUPPORTING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, ABSOLUTELY. >>JIM NORMAN: I'LL GO OUT AND CHANGE THE BULBS IF WE CAN GET THEM UP. >>ROSE FERLITA: FINE. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>BRIAN BLAIR: WE NEED FIVE RIGHT NOW. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>JOE MOREDA: FINAL ITEM OF THE NIGHT IS "EE" ON THE AGENDA. THE PROPOSAL'S TO REVISE THE NORTH DALE MABRY OVERLAY DISTRICT. MR. -- I BELIEVE JOHN HEALEY OF OUR STAFF IS AVAILABLE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IS THERE AN APPLICANT? >>PAULA HARVEY: COMMISSIONERS, THE -- WE'RE THE -- >>KEN HAGAN: THE COUNTY'S THE APPLICANT? >>PAULA HARVEY: WE'RE THE APPLICANT. >>KEN HAGAN: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. I KNOW A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE LINE UP AND GO FORWARD. FIRST SPEAKER. >>PAULA HARVEY: PLEASE COME FORWARD. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD EVENING, SIR. >> I'D LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME UP HERE AND SPEAK TONIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS VINCENT MANALE. I LIVE AT 19001 NORLLER COURT. I HAVE WATCHED DALE MABRY COME -- IN THE LAST 50-SOME-ODD YEARS THAT I AM OLD, I HAVE WATCHED DALE MABRY COME UP FROM MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE, KEEP GOING NORTH. YOU HAVE APPROXIMATELY FOUR MILES NOW LEFT FROM VAN DYKE TO COUNTY LINE, THREE, FOUR MILES. THAT'S THE LAST OF THE UNDEVELOPED AREA. THE BUSINESSES AND EXPANSION THAT YOU-ALL WANT TO DO IS LIKE A CANCER. IT SLOWLY TAKES OVER. I'M ASKING THAT YOU-ALL VOTE AGAINST THIS THING THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING ON, ESPECIALLY THE LUTZ-LAKE FERN AREA AND DALE MABRY, WHICH AFFECTS MY HOME AND THAT AREA THERE. THE SHOPPING CENTER THAT IS ALREADY THERE THAT YOU-ALL WANT TO EXPAND AND ADD AREA TO, IT HAS POOR DESIGN FOR GOING IN AND OUT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER. IT IS POOR, AND NOW YOU-ALL WANT TO HAVE -- NOT YOU-ALL, BUT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO ADD MORE BUSINESSES AND ALL TO THAT SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH IS GOING TO PUT MORE TRAFFIC INTO IT. THAT'S GREAT, BUT TRY GETTING OUT OF THAT SHOPPING CENTER. YOU CANNOT GET OUT OF IT. YOU CAN GO IN ON DALE MABRY NORTHBOUND, GOING OUT YOU CAN ONLY GO NORTHBOUND DALE MABRY AGAIN. IF YOU TRY TO GET OUT ON LUTZ-LAKE FERN, TRY IT AT 5:00 ONE AFTERNOON WHEN YOU CAN'T GO WEST, YOU CAN ONLY GO EAST UNLESS YOU WANT TO SIT ABOUT TEN MINUTES, AND USUALLY THERE'S EIGHT TO TEN CARS BACKED UP THERE. I BELIEVE YOU-ALL TALKED ABOUT THE RESIDENTS IN AREAS AND GROWTH AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE DON'T MIND DRIVING TWO OR THREE MILES TO GO SOMEPLACE TO EAT. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE IT RIGHT IN OUR LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE DON'T MIND GOING TO CARROLLWOOD. THAT'S WHERE THE BUSINESSES ARE AT. THOSE PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEIR RESTAURANTS, THEIR BUSINESSES FOR US TO COME TO. IF WE DON'T GO TO THOSE AND WE GO TO A NEW LITTLE SHOPPING CENTER, THAT GUY LOSES HIS BUSINESS. IT'S NOT FUN. ONE LAST THING ON THE LIGHTS. I LIVE ACROSS FROM OSCAR COOLER PARK ON THE LAKE. THE LIGHTS SHINE IN MY HOUSE AT NIGHTTIME. WHEN I'M SITTING ON MY COUCH WATCHING TV, I WATCH THOSE BRIGHT LIGHTS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, COMMISSIONER NORMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL AGAIN. >>JIM NORMAN: SIR, THESE ARE THE NEW -- >> I KNOW. I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE. I STOOD THERE, BUT I DIDN'T GET -- >>JIM NORMAN: IT'S A NEW DESIGN OF LIGHTS THAT SENDS IT DOWN. THAT'S ALL GOING TO BE CHANGED OUT. >> THOSE SHINE INTO OUR -- >>JIM NORMAN: WE'RE TRYING TO USE NEW TECHNOLOGY ON THOSE LIGHTS. >> HOPEFULLY IT WILL. THANK YOU ALL FOR LISTENING TO ME, AND I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE MANY MORE WITH THE SAME OPINION, AND PLEASE VOTE IT DOWN. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT, PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MICHAEL BROOKS FOR THE RECORD, 500 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD, SUITE 200, TAMPA 33602. I WAS A MEMBER OF THE WORKING COMMITTEE, AND I HAVE -- I HAVE SPENT MANY, MANY HOURS WITH MANY OF THE FOLKS IN THIS ROOM HERE. I'M HERE ALSO AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AT THE CORNER OF GERACI ROAD, SUNLAKE, AND DALE MABRY, WHICH IS AN ACRE-AND-A-HALF PARCEL GENERALLY. THAT -- THAT PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET, THE EXISTING 7-ELEVEN CONVENIENCE STORE SITE, HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR -- BY THE STAFF FOR EXPANSION INTO THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER. THAT RECOMMENDATION, AS YOU-ALL KNOW, HAS BEEN ALSO MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT I WANT TO TOUCH JUST BRIEFLY ON THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY THAT MADE IT THE SELECTION AND MADE IT THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU AND THE CURRENT ACTIVITY CENTER AND THE CONDITIONS THAT PRECIPITATED THAT. MANY OF YOU MAY NOT KNOW, BUT WHAT THE WORKING COMMITTEE DID INITIALLY IS IT IDENTIFIED STUDY AREAS AROUND THESE ACTIVITY CENTERS, AND IT THEN PUT A LENS ON WHAT ARE THE ISSUES AND CHARACTERISTICS, CONDITIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE LAST 20 YEARS, AND THEN IT BEGAN TO WHITTLE THOSE STUDY AREAS DOWN TO POSSIBLE EXPANSIONS, PROPERTIES THAT MADE SENSE. THE ACTIVITY CENTER IN PARTICULAR IS 26 ACRES ORIGINALLY. ROUGHLY 21 ACRES HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITH NON-NEIGHBORHOOD- SERVING COMMERCIAL USES. IN SHORT, IT DOES NOT PROVIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD-SERVING INTENT THAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. IT JUST HAS NOT WORKED. IT HAS A COLLECTION OF OFFICES, UTILITY SUBSTATIONS, ET CETERA. THERE WERE FIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY -- MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY THAT WERE VERY SIGNIFICANT IN ITS RECOMMENDATION TO BE INCLUDED. ONE, IT'S AT THE CONFLUENCE OF THREE MAJOR ROADS, IT MEETS LOCATIONAL CRITERIA, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT THIS PROPERTY COULD BE DEVELOPED AS OFFICE UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN, SO IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF NONRESIDENTIAL/RESIDENTIAL, IT'S A QUESTION OF COMMERCIAL VERSUS OFFICE AND IS IT APPROPRIATE TO BE IN THAT ACTIVITY CENTER. IT'S IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. IT HAS PUBLIC UTILITIES CURRENTLY AVAILABLE, AND IT'S SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES BY NONRESIDENTIAL USES, AND THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THIS IS THE PROPERTY HERE. THERE'S -- >> [INAUDIBLE] >> THERE'S AN INSTITUTIONAL USE TO THE NORTH. THERE'S OFFICE USE TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S OFFICE USE TO THE WEST, AND COMMERCIAL USES TO THE EAST. SO IT WAS -- IT IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION. IT IS A MEASURED RESPONSE TO THE CONDITIONS THAT THE WORKING COMMITTEE FOUND, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S BEEN PLACED BEFORE YOU WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL. WE ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. BROOKS. NEXT, PLEASE. >> HELLO. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS PAUL LIAU. I IMMIGRATE FROM TAIWAN TO TAMPA, CARROLLWOOD AREA, SINCE 1976, ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO. I CAME TO UNITED STATES TO FIND MY AMERICAN DREAM. I LIVE IN TAMPA LONGER THAN TAIWAN. ON 1989 I PURCHASED THE SUBJECT PIECE OF PROPERTY -- THAT'S THE ONE I PUT THE POINT THERE -- WAITING FOR IN THE FUTURE I CAN BUILD MY HOUSE OR SELL THE PROPERTY FOR MY RETIREMENT. I'M A GOOD CITIZEN. I PAY A LOT OF MONEY FOR THE MORTGAGE AND THE PROPERTY TAX. FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS, TOTAL AMOUNT I PAY MORE THAN 1.4 MILLION FOR MY INVESTMENT. 20 YEARS AGO WHEN I PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY, NORTH DALE MABRY WAS TWO LANE. SOME AREA IS STILL A [INCOMPREHENSIBLE]. TRAFFIC COUNT IS AROUND 5,000 CARS PER DAY. IT'S QUIET LIKE A COUNTRYSIDE AREA, BUT TODAY IT'S GROWING VERY RAPIDLY, BECOME A FOUR-LANE HIGHWAY. TRAFFIC COUNT MORE THAN 80,000 CAR PASS THROUGH EVERY DAY, AND ALSO AROUND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY JUST LIKE SIT ON THE HEAVY NOISE TRAFFIC SPOT. IT'S NO LONGER SUITABLE TO BUILD HOUSE IN THE AREA. WE TRIED TO SELL BUT NOBODY INTERESTED TO BUY TO BUILD A HOUSE THERE BECAUSE TOO MUCH NOISE AND TRAFFIC. THE HIGHEST AND THE BEST USE IS THE COMMERCIAL. TO ALL THE HONORABLE COMMISSIONERS, WOULD YOU PLEASE CONSIDER THE EFFECT -- RECONSIDER AGAIN BECAUSE THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY -- ON THE SOUTH IS A MAJOR ACTIVITY CENTER AND ON THE EAST IS ALREADY REZONED FOR THE 488 HOUSING AND THE 7,000-SQUARE-FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, ALSO APPROXIMATELY 600 [INCOMPREHENSIBLE] HOUSE IN THERE. OKAY. AND ON THE NORTH WE HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY ALREADY REZONED TO COMMERCIAL, SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SURROUNDING ALL THAT COMMERCIAL THERE, A LOT THE TRAFFIC. SO PLEASE IT CAN BE CONSIDERED AGAIN TO ALLOW ME TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT HIGH-DENSITY, THE HOUSE OR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING. SO THIS IS THE WAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HERE. I ALREADY -- FROM YOUNG GUY TO OLD GUY ALREADY. I ALMOST RETIRE, SO I DON'T WANT MY SECOND GENERATION STILL FIGHTING THIS AGAIN. I UNDERSTAND. NOW, NEXT HEARING ABOUT THIS PROBABLY NEXT 15 YEARS, SO AT THAT TIME, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, SO IT'S GETTING TOO LATE. SO EVERY TIME I COME HERE, IT'S ALL FIGHTING FOR THE SECOND GENERATION. FOR ME IT'S FOR MY GENERATION TOO AND ALSO FOR MY SECOND GENERATION, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH THAT I HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR ME TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS MAJURE CHISHOLM, JR. I RESIDE AT 19003 NORLLER COURT IN LUTZ. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT. I'M A LIFELONG HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY RESIDENT. I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY THAT MY FAMILY LIVES ON NOW BACK IN 1991. AT THAT TIME, AS THE LAST GENTLEMAN MENTIONED, THE ROAD WAS TWO LANES FROM VAN DYKE UP TO THE COUNTY LINE. THERE WAS ABOUT FIVE BUSINESSES LOCATED IN THAT AREA, AND I STILL REMEMBER TO THIS DAY THE SIGN THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY ON THE CORNER OF LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND DALE MABRY SAYING THAT IT WAS ZONED FOR SOME COMMERCIAL USE. SO I ANTICIPATED THAT IN THE FUTURE WHEN I DECIDED TO BUY THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR MY FAMILY. I WANTED JUST TO MAKE A NOTE. WITHIN A MILE OF MY HOME SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO ME AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW. THERE'S A FLORIST; I CAN GET MY LAWN MOWER REPAIRED; I CAN TAKE DANCE LESSONS; I CAN FILL MY CAR WITH GAS; I CAN GET MY TEETH CLEANED; I CAN SEE AN ATTORNEY; I CAN TAKE MY CHILDREN TO A PEDIATRIC DOCTOR; I CAN TAKE HORSE RIDING LESSONS; I CAN BUY PLANTS AT A NURSERY OR HIRE A LANDSCAPER TO PUT THEM IN; I COULD TAKE MY CAT TO A VET; I COULD SEE A PSYCHIATRIST, HOPEFULLY I DON'T HAVE TO; I CAN HIRE A POOL CONTRACTOR; I CAN SEE A PAIN MANAGEMENT DOCTOR, AGAIN, I'M GLAD I DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW; I CAN TAKE MARSHAL ART LESSONS; I CAN BUY HOME AND CAR INSURANCE; I CAN GET A MASSAGE LEGALLY -- [LAUGHTER] -- I CAN VISIT A PATERNITY CLINIC, WHICH AGAIN, I HAVE THREE DAUGHTERS, I'M DONE, I DON'T NEED THAT; I CAN PUT CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS IN A PUBLIC STORAGE UNIT IF I CHOOSE; I CAN GET SWIMMING LESSONS FOR MY CHILDREN; I CAN SEE A WEIGHT LOSS CLINIC, AGAIN, HOPEFULLY I DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT IN THE FUTURE; AND I CAN GO SHOPPING AT A MAJOR DEPARTMENT STORE. THAT'S WITHIN A MILE OF MY FRONT DOOR. NOW, A WALKING DISTANCE FROM MY FRONT DOOR, A HALF MILE AWAY, I CAN BUY MY GROCERIES; I CAN GET MEDICATION; I CAN GO TO A BANK; I CAN BUY A BOTTLE OF LIQUOR IF I SO CHOOSE; I CAN GET MY TAXES DONE; I CAN SEND MY WIFE TO GET A SPA TREATMENT; I CAN SEND A PACKAGE; I CAN BUY A QUICK SANDWICH; I CAN GET HAIRCUTS FOR MY ENTIRE FAMILY; I CAN PICK UP MY DRY CLEANING; I CAN HAVE A NICE MEAL OF SUSHI; AND I CAN VISIT A CHURCH. THAT'S IN WALKING DISTANCE OF MY FRONT DOOR. AND IF I WANTED TO START A NEW BUSINESS, THERE RIGHT NOW IS OVER 20 SPACES AVAILABLE FOR LEASE IN THAT SAME AREA. THE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS THAT I UNDERSTOOD WHEN I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY THAT GROWTH WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. I APPRECIATE WHAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED, BUT I THINK THE RURAL COMMUNITY, WHICH IS WHAT I BOUGHT THE AREA FOR TO BEGIN WITH, OFFERS ME ALL MY NEEDS RIGHT NOW, AND I DON'T NEED ANYTHING ELSE. >>MARK SHARPE: THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >>MARK SHARPE: NEXT SPEAKER. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MARGARET WATSON. I LIVE AT 1308 ANGLERS LANE IN LUTZ, AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE CHANGE IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL PLAN THAT'S ALREADY IN EXISTENCE. AS SOMEONE HAS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THE TRAFFIC IS ALREADY A NIGHTMARE FOR US IN THAT AREA GETTING OUT FROM THE PLAZA ONTO LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD, ESPECIALLY IN RUSH-HOUR TRAFFIC IS ALREADY A NIGHTMARE, SO THAT'S ONE CONCERN. MY HUSBAND AND I CAN RELATE TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO GOT UP AND TALKED ABOUT CARROLLWOOD. I APPRECIATE ALL THOSE PEOPLE LIVE IN CARROLLWOOD. I LIVED THERE MYSELF FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS, AND WE MOVED TO LUTZ BECAUSE WE WANTED THE TRANQUILITY AND THE PEACE AND QUIET THAT IS THERE. MY HUSBAND AND I USED TO REFER TO CARROLLWOOD AS A FISH BOWL BECAUSE WE COULD SIT IN OUR BACKYARD AND OVERHEAR THE PEOPLE IN THE YARD BEHIND US TALKING AND THE TRAFFIC GOING BY AND ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL END OF THINGS, AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE WHERE WE LIVE NOW, AND WE'D LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. SO PLEASE, PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT WE LIKE TO KEEP OUR AREA VERY TRANQUIL, PEACE AND QUIET, AND THANK YOU AGAIN. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. RON AESCHLEMAN, 18807 MERRY LANE. I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION AND LET IT BE KNOWN THAT ME AND MY FAMILY ARE AGAINST THE EXPANSION OF THE SHOPPING CENTER AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD AND DALE MABRY AND AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT. WE MOVED TO LUTZ TO LIVE IN A RURAL SETTING. WE WANTED TO REMOVE OURSELVES FROM THE EXCESSIVE DEVELOPMENT. YOU MUST ACT NOW TO STOP THE URBAN SPRAWL TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND CHARM OF LUTZ. THERE ARE PLENTY OF PROPERTIES THAT CAN BE BUILT OR RENOVATED THAT ARE WITHIN TAMPA CITY LIMITS. SOME OF THOSE AREAS COULD USE A GREAT DEAL OF CLEANING UP. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD CONCENTRATE YOUR EFFORTS THERE. WE HAVE AN OVERABUNDANCE OF VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITHIN CLOSE -- WITHIN A CLOSE RADIUS TO THE SITE IN QUESTION, SO COMMON SENSE SAYS THAT FURTHER EXPANSION OF THE SHOPPING CENTER IS NOT NEEDED. FURTHERMORE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO REVISE THE DALE MABRY PLAN SO THAT MORE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OR STRIP MALLS CAN BE BUILT. THIS WILL ADD MORE ACTIVITY TO OUR RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND DESTROY MORE OF OUR PEACE AND QUIET, ALONG WITH THE CRIME AND POLLUTION THAT COMES ALONG WITH IT. I'D LIKE TO REITERATE THAT I'M AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING AM I'M PHIL LIGHTNER. I LIVE AT 19019 MERRY LANE, WHICH IS DIRECTLY -- THE FIRST PROPERTY DOWN MERRY LANE BEHIND THE SHOPPING CENTER OF LUTZ-LAKE FERN/DALE MABRY, AND THE GENTLEMAN IS -- THE WAY HE'S LAYING IT OUT, BASICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE 40 FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE. HE'S COMING DOWN 250 FEET FROM THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER TO 40 FEET WITH MINE. THAT IS NOT A RURAL AREA IN MY WAY OF THINKING. YOU KNOW, IF I WANTED TO LIVE IN TAMPA, I WOULD HAVE LIVED IN TAMPA. I WANTED TO LIVE IN A RURAL AREA. THAT'S WHY I BOUGHT 22 YEARS AGO AND BUILT MY DREAM HOUSE, NOT A DREAM SHOPPING CENTER. AGAIN, WE HAVE THE ASPHALT, WE HAVE THE OIL RUNOFF FROM THE WATER GOING INTO OUR WATER TABLES OUT THERE. WE ALL OUT THERE ARE ON WELLS. WE DO NOT HAVE COUNTY WATER, SO THAT'S ANOTHER CONSIDERATION. PLEASE, FOLKS, THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE YOU SIT THERE AND PASS THIS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS RICHARD TRZCINSKI. I LIVE AT 19202 LAKE ALLEN ROAD IN LUTZ. WE WORKED TOGETHER, COMMISSIONER NORMAN, AT THE VERY BEGINNING AND THE ONSET WHEN WE STARTED DEVELOPING THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR. 1983 THIS CORNER GOT REZONED FOR THE 110,000 FEET ON 20- SOME-ODD ACRES. THE D.O.T. TOOK HALF OF IT, PAID THE GUY COMMERCIAL RATES IN HIS REDUCTION. WE THEN WORKED TOGETHER TO DEVELOP THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR PLAN, SHOWING THESE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTERS, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTERS, MAJOR ACTIVITY CENTERS, AND SO ON, ALONG WITH ACTUALLY A ROADWAY OVERLAY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO INDICATE HOW THE CORRIDOR WAS TO BE BUILT IN DEVELOPED IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED SERVICE ACCESS TO THE ROADS, YOU KNOW, PARALLEL LANES, SO ON AND SO FORTH, WHICH NONE HAVE UNFOLDED UNFORTUNATELY QUITE YET. LET'S HOPE IT DOES. FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THOUGH, WE NEGOTIATED THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR PLAN, AND IT WAS ALL PART OF THIS SMART GROWTH CONCEPT AND A QUALITY-OF-LIFE ISSUE, SOME OF THESE KEY WORDS AND PHRASES THAT YOU GENTLEMEN AND LADIES HAVE STATED THIS EVENING, BUT WHAT DO WE HAVE NOW? YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NEARLY 500,000 FEET AT THE SOUTHERN END OF THE CORRIDOR PRESENTLY CONSTRUCTED. THERE'S AN ENTITLEMENT FOR ANOTHER 500,000 FEET THERE ON THE GERACI PROPERTY, AND THERE'S A HOSPITAL GOING UP. UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CORRIDOR WHICH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, THE LUTZ-LAKE FERN AREA, THE SUNLAKE ROAD AREA, TRYING TO EXPAND THAT. WELL, WHEN -- IN 2001 WHEN THEY DID THE PD WE NEGOTIATED ALL THE SQUARE FOOTAGES THEN, AND WE WORKED TOGETHER WITH THE COUNTY, WITH THE COMMISSIONERS THEN, AND THEY SAW THEIR WAY FIT IN TERMS OF THE LONG-WAY PLAN, THE COMP PLAN AT THE TIME AND BUILD-OUT DEVELOPMENT, THAT THIS WAS ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE BUILT THERE AND SERVICE THE COMMUNITY, AND THESE WERE THE AREAS THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO GO INTO. WELL, WHAT IS THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCE NOW? LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE THE MILLION FEET ENTITLEMENT. HALF OF IT'S BUILT TO THE SOUTH. YOU HAVE OUR MIDDLE NODES NOW THAT ARE NEARLY 77% BUILT OUT, AND REALLY AT THE NORTHERN NODE YOU HAVE A TARGET CENTER AT COUNTY LINE ROAD, OVER 250 FEET OF COMMERCIAL BUILT, AND QUITE FRANKLY, THAT STORE ONLY HAS TWO CASHIER LIGHTS GOING ON. THE STORE IS IN BAD AMENDS COMMERCIALLY. THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT IS VACANT AND AVAILABLE IN TERMS OF COMMERCIAL USE. SO -- >>KEN HAGAN: QUICKLY, SIR. >> I AM HOPEFULLY THAT, COMMISSIONERS, YOU WILL VOTE THIS DOWN, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING EXPERIENCING THE GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE HAVE IN LUTZ. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] GOOD EVENING. >> HI. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S JANET WILSON. I LIVE AT 1315 ANGLERS LANE, LUTZ, FLORIDA. I'M OPPOSED TO THE EXPANSION OF AN AREA THAT'S UP FOR REZONING OWNED BY THE LLC, AS YOU SEE ON THE MAP RIGHT HERE. I'VE KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED -- I HATCHED IT, AND BELOW THERE'S A PARCEL THAT'S GOING TO -- THAT WILL BE EXPANDED TO WHERE I'VE GOT THE HATCH MARKS, AND THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT ZONED COMMERCIAL. I THINK INITIALLY WHEN THE SHOPPING CENTER WAS BUILT, IT WAS ALWAYS PLANNED THAT THE FIRM LLC AREA WOULD BE EXPANDED -- THAT WOULD BE THE EXPANSION FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER. I'M OPPOSED TO ANY INCREASE IN THAT AREA AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL. IT WILL IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND NEIGHBORS ALONG MERRY LANE AND ARBOR DRIVE AND ANGLERS LANE. WE'LL ALL BE IMPACTED IF THAT HAPPENS. IT'S LARGE ENOUGH LIKE IT IS. I OPPOSE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. WILSON. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] >> GOOD EVENING ONCE AGAIN. PAM CLOUSTON, R-LAND, AND THERE IS VERY, VERY FAR FROM WHERE LITHIA IS, BUT IT -- WE HAVE A HOUSE OF CARDS STARTING HERE. IF WE START TO INVADE THE RURAL SERVICE AREA AND WE START TO TAKE AWAY THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL THESE FOLKS THAT LIVE AND BOUGHT IN A RURAL AREA EXPECTING IT TO BE AND REMAIN A RURAL AREA, WE'RE TAKING AWAY PROMISES. ALL THESE PEOPLE CHOSE TO LIVE WHERE THEY LIVE. WHETHER THEY'VE LIVED THERE ONE YEAR, FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, 20 YEARS, OR LIKE THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS -- THAT SPOKE BEFORE AND SAID THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY 20-SOME YEARS AGO IN HOPES OF, YOU KNOW, SPECULATION OF SELLING IT, HAVING IT INCREASE IN VALUE, WELL, WE ALL DO THAT TOO, BUT IF YOU BUY IN A RURAL AREA AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOUR RURAL LIFESTYLE IS CUT SHORT BY A SHOPPING CENTER THAT BUTTS UP TO YOUR BACK PASTURE, THAT'S TAKEN DOWN THE VALUE OF YOUR PROPERTY UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE LIKE THE REST AND FALL, LIKE THE HOUSE OF CARDS, AND TURN THAT INTO ANOTHER TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. WE NEED SMART GROWTH, WE NEED INFILL DEVELOPMENT ARE. WE DO NOT NEED TO BE EXPANDING FARTHER AND FARTHER AND FARTHER AND FARTHER OUT INTO THE RURAL AREA. YOU HEARD THE MAN TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT IS WITHIN A MILE OF HIS HOME, EVERYTHING HE CAN WALK TO WITHIN A HALF MILE OF HIS HOME. WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? IT -- YOU KNOW, DALE MABRY HAS TURNED INTO A NIGHTMARE. WE'RE GOING TO JUST EXPAND THE NIGHTMARE A LITTLE FARTHER? AND R-LAND IS SPECIFIC TO LITHIA, BUT WE ALSO FEEL LIKE IT'S VERY NECESSARY TO SPEAK UP ON BEHALF OF OUR OTHER RURAL NEIGHBORS. I KNOW THAT WHEN THE DEVELOPERS COME UP OR THE PEOPLE THAT WANT THIS TO GO THROUGH WILL COME UP AND START TALKING, THEY'RE SAYING, WELL, WHAT ARE THEY DOING TALKING ABOUT IT, IT'S NOT EVEN WHERE THEY LIVE. IT IS WHERE WE LIVE BECAUSE IT'S HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS WHERE WE ALL LIVE. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU. NEXT. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M JOE FLACH, 1321 ANGLERS LANE. MY FAMILY BOUGHT THE HOUSE THAT I LIVE IN 25 YEARS AGO. I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BUY IT FROM MY PARENTS THREE OR FIVE YEARS AGO, ONE OF THE TWO. WITH THE EXPANSION, I OPPOSE IT, I WANT TO GET THAT ON RECORD, BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL -- WOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY WHEN I GET UP HERE NOW. I'M IN COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION. MY WIFE'S IN REAL ESTATE, SO THE ECONOMY, WE FEEL THE CRUNCH, SO I USUALLY, YOU KNOW -- CONSTRUCTION, PLEASE, LET ME GO BID ON IT, BUT IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE HERE. YOU'VE GOT SO MANY OUTLETS OF COMMERCIAL AVAILABILITY THAT ARE NOT BEING USED. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. IT'S COMMON SENSE TO SAY NO TO THIS THING. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] WELCOME. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ELISABETH FLAK. THAT'S MY HUSBAND, JOE. I LIVE AT 1321 ANGLERS LANE. I CAME UP HERE LAST TIME AND HAD A BARRAGE OF INFORMATION TO SHARE WITH YOU, WHICH YOU PRETTY MUCH ALREADY KNOW, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING SOMETHING TO YOUR ATTENTION. THIS WAS THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS IN OCTOBER OF 2000. THE BEGINNING PARAGRAPH STATES, THE LUTZ COMMUNITY SEEKS TO ENSURE THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIAL USES IN THE COMMUNITY ARE PROPERLY PLACED TO ENHANCE THE UTILITY AND HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE AREA. THE COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT NEW COMMERCIAL AND SPECIAL USE DEVELOPMENT TO FORCE THE CREATION OF DEVELOPMENT THAT DOES NOT COMPLEMENT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. ALONG WITH THAT THERE ARE PARAGRAPHS THAT STATE THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT TO DO TO PRESERVE THE LUTZ AREA OR WHATEVER THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. ONE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE, LIKE PHIL MENTIONED, IS WE ARE ALL ON WELL WATER. WHEN YOU START DEVELOPING THESE AREAS AND YOU START SIPHONING WATER OUT OF THE GROUND, EVEN IF IT IS -- THESE PEOPLE HAPPEN TO BE ON COMMUNITY -- OR, YOU KNOW, COUNTY WATER, YOU'RE STILL UTILIZING OUR WATER, AND NOW THE RUNOFF FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE RUNNING INTO THE LAKES. THERE ARE THREE LAKES THAT SURROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, SO ALL THIS DISGUSTING RUNOFF AND ALL THE SEWAGE AND ALL THE NASTY GARBAGE THAT COMES OUT IS GETTING INTO OUR GROUNDWATER, AND THAT'S MY WELL WATER THAT MY CHILDREN ARE DRINKING AND SHOWERING IN EVERY DAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS -- OR NOT YOU SPECIFICALLY, BUT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DID APPROVE WAS THAT THE WATER WOULD BE NONTOXIC AND THAT IT WOULD STAY CLEAN. LIKE ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE STOOD UP AND SAID, WE OPPOSE THIS. WE DON'T NEED IT. WE HAVE 46 VACANCIES FROM NORTH DALE MABRY AND VAN DYKE UP TO THE COUNTY LINE. ECONOMIC GROWTH IS SLOW, REAL ESTATE IS SLOW. THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD LEASE THESE PARCELS WOULD BE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHO OWNS THESE BUSINESSES NOW OR SMALL - - BIGGER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO OWN MAYBE FIVE DIFFERENT PARCELS. THEY'RE NOT GETTING LEASED NOW, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET LEASED IN THE NEXT TWO TO THREE YEARS, SO THE GENTLEMAN WHO WANTS YOU TO EXPAND HIS SHOPPING CENTER AND DEVELOP THIS AREA, IT'S UNNECESSARY. PEOPLE CAN FIND OTHER PLACES TO LEASE RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CARIN HUNT. I LIVE AT 19101 DALE MABRY HIGHWAY. I FEEL LIKE A BROKEN RECORD BECAUSE I KEEP SAYING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER, BUT I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF THIS EXPANSION DON'T SEEM TO LIVE IN THE LUTZ AREA. FOR THE RECORD, I AM AGAINST THE EXPANSION. AS SAID BEFORE, WE DON'T NEED IT, WE DON'T WANT IT. TO APPROVE THESE EXPANSIONS IS TO BENEFIT MAYBE MORE THAN ONCE THESE DEVELOPERS THAT DON'T LIVE IN THE AREA, THAT DON'T DEAL WITH WHAT WE DEAL WITH ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS, AND IF MY OPINION, IT'S JUST THE WRONG THING TO DO. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE? DON'T BE SHY. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DARLENE HALL. I LIVE AT 19259 BLOUNT ROAD IN LUTZ. I'M AGAINST THIS EXPANSION FOR TWO VERY GOOD REASONS. ONE IS THE TRAFFIC AND THE OTHER IS WE HAVE ENOUGH COMMERCIAL IN THE AREA. LET ME EXPAND JUST VERY SHORTLY. I LIVE ONE BLOCK OFF OF LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD. I HAVE TO TURN DIRECTLY OFF OF MY ROAD, BLOUNT ROAD, TO GET ONTO LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD TO COMMUTE ANYWHERE. THE TRAFFIC IS REALLY GETTING BAD, AND IT'S BEEN INCREASINGLY GETTING BAD. WE HAVE SO MANY PROJECTS GOING ON IN THE AREA ALREADY UNDERWAY, A NEW HIGH SCHOOL, A CHURCH WAS JUST BUILT, AND NOW WE'RE HAVING SAND MINES PUT ON LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD. WE HAVE ENOUGH TRAFFIC. WE DON'T NEED MORE COMMERCIAL, WE DON'T NEED EXPANSION OF COMMERCIAL. WE ALREADY HAVE PROBLEMS WITH OUR TRAFFIC AS IT IS. THE OTHER REASON IS THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH COMMERCIAL IN THE AREA, COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. WE CAN GO JUST ABOUT A MILE SOUTH TO VAN DYKE. THERE'S ALL THE STRIP CENTERS YOU WANT THERE, ALL THE STORES YOU CAN EVER WANT THERE, A MILE NORTH TO 54. ALL THIS AREA IS EXPANDING. THERE'S SO MANY VACANCIES IN THE AREA, WE DON'T NEED TO EXPAND IT. WE HAVE ALL WE NEED. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR LUTZ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU'LL SEE WHAT WE WERE ASKING FOR. WE WANTED TO KEEP OUR LIFESTYLE AS IT IS WITHOUT HAVING IT BE SURROUNDED BY HEAVY-DUTY COMMERCIAL, AND SO WE'RE ASKING YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS. WE DON'T IMMEDIATE IT AND WE DON'T WANT IT IN THE LUTZ AREA. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. JOSH HORROCKS, 10876 STANDING STONE DRIVE, AND THAT'S RIVERVIEW, FLORIDA. I'M UP HERE -- I ACTUALLY WORK FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER. I'M HERE FOR ONE MAIN REASON. THAT IS BECAUSE I AM AFRAID THAT IF THIS DOESN'T GET APPROVED, I'M JOBLESS. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT MEANS I DON'T PAY MY MORTGAGE, I CAN'T SUPPORT MY FAMILY, AND I CAN'T CONTINUE MY MASTER'S PROGRAM. THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO ALLOW THIS. IT'S DALE MABRY HIGHWAY. THE TRAFFIC, THERE'S 60,000 CARS A DAY. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I WANT TO POINT OUT NOT ONLY IS IT MY JOB, THE SHOPPING CENTER'S GOING TO CREATE JOBS FOR ALL OF THESE PEOPLE, FOR ALL OF THEIR KIDS. I JUST HIRED SOMEONE AT OUR OFFICE, AN ASSISTANT. I HAD PROBABLY A HUNDRED PEOPLE COME IN AND BEG ME FOR A MINIMUM WAGE JOB. WITH THAT SAID, I WAS PRETTY INTERESTED TO FIND OUT THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO THIS. I WENT OUT TO THE SHOPPING CENTER MYSELF TODAY. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE HERE -- AND I RESPECT THEIR OPINIONS AND THOUGHTS -- IS A GROUP WHO HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF GETTING TOGETHER, BUT I THINK THAT THOSE PEOPLE THERE ARE THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT THIS TO BE DONE. I HAVE A -- I TOOK A SURVEY TODAY OR NOT A SURVEY. I HAD PEOPLE SIGN A PETITION AS A MATTER OF FACT. I ASKED 40 PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT OF PUBLIX AT THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER WOULD YOU BE OPPOSED TO THE EXPANSION OF THIS SHOPPING CENTER? >> THEY DON'T LIVE THERE. >>KEN HAGAN: HEY, FOLKS. >> I HAVE THEIR ADDRESSES. EVERYTHING'S DOCUMENTED. 33 PEOPLE SAID I WOULD ABSOLUTELY LOVE MORE SHOPPING, SIX PEOPLE SAID NO, AND ONE HAD NO OPINION. THAT'S MY MATH, 82% OF THE PEOPLE I ASKED RANDOM, COMPLETELY RANDOM IN THE AREA, SAID YES. THERE WERE ACTUALLY PEOPLE THAT HEARD ME TALKING TO SOMEONE ELSE AND CAME OVER AND SAID, GOSH, I WOULD LOVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, LET ME SIGN YOUR PAPER, SO, YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, HERE'S A COPY FOR EACH OF YOU. THIS WAS 40 PEOPLE FROM -- NOT THAT IT'S A BUSY TIME, BUT TODAY, THURSDAY, FROM 2:00 TO 4:30. AGAIN, 82% OF THE PEOPLE I ASKED WERE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIGN THE PAPER FOR THE EXPANSION. AGAIN, I RESPECT THE THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS OF THESE PEOPLE, BUT I THINK WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS NOT A VERY GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THE POPULATION. YOU'LL SEE THIS BY THE SIGNATURES HERE, AND AGAIN, IT WAS 40 PEOPLE, 33 SAID YES, SIX SAID NO, AND ONE HAD NO OPINION. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. TODD MARK, 19808 DEER HOLLOW LANE IN LUTZ. I AGREE, WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE WORKSHOP BECAUSE I ATTENDED EVERY SINGLE MEETING, AND LIKE THAT COMMERCIAL SAYS, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW. EVERYBODY SAID NO, NO, NO, AND EVERY TIME THE WORD "EXPANSION" WAS MENTIONED, IT WAS JUMPED UPON, AND WITH ALL RESPECT TO PEOPLE THAT WORK AT A WAL-MART, I DON'T HAVE ASPIRATIONS FOR MY SON TO BECOME A CASHIER AT WAL-MART, OKAY. THESE ARE NOT THE KIND OF JOBS THAT WE NEED, AND IT'S TIME TO STOP SUPPORTING DEVELOPERS. THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE, BUT THESE AREAS, THESE NODES HAVE VACANCIES ALREADY. THEY'RE NOT FILLED UP. THERE'S NO REASON TO EXPAND THEM. AND I RESENT THE CERTAIN COMMISSIONER'S COMMENT THAT PEOPLE WHO WANT TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT ARE EXTREMISTS. I THINK TO DEVELOP JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DEVELOPMENT IS AN EXTREME POINT OF VIEW AS WELL. [APPLAUSE] THERE'S SUCH A THING AS SMART GROWTH. I'VE LIVED DOWN HERE FOR 22 YEARS, AND IT WAS A PARADISE WHEN I CAME HERE. I MOVED INTO LUTZ TO AN AREA WHERE I THOUGHT I'D BE PROTECTED FROM THE GROWTH. I WAS ABLE TO SHOW PEOPLE WILDLIFE. NOW IF I WANT TO SHOW ANY WILDLIFE, IT'S DEAD ON DALE MABRY IF THERE'S ANYTHING LEFT. YOU'VE GOTTEN RID OF MOST OF THE MAMMALS. THE BIRDS ARE HARDLY LEFT. THAT'S WHAT'S NEXT TO GO. IF YOU WANT TO MOVE TO THAT TYPE OF AREA, THEN MOVE TO THAT TYPE OF AREA. DON'T BRING IT TO PEOPLE THAT WORKED VERY HARD. I DIDN'T ENJOY MOST OF MY CAREER TO MAKE THE MONEY I MADE TO GET A HOUSE WHERE I LIVE IN THE AREA WHERE I WANTED TO LIVE. PLEASE OPPOSE THIS AND LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY, NOT A SELECT FEW THAT HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN REZONING A PERSONAL PROPERTY THAT THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE MONEY ON AND THEN LEAVE THE AREA. IF YOU TRULY WANT COMMUNITIES, THEN SUPPORT THE COMMUNITIES AND LISTEN TO WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CHERYL AYERS, AND I LIVE AT 18717 GERACI ROAD. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF LUTZ FOR APPROXIMATELY 25 YEARS. I'VE SEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF IMPROVEMENT, EXPANSION, IMPROVEMENT OF THE ROADS, WIDENING OF THE ROADS, NEW BUSINESSES BEING BUILT, AND IT'S BEEN JUST FABULOUS, BUT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. I SAY STOP. IT IS GETTING TO WHERE I BELIEVE IT WILL ENCROACH OUR ENJOYMENT OF OUR LIFE ON A LAKE IN WHAT I CONSIDER A RURAL BEDROOM COMMUNITY WHERE WE WOULD LIVE OUT OF THE CITY AND COMMUTE INTO THE CITY FOR WORK. TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THE AREA COMMERCIALLY BETWEEN VAN DYKE AND THE COUNTY LINE ROAD I THINK IS GOING TO INHIBIT OUR FUTURE GENERATION'S ENJOYMENT OF A RURAL BEDROOM COMMUNITY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO CONTINUED EXPANSION. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. AYERS. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BARBARA VILLAGER CHISHOLM. I LIVE AT 19003 NORLLER COURT, AND I TOO AM OPPOSED. PERSONALLY I AM A TEACHER, I TEACH AT THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, McKITRICK ELEMENTARY ON LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD. THE TRAFFIC IS BAD. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS, BUT WHAT WE HAVEN'T MENTIONED IS THAT -- THE FACT THAT THE EXPRESSWAY WILL BE OPENING THE -- THE ON RAMPS AND THE OFF RAMPS TO BE GETTING ON TO THE EXPRESSWAY. ONCE THOSE RAMPS ARE OPENED, THE TRAFFIC THAT NOW GOES DOWN DALE MABRY AND TURNS ONTO LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD AND DOES GO DOWN SUNLAKE, A LOT OF THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO GO AWAY BECAUSE THEY WANT THE EXPRESSWAY. THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THAT EXPRESSWAY, SO THE SPONTANEOUSNESS OF LET'S GO SHOPPING, LET'S GO HERE QUICKLY ON THE WAY HOME, SOME OF THAT'S GOING TO -- I BELIEVE WILL GO DOWN. YES, IT IS UNNECESSARY GROWTH, YES IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN TO MY FIRST GRADERS -- EXCUSE ME, I DON'T MEAN TO GET EMOTIONAL -- WHY THERE'S DEAD DEER BECAUSE THEY'RE BUILDING THE HIGH SCHOOL, SO WE TALK ABOUT THE ENCROACHMENT AND HOW THIS GROWTH IS NECESSARY, THE SCHOOLS ARE NECESSARY, WE MUST HAVE A PLACE FOR THE CHILDREN TO GO TO SCHOOL. SO IT'S HARD FOR THEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING, AND HAVE A WONDERFUL EVENING. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR STAYING LATE TONIGHT. I KNOW YOUR TIME IS VALUABLE TO YOU, AND YOU PROBABLY WANT TO GET HOME TO YOUR KIDS. I HAVE A LITTLE MAP HERE. OOPS. OKAY. I'VE TAKEN THE ATLAS AND MADE MY OWN LITTLE MAP BECAUSE SOME OF THESE MAPS ARE SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, AND JUST TO SHOW YOU HERE, THIS STRETCH OF DALE MABRY ALL THE WAY FROM WEST KENNEDY UP TO THIS POINT IS APPROXIMATELY 13 MILES, AND IT'S MAINLY STRIP DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THE FIRST REAL BREAK IN THAT, AND THEN IT STARTS UP AGAIN UP IN PASCO COUNTY. YOU CAN SEE THAT WE LIVE IN A RURAL AREA BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF GREENSPACE, A HORSE RANCH HERE, CATTLE PASTURE HERE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF BUSINESSES. HERE'S A LIST OF ABOUT A HUNDRED BUSINESSES THAT I WROTE DOWN THE NAMES OF AND WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED JUST IN THIS THREE-MILE STRETCH OF PROPERTY BETWEEN VAN DYKE CROSSING, THE PUBLIX CENTER HERE, ANOTHER PUBLIX HERE, SO -- I LIVE RIGHT HERE AT THIS "X," SO WITHIN A MILE AND A HALF RANGE EITHER SIDE OF ME I HAVE A PUBLIX. AND THIS PUBLIX ORIGINALLY, THE ONE THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE EXPANDED, WAS ORIGINALLY SCALED BACK TO THE VERY SMALLEST SIZE PUBLIX THAT THEY WOULD BUILD BECAUSE RESIDENTS REALLY DIDN'T WANT ANOTHER BIG STORE IN THAT AREA. MY CONCERNS ARE WITH ACCESS. RIGHT HERE IS YOUR ACCESS TO COME OUT. SOMEBODY'S ALREADY MENTIONED THIS, I REALIZE. AND ALSO LEAVING MY PROPERTY, COMING OUT GERACI. I KNOW THIS WAS A LITTLE HARD PROBABLY FOR YOU TO VISUALIZE LAST TIME, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THIS LITTLE HAND BLOWN-UP MAP, BUT THAT'S THE BEST I COULD DO. WHERE GERACI AND WILSON BOTH ACCESS NORTH DALE MABRY, THIS IS -- YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS STRETCH HERE IS ONLY A FOUR- LANE WHERE THIS IS NARROWING DOWN FROM THE SIX-LANE. THIS IS LESS THAN A TENTH OF A MILE BETWEEN THESE TWO STREETS. YOU HAVE A GAS STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE, ANOTHER BUSINESS HERE, PROFESSIONAL CENTER HERE WHERE THIS INCREASED EXPANSION AND THE ACTIVITY CENTER IS PROPOSED, AND THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT INTERSECTION FOR US TO MANEUVER AS IT IS. IT REALLY IS. AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ACCESS AT BOTH OF THESE POINTS. IN CLOSING, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY I WAS AT PUBLIX TODAY. NOBODY POLLED ME. [LAUGHTER] THE SERVICES ARE MORE THAN ADEQUATE, THE ROADS AND THE ACCESSES ARE NOT. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> AND IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A GREEN VISION. I JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUICK, QUICK COMMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: QUICKLY. >> I THINK OUR COMMUNITY WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE INSTEAD OF DEVELOPING MORE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL THAT THE GENTLEMAN FROM TAIWAN WAS TALKING ABOUT, HOW ABOUT AGRICULTURAL? >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. >> HOW ABOUT AN ORGANIC GARDEN? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I'M SORRY. DEBBIE JOUDREY, 18627 GERACI ROAD. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT. WELCOME. >> HELLO. I'M RUTH TALLY, AND I WANT TO THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE FOR DENYING THE CHANGE AT NORTH DALE MABRY OVERLAY DISTRICT. IN 1978, MY HUSBAND AND I BUILT A HOUSE. THERE WAS A NEW SUBDIVISION NORBERT FULLER ON TWO LAKES, AND WE BUILT A HOUSE, AND WE FOUND THE HOUSE THAT WOULD BE THE LEAST -- BE THE MOST RURAL OF ALL THE -- OF ALL THE 20 LOTS. IT TOOK A WHILE. WE HAD OUR LAST BUILDING BUILT IN OUR SUBDIVISION THIS YEAR, SO IT WAS 20 LOTS, AND THEY -- IT TOOK -- I HAVE BEEN THERE 30 YEARS, SO IT TOOK 30 YEARS TO FILL 20 LOTS. WE DO NOT HAVE A LARGE ENOUGH AREA TO REALLY HAVE A BIG SHOPPING CENTER. WE DON'T HAVE ONE. WE NEGOTIATED TO GET A SMALL SHOPPING CENTER. I WAS THERE. I WAS PART OF THE NEGOTIATION, AND WE HAVE SO MUCH DESIRE TO KEEP OUR AREA RURAL, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU'D DENY THIS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. [APPLAUSE] ANYONE ELSE? WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? GOING ONCE. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: DON'T BE SHY. COME ON. GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. BEFORE I START, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A LITTLE SURVEY POLL MYSELF HERE IN THE AUDIENCE. I WOULD LIKE EVERYONE WHO CAME OUT TONIGHT AND DROVE 45 MINUTES AND STAYED UP THIS LATE THAT OPPOSES THIS AMENDMENT TO PLEASE STAND UP. THAT WOULD BE 95% OF THE AUDIENCE HERE TONIGHT. [LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] MY NAME IS ALLEGRA CAMPOS, AND I LIVE AT 18908 MERRY LANE. WE LIVE ON THREE ACRES NEXT TO THE SHOPPING CENTER. I STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY EXPANSION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER, ALSO KNOWN AS THE PUBLIX SHOPPING CENTER. THERE IS NO CASE FOR SERVING THE PUBLIC GOOD BY EXPANDING THIS DEVELOPMENT ONTO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND TURNING IT INTO COMMERCIAL. THIS AREA IS OUTSIDE THE URBAN SERVICE AREA. IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE RURAL SERVICE AREA. THIS EXPANSION IS AGAINST THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN, AND THIS PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL HOMES. THE EXPANSION OF THE PUBLIX SHOPPING CENTER IS DOWN MERRY LANE AND ARBOR LANE, NOT ON DALE MABRY. IT COMES DOWN OUR ONE-LANE STREETS. IT'S NOT ON DALE MABRY. SOME OF IT IS, BUT NOT ALL OF IT, NOT MOST OF IT. IT'S ACROSS THE -- IT'S GOING TO COME ACROSS THE STREET TO MR. LIGHTNER'S HOME. THANK YOU. THERE'S A PICTURE OF HIS HOME. THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH LOOKING AT A WALL LIKE THIS. OF COURSE, THAT'S HOW THEY MAINTAIN IT. THE EXPANSION IS AGAIN DOWN MERRY LANE AND ARBOR LANE, NOT ON DALE MABRY. THE LUTZ RESIDENTS HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED THIS AT ALL THE TOWN HALL MEETINGS. ALL THE MEETINGS PEOPLE CAME OUT AND SAID NO, WE DON'T WANT ANYMORE. WE HAVE ENOUGH. SO WHY IS THIS BOARD PURSUING THIS? WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHERE YOU CAME UP WITH THIS. WHOSE IDEA WAS IT? THIS IS ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE TO THE LUTZ RESIDENTS. IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE RURAL QUIET ATMOSPHERE AND LOCAL CHARACTER OF LUTZ ACCORDING TO WHAT YOUR BOARD AGREED ON AND TO UPHOLD. WE'RE PROTECTING OUR PROPERTY. WE THINK IT'S FAIR, AND JUST LIKE THE OTHER PEOPLE HERE, WE FEEL LIKE OUR VOICES NEED TO BE HEARD AS WELL. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT, PLEASE. WELCOME. >> MY NAME ARLENE MANALE. I LIVE AT 19001 NORLLER COURT IN LUTZ FLORIDA. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR LISTENING. I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG EVENING, AND WE'RE THE LAST ONES ON THE MAP, SO I APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO US. FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION DENYING EXPANDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER. I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING THAT. [APPLAUSE] THEY FOUND IT WAS INCONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE OF HILLSBOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND IT WOULD BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN. THEY ALSO RECOGNIZED THE CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. I SINCERELY HOPE THAT YOU-ALL WILL TAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION INTO CONSIDERATION. THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN 1983 DID NOT INCLUDE COMING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT DID INCLUDE 110,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT PART OF THAT WAS TAKEN BY D.O.T. NOW SOME OF THAT DALE MABRY AREA, JUST A SMALL PART OF THAT, IS GOING TO BE ON DALE MABRY. THE REST THEY WANT TO BRING INTO OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, ONE-LANE ROADS. IF YOU NOTICE UP THERE I PUT A LITTLE "X," THERE'S A HOUSE RIGHT THERE. THAT'S PHIL'S HOUSE. AT 5:00 P.M. AT NIGHT I HAVE A VERY HARD TIME GETTING OUT OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAVE ONLY ONE EXIT, AND THAT'S COMING OFF OF MERRY LANE ONTO LUTZ LAKE. WHEN I TRY AND PULL LEFT OR GO TOWARDS DALE MABRY, WE'RE BACKED UP BY A RED LIGHT. I HAVE TO SIT THERE AND HOPE THAT SOMEBODY WILL LOOK AT ME TO LET ME OUT. YES, SOMEBODY ASKED, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU PUT SIGNS UP THERE SAYING, DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION. WE HAVE THEM, AND THEY DON'T LOOK AT US. THEY DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO IT. SO IF WE'RE HAVING PROBLEMS, THINK OF PUBLIX THAT'S UP JUST A LITTLE WAYS FROM US, THEIR EXIT TO GET OUT. THEY CAN'T GET OUT EITHER, SO THEY HAVE TO SIT THERE AND LOOK AT PEOPLE AND SAY, I'M HERE, PLEASE LET ME OUT, AND SOMETIMES THEY GET VERY FRUSTRATED, AND I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT OF MERRY LANE. I KNOW BETTER THAN TO GO TO PUBLIX AT 5:00 P.M. AND TRY AND GET OUT ON THAT ROAD. LASTLY, WHAT WAS THE DECIDING FACTORS WHEN YOU PURCHASED YOUR HOMES? WAS IT YOUR CHURCH, WAS IT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WAS IT THE FAMILY WAS CLOSE BY, WAS IT THE SCHOOLS THAT YOU LIVE IN, WAS IT A GATED COMMUNITY? SO MANY FACTORS. MINE WAS BECAUSE IT'S A RURAL NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A REALLY NICE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S ONE-ACRE LOTS. I SIT THERE AND I CAN SEE THE HERONS, I COULD SEE THE OSPREYS AND EVERYTHING -- AND ALL THE OTHER WILDLIFE. I REALLY DO WANT TO KEEP THAT PEACE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, SO PLEASE DON'T DEPRECIATE THE MAIN REASON WHY I BOUGHT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE DON'T DIMINISH MY QUALITY OF LIFE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. [APPLAUSE] NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. >> HI. MY NAME IS RON HEMBREE. I LIVE AT 4319 BEAU RIVAGE CIRCLE. I'VE LIVED IN LUTZ FOR ABOUT SIX YEARS, AND STANDING UP HERE IS A VERY INTIMIDATING PROCEDURE. I ATTENDED ALL BUT ONE OF THE MEETINGS WITH THE SENIOR CITIZENS IN LUTZ, AND I MISSED JUST LAST MONTH'S MEETING HERE. I STAND ON THE SIDE THAT I SEE NO REASON WHY THIS SHOULDN'T BE CONTINUED, AND IF WE TAKE A LOOK -- IF WE GO BACK TO 1983 BEFORE MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS SMALL AREA THAT ARE OPPOSING THIS CAME TO LUTZ, THE GOVERNING BODY REZONED 14.9 ACRES FOR AGRICULTURAL -- I MEAN FOR -- FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND TO NEIGHBORHOOD-SERVING COMMERCIAL USES. IN 1989 -- LET ME GO BACK WITH THIS. IN 1989 AND 1990 THE 14.9 ACRES WAS KEPT COMMERCIAL AND CALLED A NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER. IN 1999 WHEN A DEVELOPER WAS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP A SHOPPING CENTER THERE ON THE LAND THAT HAD BEEN ZONED THAT WAY SINCE 1983 -- PRIOR TO THE TIME MOST OF THESE PEOPLE EVEN BUILT HOMES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD -- THEY CUT IT BACK TO 68,000 FEET FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER, AND THAT WAS WHEN THE STATE TOOK THE LAND FROM THAT PARTICULAR SPACE. IT SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE THAT WE HAVE A VERY SMALL VOCAL GROUP TALKING AGAINST THIS AT THIS HEARING, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO MASS MAILING TO THE FOLKS IN LUTZ. I LIVE FURTHER DOWN VAN DYKE WITH -- IN LARGER COMMUNITIES, AND IT'S ONLY A MILE AND A QUARTER UP TO GET TO THE SHOPPING CENTER WHERE PUBLIX IS, AND IF WE TAKE A LOOK AT ONE OF THE MEETINGS, THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT SHOWED PROPOSALS THAT THE INTERSECTION AT THAT AREA IS GOING TO CHANGE WHEN THEY WIDEN LUTZ-LAKE FERN WITH THE COMPLETION OF THE INTERCHANGE AT THE FLORIDA TURNPIKE SYSTEM ON LUTZ- LAKE FERN. ALSO, THE INTERSECTION AT SUNSET LAKE IS SUPPOSED TO CHANGE DRAMATICALLY. IN ONE OF THE PLANS IS SHOWED THAT PUBLIX -- NO, IT'S NOT A PUBLIX -- THE LITTLE GAS STATION AND 7-ELEVEN IS GOING TO DISAPPEAR WHEN THEY RECONFIGURE THE ROADS IN THAT AREA, SO THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, WHEN DEVELOPERS ARE PROPOSING PROPERTIES, AS WE CAN SEE, IT WAS ALMOST 20 YEARS FROM THE ZONING BEFORE THEY BUILT UP AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN. REZONING THIS PROPERTY NOW DOES NOT MEAN SOMETHING'S GOING TO BE BUILT RIGHT AWAY, BUT WHEN THE ECONOMY SAYS IT'S TIME, IT SHOULD BE READY TO BE DEVELOPED, AS HAS BEEN PLANNED FOR OVER 25 YEARS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. >> MARCELLA OSTEEN, BALM. THE LADY BACK THERE, THE ATTRACTIVE BLOND LADY THAT WAS UP LIKE TWO BEFORE THIS ASKED THE QUESTION. SHE SAID WHAT CAUSED THIS TO BE BROUGHT UP AS A CODE AMENDMENT, AND I WAS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE FIRST CAME, AND I WAS PAYING ATTENTION, AND THEIR ARGUMENTS WERE COMPELLING, AND BRUCE CURY, THE CHAIRMAN -- AND -- ONE AFTER THE OTHER THEY SAID WE SAT THROUGH 12 WORKSHOPS, AND OVER AND OVER WE SAID NO, WE DON'T WANT THIS, WE DON'T WANT THIS, WE DON'T WANT THIS, ALL DIFFERENT WAYS THEY SAID NO, AND YET THEY KEPT GOING BACK, AND THE STAFF ULTIMATELY HAD TO BRING THIS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT. SO CHAIRMAN CURY, AFTER HEARING ALL THE BAD THINGS ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ONE ON THE NORTH, SAID, WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND, WHY DID THIS COME ABOUT? WHO -- AND HE WAS ASKING MR. HEALEY, AND HE SAID, WHO -- WHO -- HOW DID THIS COME ABOUT? AND MR. HEALEY SAID, WELL, IT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THIS, THIS, AND THIS. AND HE SAID, NO, WHO INITIATED IT? FINALLY HE BACKED MR. HEALEY INTO A CORNER, AND HE SAID, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. SO MY QUESTION IS AS A TAXPAYER, IF YOU-ALL HAVE DECIDED THAT YOU WANT TO -- NOW, I'M NOT SAYING ALL YOU-ALL, I'M NOT SAYING THAT, BUT IF SOMEBODY ON THIS BOARD HAS DECIDED THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT BROUGHT FORWARD, DON'T PUT THE CITIZENS THROUGH 12 WORKSHOPS. COUNTY STAFF IS FUNDING THIS, AND TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING FOR COUNTY STAFF HOURS. THAT'S A LOT OF MAN HOURS, AND -- NOW, SOME LATITUDE WAS TAKEN EARLIER BY ONE OF YOU WHO SAW FIT TO CHASTISE US IN A RANT ABOUT BEING EXTREMISTS, AND I WANT TO SAY I'M A CHRISTIAN, BAPTIST, PIANO-PLAYING BAPTIST REPUBLICAN THAT GOES TO CHURCH EVERY WEEK. MY FATHER ALSO WAS A CARPENTER, AND HE GOT LAID OFF MANY TIMES WHEN I WAS GROWING UP, AND ALL I HEARD WAS FEAST AND FAMINE. THE FEAST WOULD HAPPEN, GOOD; THE FAMINE WOULD COME, AND THEN THE FEAST WOULD COME AGAIN. SO WE HAVE A LOT IN COMMON, BUT IF THAT -- THERE'S A LAW PROBABLY SOMEWHERE THAT BAPTISTS CANNOT BE EXTREMIST, BUT IF I AM AN EXTREMIST, THERE'S A LOT MORE EXTREMISTS COMING ALONG THE LINE, AND A LOT OF US LIVE IN THE RURAL AREAS, BUT IF I AM AN EXTREMIST, YOU, SIR, HAVE MADE ME ONE. THANK YOU. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. OSTEEN. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ETHEL HAMMER, 3001 NORTH ROCKY POINT DRIVE, TAMPA. I AM HERE THIS EVENING REPRESENTING JOE DI GERLANDO, WHO IS THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND DALE MABRY. YOU'VE HEARD MY PRESENTATION BEFORE. ACTUALLY, I'D LIKE TO PASS OUT SOME PAPERS. AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT, I'M GOING TO ABBREVIATE MY PRESENTATION TO JUST SEVERAL POINTS, THREE POINTS. THE FIRST IS THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED BY SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS, WHAT IS THE NEED AND WHY SHOULD WE BE DOING THIS? WELL, THE NEED IS THE FACT THAT FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS SINCE THIS PLAN HAS BEEN IN PLACE, THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SINGLE COMMERCIAL REZONING ON NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY, YET THERE HAS -- NORTH OF VAN DYKE. MEANWHILE THERE HAS BEEN AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, MUCH OF WHICH HAD NOT BEEN APPROVED OR PLANNED FOR WHEN THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN 1989. THE CENSUS TRACT WHERE MOST OF THE GROWTH OCCURRED HAS ALMOST TRIPLED IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME. THE AVERAGE GROWTH RATE IN THE AREA SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT SITE HAS BEEN ALMOST 60%. I ALSO PROVIDED YOU TWO AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, ONE FROM 1989 WHEN THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR PLAN WAS APPROVED, THE OTHER FROM LAST YEAR, WHICH YOU CAN SEE VISUALLY HOW MUCH RESIDENTIAL GROWTH HAS OCCURRED IN THAT AREA. THE SECOND POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS RELATED TO THE FACT THAT THIS PROPERTY MEETS THE COUNTY'S LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS LOCATION MEETS THE COUNTY'S CRITERIA FOR OVER 150,000 SQUARE FEET. RIGHT NOW THERE'S ONLY 68,000 SQUARE FEET THERE. WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS 110, WELL BELOW THE MAXIMUM THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER. THIS LOCATION IS THE ONLY LOCATION ON THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR THAT MEETS THAT LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE, AND IT'S THE ONLY CORNER AT THAT NODE. THE THIRD POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS THAT THE PLAN HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED FOR 20 YEARS. THIS IS A LONG-TERM PLAN. IT PROBABLY WON'T BE UPDATED AGAIN FOR ANOTHER 20 YEARS. THIS IS NOT A REZONING REQUEST, IT IS A REQUEST TO LOOK AT THE LONG-RANGE FUTURE OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ON THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR. THIS APPROVAL THIS EVENING WOULD ONLY PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT CORNER. IT DOESN'T PROVIDE AN APPROVAL FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE DEVELOPER COULD THEN COME BACK AND ASK FOR A SPECIFIC PROPOSAL THAT THE NEIGHBORS COULD ACTUALLY LOOK AT. SO WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. WE KNOW IT'S A 20-YEAR PLAN. WE THINK THIS IS APPROPRIATE, AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE MORE THING. MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE UP HERE BOUGHT THEIR HOMES BY THEIR OWN TESTIMONY AT THE TIME WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS ZONED FOR 110,000 SQUARE FEET. THE TAKING DIDN'T HAPPEN UNTIL ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. HAMMER. ANYONE ELSE? YES, SIR. >> HI. I'M RICK JOUDREY, 18627 GERACI ROAD IN LUTZ. FIRST, LET ME STATE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID FIND THE EXPANSION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN AS NOT BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN. IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN, OKAY. AND LET'S TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR COMMERCIAL. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF NUMBERS THROWN AROUND HERE. I HAVE A SURVEY OF 114 RETAIL EXPERTS, OKAY, DONE BY CCIM INSTITUTE, AND THEY TALK ABOUT A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER AND WHAT MAKES IT SUCCESSFUL. AND IN THE WORST-CASE SCENARIO, THEY CITE THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE AT LEAST 4,000 HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER. I DOWNLOADED SOME INFORMATION ON LUTZ, SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHICS. THERE'S CURRENTLY 945 HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS OF THIS SITE, OKAY. TALK ABOUT THE EXPLOSIVE GROWTH. FROM 1990 TILL TODAY, 2007, THERE WAS AN ADDITION OF 287 HOUSEHOLDS, AND I THINK THAT CONFIRMS THE LADY THAT MOVED INTO A 20-LOT SUBDIVISION 30 YEARS AGO AND LAST YEAR THEY BUILT THE LAST HOUSE. THERE HAS NOT BEEN EXPLOSIVE GROWTH THERE. OKAY? WE'VE GOT TO KNOW WHEN TO STOP, OKAY. WE HAVE A PLAN HERE THAT SAYS LET'S LIMIT GROWTH. IF WE'RE GOING TO LIMIT GROWTH, WHY EVER BRING IT BACK UP? THE TYPE OF RURAL ZONING THAT'S IN THIS AREA IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE. OKAY. THE HOMES ARE AVERAGE ONE TO TWO ACRES PER HOME. YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH HOMES TO MAKE THAT SHOPPING CENTER WORK. THROWING MORE SPACE THERE IS NOT GOING TO MAKE IT WORK, AND WHEN THEY OPEN UP THE SUNCOAST, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO GO TO THE NEW PUBLIX AT 54, SO THE ONE-MILE RADIUS IS ABOUT CORRECT. LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THIS SHOPPING CENTER NEEDS 4,000 HOUSEHOLDS. IT'S NEVER GOING TO HAVE IT. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. SUNLAKE'S ANOTHER THING. THERE'S TWO ACRES ON THE CORNER OF SUNLAKE, DALE MABRY, GERACI ROAD. IT'S MOSTLY WETLAND. IT'S GOT MAYBE A HALF AN ACRE OF DRY SPACE THERE. THAT INTERSECTION'S A NIGHTMARE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY MONEY IN THE CIE IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS TO FIX THAT INTERSECTION, OKAY. SO AGAIN, THAT IS A FAILING "F" ROADWAY, A FAILING "F" INTERSECTION, AND ON THE -- AND ON THE COVER OF YOUR OWN MATERIAL, IT SAYS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO USE THIS INFORMATION - - THIS IS DESIGNED FOR REZONING AND CONCURRENCY REVIEWS. SO YOU DON'T HAVE A CONCURRENT SITE HERE, OKAY. SO I THINK YOU COME UP WITH A LOT OF THESE THINGS TO MAKE DCA THINK YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, AND IF YOU STICK TO YOUR PLANS, YOU PROBABLY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DCA, BUT YOU'RE NOT BECAUSE YOU DON'T STICK WITH THESE PLANS. MAKE A PLAN, STICK TO IT. THERE'S NO EXORBITANT GROWTH, THERE'S NO REASON TO EXPAND THE CENTER, THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T WANT IT, AND YOU NEED TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY AND PREVENT SPRAWL, WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON WHY THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE GROWTH PLAN, BECAUSE IT IS ENCOURAGING SPRAWL. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: ANYONE ELSE? [APPLAUSE] OKAY. THIS WILL BE OUR LAST SPEAKER. GOOD EVENING, SIR. >> MY NAME IS JAMES W. BROXTON. MY ADDRESS IS 3705 GREENERY COURT, NUMBER 105, TAMPA. AND I'M A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKER AND HAVE BEEN ONE FOR -- BROKER AND HAVE BEEN ONE FOR 35 YEARS, SO YOU KNOW I WANT YOU TO APPROVE THIS TONIGHT. I THINK YOU-ALL HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS UP IN THAT PART OF THE COUNTY. AND THE -- THE OPPONENTS, THEY PUT OUT A FLIER STATING THAT OUR PROPERTY VALUES AND QUALITY OF LIFE ARE AT STAKE. WELL, I BELIEVE -- TODAY I WENT INTO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER. THE WEB SITE IS WWW.HCPAFL.ORG, AND THE PROPERTY VALUES THERE -- I JUST PULLED UP NINE EXAMPLES, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE ON THE RECORD, AND ALL -- ALL OF THEM FROM WHAT THEY PAY FOR -- SINCE THAT SHOPPING CENTER'S GONE, THEY'VE REALLY INCREASED IN VALUE, SO WE'RE NOT HURTING THE VALUES THERE. AND THEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE. THE -- WITH -- IF THEY ADD THE EXPANSION -- JUST FROM THE POLL THAT JOSH TOOK TODAY, 82% OF THE PEOPLE THERE WANTED THE ADDITIONAL STORES TO HAVE A BETTER SELECTION, SO IF WE COULD GET THOSE PEOPLE HERE, YOU WOULD VOTE FOR IT. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> THEY -- AND WITH A GREATER SELECTION, THERE'S SHORTER DRIVING DISTANCE, THERE'S SAVING ON GAS AND FUEL, THE TAX BASE WILL BE EXPANDED, WHICH WILL BE GOOD FOR ALL. BUT ANOTHER REASON THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE APPROVED IS THAT WE ARE IN A RECESSION. PEOPLE NEED TO WORK, AND IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY AND GIVE US A LOT OF JOBS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. THOSE THAT ARE IN LINE RIGHT NOW WILL GET TO SPEAK, AND THEN THAT WILL CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION. COME FORWARD, MA'AM. GOOD EVENING. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS NATALIA CAMPOS. I LIVE AT 18908 MERRY LANE, LUTZ, FLORIDA 33548. I'M AN EIGHTH GRADER AT MARTINEZ MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY FOR ALL THE CHILDREN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AGAINST THE CENTER BEING EXPANDED. WE ARE CONCERNED BY THE CRIME THAT A SHOPPING CENTER LIKE THIS ATTRACTS. THE BUSINESS THAT -- THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE THERE NOW HAVE ALREADY BEEN ROBBED AT GUN AND KNIFEPOINT AT LEAST ONCE, MAYBE TWICE, AND IF YOU WERE TO EXPAND THIS CENTER, YOU'D BE MOVING IT CLOSER TO OUR HOMES AND FAMILIES. I MEAN, THESE ARE REAL PEOPLE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THINK OF THE FUTURE, OUR FUTURE HERE IN LUTZ. THERE ARE MANY CHILDREN ON OUR STREET. WHAT IF BECAUSE OF THIS CENTER SOMETHING HAPPENS? BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY. WE DO NOT WANT THIS CENTER ANY CLOSER TO OUR HOMES. LUTZ HAS REMAINED A RURAL AREA, AND WE ALL WANT IT TO STAY THAT WAY. YOUR BOARD HAS ALREADY AGREED TO UPHOLD THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN. I'VE READ IT. WHEN YOU MAKE A LAW, STICK BY IT. BY THE WAY, I'VE GOT FACTUAL TRUTH. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> THAT WAS WONDERFUL. MY NAME IS MICHAEL HUNT. I LIVE AT 19101 NORTH DALE MABRY HIGHWAY. I LIVE ON DALE MABRY HIGHWAY, WHERE I GUESS NO SANE PERSON WOULD LIVE OR OWN A HOME FROM -- MY HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1980, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT MOST OF THE HOMES IN MY AREA WERE ACTUALLY BUILT IN THE '70s, NOT WHAT THESE OTHER FOLKS MIGHT BE TELLING YOU. ALTHOUGH IT MAY APPEAR THAT ONLY A FEW HOMEOWNERS HAVE COME BEFORE YOU, THE TRUTH IS THAT AT ONE HOME PER ACRE -- AND SOMETIMES MORE -- THE PEOPLE HERE TODAY REPRESENT MANY ACRES. OUR COMMUNITY COMES BEFORE YOU TODAY IN THE HOPE THAT OUR VOICES WILL BE HEARD. FOR THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF THE COUNTY HAS SIDED WITH LOCAL LAND USE PROFESSIONALS TO EXPAND OUR PRIOR AGREED- UPON ACTIVITY CENTERS AT DALE MABRY AND LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND ALSO AT DALE MABRY AND SUNLAKE BOULEVARD. MOST OF LAST YEAR THE COUNTY HOSTED MONTHLY UPDATE MEETINGS AT OUR COMMUNITY CENTER. WE HEARD FROM THE D.O.T., ZONING, EPC WAS ABSENT, SOME ORIGINAL NORTH DALE MABRY OVERLAY DISTRICT MEMBERS, LAND USE PROFESSIONALS, AND ACTUAL CONCERNED HOMEOWNERS. AT THE END OF THE MEETING SERIES, THE COMMUNITY'S CONSENSUS WAS OVERWHELMINGLY NO EXPANSION OF THE ACTIVITY CENTERS, AND I BELIEVE ELI ALVARADO CAME BEFORE YOU AND USED THOSE EXACT SAME WORDS. CONTINUED. SORRY. NO EXPANSION OF THE ACTIVITY CENTERS WAS WARRANTED OR DESIRED BY THE LOCAL RESIDENTS. THIS WAS REPORTED TO THE BOCC, WHICH PROMPTLY AUTHORIZED THE EXPANSION OF THE ACTIVITY CENTERS. THE TAIWANESE GENTLEMAN THAT SPOKE A LITTLE BIT EARLIER'S PROPERTY IS EXTRANEOUS TO THE EXPANSION ISSUES. IT'S NOT AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND IT'S NOT AT SUNLAKE, IT'S MUCH FURTHER SOUTH. TO CALL PEOPLE -- TO STAND IN OPPOSITION LIKE WE HAD A LITTLE BIT EARLIER I THINK IS A PRETTY ACCURATE CENSUS, MUCH BETTER THAN THE CENSUS PERFORMED BY THAT PAID REP OF THE LANDOWNER WHO DID A NONSCIENTIFIC SURVEY SUPPORTING THE SHOPPING CENTER EXPANSION. AND ALSO IN CLOSING, PLEASE DON'T LET MR. DI GERLANDO'S SINGULAR DREAM OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT COME AT THE EXPENSE OF ALL OF OURS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. [APPLAUSE] ANYONE ELSE? GOOD EVENING. >> HI. MY NAME IS PAT CUFFARO. I LIVE AT 905 HILLARY CIRCLE, AND THAT'S IN LUTZ. I LIVE ABOUT A HALF A MILE AWAY FROM THIS AREA, AND THE PUBLIX SHOPPING CENTER, I THINK, IS THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE TO GO EITHER TO THE WINN DIXIE ON 41 -- AND I NEVER LIKED GOING TO THE VAN DYKE ONE, SO I THINK THIS WAS THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO US, AND I SUPPORT THE EXPANSION AND SO DO ALL MY NEIGHBORS IN MY SUBDIVISION. I LIVE IN JUST A LITTLE SUBDIVISION. THERE'S ONLY EIGHT HOUSES IN THERE WITH SEVEN OF THEM STILL OCCUPIED, AND THEY ALL ARE FOR IT. AGAIN, I SUPPORT THIS. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. >> HOW YOU DOING? MY NAME IS DOUG WILSON. I'M REPRESENTING A FEW PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON ARBOR DRIVE THAT ARE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. THE REASON WHY I'M UP HERE IS BECAUSE I'VE HEARD A LOT OF THINGS. I'VE BEEN HERE FOR NEARLY 30 YEARS. MY FAMILY'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1930. THEY DEVELOPED ALL THE PROPERTY AROUND THERE, ALL THE WAY AROUND THE LAKE ON THE GERACI SIDE WHERE ALL THESE PEOPLE LIVE FROM LAKE ALLEN ALL THE WAY OVER, AND THEY WANTED IT TO GROW. THAT'S WHY THEY DID WHAT THEY DID. THEY DIDN'T WANT IT TO STAY, AS THEY SAY, COUNTRY AND RURAL. THEY WANTED MORE PEOPLE TO COME TO LUTZ, AND THE MORE YOU BUILD IN LUTZ, THE BETTER IT IS FOR EVERYBODY IN LUTZ. YOU PUT MORE SHOPPING -- LIKE THE KOHLS THAT THEY PUT AT VAN DYKE, EVERYBODY GOES TO KOHLS, A LOT OF PEOPLE DO. 90% OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE COMPLAINING ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO NOW ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT COMPLAINED ABOUT THE PUBLIX, WHICH THEY ALL SHOP AT, SO IF WE PUT THE STORE THERE THAT THEY NEED OR WANT HALF A MILE DISTANCE FROM THEIR HOUSE, THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE THERE ENJOYING IT LIKE THEY DO NOW. EVERYONE'S GOING TO HAVE COMPLAINTS ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS, BUT THEY STILL ENJOY THE PUBLIX, THEY ENJOYED THE VETERINARIAN THAT USED TO BE THERE, THEY ENJOYED THE PIZZA PLACE THAT WAS THERE, THE SUBWAY THAT WAS THERE, BUT THEY NEED TO ENJOY IT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR COMMUNITY AND BE THERE FOR THE COMMUNITY INSTEAD OF BEING AGAINST THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPING THINGS FOR THE NEW PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING. MY WHOLE FAMILY, MY GRANDMOTHER, 75 YEARS OLD, STILL LIVES THERE, MY DAD, MY UNCLES, AND QUITE A FEW OTHER RESIDENTS THAT RESPECT IT, THE DEVELOPMENT OF LUTZ, THE SAME PEOPLE THAT -- LIKE, I'VE BEEN WATCHING OVER THAT PROPERTY FOR NEARLY 15 YEARS WITH MY FATHER, WATCH THE PEOPLE ON MERRY LANE DUMP OVER THERE, AND THEY TALK ABOUT POLLUTION. THERE'S BETTER FISHING NOW ON THOSE THREE LAKES ON THEIR SIDE AND ON MY SIDE THAN THERE'S EVER BEEN, SO IF THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT POLLUTION, THEY MIGHT WANT TO TALK ABOUT STOP DUMPING THEIR TRASH OVER ON THE PROPERTY AND TIRES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT AND TRESPASSING INTO THE PROPERTY AND DOING THE THINGS LIKE THAT. THEY NEED TO EXPAND THE PROPERTY AND MAKE IT MORE PRESENTABLE TO THE COMMUNITY OF LUTZ, AND AGAIN, I DO AND ALWAYS WILL BE FOR DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PROPERTY. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE OUR LAST SPEAKER. WELCOME. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I JUST PASSED TO -- IN FRONT OF YOU HAVE THE -- THIS FLIER THAT WAS PASSED THROUGH ALL THE ALL THE RESIDENTS IN THE AREA WHERE WE'D LIKE TO EXPAND OUR CENTER. AND AS YOU SEE, JUST TO -- YOU NOTICE THAT IT SAYS THAT -- STOP THIS EXPANSION OF PUBLIX SHOPPING CENTER ON ARBOR AND MERRY LANE. THE SHOPPING CENTER'S NOT ON ARBOR OR MERRY LANE, IT'S ON DALE MABRY AND LUTZ-LAKE FERN ROAD. THERE ARE NO EXITS OR ENTRANCES FROM NONE OF THOSE -- BOTH THOSE STREETS. THE CLOSEST HOUSE -- RESIDENCE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE CENTER WILL BE AT LEAST 450, 500 FEET FROM THE -- WHERE WE WANT TO EXPAND. WHEN I SAW THIS -- WHEN I SAW THIS FLIER, ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SAY HERE TOO IS THAT TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY VALUES. WELL, YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU A LETTER FROM AN APPRAISAL, MAI APPRAISAL, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE SENTENCE THE SECOND FROM THE BOTTOM IT SAYS, THERE IS NO MARKET EVIDENCE THAT I KNOW OR THAT WOULD SUGGEST THE QUALITY OF LIFE OR MARKET VALUES FOR PROPERTIES IN PROXIMITY TO THIS PROPOSED EXPANSION WOULD BE DIMINISHED. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT I HOPE THAT THIS BOARD DOESN'T MAKE A DECISION JUST ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU SEE HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE DID DO SOME -- WE HAVE SOME PETITIONS THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR -- IN YOUR HANDS NOW OF PEOPLE THAT WON'T COME HERE, BUT THEY SAID THEY WANTED TO SIGN THAT. WE MADE ANOTHER -- WE MADE ANOTHER SURVEY. ONE WAS ON SEPTEMBER -- I MEAN OCTOBER 27th AND ANOTHER ONE OCTOBER 20th, AND JUST WITH THE FEW HOURS, ON THOSE SURVEYS WE HAD -- AND YOU HAVE IN YOUR HANDS -- 23 PEOPLE SAID THEY'RE FOR IT, TWO AGAINST IT, AND 13 HAD NO OPINION, SO WHAT I'M REALLY SAYING IS THAT WE -- WE HOPE THAT YOU MAKE A DECISION FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY TOO THAT THERE ARE NO -- THAT WITHIN A MILE THERE ARE NOT 4,000 RESIDENCES. THERE ARE MORE THAN 4,000 RESIDENCES WITHIN THE FOUR MILES, AND IF YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT ACCORDING TO THESE SURVEYS THAT WE HAVE FOR A FEW HOURS, IF YOU MULTIPLY BY THE HOURS THAT THE SHOPPING CENTER'S OPEN WOULD BE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THERE FOR IT BECAUSE THEY LIKE TO SHOP AND THEY LIKE TO HAVE COMPETITION, THEY'D LIKE TO HAVE SERVICES SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. >> MAY I HAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS JOSEPH DI GERLANDO, AND I RESIDE AT 10116 LINDELAAN DRIVE, TAMPA. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU. OKAY. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? COMMISSIONER BLAIR. >>BRIAN BLAIR: WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS. IT'S VERY, VERY TRUE THAT THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS THERE TRAFFICWISE. WE HAVE SOMETHING CALLED CONCURRENCY. WHEN YOU -- IF SOMEBODY GOES TO BUILD SOMETHING AND IT'S GOING TO ADD MORE TRIPS OR MORE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, THEN YOU GET YOUR PROBLEM FIXED, YOU GET YOUR TRAFFIC FIXED. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A GROCERY STORE, NOT A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. I'VE LISTENED TO BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY, I'VE READ THE LETTER THAT THE AUDIENCE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO READ. I'VE ALSO READ THE STOP THE EXPANSION HERE THAT SOMEBODY ORGANIZED AND SENT OUT, WHICH SHOWS THAT MORE RESIDENTS SUPPORT IT. OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE NOT HERE. WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT -- UNFORTUNATELY I'VE SEEN -- WE HAVE ADOPTED COMMUNITY PLANS BECAUSE EVERY COMMUNITY'S DIFFERENT, EVERYBODY WANTS SOMETHING DIFFERENT, AND I'M RESPECTING THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE FROM CARROLLWOOD -- I MEAN FROM LUTZ THERE, BUT WHEN SOMEBODY TALKS ABOUT SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T LIVE IN THAT COMMUNITY, I THINK THAT'S BOLOGNA. I DON'T THINK THIS BOARD -- AND I SEE IT ALL TOO OFTEN -- AND I'M NOT GOING TO CRITICIZE THE BOARD, BUT IN A KIND WAY I WANT TO SAY LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE. YOU KNOW, IF YOU -- YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE GROUPS -- SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS THAT TRY TO BREED THEIR STYLE AMONGST THE ENTIRE COMMUNITIES, AND THAT'S NOT RIGHT. I WOULD ONLY LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE COMMUNITIES. I THINK THAT'S -- THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY PLAN. THAT'S WHY APOLLO BEACH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LUTZ OR RUSKIN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DOWNTOWN TAMPA. THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE COMMUNITIES. SO LET THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE SPEAK. THAT'S THE ONE THING I WANTED TO SAY. I MENTIONED THE CONCURRENCY TO FIX THE PROBLEMS. THERE ARE PROBLEMS THERE. YOU CAN'T BUILD THERE IF IT'S GOING TO HURT THE TRAFFIC ANYMORE OR IF IT'S GOING TO INTENSIFY THE SCHOOLS ANYMORE WITHOUT BRINGING THEM UP TO SPEED. DALE MABRY'S DALE MABRY. IT'S A HIGHWAY. THEY'RE BRINGING IN AN INTERCHANGE RIGHT THERE. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AN INTERCHANGE WITHOUT SOME STORES RIGHT THERE TO GET ON? I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SUNSHINE PARKWAY. I NEVER HAVE. ALSO, MOST OF THAT TRAFFIC COMES IN FROM THE PASCO COUNTY LINE BECAUSE PEOPLE BUILT THERE BECAUSE IT WAS CHEAPER AND EASIER TO BUILD, SO THEY ALL BUILT ON THE PASCO COUNTY LINE. THEY COLLECT THE TAXES, AND THEN THEY USE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIX THAT, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S HAPPENED. SO I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE FOLKS THAT LIVE IN THAT AREA THAT FEEL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE AFFECTED, BUT I ALSO AM WEIGHING OUT ALL THESE SIGNATURES THAT I HAVE TOO BECAUSE MANY OF THESE PEOPLE DON'T -- EITHER DON'T LIKE TO COME TO THESE -- TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA, THEY'VE GOT KIDS TO TAKE CARE OF, THEY'VE GOT SOMETHING TO DO, VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO DO. SOME PEOPLE MAKE -- SOME PEOPLE MAKE A LIVING OUT OF LIVING HERE. THE -- THAT'S THE WAY -- THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRIAN BLAIR: YOU KNOW, IT'S AMAZING HOW RUDE -- YOU KNOW, I DEPARTMENT SAY ANYTHING WHEN YOU GUYS WERE TALKING. >>KEN HAGAN: PLEASE CONTINUE. >>BRIAN BLAIR: HOW RUDE CAN YOU BE? HOW RUDE CAN YOU BE WHEN YOU -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR. >>BRIAN BLAIR: -- ARE SO HYPOCRITICAL THAT YOU LIVE IN A HOME THAT A DEVELOPER BUILT, BUT YOU CRITICIZE THE DEVELOPER WHEN WE'VE GOT PEOPLE OUT HERE SUFFERING WITH NO JOBS. ANYWAY -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR, CAN WE [INAUDIBLE] >> [INAUDIBLE] >>BRIAN BLAIR: I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT FOR THE RECORD. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: THAT'S GOING TO BE A HARD ACT TO FOLLOW, BUT I WANT TO ASK PAULA SOMETHING, BUT I WANT TO -- I GUESS I WANT TO ADDRESS THIS TO COMMISSIONER BLAIR. I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOU ON ONE PARTICULAR POINT IN PARTICULAR THAT YOU JUST MADE WHERE ONE PARTICULAR COMMUNITY IS I GUESS NO MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OTHER. THIS IS -- THIS IS STILL HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. WE ALL LIVE HERE, WE ALL LIVE TOGETHER, AND IRRESPECTIVELY, I GUESS, IF YOU LIVE IN BALM OR RIVERVIEW AND THE SOUTH END OF THE COUNTY, I'M SURE ON SOME OCCASION THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO UP TO LUTZ AND LUTZ-LAKE FERN TO EITHER VISIT FAMILY OR GO SHOPPING OR WHATEVER, AND I THINK WE ALL NEED TO RESPECT EACH OTHER'S AREAS, BOUNDARIES, OR -- WE ALL LIVE HERE. IT'S A COMMUNITY. WE ALL LIVE TOGETHER. WE ALL HAVE TO INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER. WE ALL HAVE TO BOND AND GEL, SO I THINK ON THE COMMUNITY SENSE, THAT'S WHY IT'S A COMMUNITY. IT'S NOT JUST THE TAMPA COMMUNITY, THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMMUNITY, THE TEMPLE TERRACE COMMUNITY, THE LUTZ COMMUNITY. WE'RE ALL ONE BIG COMMUNITY TOGETHER, BUT I ALSO TEND TO AGREE WITH YOU ON ONE POINT, THE MAJOR ACCESS POINTS, AND I KNOW WHEN WE HAVE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS COMING IN, SUCH AS THE SUNCOAST PARKWAY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE DEVELOPMENT, MORE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT WHEN IT COMES, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO GET CLEAR, MS. HARVEY, IF YOU COULD, PLEASE, I KNOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, I READ THAT, BUT COULD YOU VERIFY STAFF'S POSITION FOR ME BECAUSE AS -- AS PEOPLE HAVE SAID IN THE AUDIENCE ON PREVIOUS PETITIONS - - AND I JUST WANT TO BE KIND OF CONSISTENT AND ACROSS THE BOARD, AND I KNOW EVERY PETITION STANDS ON ITSELF AND WE DON'T -- AND WE VOTE ON EACH ONE OF THEM IN PARTICULAR, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AT LEAST FROM MY STANDPOINT I WANT TO BE AS CLEAR AS I CAN ABOUT THIS, BUT I'M SEEING STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, AND I'VE SEEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOT, AND I'VE READ THAT, BUT I NEED CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF'S SIDE TO BE ABLE TO -- FOR ME TO CONTINUE TO MAKE UP MY MIND ON THIS. >>PAULA HARVEY: IT'S KIND OF TOUGH, COMMISSIONERS, BUT I'LL DO THE BEST I CAN. WE DID QUITE A LONG TIME AGO ACTUALLY COME TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AFTER YOU HAD DIRECTED THAT WE EXPEDITE THE STUDY OF THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR PLAN. WE HAD MET WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS OUT THERE AS WELL, AND WE CAME TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS STAFF AND EXPLAINED THAT OUR CONCLUSION ESSENTIALLY WAS THAT THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY CHANGE BECAUSE WE COULD NOT GET A CONSENSUS. WE ALWAYS STRIVE TO GET CONSENSUS BETWEEN THE VARIOUS PARTIES WHEREVER WE POSSIBLY CAN, AND THERE CLEARLY WAS NONE. WE COULD NOT GET THE PARTIES TOGETHER. AT THAT POINT THE BOARD BEGAN YOUR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FACT OF THE TAKING ISSUE THAT HAD OCCURRED, WHAT HAD ORIGINALLY BEEN APPROVED FOR THE SIZE OF THE CENTER, AND YOUR DIRECTION TO STAFF WAS TO PROCESS AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD BRING BACK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ORIGINALLY APPROVED. NOW, WE TOOK THAT -- WE PREPARED THE AMENDMENT, WE PROCESSED IT, WE TOOK IT BACK OUT TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE YOU DID SAY YOU WANTED THE COMMUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON IT WHEREVER POSSIBLE, AND WE FOUND PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAD INTERESTS, PARTICULARLY THIS PROPERTY OWNER, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER IN FAVOR AND A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE LUTZ COMMUNITY VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT AND VERY ANGRY AT STAFF FOR THE AMENDMENT THAT WE HAD INITIATED. BUT WE BELIEVE THE RECORD'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE BOARD WAS SENSING THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE SOME RECOGNITION OF THE FACT THAT THE ORIGINAL PLANS AT THAT CENTER HAD CALLED FOR THE INCREASED AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND IT WAS CLEAR THROUGH A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT YOU WANTED TO BRING IT BACK TO THAT ORIGINAL SQUARE FOOTAGE. PART OF OUR REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD HAD PRETTY CONVINCING EVIDENCE, AT LEAST FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, THAT THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER WAS ON VERY GOOD GROUND FOR CONSIDERED EXPANSION BECAUSE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE KNEW WERE GOING TO BE HAPPENING AT SUNLAKE BOULEVARD. THE CORNER AT LUTZ-LAKE FERN AND DALE MABRY BECAME MORE COMPLICATED BECAUSE THERE SEEMED TO BE SUCH A HUGE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO IT. I DON'T BEGIN AND WOULDN'T PRETEND TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF THEIR REASONS, BUT WE GO BACK TO THE SAME POSITION THAT WE HAD BEFORE. THERE WAS NO CLEAR CONSENSUS, AND WHAT MOVED THE PETITION ALONG WAS THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION TO GIVE BACK TO THIS DEVELOPMENT THE POTENTIAL THEY HAD FROM - - IN THE BEGINNING, WHICH WAS THE CENTER OF 110,000 SQUARE FEET, AND IT WAS SO STATED IN THE MOTION. SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT THE AMENDMENT TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. >>KEVIN WHITE: OKAY. I WILL -- I GUESS I'LL DEFER AND HEAR SOME OTHER BOARD MEMBER COLLEAGUES BECAUSE SOME OF THIS WAS WAY BEFORE MY TIME, AND I JUST WANT TO GET AS MUCH INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AS I CAN. MY CLOSING COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I DON'T -- I DON'T TAKE ANY OF THE CITIZENS BEFORE US HERE TODAY OR IN THE LISTENING AUDIENCE FOR GRANTED, AND I REALIZE THAT YOU- ALL HAVE CHILDREN, AS WE DO, AND WE'RE AWAY FROM OUR FAMILIES, BUT SO ARE YOU, AND THIS IS A GIVE-AND-TAKE AND A TWO-WAY STREET, AND YOU-ALL HAVE FAMILIES, YOU-ALL HAVE LIVES. I'M SURE -- I'M MISSING MY SON'S FOOTBALL GAME TONIGHT, BUT I'M DOING MY JOB. SOME OF YOU ARE MISSING -- THE YOUNG LADY, SHE'S MISSING HER RED WINGS/LIGHTNING GAME. WE'RE DOING WHAT WE HAVE TO DO AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN CHARGED TO DO, AND I, FOR ONE, AM GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO BE HERE, NOT THIS LATE AT NIGHT SOMETIMES, BUT I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A PART OF WHAT WE DO, AND I WANT TO THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO TO HELP MAKE YOUR COMMUNITY BETTER, AS WE'RE TRYING TO DO ON OUR SIDE OF THE DAIS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: PAULA, CAN YOU CLARIFY ONE THING. SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS THIS EVENING STATED THAT THIS WAS A REZONING, AND CAN YOU CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE OF THE REQUEST HERE AND, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THIS PASS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS ACTION AND A REZONING ACTION THAT WOULD HAVE TO TAKE PLACE? >>PAULA HARVEY: WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT PROVIDES THE BASIC GUIDANCE FOR AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, IF YOU WILL, CALLED THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR OVERLAY, AND IT SETS THE OPPORTUNITIES IN PLACE FOR SOMEONE TO COME IN AND DO FUTURE REZONINGS AT ALL THE DIFFERENT -- SPECIFICALLY ON THE INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN A MAPPED FORM AS PART OF THE CODE. IF IT'S APPROVED, THEN THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR EXPANSION FOR SOMEONE TO SUBSEQUENTLY AT ANY POINT IN TIME ON THEIR OWN TO COME IN AND ASK FOR THE REZONING THAT WOULD ACCOMPLISH THAT DEVELOPMENT. IT WOULD BE AT THAT TIME THAT WE WOULD THEN BE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESSES THAT WE DO WITH ANY REZONING REQUIRING TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE REQUEST, A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS ALL THE VARIOUS CHARACTERISTICS AND THE LAYOUT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER, WHERE THE ACCESS POINTS WOULD BE, AND HOW THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD WORK. IT'LL GO IN FRONT OF THE ZONING HEARING MASTER AT A NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN IT WOULD FINALLY COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FINAL ACTION, BUT WE'RE NOT IN THAT PROCESS TONIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M OUT OF TURN. WHEN WAS THAT VOTE ON THE BOARD DIRECTIVE? I'M SORRY FOR BUTTING IN, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I -- >>MARK SHARPE: THAT'S FINE. >>PAULA HARVEY: I'M LOOKING AT MY DATES HERE. I BELIEVE THE FIRST VOTE WAS DECEMBER -- YEAH, DECEMBER 11th OF 2007. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. SO JUST THIS LAST -- WITHIN A PERIOD OF OUR BOARD HERE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BLAIR. >>BRIAN BLAIR: NO, I JUST WANTED TO SAY TO KEVIN THAT I THINK EVERYBODY IN THIS COMMUNITY'S IMPORTANT. THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS GETTING AT AT ALL. EVERYBODY'S IMPORTANT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAXES OR ANYTHING. EVERYBODY'S INVOLVED, AND THAT AFFECTS EVERYBODY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHERE YOU LIVE IF I LIVE A HUNDRED MILES AWAY HOW TO BUILD YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: THIS DISCUSSION SIMILAR TO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD IN MY OFFICE WITH MY STAFF, WE'VE TALKED WITH STAFF, AROUND AND AROUND IN CIRCLES AND CIRCLES BECAUSE WHEN IT BEGAN, WHEN I FIRST HAD THIS PRESENTED IT WAS FAIRLY CLEAN, AT LEAST TO ME, WHICH WAS WE HAD AN ACTIVITY CENTER, A DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER PICKED FOR A PURPOSE THAT HAD A PORTION OF THE LAND TAKEN AWAY, AND IT WAS COMPENSATED FOR, BUT FOR ME THE ISSUE OF WHETHER IT WAS COMPENSATED FOR WAS NOT THE ESSENTIAL ISSUE. THE ESSENTIAL ISSUE WAS HOW WAS IT SELECTED. IT WAS DESIGNATED IN 1988; IS THAT CORRECT? 1988 -- 1983, EXCUSE ME. 1983 AS A NEIGHBORHOOD -- THE TWO -- THE MAJOR ACTIVITY CENTER AND THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER DON'T SEEM TO BE DRAWING THE IRE. IT SEEMS -- SO I'M FOCUSING RIGHT NOW ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER, BUT THERE WERE THREE ACTIVITY CENTERS THAT WERE SELECTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO, ACTUALLY, I THOUGHT, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, TECHNICALLY LIMIT SPRAWL BECAUSE THERE WAS ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT GOING ALONG DALE MABRY FROM THE VAN DYKE TO COUNTY LINE ROAD, AND THE IDEA WAS LET'S -- WAS IT NOT, PAULA, TO TRY TO CONCENTRATE IT IN CERTAIN AREAS AND SAY, OKAY, THIS IS WHERE THE DESIGNATED ACTIVITY WILL BE. IS THAT CORRECT? >>PAULA HARVEY: THE STATED PURPOSE IN THE CODE FOR THE OVERLAY DISTRICT WAS TO PROHIBIT THE EXPANSION OF THE STRIP COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BY IDENTIFYING APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS. >>MARK SHARPE: SO THE -- SO -- BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M -- I'VE BEEN FIGHTING SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE THIS CONCEPT OF THE SPRAWL AND THE STRIP MALLS AND ALL THE STUFF. I MEAN, I LIVE VERY CLOSE TO A MAJOR ACTIVITY AREA, AND THERE'S STRIP, I MEAN, WITHIN -- MUCH CLOSER THAN THE 500 FEET. THERE IT IS. BUT THIS WAS TO CONCENTRATE IT. OKAY. SO IT WAS TAKEN. AND THEN THE QUESTION BECAME, WELL, COULD THIS NEIGHBORHOOD -- AND I'VE ASKED THIS, AND I THINK ONE GENTLEMAN -- I'M NOT -- IT'S BEEN SO LONG AGO, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH SIDE HE WAS ON, BUT ONE GENTLEMAN SPOKE ABOUT THE SIZE OF AN ACTIVITY CENTER BECAUSE THAT WAS MY QUESTION TO YOU EARLY ON, WELL, IF THIS ACTIVITY CENTER LOST A PORTION OF ITS LAND, COULD IT THEN ACT AS AN ACTIVITY CENTER AT ITS REDUCED SIZE, 68,000 SQUARE FEET? COULD YOU PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR? AND YOU WERE GOING -- AND THE ANALYSIS WAS, I GUESS, THAT IT COULD ACT AS AN ACTIVITY CENTER AT ITS CURRENT CONDITION, WHICH IS REDUCED FROM WHERE IT WAS IN '83, WHICH IS 68,000 FEET, AND THAT'S UP FOR DEBATE, BUT IT COULD. >>PAULA HARVEY: YES, IT COULD. I MEAN, IT ACCOMPLISHES STORES AND PROVIDES SERVICES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S NOT TO SAY IT COULDN'T ACCOMPLISH THE SAME THING WITH MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE. YOU MIGHT HAVE A LARGER GROCERY, YOU KNOW, SOME VARIOUS OTHER -- >>MARK SHARPE: IT ACTUALLY WOULD BE ENHANCED, AND IT COULD ACTUALLY BE ENHANCED FOR BETTER IF IT HAD MORE SPACE IF IT WAS DESIGNED IN A CERTAIN WAY, BUT I DON'T DESIGN THESE THINGS. NOW, THE OTHER QUESTION -- AND THE CONCERN THAT I HAD WAS ALL THESE MEETINGS, AND THIS IS -- THIS IS WHERE I'M REALLY -- THE PROCESS. WE IN GOOD FAITH ASKED THE CITIZENS TO SIT WITH US AND GO OVER THIS AND OVER THIS AND OVER THIS, BUT I STILL THINK THERE'S SOME -- THERE STILL SEEMS TO BE MISUNDERSTANDING. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT AS BEING A REZONING. IF WE APPROVE TONIGHT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEVELOPING ON IT SOON, AND IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS TO LOOK AT NOT JUST THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, THREE YEARS FROM NOW, BUT 20 YEARS FROM NOW, OR COULD WE DELAY THIS AND HAVE -- COULD THEY COME BACK LATER AT ANOTHER DATE WHEN THE CITIZENS WERE OF A DIFFERENT MIND AND GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN? >>PAULA HARVEY: WELL, THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WE HAD HAD WAS ACTUALLY TO LOOK AT THE NORTH DALE MABRY CORRIDOR OVERLAY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE UPDATE OF THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH IS STILL SCHEDULED A FEW YEARS OUT, NOT THAT FAR OUT BUT A FEW YEARS OUT, AND WE MOVED TO IMMEDIATELY ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. >>MARK SHARPE: COULD YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN, PLEASE. GO BACK TO WHAT YOU JUST STATED. >>PAULA HARVEY: WE HAD INITIALLY INTENDED ON LOOKING AT THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE UPDATE OF THE LUTZ COMMUNITY PLAN. >>MARK SHARPE: AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WILL BE. >>PAULA HARVEY: AT THAT TIME WHEN WE HAD IT PROGRAMMED, I THINK WE WERE ONLY A COUPLE YEARS OUT. NOW, WE HAVE -- SO YOU'RE FACTUALLY CORRECT, WE'VE HAD TO EXTEND IT BECAUSE OF CUTBACKS THAT WE'VE HAD TO FACE, BUT THAT'S WHEN WE WERE PROPOSING TO DO IT. WE WOULD HAVE DRAWN THEN APPARENTLY ON EVEN A LARGER COMMUNITY TO LOOK AT THE DISTRICT. LUTZ AND KEYSTONE WERE DONE AT THE SAME TIME, SO ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE IN KEYSTONE THAT MIGHT HAVE HAD ANY INTEREST MIGHT HAVE ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THAT PROCESS, BUT WE WERE ASKED TO UPDATE IT AND GO FASTER BY THE BOARD. >>MARK SHARPE: HAD I BEEN ABLE TO CONNECT THOSE DOTS, I WOULD -- I WISH WE -- THIS IS ONE COMMISSIONER STATING I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HAD IT DONE AT THE SAME TIME, BUT I KNOW I'M ONE OF THE ONES WHO PROBABLY ASKED FOR THE EXPEDITED PROCESS. IF THE -- THIS WERE APPROVED AND -- BECAUSE THIS WAS A CONCERN THAT I'VE HAD, THIS ISSUE OF BUFFERING. THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU'VE GOT THE -- I MEAN, THE TERRIBLE CONDITION BEHIND AND WHAT HE HAS TO LOOK AT, THE EYESORE, THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC. ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSED THIS. WHAT ASSURANCES WOULD THERE BE TO THE CITIZENS WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION CLEARLY, AT LEAST THE ONES THAT ARE HERE, THAT THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE, I MEAN -- OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THEY WOULD COME HERE AND PROBABLY GET A DENIAL BECAUSE THIS WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD; IS THAT CORRECT? >>PAULA HARVEY: WELL, THE ISSUE YOU TALK ABOUT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE COURSE OF REZONING. THEY HAVE TO BE. THEY'RE AN ELEMENT OF ALL OF OUR REVIEWS, BUFFERING AND SCREENING AND TRANSPORTATION. WE LOOK AT IT IN EVERY REZONING, SO WE DO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS, AND IF THE REQUEST COMES TO THE BOARD AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, THERE WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MEETINGS SPECIFICALLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ADDRESS JUST THAT REZONING AND THE SITE PLAN THAT GOES WITH IT. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. I'LL ASK NO MORE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE ALL CAUGHT BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. WE WANT TO BE FAIR, WE WANT TO CONSIDER THE TAKING ISSUE, WE WANT TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS FROM INTRUSION, BUT CHRONOLOGICALLY I WAS LISTENING TO THE GENTLEMAN BACK THERE IN THE BLUE SHIRT, SIR, AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T REMEMBER YOUR NAME, I DON'T REMEMBER IT, BUT WHEN HE WAS GOING THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS -- AND OBVIOUSLY IN THE EARLY '80s I WASN'T HERE, BUT THE ORIGINAL PD ALLOWED FOR 110,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN, OF COURSE, LATER THAT WAS CHANGED AND IT WAS AMENDED SO THAT IT WAS 60,000 SQUARE FEET. IS THAT RIGHT, PAULA? >>PAULA HARVEY: 68 ACTUALLY. >>ROSE FERLITA: 68. I'M SORRY. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: YEAH, AFTER THE 68 IT WAS TAKEN, WELL, AMENDED AFTER THE TAKING TO 68. AND I THINK MR. HAGAN BROUGHT UP A POINT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AND VERY COMPELLING THAT ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT SITE OR ANY PART OF THAT SITE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FILE A PLAN AMENDMENT REZONING PETITION; RIGHT? >>PAULA HARVEY: REZONING -- >>ROSE FERLITA: AND WE WOULD HAVE THE DISCRETION AS A BOARD AT THAT TIME CASE BY CASE, DEPENDING ON WHAT CAME FORWARD, TO REVIEW THAT APPLICATION IN TERMS OF SPECIFIC DESIGN, INTENSITY, ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT. SO MY PROBLEM IS THIS. WE -- WE LOOKED AT THIS AS A NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER IN TERMS OF 110,000 SQUARE FEET. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY WE JUST LOOKED AT, IT'S BEEN REDUCED. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, MR. DI GERLANDO IS NOT ASKING FOR ANY ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, HE'S ASKING FOR THIS TO BE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL 110,000 SQUARE FEET. MR. SHARPE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, WELL, MAYBE GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTS THAT WE HAVE NOW, MAYBE THE 68,000 WOULD -- SQUARE FEET WOULD WORK, BUT, OF COURSE -- >> [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: EXCUSE ME. I'M TALKING. THE 68,000 MIGHT WORK. I DON'T KNOW THAT. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY CAN SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT, BUT IF YOU ANTICIPATE GROWTH AS WE GO FORWARD, MAYBE NOT NEXT YEAR BUT MAYBE THE YEAR AFTER, MAYBE 20 YEARS FROM NOW BECAUSE WE DON'T REVIEW THIS VERY OFTEN, THEN THERE MIGHT BE A NEED FOR THIS NODE TO BE THE SAME AS IT WAS INTENDED TO BE IN 1984, SO BECAUSE OF THAT HISTORY, BECAUSE OF THE CONDITIONS, BECAUSE OF THE -- I THINK THAT THERE WAS A TAKING IN TERMS OF WHAT FDOT DID TO THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE AND BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE NOT CARTE BLANCHE GIVING MR. DI GERLANDO THE OPPORTUNITY TO ZONE THIS AND BUILD WHATEVER HE WANTS, THAT HAS TO COME THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND THE POINT THAT THAT DOES COME THROUGH, IF IT DOES COME THROUGH, THEN THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND COMPLY WITH A LOT OF CRITERIA IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, IN TERMS OF BUFFERING, IN TERMS OF A LOT OF THINGS, SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME BECAUSE TYPICALLY I WILL BE ON THE SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SOME EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM GOING TO HAVE TO SUPPORT THE FACT THAT I THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE REINSTATED BACK TO THE 100,000 SQUARE FEET, AND I WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT POSITION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: WELL, I DIDN'T -- IS THAT A MOTION OR -- >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT WAS -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'LL MAKE THE MOTION IF YOU HAVEN'T, BUT I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON IT AS WELL. >>ROSE FERLITA: GO AHEAD. MAKE THE COMMENT, AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT OFF OF WHAT COMMISSIONER FERLITA SAID, AND I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION IF THAT WASN'T A MOTION, BUT IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK, MR. -- COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, I'LL DEFER TO YOU AND I'LL -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: IN OUR VOTE THAT WE MADE LAST DECEMBER, THIS IS BASICALLY -- MS. HARVEY, ISN'T THIS WHAT WE'RE COMING -- OUR INSTRUCTION AND FOR US TO BE CONSISTENT WITH US FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH THIS, WE'RE BEING CONSISTENT WITH APPROVING THIS TODAY BASED ON WHAT I'M FOLLOWING. >>PAULA HARVEY: UH-HUH. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SO THAT'S MY MOTION, WE'RE FOLLOWING WITH WHAT WE'VE DONE LAST DECEMBER, AND I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. >>KEVIN WHITE: IS THAT FOR APPROVAL? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: FOR APPROVAL. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION TO GO BACK TO THE 110,000 SQUARE FEET? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >>PAULA HARVEY: YEAH. THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE -- >>ROSE FERLITA: THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS NOT THAT. >>PAULA HARVEY: NO, THAT IS. THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, AND THE LANGUAGE PROVIDED UNDER THE ACTIVITY CENTER IS ACTUALLY HERE IN YOUR BACKUP. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DREW DISTINCTIONS. >>ROSE FERLITA: NO, I KNOW WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID, BUT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION YOU WERE ON THE SIDE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >>PAULA HARVEY: WE DIDN'T MODIFY OUR REQUEST. WE'VE RECOMMENDED THAT IT MOVE FORWARD. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> SAY DENIED. >>ROSE FERLITA: THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIED IT BUT YOU DIDN'T. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: WELL, I -- THERE'S MORE TO THIS THAN JUST THAT. TELL ME ABOUT THE -- THE, AS THEY CALL IT ON THIS MAP, I GUESS, COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER ALSO, AND THE DEVELOPMENT'S GOING TO GO ALONG THERE. BASICALLY I'M SAYING THERE'S THREE PIECES TO THIS WHOLE -- THIS WHOLE THING, AND I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT EACH PIECE BE VOTED ON SEPARATELY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: WE HAVE ONLY TWO PIECES WE'RE VOTING ON THIS EVENING; RIGHT? >>PAULA HARVEY: THERE'S TWO ACTUALLY. IT WOULD CHANGE THE FIGURES PROVIDED FOR IN THE MAP IN THE CODE TO INCREASE THE ACREAGE -- >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] AND ALL OF THAT HASN'T OCCURRED YET OVER HERE, BUT HE TALKS ABOUT A VERY DANGEROUS CORNER AND A DANGEROUS INTERSECTION AND WHATEVER, AND THAT -- I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT TOO, SO -- THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE -- >>KEN HAGAN: WE'LL SEPARATE THE MOTIONS, THE FIRST ONE FOR THE NORTHERN SEGMENT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER, SO THAT MOTION WAS BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. NO FURTHER COMMENT, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>JIM NORMAN: THIS IS FOR WHICH SECTION? >>KEN HAGAN: THE NORTHERN SECTION, LUTZ-LAKE FERN. >>JIM NORMAN: ALL RIGHT. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. HAGAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VOTING ON THIS SECTION HERE NOW? >>KEN HAGAN: YES. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-1. COMMISSIONER SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. NOW THE SECOND MOTION FOR THE SECOND ACTIVITY CENTER AROUND SUNLAKE BOULEVARD. >>PAULA HARVEY: THE COMMUNITY ONE. >>KEN HAGAN: YEAH, THE COMMUNITY. >>KEVIN WHITE: THAT'S THE 110,000? >>PAULA HARVEY: NO. THAT'S ACTUALLY EXPANDING ITS SIZE ONLY BY 2 -- .15 ACRES. >>JIM NORMAN: AND IN MY OPINION, ONCE ALL THAT IS DONE, AN AMENDMENT CAN BE FILED. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY -- I'M SORRY. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER -- >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: -- WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-2. COMMISSIONER FERLITA AND COMMISSIONER NORMAN VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. NOW WE NEED A MOTION TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE OF THESE ITEMS. >>KEVIN WHITE: SO MOVE. >>ADAM GORMLY: COMMISSIONERS, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO ORDINANCES TO -- AT LEAST TWO, AMENDMENT 08-1023, WHICH IS CHANGING THE LIGHTING REGULATIONS DEALING WITH RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. THERE WAS A REQUEST TO HAVE THAT ORDINANCE BECOME EFFECTIVE EARLIER THAN THE NORMAL TIME, SO WE'D ASK FOR A MOTION WITH THE EFFECTIVE DATE -- >>JIM NORMAN: I'LL MOVE THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: IMMEDIATELY. >>KEVIN WHITE: YEAH, WE DID THAT ONE ALREADY. WE DID THAT ONE ALREADY. >>KEN HAGAN: THE LIGHTING ORDINANCE WOULD JUST GO INTO EFFECT -- >>ADAM GORMLY: JUST TO PUT IT ON THE ORDINANCE TO ACTUALLY ADOPT IT WITH THE EFFECTIVE DATE. >>KEN HAGAN: IT'S THE EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEN WILL IT GO INTO EFFECT? >>ADAM GORMLY: THE EFFECTIVE DATE WILL BE WHEN FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WHICH IS THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE EFFECTIVE DATE. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. CHAIRMAN, WHEN YOU GET TO THAT POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE SEPARATELY FOR THE TWO THAT I DIDN'T SUPPORT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. SO WE'LL HAVE A MOTION FOR THE REMAINING ITEMS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LDC 08-1035 AND LDC 08-0334, AND THOSE WERE THE TWO ITEMS THAT -- >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE REST OF THOSE ITEMS? >>KEVIN WHITE: SO MOVE. >>BRIAN BLAIR: MOTION TO ADOPT. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>BRIAN BLAIR: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER BLAIR. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THEN THE MOTION FOR 08-1035 AND 08-0334. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION. >>KEVIN WHITE: SO MOVE. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. SECOND? >>JIM NORMAN: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-2. COMMISSIONER FERLITA AND SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: ANY OTHER ITEMS THIS EVENING? OKAY. WE THANK EVERYONE FOR YOUR PATIENCE. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 1