PDE-25-0135

Every appearance6 of 6 are in a recording

Each appearance carries the official title above. Where the county’s wording changed, the change is marked: added and removed. Steps with no marks were worded identically.

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 74% of 969 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1. 1Mar 20, 2025
   Planning CommissionPC16Consent agendaNo disposition in the minutes

   An Ordinance By The … Amending Section 1001 Docks And and Seawalls; Section 1001.1 Intent … Section 1001.5 Maximum Projection And and Location of Docks And and Seawalls; Creating Section 1001.6 … And An Effective Date.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 2:17:06
   ▶ 2:17:0657m

   Jon Moody

   2:17:06Mr. Chairman, the last item on the list is PC sixteen, which is the proposed Docks and Seawalls Ordinance by Amandala Hill.

   Amanda Hill

   2:17:15Planning, development and economic growth.

   2:17:21Uh the item before you is section one thousand and one, Docks and Seawalls Ordinance Update. The intent of the ordinance update is to readopt text changes to the Pasco County Land Development Code that were invalidated by the Circuit Court for Pasco County Civil Division. through a motion for partial summary judgment in 2023. Uh an additional intent of this ordinance update is to provide standards on bolt lift canopies.

   2:17:51There we go. So just to give a brief history of the ordinance. Back in 2012, uh section 1001 Docks and Seawalls was created by the Restated Land Development Code. In 2017, there was a BOCC workshop to discuss, among other items, whether or not to continue to prohibit roofs over docs. Ordinance 19-12 was passed in twenty twenty nineteen. And then in 2021, the BOCC had

   2:18:21a discussion that resulted in the decision to abandon the previous direction that the board wished to proceed with an amendment to the LDC to allow covers over docs. And then like I mentioned before, in 2023, there was that invalidation of ordinance 19-12.

   2:18:45Uh right now covers are not allowed over docs.

   2:18:47Not allowed

   2:18:48over

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:18:48docs. Correct. Okay, so in 2019, ordinance nineteen-twelve prohibited Roofs over docks, correct?

   Amanda Hill

   2:18:55Yes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:18:55And then in twenty twenty one the board

   2:19:01Change voted to allow them.

   Amanda Hill

   2:19:04So there was discussion as to whether or not to allow them. They decided to abandon that discussion as to proceed with allowing them.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:19:10Yeah, I think that that bullet's a little confusing. Yeah, it sounds it sounded to me like they were approving. So so my understanding is that twenty nineteen the ordinance The twenty nineteen ord wasn't there an ordinance that allowed roof silver docks but only on lakes?

   Amanda Hill

   2:19:27I don't have clarity on that, uh Tari. That was in the

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:19:31staff in the that was in the I believe that was in the twenty twenty one effort. And then It was dropped

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:19:39basically. Yeah, before that, okay, the ordinance and I believe it was ordinance nineteen dash twelve. Um I don't know if Sam's a villain but he knows this history better than me, but My recollection is that originally they were prohibited entirely We then adopted an ordinance that I believe it was nineteen dash twelve that allowed them only on inland lakes. But it still prohibited them. Yeah. So uh so I believe

   2:20:09that was ordinance nineteen dash twelve.

   Amanda Hill

   2:20:11Okay.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:20:12Um Which you might want to clarify that in your bullet about ordinance nineteen dash twelve.

   David Engel

   2:20:18We'll do.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:20:19And then

   2:20:22There was some discussion about allowing them even on the coast. in twenty twenty one, that was the ordinance that was brought to the board and then abandoned basically. After that the court invalidated nineteen dash twelve, which basically meant that they went back to the prior version which meant they were prohibited entirely.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   2:20:46Right. Like

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:20:47they're not even currently allowed on lakes because nineteen nineteen dash twelve was invalidated, is my understanding.

   2:20:55So Then what happened is after nineteen dash twelve was invalidated There was a discussion and with the board about whether We would just readopt ordinance nine da nineteen dash twelve, which would allow them on lakes but not The coast.

   2:21:12But it appeared that the board wanted to now allow them countywide. Mm-hmm. And so that's the ordinance that's before you today. That's my understanding of the history. Somebody tell me if I'm wrong. Anybody? Think that's right. Okay. Is that clear? Sorta.

   Amanda Hill

   2:21:30Thank you.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:21:31As mine.

   Amanda Hill

   2:21:32Yes. Okay, so for the proposed changes, uh for section 1001.1, intent and purpose, an additional purpose is added to provide standards for reasonable protection of vessels from the elements. Section 1001.4, visibility, additional clarification on the prohibitions of buildings or structures on waterfront properties provided. Specifically, there's an expansion of the applicable structures listed. There is also an expansion

   2:22:02in the description of allowable structures that are subject to height limitations. Uh it also clarifies the exception of when roofs are prohibited. and it prohibits residential use of enclosed areas built over docks. For section 1001.5, maximum projection and location of docks and seawalls. That section is renamed from navigability and protection of watercourses to maximum protection and location of docks and seawalls. The

   2:22:33previous prohibition of obstructions in this section is removed. Additional guidance on the maximum projection is added. The retroactive applicability of the subsection is updated to provide revised guidance. So more specifically. Uh there's removal of non-applicable language to the subsection.

   2:22:52Uh an exception is added to the existing maximum projection standard.

   2:23:00The seawall location text was just relocated. There's nothing that has been added there, but it was relocated from the end of that subsection to the section immediately after the common ownership doc section.

   2:23:14And then for the subsection regarding um

   2:23:19Regarding the retroactive applicability, there's a summary of the description of non-conforming structures, and it also addresses the restoration of substantially damaged structures.

   2:23:34There is also a proposed edit to Appendix A to uh amend the definition of mean high waterline.

   2:23:43And then in terms of proposed additions, uh there is a proposal to add section 1001.6 for boatlift canopies.

   2:23:55There are dimensional standards and standards regarding placement that are included within that section. And then there's also a proposal to add two new definitions, one for boatlift canopy and one for waterfront property.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:24:10Can you

   Amanda Hill

   2:24:11go over those? I have it in the presentation. Right. And the staff recommendation is to recommend that the local planning agency find a proposed amendment consistent with a comprehensive plan and recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners. So I could just Right found stupid. This is just a red line text.

   2:24:33So these are the proposed uh edits and additions to appendix A. Could you go back to

   2:24:38your picture for

   2:24:39a second? Sure.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:24:42So that's this is showing the type of covering you could It will now be allowed over

   Amanda Hill

   2:24:52That is correct. And it gives specifications as to the height, length, width Horizontal projection, side setback, curtain length and maximum production.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:25:01Generally consistent with what staff was proposing in two thousand twenty-one before the board told staff to go away.

   Amanda Hill

   2:25:07This came directly from that initial proposal in twenty twenty one.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:25:10Okay, thank you. And the mean high water line definition?

   Amanda Hill

   2:25:15Okay. Too fine.

   2:25:19So previously it was the intersection of the tidal plane of the mean high water line with the shore. Mean high water is the average height of waters over a 19 year period. And now it's been amended to the intersection of the tidal plane of mean high water with the shore. It shall also mean the ordinary high water line of non tidal natural water bodies, the precise delineation of the ordinary high water line or mean high water line. Shall be determined through site-specific studies and field determinations by the applicant and SWIFMUDEP and

   2:25:49or Army Corps of Engineers as applicable prior to the construction plan approval.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:25:59And then A question about the ordinance. So So and maybe you could go back to your picture.

   2:26:13Would allow a cover over a boat? Lift. But so long as the boat lift is part of the dock. But if one could not so if they had like a boat lift it it says They can't do this if it's attached to the seawall. Rather than the dock.

   Amanda Hill

   2:26:33So in terms of placement, there is specifications here. So they're allowed over vertical or cantilever lifts only. They're prohibited over elevator lifts, Davits, or other similar or similar similar scenarios where the canopy supports would be attached to a seablone or a similar condition.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:26:52I get it, but I'm not sure. Why the prohibition over uh Davits or, you know, if it's attached to the seawall. I'm trying to understand why there's a difference.

   Amanda Hill

   2:27:04I personally don't have the context on that. Uh Terry, do you have additional insights from twenty twenty one when this was first proposed? Because the language here is also the same from that initial proposal.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:27:15Uh That was over four years ago at this point. Um I don't have the the recollection. The only thing that I do recall though is that that language was brought before the Planning Commission and was moved through the process and it got to the board when the board decided to abandon the pro so what we were doing in this latest effort was just take what was what had gotten through the process in twenty one. And reinsert it again.

   2:27:41Well w

   Charles GreyChair

   2:27:42one of the problems might be with the Davits is they might just be The Davids are too high, they're gonna way up above where the boat is.

   Unidentified speakerVoice E

   2:27:51Well

   Charles GreyChair

   2:27:51so there's limits.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:27:52So there's a height. There's a there's a height limit of fifteen feet above the mean high water line. So I guess what I'm asking And I'm not sure. trying to be a proponent of these things one way or the other. What I'm asking is what's the difference if the canopy is over a davit and it's no higher than fifteen feet above the mean high water line, how's that different than if it's attached to the dock? I just Not understanding that.

   Amanda Hill

   2:28:20We can potentially take that question back to BCS for some clarity on it?

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:28:24Yeah, I was I think we need to go back to BCS because it may be a building code issue too. So Well it is, yeah. So we we we can we can find the answer

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:28:34to

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:28:34that.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:28:35Uh building. Yeah. As long as it meets the Florida building code, why would I'm Just not understanding that. And I'm familiar enough with the building code to W whether it's attached to the seawall or attached to the dock, it still needs to meet a certain wind loading. It Well number three requires a comply

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:28:57with the building code anyway. Right. But I Again, I don't w think we have anybody from BCS here to know.

   2:29:05I mean I will say the problem. policy standpoint, I believe the board direction was to L our roofs over docs, not necessarily these other structures. But but

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:29:14And that's all I'm asking is why? I'm trying to understand why I I Why

   Charles GreyChair

   2:29:20roofs over docks?

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:29:22Why only over the dock and not over if one if one had pulled their boat up against the seawall and put out fenders, why they couldn't have a canopy out over the seawall versus Over the dock. That's all I'm trying to understand.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:29:37Yeah that well

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:29:38well

   Charles GreyChair

   2:29:38that picture that you showed earlier is That's attached. It's not over the dock. It's attached to the dock. Right.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:29:47And that's what I'm getting those.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:29:50If you have it attached to the water, you can see that the right-of-way,

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:29:52right, that's what I'm asking.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:29:54Mamble, just just kind of for background, why why did this just go away in twenty twenty one?

   Amanda Hill

   2:30:01It was based off of that discussion that the board wanted us to basically shelve at at that point in time. Yeah, thank you.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:30:13There's been a change in the membership of the board county commissioners to be quite honest. Someone so a majority of the board in twenty twenty one did not want to see a roof server docs. That's it's as simple as the majority of the board has has changed now. And now they're willing to allow roof server docs. Okay.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:30:29I think the

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:30:30thrust

   Charles GreyChair

   2:30:30of it is to pro protect their boats.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:30:34Yeah. Well, I mean there's other ways to protect your boats too. My concern with something like this is it

   Charles GreyChair

   2:30:38tears those boats up.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:30:39But s they make don't they make covers for boats too?

   Charles GreyChair

   2:30:42Yeah, but they tear up the covers too.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:30:45Well, I mean I I understand, but but putting a canopy out there st all of a sudden you're you're blocking and put causing visual obstructions for is everybody that's enjoyed the canals or the waterfront.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:30:54Sorry, Jamie. Am I to understand that the the the canopy over this thing can only be like a fab can't be a hard surface. It has to be like a A fabric.

   Amanda Hill

   2:31:04There are specifications to that, yes. Um the canopy shall be a fabric or a similar material that can be rolled and or folded. And there are color specifications here too as well. Got ya. Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:31:18I guess here's the question I have from a zoning perspective.

   2:31:24There's a s in the supplementary rela regulations uh for waterfront properties. there's a fifteen foot set back from the mean high water line to anything that presents a visually solid wall.

   2:31:43So

   2:31:46It would seem that the boat covers are in direct conflict with that section of the code. And maybe that's fine. But my question is

   2:32:02Where do you draw the line? Okay, if it's fine that I can block the view down the canal with this boat cover, how come I can't I just had a client. that was a hurricane Rebuild. And he had to move his house because the balcony off the back of the house was gonna encroach in the fifteen foot high me mean high water setback. And this balcony was twenty five feet up in the air. where

   2:32:34it probably doesn't obstruct anybody's view, especially that's down lower. I'm trying to figure out how you

   2:32:45It seems that one This allows something that another section of the code is expressly prohibiting. for the purposes of protecting view.

   Amanda Hill

   2:32:57I think that this section speaks to that to some extent. Let me go back a little bit.

   David Engel

   2:33:04Here comes our um zoning.

   Amanda Hill

   2:33:08Let me just

   2:33:12mentioned um that fifteen feet setback, um it actually expands the list of applicable structures to include fabrication fencing or barrier that presents a visually solid type wall or roof. Right. And that's that's what

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:33:26you're talking about. So that's what I'm getting at is okay, so now here we are we're allowing a roof that would encroach in Fifteen feet. mean high water. water setback.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:33:38But then

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:33:41or The reason the reason that there's a fifteen foot mean high water set back is it's perceived that there's some harm That if you have an encroachment into that fifteen feet that you're blocking somebody else's entitlement to a view. So how is d allowing this structure not in conflict with that.

   2:34:10Aspiration.

   Unidentified speakerVoice C

   2:34:13Yeah.

   Liam Devine

   2:34:15Liam Devine, Planning Development and Economic Growth Department. Um so I do know that section. I know you and I have discussed that section. So that section from supplemental regulations talks about creating a visual screen similar to a wall. These canopies can only be two inches thick, so in in in

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:34:35Yeah, but this is they're

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:34:36adding the word roof. Yeah, but they are adding or roof, which implies it's more now not a wall.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:34:40And it allows a two foot curtain.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:34:43a two

   Liam Devine

   2:34:43foot curtain. So I was unaware of the curtain. But I would say if it was just the roof, it wouldn't necessarily be creating a visual wall. Um that would be creating a roof line, but the there they're there it would still be passable to be able to be viewed. So it wouldn't be necessarily creating that wall.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:35:03Wall. That's if you have a flat roof. If I got a gable roof. And I'm looking at it from that side. Well I think

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:35:13Liam, I I do understand your interpretation When it just said presents as a visually solid type wall. But With this code change they're adding or roof.

   2:35:27So a roof doesn't present as a visually solid type wall. Correct. Isn't the addition of O roof

   2:35:36Make a direct conflict?

   2:35:41I'm

   Liam Devine

   2:35:41confused by your question.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:35:43Well Your argument is that there that This section one thousand one point four A is not in conflict with the concept of doing a two-inch roof because it doesn't present as a wall. Correct.

   2:35:59And I see that line which it says it says that presents as a visually solid type wall. But then this this amendment to the code is proposing to add or roof to the af after wall.

   2:36:15Went to the supplemental regulations five thirty? Okay, I'm I'm going by what's on the screen right here. I don't maybe that's not the provision we should be looking at. I don't know. That's the same language that's the

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:36:31That's in the supplemental.

   2:36:36I think it's roof.

   Liam Devine

   2:36:41Why can't you just remove roof?

   2:36:44Yeah. Well they can remove the roof. Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:36:49Uh Terry Nicaragua Spito was playing development economic growth. It seems to me that either the word fabrication More or a roof. are the w are the words that are tripping this up a little bit. So to the extent that we can clean this up, perhaps we just delete the word or roof. I think part of the original um drafting from twenty twenty one Uh Considered the fabric roof. Uh to be an amenable material that can be as a as the ordinance

   2:37:20notes rolled up. In the event of a hurricane coming. You could just basically take the roof away and then now it's a little bit more wind resistant in that regard. Or Wind resilience maybe is a better word. W when resilient in that regard. Um and then also if there's no boat docked. And you don't need the roof, you can just

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:37:42But but but to get to the heart of Mr. Moody's question, it sounds like what you're I hear stop saying is that You view it. That requirement as basically prohibiting somebody blocking the view of the wall. Or a fence or that's with a wall, yeah.

   2:38:02it's basically blocking it this way.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:38:05Yeah.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:38:07But if it has if it's only blocking it with the some roof type structure or canopy type structure. that would not be a violation of that section. I think that's what Liam is saying. If that's what your if that's your what your position is, you can't be adding or roof. Right. I would tell you that depends upon your point

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:38:29of view.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:38:30Where you're

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:38:30viewing this from

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:38:32the right-of-way. I've been saying I want to be clear. I'm not going to weigh into the policy issue about whether these should be allowed or not. I'm just trying to reconcile The two code sections. So If staff's position is that one thousand one point four A only applies to wall type structures I agree that you should strike the word Fabrication and the word roof.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:39:00In practice Well for instance and I'm not trying to support or defend a c client, just using it as an example. It was a balcony with balusters. That's not solid. But it's still obscure. Could obstruct someone's view. Yeah, I mean to be clear if And so it was still prohibited from encroaching into the meaning of

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:39:25water setback. If Planning Commission andor the board don't want to block the view at all To your point.

   2:39:35then you probably shouldn't be allowing this ordinance at all. I mean Because that's a good visual stuff.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:39:41The commission wants the ordinance.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:39:43It appears that a majority of the commission current current commission wants to allow some type of Can and be over the boats.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:39:53Mr. Chairman Mariano. I was just re referring to staff. So If we w if we strike the or roof phrase from the sentence, it would be consistent with um section five thirty dot thirteen, which also references the same type of language.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:40:11Yeah, that looks like it's almost identically the same.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:40:13Yeah, so it sounds like maybe that word or roof was some leftover clause that probably shouldn't have been there.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:40:20So it looks like it.

   2:40:24Well why don't you just refer to that?

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:40:26Yeah,

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:40:26why

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   2:40:26are

   2:40:26we

   2:40:26regurgitating the same s language again? Why aren't we just referencing that?

   2:40:33So

   Amanda Hill

   2:40:33if it's

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:40:34coming from this.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:40:38And that's one of the reasons for my question is I

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:40:41We c we can

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:40:43I don't want there to be a confusion, well if it's this it's this ordinance, or if it's this, it's it's one or the other.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:40:50Yeah, we we can uh that either that language already exists, I don't have the actual code open in front of me right now. But it from what it looks like on the screen, there's existing language in the code that's already referring to this. But in any event we can go back and just refer to the one section. But

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:41:06clearly Staff's intent is that It's th whichever section we're talking about, it's a prohibition on basically solid Solid tape wall structures. Is that what you were basically saying? Sorry, I

   Liam Devine

   2:41:19was going to you answered that one.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:41:21Yes. Okay. Yeah. And it doesn't necessarily prohibit the right-of-way. this ordinance which is canopies. So that's your position. I just wanna

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:41:32I'm trying to understand and I just want to give

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:41:35the answer to the question first. Okay. So Is that accurate that you're not You're not trying to through that those two sections we just talked about prohibit boat canopies.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:41:45I th the idea of the amendment in twenty one and then w what's coming forward now is to Enable the bolt lift canopy. But with a specific type of material.

   2:41:58Go on

   Liam Devine

   2:41:58with your question now. Sorry. So excuse me. If I could wait a minute, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Go ahead. Okay. Sorry, I just want to note because I know there is confusion. You're trying to not have confusion between the language that already exists in this code and this proposed one. Just so you know, section five thirty point thirteen of where that visual screening comes from comes from actually references section one zero zero one. Okay. So they reference each other.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:42:22Nonetheless, it says visually solid type wall. All right, but that same Code section. Prevents A birdcage around a swimming pool. to encroach in that fifteen foot

   2:42:42mean high water setback. Well a screen for a pool is not a solid wall. a balusters on a balcony are not a solid wall.

   2:42:59So there has to be consistency. either consistency in the language Maybe the language needs to be changed because the interpretation has been the historic and I've been doing this a long time. The historic interpretation is we go after screens We go after Fences You know, it went to the right-of-way. I I could even come in with a picket type fence that you can see through. But it's still Prohibited. Interestingly enough And here's where

   2:43:29nobody thought beyond lunch when they wrote this.

   2:43:33There's nothing that stops me from going out and planting a viburnum hedge in the fifteen foot mean high water setback and watering the living heck out of it and letting it get twenty feet tall and blocking somebody's view. It's only if I want to put something that's

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:43:55So was staff's intent to prohibit

   2:44:00vertical obstructions and not horizontal obstructions? Is that The general gist of what You're trying to achieve here.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:44:08I think that um the horizontal obstructions was a concern in the initial discussions about roofs over docks and what kind of um barrier to visibility that an actual roof over a dock would cause. And what the middle ground was in twenty twenty one. and what's being presented here is that if we're going to put a cover of some sort, a canopy of some sort over a dock or a boat lift Uh it should be of a very limited and specific type

   2:44:39of material that can be um folded away or taken down. in the event that there's a hurricane because I think the the there were the two main issues in twenty twenty one were the aesthetic value of preserving the visibility down the canals and what have you. And the second was uh the danger posed by high winds. When these canopies get blown off. That was that was what w what was happening in twenty twenty one.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:45:05Yeah, but if they're required to meet the building code. then there's a wind load that they have to meet whether it's a fabric or whether it's wood or fiberglass or steel, they still have to be able to survive that Wind.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   2:45:21I understand. I'm just relating that what some of the the background was in twenty twenty one that went into that.

   2:45:28And

   Charles GreyChair

   2:45:29practically the John practically the The the v visibility barrier comes from having the boat lifted up. That's so that's where you that's what blocks the vision. Not the roof. So I mean if you're gonna Take that tact, you gotta say, Well you can't have a vote either, because that blocks my view.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:45:47Yeah, and don't get me wrong, the the the reason for my questions Has more to do that so that the code is consistent, what I'm getting at is you may need to go back and change One zero zero one point four to better clarify what it is you're trying to do And then you can make the statement that you find that these boat covers or whatever are not in conflict with that particular

   2:46:18Section. I can just tell you as someone who uses this code My clients, they go down to the building department, and one person tells them, Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's all right if it's in the 15-foot mean high water, and then it gets over into the zoning person says, No, no, no, no, no, you can't do that. There needs to be, I think the language is a little ambiguous. It's like I said, what talks about a visually solid type wall, but yet a swimming pool enclosure with a screen to you can see through is considered to be a visually solid wall.

   2:46:49That that makes sense.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:46:50Well I'm wondering now 'cause I'm rereading this, it says or roof. I wonder if staff's position was that he These canopies are not roofs. Right. I mean, I think that's a good thing Is that is that why Oarroof is there? Is because His staff's position that these canopies are not functioning as a roof, they're functioning as something else. They're because they're removable, they're Not a roof.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:47:16Well in the past many people have used the thatched roof over their boat. That on the dock. On the it's not on the land at all. But if you have a boat and you lift it up out of the water, it's gonna block the pew. This is true.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:47:40And then by the same token, if I have Davids.

   2:47:46I have Davits and I lift my boat up. Just above the seawall and then swing the davits. So that they're pointing into the backyard. Now I've got this visually solid obstruction in the fifteen foot P9 water set back. That's why I'm trying to figure this out. Trying to figure out what's what's important. What are we trying to protect

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:48:07Are you asking? What were we trying to protect in With the original ordinance or with this current ordinance?

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:48:15What's To me it seems that the two are in some

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:48:21I think Mr. Pitos is correct.

   2:48:26On roofs, canopies, whatever you want to call them over Over docks or over boats. was the fear of the visual impact and them becoming projectiles during a hurricane. So that was for many, many, many years, up until this last year that was the county's position is that These should not be allowed for that reason. And part of the reason we allowed them on inland lakes is because there was a less first of all there was less of

   2:48:56a hurricane potential on inland lakes. Um But also they tended to be more spread out on lakes and so the the vegetable impact was not as Severe on lakes. So That was the reason why the board eased up on the requirement in two thousand and nineteen. It was only recently that the board said and we want you to also ease up on the requirement On the coast. So that's so in s staff's defense all they did was say, Okay, the

   2:49:26board has changed direction, we're gonna bring back the ordinance that We brought we're gonna bring you in tw two thousand twenty one. And here it is.

   2:49:39All right. So it appears that the board is less concerned about those two issues now.

   2:49:48By the way, you also need to take public comment on this ordinance before you Oh.

   2:49:57Unless you have more questions for staff, you probably should take public comments.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:50:01Mm. Any more questions for staff? No. Okay, so is there anybody from from the public is here to comment?

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:50:16No I step aside so that

   Amanda Hill

   2:50:18Cold work.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:50:22She's not gonna let

   Charles GreyChair

   2:50:23anybody come.

   Barbara Wilhite

   2:50:25Barbara Wilheites, an individual who lives at [address removed]. I have a beautiful home in Gulf Harbors. I've lived there for almost ten years. So to me this is a question about change, right? So Should there be a change? My home's been there for 41 years. And the point of saying, Well, there's a boat there, there's two reasons why I have a home there. One is so I can have a boat out back. It's common, I actually have three of them, but because my husband has to have three, but it's common to have

   2:50:55boats out back and you buy considering that because you actually want to have a boat out back. The second reason you live there is for the view. I am fortunate enough to live on a canal that face that goes east west. So when I look down the canal, I get to see the sunset. It also means I look by all of my neighbors all the way down my canal and look at their boats and their docks, but all those things are common. And I bought into that. But I also bought into no boat covers. In Pasco County, no boat

   2:51:25covers. And so to change for the convenience of some people that want. To protect their boat in that manner, to change my view. To change what I bought into for the convenience of someone else isn't fair and not reasonable. There are ways to protect your boat? You get out there and you put the cover on it, take the cover off, or you say, heck, you know, every three years I gotta put new soft goods. That's a term that I understand from my husband. That's what you call the padding

   2:51:55on your boat. So I really want and so the board may think they want to do that. And the other question is, did anybody notify any of the HOAs and any of these affected communities? Not that I could go talk to my neighbors about this because most of them don't live there now. I have my neighbors that live with me. I have roommates for going on six months because of what happened to our area. I was fortunate enough, my house was built to FEMA codes when I built when it was built in 1984, so we had no effects, none, of either of those hurricanes.

   2:52:26But so I want you to think about change. And is it fair if somebody wants a boat canopy? That's gonna sound harsh, but go buy in a county where you can have that, but don't come where where you're where the rules are no boat canopies and change it on all of us for the convenience of others. It does impact me. The view is really important and I will definitely change my view if if everybody can have boat canopies all the way down my canal. Thank you.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:52:55You would support the borders readopting ordinance nineteen dash twenty

   2:53:01lakes.

   Barbara Wilhite

   2:53:02Yes, I the lakes are a different situation. I recognize that. My husband's from Canada, they have lake houses there, you know, so I get the difference. They all have boat houses. It's very different.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:53:12Quick question in that same regard. Yeah. I had a house. Let's say I have a house at Gulf Harbor's Beach that faces west directly to the Gulf of Mexico. My view is is the Gulf. I'm sorry, did I say Mexico? Gulf of America.

   2:53:38How if I had that view on open water.

   2:53:45This ordinance or The ordinance you would propose reinstating would also prohibit them from having a boat cover and I'm not trying I'm trying to figure out in my mind how would that be any different than being on a lake.

   Barbara Wilhite

   2:53:58Well, I can tell you that the sun changes. So at one point of the year you look this way for the sunset if you're if I'm if I'm on the open golf, and then the next part of the year it's over here.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:54:07Okay, similarly on a lake.

   Barbara Wilhite

   2:54:10Maybe, maybe, yeah. I'm hey, I'm I didn't I didn't suggest the lake. I mean that was something the board did, but I'm just saying that's not a reason to to change the views for these waterfront properties.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:54:20Well Barbara also don't forget that there was was a time. When they did allow vote covers they even allowed boat houses along the river. Yes, there was So the They're historical in fact. They they weren't very happy about that change either. So Yeah, there's a there's history.

   Barbara Wilhite

   2:54:40Sure, right. Um I I'm just saying for m for my Gulf Co front community what my experience is. So Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:54:49Is

   2:54:52So in some of the discussions that I've heard

   2:54:57It seems that There are some communities

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:55:01Move free free

   Charles GreyChair

   2:55:09Oh they didn't have a agenda? Oh, you already spoke once though.

   Pastor Jim

   2:55:17Um Pastor Jen Kerouck, [address removed], and I would just say You know, um likewise I think that those that may or may not be watching who live in a rural protected area might feel the same way that they purchased their home in a rural area looking to enjoy the scenery that they purchased. And likewise change has been coming.

   2:55:48And if there are, you know If there are reasons why, I'm not sure that I necessarily know why, but I think that just as Chairman Gray mentioned, you know, there are changes that happen and we have to go with the flow. and there are a lot of people not happy with that. Um and I think that, you know, just as I am now, I have the opportunity to come and and, you know, state

   2:56:18my concern and I know that I looked into this particular situation in depth and it seems like there were a lot of folks that were unhappy about not allowing the boat covers and some choose to, you know, put the cover on and then some choose to build. Um, you know, we have rights, we own our property, and I understand maybe someday I'll get to the Gulf of America. Um I'm not there now,

   2:56:48but I think to the point that, you know, they're asking for this to go back to where they were allowing boat covers and And I just don't see any difference than, you know, the disruption that is occurring in the rural areas of Pasco County. Thank you.

   Charles GreyChair

   2:57:08Thank you.

   2:57:12Anyone else?

   2:57:16Okay. Sorry Mr.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:57:17Mayor, go ahead.

   2:57:20I was oh, I was going to ask In listening to these discussions in the board.

   2:57:30I've heard One commissioner advocate for these kinds of covers. And the claim is that that commissioner's constituents support these covers and I've heard another commissioner argue that

   2:57:48The constituents of that commissioner. Don't want these covers. The question is

   2:57:57Can the ordinance be applied to those areas that want them. And those areas that don't want them, or for instance could the bo Sorry, Mr. Engel, to burden you with a workshop, but could one hold a workshop and find out, hey, this neighborhood really wants these things and doesn't have a problem with them, but this neighborhood's adamant they don't want anything to do with these and maybe they're prohibited there. So Or

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:58:24not on a blanket basis. I don't think that's defensible. I mean uh we were able to defend inland versus Coast because there are rational reasons to di differentiate them.

   2:58:38I mean, you have to have some rational basis to defend your regulation. Now could you make them a special exception use and then handle them On a case by case basis, I guess you could. Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:58:49That's a possible solution.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:58:51I mean that that's the only way I know to handle them on a case by case basis is to make them a conditional or special exception use were You only allow them

   2:59:03You know, somebody's gonna have to file an application to do that. That's your I don't know how to d else to do what you're talking about.

   David Engel

   2:59:12Okay.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:59:17And I don't know if Margaret would have a different position if there were special exception or conditional use.

   2:59:26Well, I mean th I guess one advantage is then you'd have to notify your neighbors That you were proposing the use of the easy. Which would give them an opportunity to object.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   2:59:36or to agree on what Would preserve their neighbors' view to keep peace in the neighborhood.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   2:59:44In theory if there were conditional use or special exception you could approve it with conditions as well, such as Maybe a lower height or maybe even a higher height. I mean you could So that it doesn't impact the view as much. Um So it is It is a potential middle ground. Penny for We I can't tell you whether that's consistent with the board direction or not because

   3:00:09The board direction was clearly to allow these. So

   3:00:15Is that by and we have had at least one commissioner when we were talking about ADUs making some of them a special exception use who objected to it being a special exception use 'cause that was too much burden to put on somebody. Yeah. Or listen to it. So Can't tell you whether Board would agree with that, but I'm just saying I I can't defend a ordinance that says This applies everywhere other than Gulf Harbors. Okay. You probably could defend there an ordinance that says that it's a special exception or conditional use.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:00:48Okay. Each each respective board could adopt their own declarations or something like that to prohibit the right-of-way.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:01:00A man any mandatory deed restrictions that would prohibit this. Right.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:01:03And I and I think that's a lot of the case in the uh the west side of the county. It's older. And so th maybe there were covenants and restrictions that were in place when the communities were first developed, but they've now been here fifty, sixty plus years and those covenants have expired. So

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:01:24But you're correct that any particular HOA could have more restrictive requirements that are prohibited.

   3:01:32But a lot of the communities on the Gulf are n are older communities that that are probably only regulated by our ordinance and not By any each way of it.

   3:01:51Can we ask Barbara what she thinks about the special exception or

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:01:53conditional use?

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:01:55She was contemplating it. Would she would that be more tolerable?

   3:02:02Since you're the only person from the county that

   Charles GreyChair

   3:02:04cares.

   Barbara Wilhite

   3:02:11That we're all struggling with. And at least that gives the opportunity for neighbors, to talk with neighbors as opposed to just so I mean it is it could be a better balance. Certainly This doesn't go away because one year it's we're not gonna do it, another year we're gonna do it and so maybe this is would would achieve a balance, uh, David's idea that that uh would allow it, but you could have to look at the circumstances.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:02:37That's that's interesting that you say that because You've had one board that says no, we don't want them. This board says well we'll allow 'em, but the next board might say, Hell no, get rid of these things. And we just keep amending the so in some ways maybe the special exception is the answer.

   Barbara Wilhite

   3:02:56Certainly would allow for that balance and you could consider the cases on a case by case basis. Because it is different. It is different if you're which way your canal's going. It does make a difference, you know. Is that our meetings aren't long enough anyway so

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:03:09fifty of 'em at one time. Yeah.

   3:03:13Jamie, they'll all be on the consent agenda, relax.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:03:16Uh I mean my pay double

   3:03:19time.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:03:24Um it would add a a a workload to the planning commission and of course to the to the staff to process the special exceptions, et cetera. This wouldn't be the only special exception that we're considering.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:03:35Well then you should just make the board hear those special exceptions and then decide before they've exist in one way or the other.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:03:47So We're looking at two amendments that are making their way through the process right now, this being one where that could happen, a special exception c um compromise. But the other one of course is the ADUs which which has a special exception. uh built into it and it's just the workload aspect of it that's all that you'd have to think about a little bit.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:04:06The difference with the ADE one though was it was special exception only it had certain things that were allowed as a right. Where you wouldn't have an additional workload. Um This in theory may be harder harder to do as sort of an as of right provision if you're trying to accommodate Barbara's concern because really any particular canopy could in theory block views.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:04:34And I will say that with the ADU's We're probably gonna hear if if the people actually go for them, we're probably gonna hear a lot of special exceptions because the one caveat it didn't require a special exception as it had to fit within the existing setbacks and lock coverages and the If you live in a typical suburban type neighborhood, the chances of you doing that are slim and none. So Without the special exception. And a large lot, that's probably not a problem.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:05:02Well, and by the way, the board hasn't even approved the ADU ordinance and it's still it's still

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:05:06in

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:05:07still state of flux, right? I had to argue first what an

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:05:09ADU was. Right. Um and the state may tell us that. That's true. There's a possibility that we'll get preempted

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:05:17by by the state on ADUs.

   3:05:21But luckily you you don't have to you don't have to worry about ADUs for now unless the the special exceptions come before you. But I We do need to make a recommendation on this ordinance, so you need to

   3:05:32I understand the board has changed direction a few times on this, but This is the ordinance be before you you need to make a recommendation one way or the other on it?

   Charles GreyChair

   3:05:44Okay.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:05:44Who's gonna be bold? Okay.

   3:05:49I mean should we should we clear up the the minor issue

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:05:52the chair for a minute, then you can make the motion.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:05:56So I think regardless of what happens, uh, staff, you're okay with getting rid of that or roof requirement?

   Amanda Hill

   3:06:02Correct.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:06:06You want a motion to that effect or you're just okay just getting rid of it?

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:06:10I I think the record will speak for

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:06:12it okay, got it. Okay, so that we now we need just need something on the

   3:06:19Recommendation on the remainder of the ordinance.

   Chris Williams

   3:06:24I don't vote on this, so unless unless you all tie, I guess.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:06:30I mean I'm I'm a bad person to make a motion because I'm against this thing because I just think I I just think it blocks and changes everybody's view. So

   Charles GreyChair

   3:06:37Why are you a bad person to make it?

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:06:39So I'll make a motion to deny.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:06:44So nobody wants to make the motion for the middle ground of allowing it by special exception or conditional use. You're worried about the workload.

   Charles GreyChair

   3:06:53Okay, all right well. So

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:06:53there's no second.

   Charles GreyChair

   3:06:56Says no second. Okay, that motion deck lack dies for lack of a second. By hair motion for something in the middle.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:07:05Well then I would Move to

   3:07:11Continue. It doesn't matter. For another sixty days.

   3:07:21If you get input? If the if the staff can work with that and I'm open to that, you you guys tell me how long to continue it. for you to come back

   3:07:32And rewrite this, repropose it as a special exception use. I think that I think there's probably multiple language changes that have to happen to this ordinance to make it a special exception use that's probably too much drafting to do on the fly right here. That that's my only reason for continuance.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:07:57It depends on whether you want to see it again. if you don't want to see it again you could just Make a recommendation that it be approved if it's made a special exception use and then you can let staff figure out between now and the board what

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:08:11with the board.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:08:13They You know, that maybe they could propose an alternate version of the I'm saying I wouldn't hold it up just because of the drafting issue. Staff is capable of redrafting it so it's a special exception use.

   3:08:26I mean that's This wouldn't be the first time they've done it. They just did it with ADUs. So I I mean it they're capable of doing implementing that direction unless you really want to see it again.

   3:08:40Well I guess I'm not sure. I'm just slightly concerned that you guys keep continuing things at some point you just need to get things too.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:08:47I guess what we're gonna see is if this happens, then we're gonna see some special exceptions. So

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:08:52Your choices are either special if you w if you're trying to make it a use that isn't as a right, your choices would either be special exceptions, which only come to the Planning Commission. or conditional use which come to the Planning Commission and Board. That's basically I mean there's difference in criteria but If you're asking who approves them, that's the main difference.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:09:11Might interest is more that there's at least one public hearing and a special exception accomplishes a public hearing.

   3:09:22So I'd still rather see it before it went back to the board. Yeah. This

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:09:28is up to the Planning Commissioner Yeah. Unless is well let me ask you Terry, is this one of those ordinances where the board gives you some deadline to get it Adopted.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:09:39I don't think the Board of County Commissioners has issued me a deadline, although I was a and I may be Um Mm don't have the full picture here, but I thought that there was a a deadline on the part of the county attorney's office for this to move forward. Oh, so you're the

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:09:56same thing.

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:09:57I don't I don't know if I have all the information.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:09:59So I've not discussed what that was saying. But I I my understanding though is that Did Nineteen dash twelve was invalidated, which basically reverts us back to they're not allowed at all. So Yeah. The question is whether we're okay with the status quo, which is they're not allowed at all. Um I don't think we're permitting any in the interim. Is is the is the issue. So Um even on lakes, technically they're not allowed at Currently. So

   3:10:31I don't know. As long as nobody as long as the board has not told you that they're unhappy with the status quo for another sixty days or whatever that then maybe there isn't any urgency. Terry, are you are you

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:10:45Uh we would we were uh we were imposing our own deadline to get the project to the board and to the finish line by April in order to, you know, close this gap as much as fast as possible.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:10:55Has it been advertised for the board meetings? Yes. So if it's continued you're gonna have to probably

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:10:59readvertise it. I don't know we'll have to ad re advertise but we'll definitely have to continue the board meetings. For the moment I'm gonna

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:11:07withdraw the motion.

   3:11:10And that's so I can ask the staff. Another question.

   3:11:17Is it necessary

   3:11:20For This issue to be addressed in the land development code. In other words, could this be addressed in the code of ordinances?

   Unidentified speakerVoice B

   3:11:39I I I would I'm gonna defer to David Goldstein as an answer first.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:11:45Well but uh well, how does that help anything? I mean I I think it is a form of development, so it probably is appropriate to locate it. I mean you're allowing development to occur and by the way, if you want to make it a special exception, it definitely needs to be in Land O' Lakes that's where we regulate special exceptions. So I I don't I don't I think it is in the proper location. Right.

   3:12:16So we're back to no motion on the floor.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:12:18John, why would why would you want to see this again rather than just recommend It go to the board for the special exception with the dra staff draft and the language.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:12:29Because I think sometimes there are

   3:12:34If If all we were making was an ordinance that contained one sentence?

   3:12:42Or one paragraph. Yes, but I think there's other issues in here. As well. And I'd like to see the hole.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:12:54Mm-hmm.

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:13:00But another reason for asking could it go in the code of ordinance is you've got one, two, three, four, five people here that don't want to make a motion.

   3:13:10I

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:13:11mean

   Unidentified speakerVoice D

   3:13:11I made one. Sure. Make it again. Then make it again.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:13:18Well I'm I mean I I'll make another motion to deny the ordinance again. And and and again, I I think Barbara raised a valid point with you know, the timing's not very good either. I mean most of the people that this affects Most of them don't even have their house right now. So who knows if they even got notice, if they even read or even paying attention. They're trying they're upstairs trying to get a building permit to fix their house.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:13:38So to be clear your motion would have to be that you're finding it inconsistent with a comprehensive plan because that's technically your role for this for this ordinance.

   Unidentified speakerVoice A

   3:13:47That's my motion.

   3:13:48Okay, we have a motion and second. Further discussion on the motion.

   Charles GreyChair

   3:13:57Silence is deafening. No further discussions at the discussion. Okay, all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign. Mine carries.

   Amanda Hill

   3:14:12Thank you.

   Jaimie GirardiVice Chair

   3:14:16No, but it just may come back at a different form.

   Jon Moody

   3:14:23And that concludes the agenda for today, J Commissioner. Thank you.

2. 2Apr 9, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP36Public hearingContinued

   An Ordinance (Continuance) By The Pasco County … And An Effective Date.

   Approved minutes

   Approved to continue the item to the May 20, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 51:39
   ▶ 51:393m

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   51:39P thirty six.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   51:42Item P thirty six was published in the Tampe Times on march fifth, twenty twenty five.

   Ron Oakley

   51:49Thank you, Madam Chair. Nicarios Pitos Planning Development and Economic Growth. Item P thirty-six is PDE twenty-five zero one three five. This is the Land Development Code amendment and ordinance by the Pasco County Board of Commissioners for docks and seawalls. It's coming to you with a recommendation today to continue the item. to the May 6th meeting in Dade City. However, we're requesting a uh an updated continuance to the May twenty, twenty twenty five Board of County Commissioners meeting in New Port Richey at 130 P.M.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   52:20Um Terry, before you go further I'm gonna have our county attorney give instructions.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   52:26There are two rezoning agendas, regular and consent. Staff will present each application to the Board of County Commissioners. If staff or planning commission has recommended approval and there's no opposition, the application will be considered by the board without further presentation. If staff or planning commission has recommended denial, or if there is opposition to the application, the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation. The opposition will be given three minutes. for each individual or five minutes for a group representative. And the applicant will be given three minutes for

   52:56rebuttal. Any individual disagreeing with staff or planning commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the rezoning may at this time request the petition be pulled from the consent agenda, in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting. Otherwise, all rezoning applications on the consent agenda Will be approved by a single motion and vote. If you wish to speak to any petition, please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record. These are quasi-judicial

   53:27public hearing. The law in Florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action. Please limit your comments to those criteria found within the board's land development code for rezoning.

   53:43Madam Clerk, would you like to swear the public in? I we only have one item, but

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   53:49Is there anyone here to speak on the items, the rest of the items? Please stand. Okay. All right, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you God. Thank you.

   54:13And we're on P thirty six.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   54:15B thirty six.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   54:17P thirty six is English. Is a continuance. Yes.

   Ron Oakley

   54:19Okay. So the continuance again was uh delivered to you on May si for four May sixth, BCC, but we're requesting it to be for the May twenty, twenty twenty five Water County Commissioner's meeting in New Port Richey one thirty P. M.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   54:32Okay, so um P thirty seven

   Ron Oakley

   54:34Digg, you need a motion.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   54:36Oh I need a motion to continue.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   54:38Move to continue time certainly. Sorry.

3. 3Apr 22, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP46Public hearingContinued

   An Ordinance By The … Maximum Projection And Location of Of Docks And Seawalls; Creating … And An Effective Date.

   Approved minutes

   Approved to continue to the June 17, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 38:09
   ▶ 38:091m

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   38:09six. Okay, P forty six was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March fifth, twenty twenty-five.

   Ron Oakley

   38:19Item P forty six is PDE 250135. This is an ordinance uh amending the Land Development Code, uh section of 1001 docks and seawalls. This is being requested for a continuance to the June 17, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1 30 PM in New Port Richey.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   38:37Move to continue time certain.

   Ron Oakley

   38:39Second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   38:40All in favor?

   Ron Oakley

   38:40Aye.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   38:41Aye. Okay, P forty seven.

4. 4May 20, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP44Public hearingContinued

   Approved minutes

   Approved to continue to the June 17, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey by a roll call vote.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 42:33
   ▶ 42:334m

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   42:33Okay and maybe uh she's gonna come back on. Um so we're on P forty four and I am asking for a continuance on this one and I think

   Mike Carballa

   42:44Mm-hmm.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   42:46County Administrator.

   Mike Carballa

   42:47Well no, I was trying to see if uh Commissioner Yeager was online. She's she's able to dial in. She says she voted twice, but uh she's not on mute. Can we can we test her right now? Commissioner Yeager, are you online?

   43:12Okay, we we c we can't hear you, Commissioner Yeager, if you are online.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   43:16Can you hear me? Yes.

   43:21So

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   43:21I have a Chairman Mural question. Voting online. We're not ill. Can we vote this way? Yeah, Jordan.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   43:31She has a business commitment that she is heading to the airport. She's still in in the county, so it's If the board believes it's an emergency You can it's not It's not for convenience. She's

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   43:49I'm okay with her

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   43:49buttons.

   Ron Oakley

   43:52Okay. They can still pass.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   43:54Okay, so um I just spoke up about continuing P forty four. Madam Chairman

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:00Mariano Pucation for Penny for Pasco.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:03Yeah, I just want to know how long she's gonna be online.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:06Um

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:06do

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:06you have to do that first?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:07Yes, ma'am.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:07Okay. Item P44 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on March 5, 2025. The item was continued from the April 9th, 2025 BCC meeting to today. Thank you. Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   44:18P forty four is your first hearing on this. Right,

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:21right. The most important one. I'm not

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   44:24sure why why would you want to

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:25continue? Because at least I don't want to speak for another commissioner. Did you get contact by another commissioner?

   Mike Carballa

   44:31Commissioner Ye well Commissioner Yeager did request uh to continue it as well since she wasn't here, but we do have her online so

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   44:39I'm okay to continue with that. Okay. Move to continue.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:42Okay, so we'll move it to the June seventeenth Board meeting.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   44:47Rogal.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:49Do you have to read my read

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:50title?

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   44:50Madam Clerk.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   44:51Yeah.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   44:52So instead of doing it, let's get it let me ask a question though, before we go go to that. Instead of doing June seventeenth. Well it's gonna be two hearings. You wanna just have the other one in Deed City first? Because otherwise it's gonna be later.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   45:04No, because it's affects the the people on the coast most.

   Ron Oakley

   45:08Yeah, it's it's mostly

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   45:10mostly in my neighborhood.

   Ron Oakley

   45:11I know I know that. All right, two and seventeen cost.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   45:15Let's have the clerk read the title into the ordinance, then you can make your motion to continue.

   45:22Uh

   45:24Thank you.

   Ron Oakley

   45:25Madam Chair. Uh item P forty-four is PDE twenty-five zero one three five. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section ten one thousand one docks and seawalls, section one thousand one point one, intent and purpose. Section 1001.4 visibility, section 1001.5, maximum projection and location of docks and seawalls, creating section 1001.6, boat lift canopies, appendix A definitions, and

   45:55other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability repealer, providing for several inclusion to the land development code, and an effective date.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   46:04Thank you. Um I do wanna note we have Planning Board members here in the audience and I appreciate them coming today. Um if you didn't see it, the planning board voted unanimously to deny this. Do I have that right?

   46:18Do I have that right? They're nodding their head. Okay. All right. So um Then we will I'll take a motion.

   46:26And I appreciate you guys coming. I hope you come the next time.

   Ron Oakley

   46:30We got a motion to continue. So you've

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   46:32you've moved to continue to June seventeenth at one thirty or soon thereafter is same maybe.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   46:39Okay, all in favor? Aye. Roll call, roll call. Oh sorry, yeah, roll call vote. District one, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District four, Commissioner Yeager.

5. 5Jun 17, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP60Public hearingNo action

   Approved minutes

   No action was required as this was the first public hearing. The adoption hearing was scheduled for the August 19, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 57:32
   ▶ 57:3243m

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   57:32P sixty. All right. P sixty was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March fifth, twenty twenty five.

   Ron Oakley

   57:40Item P60 is PDE 250135. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending Section 101 Docks and Seawalls, Section 1001.1 intent and purpose, Section 1001.4 visibility, Section 1001.5, maximum projection and location of docks and seawalls. Creating section 101.6 boat lift canopies. Appendix A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severability,

   58:10inclusion into the land development code in an effective date. Revised ex-party documents were submitted to the clerk's office, as well as a late ex-party communication that uh was received was also sent to the clerk's office. Um Mandela Hill. Principal planner with planning services will be presenting this item.

   Amanda Hill

   58:33Good afternoon, Commissioner. I'm Anthony Planning, Development, and Economic Growth.

   58:41Planning, development, and economic growth was instructed to bring forward this item for consideration. The purpose of this presentation is to provide details on the intent, history, and proposed changes to section 1001 of the Land Development Code. The intent of the ordinance update is to readopt text changes to the Pasco County Land Development Code, which were invalidated by the Circuit Court for Pasco County Civil Division in 2023. It is also to provide standards on boat lift can bees.

   59:11I'm gonna provide a brief history of the ordinance. So back in 2012, Section 1001 Docks and Seawalls was created. That was based off of the adoption of the restated land development code and that moved that previous dock ordinance into that land development code. In 2017, there was a board workshop to discuss, among other items, whether or not to continue to prohibit roofs over docks. The direction provided by the board at that time was to move forward with an ordinance allowing roofs and other similar

   59:41coverings over docks on privately owned lakes.

   59:47Fast forward to 2019, Ordinance 19-12 was adopted by the board, allowing roofs and other similar coverings over docks on privately owned lakes. In 2021, there was a board discussion that resulted in the decision to abandon the previous direction that the board wished to proceed with an amendment to the Land Development Code to allow covers over docks. And then in 2023, that previous invalidation that I mentioned of ordinance 19-12 by the circuit court,

   1:00:18and that was through a motion for partial summary judgment. And covers are currently prohibited everywhere, including on privately owned lakes.

   1:00:29So now I'm going to walk you through the proposed changes and additions to the section of the code. So first, section 1001.1, intent and purpose. An additional purpose is added to provide standards for reasonable protection of vessels from the elements. Section 1001.3 permit required. This section was included after the 320 LPA for internal consistency. An additional description is added to the type of property for which owner

   1:00:59authorization is required prior to obtaining a permit to construct or substantially improve a structure regulated by the section.

   1:01:09Section 1001.4 visibility. Additional clarification on the prohibitions of buildings or structures on waterfront property is provided. Section 1001.5, maximum projection and location of docks and seawalls. The name of section 1001.5 is changed from navigability and protection of watercourses. to maximum projection and location of docks and seawalls. The previous prohibition of obstructions in the section is removed. Additional

   1:01:39guidance on the maximum projection is added. And the retroactive applicability of the subsection is updated to provide revised guidance.

   1:01:49For proposed additions to this section of the code, uh section 1001.6 boat lift canopies is being proposed to be added, and this provides standards for the canopy dimensions and placement.

   1:02:04There are also proposed changes and additions to Appendix A definitions of the LDC. Specifically, there is a proposed update to the definition for mean high water line. And two new definitions are being proposed to be added, Boatlift Canopy and Ordinary High Water Line.

   1:02:26This is the first public hearing of the proposed Land Development Code amendment. Staff research supports that the proposed amendment is consistent with a comprehensive plan. And staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners waive the requirements of the evening hearing pursuant to section one hundred-five point six six five B one of Florida statutes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:02:49Yes, right.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:02:50Why?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:02:51Do you want to have a hearing after five o'clock?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:02:54Oh. No. That's why you wave. Okay, um so this is a public hearing and we can We have multiple people signed up. Yeah. Does anyone here wanna

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:03:09I'll listen to the public at this point.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:03:11Okay. Let's hear the public and then we'll talk amongst themselves.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:03:15All right, so um first we had Jay Pasqua was signed up for P56. Do you want to speak to this item? Yes. Okay, please come to the podium, say it your name and address for the record, and then you have three minutes.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:03:32I'd like to first thank uh Chairwoman Starkey and all the commissioners for allowing me to speak here today. I would like to also first thank Jack Mariano for everything that he's done for our communities. I live in Leisure Beach and I have relatives who live in Signal Cove. There have been many, many boat covers that have been protecting our vessels over many years. There is nothing that I've seen in any record that would indicate that a cover has made damage or has done anything to any homes in our areas. As

   1:04:02you very well may know, the way prices increase, whether it's on cars or anything else, I've personally spent one hundred and twenty five thousand dollars on a boat. And I can uh truly t tell you that it is very important for us, just as you would protect your car or anything else, that we protect our vessels. Reason being is there's a lot of reasons. Number one, the resale value which creates more tax dollars. And not only that, boating is part of our community in our area.

   1:04:33I remember when we passed the amendment that allowed it over the lakes and was a little disappointed that we weren't able to get what we needed. We're not asking for boat houses, we're not asking for cuts in our seawalls, but we're asking for a way to protect our vessels in our community. There are many lifts that are there now, there are many covers that are there now. There are objects that are made out of wood that have been there for hundreds of years, if not since I can remember from back in the seventies. So I do ask that you consider Taking

   1:05:04the measure into some serious consideration, number one, don't limit colors. I'm hearing that you're only allowing three colors. Red I I d I don't know what they are. I have a printout But I think all the colors should be put into place. I am all for regulation for safety. There's no doubt about it. But if you think of the fact that if you own a $150,000 Bukati or if you own another car, you are either going to put it in a garage, Or you're gonna cover it. So when hardworking

   1:05:35people are out there and not all of us are millionaires and we buy a boat, we're looking to just protect our investment. My grandchildren are enjoying the time. A lot of neighbors come over to our homes. We have elderly people that come and not that it has anything to do with it. But if you work hard and you go to retire and you buy a boat And it's something that's all you do. I'm just asking that you take into consideration that you allow us to cover those boats and cover those vessels. to protect it. Now we understand

   1:06:05that there's a lot that's been going on with controversy of companies and so forth, and I'm not here to complain. But I'm here to let you know that I now have a boat there that has a two thousand dollar cover on it. that's black and it hangs over the side of the boat and it looks like a big blob. And the reason for that is is because I can't have a canopy over my boat. So I would ask you to please take into consideration, Madam Chairman M And Chairwoman and all you the Board of County Commissioners to take that into consideration

   1:06:35and I thank you for your time.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:06:36Can I can I ask you a question?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:06:37Yes ma'am.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:06:38Um how much w uh seawall do you have on your canal here? I'm looking at your

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:06:44picture. Th the seawalls in our area range in widths. My personal seawall is sixty feet wide.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:06:52That uh so are you on the corner of that cul-de-sac?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:06:55I I'm actually in the middle of the street. If you're looking for my address, it's [address removed]. I'm directly in the middle.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:07:00[address removed]?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:07:01Yes ma'am.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:07:02Okay, I did the wrong one.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:07:03Yes, ma'am. So a lot of the properties do vary depending on if you go down to the cul-de-sac, they're a hundred feet long. They are bigger. Some are smaller. And the ones in the corners are very difficult to navigate. And I do understand that there has to be, like I said, there has to be rules and regulations. I do understand that. But putting a cover over my boat Would save A lot of aggravation in rotting interior and and and the fiberglass cracks and it

   1:07:34fades out. And the other point that I made before was is that when you sell it you get more money for it. If you get more money for it, you get more tax dollars out of it. So being that we're on the water, I would just ask that you take that into consideration.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:07:47Thank you.

   1:07:49All right, the next individual signed up is Nicholas Mudry, and then behind Mr. Mudry it'll be Wendy Joule.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:07:59Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Nicholas Mudry. I live at [address removed]. I live on a canal. Uh I like to caveat off the previous speaker. Uh Pasco County is one of the few places in Florida that doesn't allow boat covers. If you look at the Florida DEP and if you commissioners I brought plenty of Moved or even five for the second, if you'd like to

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:08:27All favor? Good Shannon. Shannon will come get it.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:08:30This gives you an idea of a cover over a boat uh a boat. Um it's an investment. Uh just like if you have an expensive car, we'd like to go and have some cover over the elements. If you go to other counties Especially up and down the west from Santa Rosa County to Monroe County. Pasco County is the only county that I know of that has a prohibition. over the covers

   1:09:00of her boat lips.

   1:09:05And I just questioned how many people who have the wherewithal to live on the water and to pay the higher taxes. Avoid the county. because of this prohibition. I ask that you'd approve

   1:09:22Item P sixty for the benefit. Of the residents. Any questions? We

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:09:31don't generally engage.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:09:35Thank you.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:09:35Okay, so uh Wendy Jou.

   1:09:40And then behind her Craig Rogers will be next.

   Wendy Jewell

   1:09:44Hello, my name is Wendy Jewell. I live at [address removed] in [address removed]. And I'll be brief because it's actually uh in my view it's actually very simple. Uh the boat canopies provide vital protection from environmental damage to our investments. With rising prices on everything, we should be allowed to do what we can to provide that protection. Just as the other two gentlemen stated, if you had a nice car, you're gonna

   1:10:15put it in a garage or you're gonna cover it or you're gonna do something. Um the covers also provide practical benefits such as shade in extreme heat and sun, which is especially valuable for individuals with health concerns and the elderly. A lot of time can be spent prepping for a day on the water and cleaning the boat when you get back. Um and it isn't pleasant spending that time in the blazing sun and it I think it causes safety

   1:10:45concerns.

   1:10:47They're non-permanent structures. They can be removed during hazardous weather. And I, for one, I do that. And that ensures flexibility and safety. Uh we d we're we're not where I am at, we don't have an HOA. Um and that's one reason why many in my area um settled there. Um these These canopies are attractive. Unlike some of the properties surrounding There. So

   1:11:18nor are real threats addressed in our canals and surrounding waters. And I know it really doesn't have anything to do with it, but when you compare what we're talking about today with derelict and abandoned boats, crumbling seawalls and boats that don't follow the navigational laws. Um I would prefer that those issues be addressed than what we're talking about here today. The visibility issue, I can't, I don't see it. I can tell you that my home faces south. The

   1:11:49home next to me on the west side has a boat with no canopy. And I can't see any further down the canal than than if there was if there were a canopy. Uh the home on my east um has a canopy and it doesn't doesn't really affect my my view at all. So um that's it. I I ask that you approve uh these for

   1:12:19the communities here in outside.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:12:22I have a question for you because I see you have a a a canopy on your dock. I didn't

   Wendy Jewell

   1:12:28know that they weren't even allowed.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:12:30Yeah. Um did you take it off during all the hurricanes? Absolutely did.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:12:34Madam Chair, we usually generally don't engage in public comment. We take the three minutes and we go.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:12:40In an ordinance you do. We do? Yeah. It's public comment in the morning.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:12:45And I I see all the bird droppings on the top of yours and your neighbors. So how do you clean that off?

   Wendy Jewell

   1:12:51Two ways. I have a I have a power washer, I get a ladder out there and I'll wash it off. Um and if you looked at it today with the rains that we've had, it's all gone. And by the way that They go up on my roof of my home too, so that's not a pleasant look from the back. Do you

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:13:07have a one story or a two story? I can't. I have

   Wendy Jewell

   1:13:09a two story.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:13:10Yeah. So so you see the roof of you so you're seeing all the canopy and the bird droppings from your second floor.

   1:13:20Um how hard is it how hard was it? Are you able to take that off yourself, that canopy, or do you have to hire someone to take it

   Wendy Jewell

   1:13:27off? No, no, no. I I get a l little ladder and I get my power washer and I wash it off. Well, how do you take it off? Oh how do you take it off? Oh, I hire someone to take the it off. We have taken up we have Are you looking at it? You know I have two, right? Yes. One one is far much further in and covers a outdoor kitchen. Yeah. The one that covers the boat We can't take off ourselves. It's just a little too dangerous. So we hire somebody a couple days ahead to come and and take it off and then they come back and and put it on after the storm. The

   1:13:57one over the kitchen we have taken off ourselves because it's and um at what wind level do you decide to take that off? We watch for the storms when anything comes out, usually three days prior. So how many times have you taken that

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:14:11off? Three? And how how long have you had that?

   Wendy Jewell

   1:14:19Four? Four years? And you've taken it off three times. Actually twice. We've taken off the kitchen one once and we've taken off the boat cover twice.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:14:31And d uh do you mind saying how much it costs to have it taken off and put back on?

   Wendy Jewell

   1:14:38Three fifty to take it off.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:14:41We have fifty dollars?

   Wendy Jewell

   1:14:42Mm-hmm. Yeah, I mean it's it's the right thing to do. I but it you know, I've never seen I believe the other gentleman stated as well, never seen it them come off and do damage, here's the problem. It's not so much if you had to buy a new one, it's gonna cost you a couple thousand, right? You can leave it on with as many bungees. The bungees are I

   1:15:12think twelve to sixteen, something like that, inches all the way around. And That thing isn't going anywhere. But it will rip off S it might put a rip in it, it might We don't dare leave our boat on it because it does have a cage that goes over. Um and we have a T top on our boat. So if the boat were to hit the T top, it could damage the boat. So we take ours off, we take our boat off. Um Those that have bimines

   1:15:43probably don't have the same same issues that we do. Um but we take them off mainly because you should, it's the right thing to do. If you didn't, it's not gonna hurt anybody's price, it's not gonna damage anything. You're just gonna have to buy a new cover.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:00Um the house to your west, is that a permanent roof on the dock? What is that?

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:05That was grandfathered in before permanent

   1:16:12I don't know about that one. Someone needs to go check that one out.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:15Oh don't. Tony will

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:16kill me.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:16I'm sorry, but that's you're not allowed to build a permanent roof on

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:19it. No, that was done back in

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:22We can tell by Google or so.

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:24Okay.

   1:16:25Yeah. Yeah. Okay,

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:27thank you

   1:16:27so much. You're welcome.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:28It looks

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:28like you have

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:28a beautiful

   Wendy Jewell

   1:16:29house. Thank you.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:30Uh Craig Rogers is next signed up.

   Craig Rogers

   1:16:40How you all doing today? Um it just to clarify

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:44Rogers, can you just give your name and address for the record quickly?

   Craig Rogers

   1:16:46I'm sorry.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:46Yeah, it's Craig

   Craig Rogers

   1:16:47Rogers, [address removed] in [address removed].

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:16:51Okay, thank you.

   Craig Rogers

   1:16:52Um just to clarify, uh we're discussing

   1:16:57New boat covers to be done and existing boat covers also?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:17:06Existing boat covers have not been legal under current ordinance.

   Craig Rogers

   1:17:10Okay. I guess my big question is I've had mine for and I'm just gonna guess about seven years Um Did these companies have occupational license or contracting licenses in Pasco County?

   1:17:25I am unaware. You're not aware or you don't know you don't know or

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:17:30They're not legal. If they're not legal, they wouldn't have been permitted. So we wouldn't know. Yeah, they don't have a permit. That's an unpermitted structure that you have there.

   Craig Rogers

   1:17:37Okay, so they were working without any kind of license in Pasco County. Okay.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:17:40Well we

   Craig Rogers

   1:17:40don't

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:17:41I don't know what kind of license

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:17:42is.

   1:17:43They may have a a a business tax receipt from the from the tax collector's office. That's not that's not licensure. Okay.

   1:17:53four eighty nine license for some other reason, but we don't But they're not pulling building permits for these structures. But

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:01that's but they

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:04Yeah.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:05I mean there should be

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:06Should be. It's

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:08all unpermitted.

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:09Right.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:09We'll have to deal with that one.

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:11Okay. All right. No problem. Um Well when code enforcement comes around and they come around in our neighborhood quite often uh uh I know they have to see these structures going up.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:22Are you saying they're coming in your neighborhood by boat?

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:24Absolutely. A hundred and ten percent.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:28I live on the water I've ne I've never seen. One time.

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:31Okay. Um you can definitely see them from the street. I can see my neighbors from the other canal from them. In my front driveway. What I'm saying is I guess If these weren't allowed for years and we have got these and we're you know, supposed to be getting them. Why didn't someone tell us prior to this? Why

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:50didn't you say you were who said you were supposed to be getting them?

   Craig Rogers

   1:18:53No when we got these. When I got mine seven years ago, how come someone didn't say you can't have these?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:18:59That's a good question. You should have asked the guy who was installing it if it was legal or not. Okay.

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:07Okay. All right. So it's totally on the actual residents. The county's taking no respon so the county is saying they've never seen these boat lift covers. They just appeared one day. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just saying that, you know, Um

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:19:22for us. So

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:23I guess what I'm asking you is You were aware of these boat covers being in installed, correct?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:19:30I I had no knowledge you had one installed in your backyard.

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:33Did you have any knowledge that anyone in Pasco County had a buttlift

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:19:36cupboard installed?

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:38This is this is a

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:19:39a a hearing on this ordinance.

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:42Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:19:43Grilling the County Commission doesn't get you anywhere.

   Craig Rogers

   1:19:46Okay. I don't mean to be drilling the county commission. Point of order, Madam Chair?

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:19:49So we generally do, and I've never seen it, you can say we do with different nuances, but when we have citizens coming up to speak, they get three minutes to talk, they go through it, they make their comments, and then we talk about what they said later on. That's how we've been doing it. Uh this this it back and forth is up to brand new.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:20:06Just go um go ahead finish your

   Craig Rogers

   1:20:07question. I'm sorry, I I'm not trying to be argumentative or anything like that. It's just that, you know, all of a sudden this came up. We've had 'em for years.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:20:13I wanna I won't answer any more questions.

   Craig Rogers

   1:20:14You

   1:20:15know,

   1:20:15we we've we haven't had an issue with them or anything. I just You know, I just don't understand how this just crept up on us all of a sudden, is the way it kinda seems. To me.

   Alan Rose

   1:20:26Okay.

   Craig Rogers

   1:20:28So so we are moving forward to get these permitted and everything. What does this mean that everyone that has one has to take them down and start over from scratch? Why has this time been reset?

   1:20:42Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:20:43Do you wanna answer? I I

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:20:44I

   Unidentified speakerVoice H

   1:20:44feel like I think we need to.

   Craig Rogers

   1:20:45So are we saying we're gonna take these down and then start over from scratch? Well, you

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:20:53This is your time to speak. We're not answering this is not a this is not a session for you to get your questions answered.

   Craig Rogers

   1:21:00Okay. All right, I understand. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Sorry.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:21:05Okay, so that is the last person signed up in the audience, although I believe a Mr. Brent Lee is online. Mr. Lee

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:21:14and Barb Barbara's here to speak as well. Do you want to wait for him? Sure, yeah. Okay. Mr.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:21:19Mr. Lee? Are you there?

   Brent Lee

   1:21:22I'm here.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:21:23Uh okay, so give your name and address for the record and then you have your three minutes.

   Brent Lee

   1:21:29Okay. My name is Brent Lee. My wife and I own [address removed] in [address removed]. And uh thanks for uh giving us the opportunity to address these issues. Uh in keeping with what's just been decided that it's not a question and answer session, I'll just go ahead and say what I'm saying. They uh The way I see this and many other people Uh this really only concerns the boating community

   1:21:59and those that are property owners on the water. water. Um so I I'm I'm wondering why it's gotta be a concern for everyone. Um There's the three items I want to discuss is there I understand that there are two lifts per property allowed if you have sufficient seawall to to hold them. I believe that you're limiting it to one canopy, so I feel like there should be

   1:22:29the same number of canopies permitted that are uh possible with the lift.

   1:22:38The canopies must be three feet inside of setbacks. Uh that uh is gonna pose a problem to try to cover the entire boat. Uh, specifically the bow is what I'm thinking of. And the third item is the three colors allowed, blue, green, and beige, which is what I understand. Um I understand the aesthetic appeal of earth colours. However, I'm thinking that dark colors

   1:23:08attract heat. What trying to to eliminate is direct sun and heat on our investments. Uh white, silver, light gray, these are colors that are known to reflect the heat of the sun and affect the purpose of having a boat canopy. Uh so I and I I'm just wondering, you know, why the The colour. Uh, you know, I can't see

   1:23:38anyone who can afford to live on the water and afford to have a boat and a boat lift and a cover, I'm not sure that they're gonna have uh tricolored purple uh tops. I'm thinking they're gonna kinda maintain the um value of their property by use choosing a color that worked. But I think white, silver, light gray should be three additional colors at least that should be handy. Um the uh since only the voting community is really concerned with

   1:24:09this and we are the ones that that Want to see Uh our community uh aesthetics maintained Uh I'm not sure uh how I would word this with you. I don't know if if uh I would like to see a motion made for a referendum on these canopy um ordinances restricted to only people who actually have

   1:24:39property on the water, the canals or what have you. Uh um So I'm not um You know, other than that, uh I don't see, you know, I mean I think there should be permitted, I think it should be controlled, uh, for everyone's benefit. most particularly those that are actually on the water. How much time do I have left?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:25:01I think you I think he the red light. I don't know why it wasn't cut off. The red Yeah, you're done. Thank you so much.

   Brent Lee

   1:25:08Thank you.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:25:10All right. And then we had one other individual, but did Mr Pratt show up or is he still

   1:25:17He is not online. Okay. So we do not have anyone else signed up if you want to take a look at the right-of-way. Comments from the public.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:25:26Good afternoon, Commissioner. Barbara Wilhite, [address removed]. That is my home. It's been my home for several years. My home was built in 1984. I have not owned it since 1984. Um so obviously I'm one of these affected people because I live on the water. I did want to say in the staff's presentation that there was something kind of missing what I want to point out to you, which is Ordinance um 1912 was rejected by the court or a procedural matter, not a substantive matter. So when

   1:25:56I talked to David Goldstein, just to clear up, do you need do you have to do this because of the litigation? Do you have to change what you did in 2019 or what the board did in 2019 because of litigation? The answer was no. If you want to readopt 2019, you could readopt uh readopt what you did in 2019 or what the board did in 2019.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:26:13Is that the one that allowed um covers on lakes?

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:26:16That's correct. Yeah. So I just want to make sure that that That's that you're not driven by you have to do something or you have to make a change. The the third, excuse me, the second speaker recognized and acknowledged that this has been a prohibition. These have always been pro prohibited in in uh this county. And I think that's a good thing, as opposed to being a a negative thing. This is about views and and I stand here not really to say I Your other speakers all said aye.

   1:26:47It was about aye. I spent twenty five hundred twenty-five thousand dollar bot on my boat. I wasn't able to achieve what I needed in twenty nineteen. I work hard to buy a boat. My house has been there since 1984. Everybody's had boats in our community. We have eighteen hundred homes. Everybody's had boats. It's nothing new to work hard to buy a boat. You cover your boat. You buy a boat cover, you cover it. You hire a company to wash your boat weekly and cover it for you if you can't.

   1:27:17Nothing is changed. Please don't change.

   1:27:24The quite a few of your speakers, and I I read all the commentary that you received by email as well, already have these boat canopies. So they're coming here because they've already violated your ordinance and they're coming here asking you to change it. But but what I'm asking you is to not change and not be half of I It's on behalf of our Our community, our county has never allowed these covers. They change views. Now your speaker can say and a c your speaker

   1:27:54number four, I don't want to call out people, your sequel number three number three says I don't see the visibility issue because I don't have one. I can't see. I don't have a view anyhow. Well, there's a whole bunch of people that do have views, like myself. And it'll change the view. All the way down my canal, the way I the way my canal sits is it's in it sits east-west. So it is a sunset view canal. So all the way down that canal there's boats after boats after boats after boats. And if you change the ordinance

   1:28:25For the eyes. People that want it for their own personal benefit. You're changing that view all the way down that canal. For something that's been that way for my home since 1984, your changing of you. I'm asking you, as in 2019, the board weighed this out and said, we don't need to do that. People can cover their boats. We recognize that lakes were different, the viewshed for lakes were different, larger lots, the setbacks are very different from then the canals. And you and that distinction

   1:28:55was made. And that was not overturned, that distinction. Your county attorney said it was appropriate distinction. So I want to honor your time. Sorry. So I saw I see my time up, but thank you for giving me the time to speak on my personal behalf. Thank you. Thank you, Barbara.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:29:09Um

   1:29:11So I I wanna speak to this too. Um I I am a boat owner. And I I live on the water. And um we've lived there, we've had that house I think about ten years. Uh And I've grown up around boats. And I'd never had a boat cover. Over a boat. My boat was made to be out boats are made to be outside. I I have a wonderful view. I'm on the open

   1:29:42canal. I would Just It would really affect m the value of my M my view shed. If my view is not a little bit more than a little bit of Of the island. And the lighthouse and Eagle Point Park and all that was taken away because of boat covers to my right and to my left. It would seriously affect my view. And and my neighbors that that view goes away. Um it's It when my when my the

   1:30:12boat next to me when he Even when he puts the covers on just his windows around his boat, it it takes away um part of Bailey's bluff. So I I ha w what would happen on the boat cover would be huge. Um I it doesn't affect people on large lots. And it maybe it doesn't affect people who don't care about their views down their canals. Maybe they're not scenic, but I know our community It's a beautiful community

   1:30:42and we love our water views. There's a reason why The side fences for for fifteen feet back can only be four feet high and they have to be see through. Because everyone's view has Those long views have great value and the county ordinances say you cannot block it. And so the f the Fences are four feet high and they cannot be solid. Um And I I heard that gentleman say that the other counties don't

   1:31:13have Uh we're the only county that has this. That is not true. My family lives on the water in in Miami, no boat covers allowed. For Howard, there's no boat covers. It's all over the place there's no boat covers. And I wanna remind you what happened in Charlotte County. During Hurricane Ian.

   1:31:34That um boat cover Became a um the the metal of it Became a missile. and it went into a neighbor's boat Went through the hole and sank it. And you know what? Uh the the person who had that boat cover didn't have to pay for the guy who lost his boat because they considered that an act of God. Just like in in Gulf Harbors. during a f uh two years ago when we had wasn't even a hurricane, just these

   1:32:05winds come through, took off someone's um back porch, the roof over their back porch, went on a ne one of my neighbor's house. Did all kinds of damage to his roof. They had to pay for it themselves. the the other guy was not responsible uh to have to pay for to fix all actually that that hurt a bunch of people's houses. So I don't see any reason.

   1:32:31since the beginning of time. I'm I am all for boat covers on lakes. I don't think it takes their view away. Um But um I I don't see any reason why we should be be doing this to our communities.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:32:45Madam Chairman, before you get into general discussion, can I get you to call for any other public comment and then close public comment?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:32:52Is there any other public comment? Sorry, I didn't see anyone else wanna come up. Okay, here comes somebody.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:33:03Do you have anyone else online? No.

   1:33:06I live next to Wendy Toole who got up and spoke on she's like, Oh I'm sorry. Florence Carter, [address removed].

   1:33:15Okay, and you can pull the microphone down to you so you don't have to say any of your tippy toes. All right.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   1:33:22The end of it bends. Yeah.

   1:33:25Can you hear me? There you go. Okay.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:33:28You may proceed.

   Unidentified speakerVoice I

   1:33:29She has a boat cover. I have a boat cover. And her cover doesn't block anything. It's not like it's like this. It's like more straight across. So there's there's no view. That's blocking.

   1:33:46Yeah. Blocks way more than the boat cover.

   1:33:52That's all I wanted to say and I'm not sure. I just hope you guys make the right decision when the time comes. Jack?

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:34:03As soon as you're done, I'm gonna make a motion.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:34:07And you had somebody in the back row raising their hand. If

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:10you want to speak to

   1:34:10this,

   1:34:11is there anyone else who wants to speak to this one? They come to the podium. Yeah, come on upstairs.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:17I had uh you know, I had people from Gulf Harbors coming, but I think they were confused by this continuance. Because their Gulf Harbor's They don't want this, so

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:34:29Oh excuse me. Hi, my name is Darrell Whitlock. I live

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:32You can pull it up. There you go.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:35We

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:34:35accommodate all people. We don't

   1:34:36have to do it.

   1:34:36My name is Daryl Whitlock. Uh actually I live in Sun Branch Civic Association. Actually the president.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:42And what's

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:34:42your

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:42address?

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:34:43Uh I live on Veronica [address removed]. Right. And actually I was in front of you the board probably I'd say about was it two, three years ago, I think was Jack. Now we we talked about this issue. And it was uh really hot back then and it still is. And it seems like it it actually died down. Since that happened, I've my neighborhood have probably talked to hundreds of people, hundreds of people in Hudson Beach. And I found a couple of people that say no. But a couple

   1:35:13of people say no they don't want them. There's like fifteen to twenty to that one that want them. And I think really we should have the right to protect our boat and our our investments. Uh my boat cover, I had it on through the last two hurricanes. And it did not tear her. Jack came to my house and seen it. If they're strapped down right, I've went through I've taken mine off before during the hurricanes. Bullet em up. Put 'em back on and I had people I seen that they had left theirs

   1:35:43on and there was no issues with them. Didn't stretch out. Later on they had come in, they put new bungees back on them. If they're maintained right. Our storms that we get over here in Hudson don't really exceed over a hundred mile an hour. Inland, I lived in Orlando for thirty two years. I've seen Charlie go through over one hundred and twenty mile an hour. Take roofs off. I've never seen a storm over here like that. When Milton came in, we didn't get hardly nothing. By me, Enland, it destroyed it. It tore down trees,

   1:36:14blocked roadways. Inland they got more wind, more hurricane uh hurricane damage. Tornadoes drop, we do not have the tornadoes that drop on the on the coastal areas. We should have the right to protect what we've got there. There's people my neighbor just spent three hundred thousand dollars on a boat. That's more than some people are paying for houses right now. I mean, I think it's a good thing

   1:36:39A carport over it, no problem. And protect it out there in front. What is the difference in a back? They're saying that it's blocking views. My my canopy is probably I would say probably about ten foot off the ground. So you can look through it to see it. Now I got seventy foot of property. Technically I got but a sixty foot boat out there. Now don't don't you think that sixty foot boat would block your view more than my canopy would? That's what it comes down to. We've got investments that all

   1:37:09we want to do is protect what we've got. And it is a boating community. I'm sorry, it's what it is. But I guess that's about it. I think my time's about okay about thirty two seconds. But I do want to thank the commissioners for what you're doing. You are doing uh very good, very well for us in general. And I want to thank you for that. But thank you very much for

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:37:32your time on this. Okay, is there anyone else uh that wants to speak in public comment?

   1:37:40Nope. No. Sorry.

   1:37:43Okay. All right, we've closed public comment.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:37:45All right, Madam Chair?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:37:46Yeah.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:37:47So this issue here when this was going through I I cautioned as far as like trying to separate the lakes to the canals. Um I knew my area had voiced the concerns from from years before how they wanted to protect their boats. Um The gentleman who just spoke, Daryl Whitlock Right beside him was a house that got destroyed. Walls came down, windows are out. the whole house destroyed, his boat covers right in place. A few others across the way, all in place. So if built properly they they can with storm the stor withstand

   1:38:17the storms. I I firmly believe the boats as as if you've heard in testimony that They block the view more than the cover does anyway. And that's why we're doing the silver cover. We're not talking talking big canopies like it was down in Gulf Harbors. Uh and I think Gulf Harbors has a deed restriction in place that would keep you from being able to do it. Well that's not what I've heard, but anyway. Um as far as this, I'm gonna move that we move this thing forward. Uh I'm okay if we add the colors of white, silver, and light gray as well.

   1:38:48We're

   Unidentified speaker

   1:38:48not

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:38:49voting on it. Just to move it forward. But I mean I w I wanna make that mention so we can look at it next week.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:38:55So yeah, so if we can get consensus on changing the color, that's really all or you can make a motion to amend the ordinance to change to add those colors if you wish. But So moved.

   1:39:12Really?

   Lisa Yeager

   1:39:13Okay. So we're

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:39:14second.

   Lisa Yeager

   1:39:15Second. We we're moving it forward. We're not moving on the colour. This is just this is just

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:39:20changing the colors in the in the

   Lisa Yeager

   1:39:23or I thought we're adding. We're adding those. Adding. Adding those results. Adding. I'll second that.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:39:29Word commercial oblique.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:39:31Bathroom.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:39:32Okay. Um all right, all in favor? Aye. Okay.

   Amanda Hill

   1:39:41That's

   1:39:41it. There is still another motion that needs to be made um in terms of recommending that the board waive the requirements for the evening hearing. So moved. This

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:39:51is recommending the waiving the

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:39:52evening. The motion would be that the Board of County Commissioners waive the requirements for section 125.665 B1, Florida statutes, that at least one public hearing be held after 5 PM on a weekday and in and instead provide both required public hearings be held at 1.30 or sh as soon thereafter as same may be heard. Some moving.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:16I'll take a second.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:40:18Second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:19All in favor? Aye. Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:40:23And your next public hearing on this matter will be

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:28August something.

   Ron Oakley

   1:40:34Yeah.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:38August nineteenth is what I have.

   Ron Oakley

   1:40:41Aug August nineteenth.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:42August nineteenth.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:43Thank

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:43you.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:45Hit 'em long, hit 'em straight, all that kind of stuff.

   1:40:51All right,

6. 6Aug 19, 2025
   Board of County CommissionersP55Public hearingAdopted

   Approved minutes

   Approved to adopt by a roll call vote with Chairman Starkey voting nay.

   Open this item →▶ Play from 1:24:41
   ▶ 1:24:4155m

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:24:41P fifty five, we have proof of publication in the March fifth, Tampa Bay Times, uh March fifth, twenty twenty-five edition of Tampa Bay Times for the April twenty-second Board of County Commissioners meeting where it was continued to June seventeenth, where it was continued to today.

   Amy Heiler

   1:24:59Uh good afternoon, Amy Tull with Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Item P55 is an ordinance by Pasco by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section 1001, Docks and Seawalls, Section 1001.

   1:25:19Section 1001.4 visibility. Section 1001.5 Maximum protection and location of docks and seawalls, creation, creating section 1001.6, boat lift canopies, appendix A definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severality, inclusion into the land development code, and an effective date. This item comes with a recommendation of approval. There is a presentation. Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:25:51I think you need to give a presentation.

   Amanda Hill

   1:25:59Oh that maybe.

   Amy Heiler

   1:26:01Sorry. Uh there is also ex parte communications that were sent um as early as a legislative item you

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:26:08will

   Amy Heiler

   1:26:08doesn't matter. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you.

   Amanda Hill

   1:26:18Good afternoon, Commissioner Oakley Amanda Hill, Planning Development and Economic Growth. I'd like to request that the Board receive and file the following revised documents for this item, the agenda memo, ordinance, amendment text red line, appendix aid definitions red line.

   1:26:41So as a reminder, the intent

   1:26:46Yes. A

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:26:48motion?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:26:48You can't make a motion. To accept it. I would like to request the question. We're asking for the board to receive and file those documents.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:26:56Oh so we need a motion from our own staff?

   Amanda Hill

   1:26:58All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. Thanks. So as a reminder, the intent of the amendment is to readopt text changes to the Pasco County Land Development Code, which were invalidated by the Circuit Court for Pasco County Civil Division in 2023, as well as to provide standards on boat lift canopies. I'll now review some of the concerns that were discussed at the LPA and BCC public hearings held on March 20th and June 17th, respectively. The LPA

   1:27:29expressed concerns regarding the proposed prohibition of canopies over Davids and canopies attached to seawalls in section 1001.6A1. Staff's research regarding this supports the prohibition in order to reduce the load on the seawall that may not be engineered to support such loads. The LPA also expressed concerns regarding the obstruction of few sheds, which I'll address later in this presentation. Staff did not receive additional documentation from the LPA

   1:27:59as to the specific policies and the comp plan that the proposed ordinance was inconsistent with. However, they did recommend that the boat lift canopy should not be a use by right and recommended to staff that a special exception or conditional use application should be required for the installation of a boat lift canopy.

   Unidentified speakerVoice K

   1:28:17Mm.

   Amanda Hill

   1:28:20The board expressed concerns regarding the impact of hurricanes on Boat Lif canopies at the six seventeen meeting. SAF has identified uh section 1001.6A3 and section 1001.6A4 that attempt to address those public safety concerns. namely that boatlift canopies shall meet or exceed the requirements of awnings and canopies in the Florida Building Code, and that boatlift canopies must be removed and safely stored indoors whenever the public is

   1:28:50instructed to do so by a governmental authority based on the weather.

   1:28:58The board also expressed concerns regarding the color restrictions and voted to include additional colors, namely white, silver, and gray. Section 1001.687 has been revised accordingly. The colors will be in this proposed amendment: beige, white, silver, light gray, or neutral shades of blue, green, monochromatic, and free of any design unless otherwise stipulated by a homeowners association or a similar entity.

   1:29:26The board expressed concerns regarding maintenance of the boatlift canopies. A new standard, Section 1001.6A5, has been added to attempt to address those maintenance concerns. And it requires boat lift canopies to be maintained so as to present a neat, clean appearance. The county may also order the repair or removal of boat lift canopies if the building official determines a boatlift canopy presents an immediate threat to the public health and safety.

   1:29:58The board expressed concerns regarding the impact on viewsheds. There are multiple standards that are currently included in the proposed amendment to minimize the impact on view sheds, namely the previously mentioned color restrictions. The requirement for the canopy to remain open on all sides in section 1001.6A6. Staff also removed a previously proposed allowance for a 24-inch drop curtain around the perimeter of the boat lift canopy, and these are all intended to help the canopies blend into the view

   1:30:28shed. As seen in this image here, there are actually six boat lift canopies in this image, but you can see that they're blending into the existing view shed.

   1:30:42Some other notable staff revisions to the dimensional standards in section 1001.6A were completed, and that was the main reason for the walk on edits to the documents that were originally with this item. So, as a reminder, uh the dimensions that are included in this section include the height, length, width, Horizontal projection, side setback, arch height, and maximum projection.

   1:31:12The height that was proposed at the six seventeen meeting was fifteen feet. Uh boat lists in the county are currently already at 15 feet from the mean high water line, and restricting canopies to the same height would limit. what would be practical to permit for the boat lift canopies. So as such staff is proposing at this hearing that the limit for the height would be five feet above the boat lift structure. not to exceed twenty feet above the mean high water line.

   1:31:44The length that was previously proposed at the six seventeen meeting was forty feet. The LDC already governs the maximum length of structures. That is actually a third of the width of the canal, and that's existing code language. And restricting it to 40 feet was considered to be arbitrary as it allows for covers on some boat lifts and restricts it for others. And the intent is to allow boatlift covers for all boat lifts. As such, staff is proposing that the standard for the length is actually

   1:32:14the length of the boat lift plus the allowable horizontal projection. The width that was proposed at the six seventeen meeting was eighteen feet. And staff is proposing that that is updated to the actual width of the boat lift plus the allowable horizontal projection. And this is because the width is already governed by the side use lines in section 1001.5. The horizontal projection was previously proposed as a maximum of two feet

   1:32:44at the 617 meeting. And staff kept that two foot maximum. However, we also added an additional requirement for a maximum of one foot for docks that are located within an aquatic preserve. And this is a matter of state preemption where for single-family dock standards and criteria, roofs are allowed but cannot overhang more than one foot beyond the footprint of the lift and boat that's stored on the lift.

   1:33:15For the side setback at the 617 meeting, referred to zoning district was the standard that was proposed for this standard. Uh we have reviewed this and we were advised that it's inapplicable to the bolt of canopies since the zoning district setbacks applies to yards. And to the extent that setbacks apply to docks, they are governed by section 1001.5, which states that docks and structures over the water may not

   1:33:45extend past the side use lines. So as such, we're proposing that that is updated accordingly. And the arch height and maximum projections were not changed.

   1:33:57Some other communities that staff researched while drafting this code included Collier County and City of Cape Coral. And the proposed standards that is being presented to you today seek to protect view sheds while creating standards that will provide for the installation of boat lift canopies that are proportional to the size of the boats and boatlifts.

   1:34:21Staff recommends that the board accept public comment, adopt a proposed ordinance amendment by roll-called vote, authorize the chairman to execute the ordinance amendment, and direct board records to transmit the ordinance to the Department of State by electronic mail within 10 days after adoption of the ordinance amendment. And I'm here for any questions that you may have.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:34:43Madam Chairman Mari Uh if I'm advised that Commissioner Yeager is online so if the record could reflect that she's joined us on this item.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:34:53I do have one question. Um can you go back to Lisa, can you um mute mute up is that Lisa? Make it that okay. Um could you tell me what were the what were the rules here when we have a storm impending storm? I'll go back. Sorry, I was doing some research on here and I didn't see what the rules are.

   Amanda Hill

   1:35:20So Bolt Lift Canopy shall meet or exceed the requirements of awnings and canopies in the Florida Building Code. All boat lift canopies must be removed and safely stored indoors whenever the public is instructed by a governmental authority that the weather conditions require the storage of any loose items or materials due to an impending storm or other weather system.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:35:38I think we need to um We don't we don't tell people

   1:35:44We I mean I think we need to put in there uh a little more when we have a s a w a certain wind event, at what time expected wind event, That they have to do. Take 'em out. I don't want to leave it as loose as loose as that. If this passes. Um So, is it a tropical storm? Is it uh Heavy thunderstorm. I mean what what is we need to think about what is the right criteria to make sure these don't become

   1:36:15projectiles like they did. Down in Charlotte County. um during the hurricane.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:24Madam Chair?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:36:25Yeah.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:36:26Is there a standard f for how much wind these have to sustain to be approved by the Florida Building Code?

   Amanda Hill

   1:36:33I know that there are some manufacturer specifications regarding that. I believe it's mostly seventy miles per hour. Um do you have that information with you, Chris?

   1:36:43We have staff from Building Construction Services here as well and natural resources and the County Attorney's Office. So I've been working along with them.

   Unidentified speakerVoice L

   1:36:54Good afternoon, board Chris Mayne, Deputy Building Official for Building Construction Services. Um there is a a provision in Florida building code that does require these canvas and and awning canopy type type structures to be removed at I believe it's sixty five miles an hour, I'd have to look. And also any of these structures that are the actual structures, the frames themselves, um, if they're built coastal, Have engineered plans to be

   1:37:24able to survive a hundred year storm.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:37:29What is a hundred year storm?

   Unidentified speakerVoice L

   1:37:31Uh a hundred year storm event uh any of those hundred year storm events. In the

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:37:36hundred year storm event isn't it like

   Unidentified speakerVoice L

   1:37:37a storm event?

   project engineer

   1:37:40Sure it is. But if we're talking flooding wouldn't really be germane to a canopy, it would be more of a wind issue.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:37:45It would. You're right. I mean it's the wind that we're caring about here.

   Unidentified speakerVoice L

   1:37:50It is. Uh what the the code says is that a hundred year storm event, the structures located seaward of the coastal construction control line must be designed to withstand a hundred year storm event.

   project engineer

   1:38:03That's what the code says.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:38:05Okay. Um are there any other questions before we listen to the public and then we'll discuss it amongst ourselves?

   1:38:15Um I had a I had a question on the five I guess I have one more, sorry. The five foot five foot above what? Above the bolt lift. Well, do you have a boatlet? 'Cause I have a have a couple of boatlets. Uh is that the motor? Is that the bunks? Is that the There's all different s heights of the

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:38:38it should be the horizontal beam. Because that's what it attaches to.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:38:46Five foot above the horizontal beam?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:38:49Mm-hmm. That's

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:38:50Well my boat would never fit in that and my I mean,

   Ron Oakley

   1:38:54I'm not sure. Probably have a cover or

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:38:58I I I I need I need to I need you to diagram what that means. For me. Somebody. what that means, 'cause that's important. We're that five foot as far as view blockage. And when you took that view of all those you were at water level, you weren't in a house looking down a channel.

   1:39:20Oh the horizontal uh going down the side. Yeah. Okay. So that's the The beam that holds up the motors. Usually on a lift.

   1:39:33The motors are usually attached to the front of the the front of those beams.

   1:39:38Yeah. Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:39:39Yeah, I got it. At least on the lift I have on my house.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:39:42Yeah, so so if you're looking at this one on three, it would be kinda where the three line touches

   1:39:51That where

   Amanda Hill

   1:39:51it makes that tea.

   1:39:54The dimension line.

   1:39:58Okay, so

   Amy Heiler

   1:40:00Have it. No, it's not not any okay.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:04All right. Um Okay, so I guess we're gonna hear from the public now. Okay. If we have no more questions.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:40:13First person signed up is Jay Pascoal.

   1:40:20Your address for the record, please.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:40:22J. Pascoa, [address removed]. And yes, it's at the top of the aluminum beams that come straight across.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:30Yeah.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:40:31There's one that goes down the left and one goes down the right. And from what I'm understanding, it's at that point it would be five feet up.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:38And what was your street again?

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:40:39[address removed].

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:40:41[address removed].

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:40:42That is correct. Yeah, you've you've looked me up a few times. But anyway, um my can I first of all I want to say thank you for all the time you have taken to over to look at this issue and I am in support of it. I'd like to thank Commissioner Mariano for his support and former Commissioner Mike Wells. Um it is very important that we cover our property, but the reason why I am here is, yes, to support it. But to get a little bit of clarification on one thing. On page 4, item B2, or page 16 and 2A,

   1:41:13it says other visual obstructions are prohibited from your dock. Now the reason why I bring that up is is because I have a cannon and I have a six foot statue of a pirate. So it is a very big vague statement when it says prohibited on docks or obstructions are prohibited on docks. So if we could get a clarification on that and not leave that as an open item. Um whether that is by email or by text or

   1:41:43by any way. We'll clear it

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:41:44up here today.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:41:45I'm sorry?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:41:46We'll ask today.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:41:47That'd be great. Thank you very much. In one of the replies that I got on January twenty sixth, twenty twenty two, um when I asked about that, the reply was interesting catch, Christy Dolotowski. So I'm not too much concerned about it, but I am curious as to what that meant by good catch.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:42:10Well Katie it that's probably Katie Doletowski, which is my executive assistant.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:42:17So I'm kind of concerned as to what is going to be allowed Now if I want to put chairs out there or a table out there or

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:42:27no, I think that's a a good question to ask, but we need to clarify that.

   Unidentified speakerVoice G

   1:42:32Um I have not for the I have fifty seconds left, but not for the time that I've been in Hudson that I've seen any cloth canopy or vinyl canopy become a projectile. As a matter of fact, I watch them very closely. I'm out there on a daily basis. I have not seen any that have come apart. As a matter of fact, the wooden ones that were erected in the seventies are still standing. And the only concern I have with anything out there right now is the docks that have sunk into the canals that have not been removed. Uh

   1:43:03that is a a safety hazard, not that it has anything to do with this. But again, thank you very much for your time and I appreciate you taking that and I do support both canopies. Thank you for your time.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:43:14Let me show you. Nick Mundry.

   1:43:21Your address for the record, please.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:43:23Good afternoon. My address is [address removed]. And I've been following this uh for several years. Can I show the commissioner something?

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   1:43:35Move to receive and file. Second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:43:37All in favor? Aye.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   1:43:38Aye.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:43:56The first picture you see is a picture of a boat cover. Not a lift cover.

   1:44:06It's got a frame over the the lift that's attached to the poles.

   1:44:13Very much similar in kind to a frame if you look at the second page.

   1:44:20Of a boat lift. The lift cover. The other thing I like to put out, this is completely legal, 'cause I I took this picture to several years ago. I took this picture to code compliance and code compliance told me It is a boat. cover 'cause it's laying on the boat. It's not a lift. Cover. The other thing is This thing definitely blocks the

   1:44:50view. Of The neighbors to the left and right. Opposed to The proposal that is being done. through the change of the ordinance. I j I I just couldn't figure for many years how this was legal. And the second page was not. And I hope you consider approving the change to the ordinance.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:45:17Um the public is not seeing this, but it's a It's a c it's a boat that's wrapped versus a boat with a boat cover.

   Nicholas Mudry

   1:45:27Yeah, this is a boat cover. Because it's actually touching the boat. And that's what Code Compliance told me when I took this to them. It's about cover. And to me it's more Yeah It blocks the wind more. And it obstructs the view more. But it still has a frame. And I know there was a lot of discussion in the last meeting and in the twenty twenty two meeting Of the frames in this. I

   1:45:57thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:46:01Daryl Witla.

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:46:17My name is Daryl Whitlock. Well, that's loud. Darrell Whitlock, I live on uh [address removed].

   1:46:29[address removed] in the over in C Ranch.

   1:46:34Uh the last meeting we had here. We felt compelled to actually show how many people actually wanted in our neighborhood. Wanted to have the boat lift covers. So we took it on ourselves to put together a petition to get a to get a idea. And the petition isn't isn't really on the ordinance, uh, because the ordinance still had different things that had to be revised and changed around, but it is saying that we do want the covers

   1:47:05and we don't believe they block views. The total county. count of the petitions I got for people to sign was five hundred and forty five people actually signed it. And out of out of that I had five that didn't want to sign. Yeah. So Um I do like the ordinance changes that I've been seeing that you guys did come up with. I think there's only probably

   1:47:35one maybe that might be addressed later on. Mm. by actually Jeremy following behind me. But um I do agree with the gentleman prior that said Out of all the years I've seen these up, I've never seen one blow off and hurt anybody's house. Um even if you choose not to take 'em off. It's it's just rubber, vinyl. There's more obstacles

   1:48:05in our backyards that we sh if we're gonna do that we need to start addressing grills, things that sit in in the back, uh chairs that could blow and hit people's windows and break 'em. There's a lot of other obstacles in the backyard that could do a lot more damage that actually could get airborne and go through windows and hurt people. Um I still got a minute left, but that's about all I need to say to cover this. And again, thank you on that on your time on this ordinance.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:48:34Thank you. And you've got you've got a cover now, I see. Yes, ma'am.

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:48:38I do. I've had a cover for Probably years since this th I've been following this and I think I've been in front of the commissioners, all you commissioners back I think is nineteen, two thousand nineteen or twenty I think it was we were doing this. It's been years. Excellent.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   1:48:57And your boat cover that you had on your on your place, did it say in place?

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:49:01Yes.

   1:49:07it off. It went through Milton, I didn't take it off. Didn't rip. Commissioner O Mariano was over the house and he seen that it was not ripped, tethered, or torn at all. And the house next to me. They end up demoing it because there was so much damage done to the house right next door to me.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:49:23Yeah, but state law requires you to take it off.

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:49:25Yeah, granted, but I'm just saying is it it went through it and it it it handled everything with no issues.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:49:36We had a strong storm come through in Gulf Harbors, took someone's um metal porch off, metal porch roof off, damaged three roofs on my street and the homeowners Couldn't get any money from the person whose porch blew off.

   Daryl Whitlock

   1:49:55Yeah. Yeah. Well I again I I want to thank you guys for what you do and what and working on this over these years and hopefully the ordinance can be revised to a point where it could be passed and actually Help protect all of our properties. But thank you very much for your time on this.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:50:13Okay, thanks.

   Jennifer Akins

   1:50:26Good afternoon. Can you hear me? Yes. I can it's weird in my ears. So my name is Jennifer Akins. I live at [address removed]. And um I'm here to support it, as I hope that all of you do. And um I've been in our community for a long time. I do a lot for our community. Um I was a part of assisting with Darrell to get some of the signatures.

   1:50:57And I will add to what he had said that out of the about 110 signatures that I obtained from other people, and not all of them were on the water. Many of them um have to put their boats in a the public boat ramp. So they see things in a different manner than than what some of us do that actually live on the water. And um we only had one person that didn't want to sign the the actual um paperwork that we had put together. And the

   1:51:27only reason that gentleman didn't was because he was afraid of the ramifications of it, because he does actually have a boat cover. So What I did want to say is asked for obstructions of views and stuff, where I'm seeing things um where I live at this point. We're getting a lot of houses now that are being built that are second stories, two s uh three stories and I can see that as blocking my view more than what I do with the actual boat covers.

   1:51:59And I think that where we're seeing the influx of the money here, because I'm seeing that with real estate where I live. that you'll I'm starting to see the prices of boats increase and I'm talking like increasing from like maybe seven hundred thousand dollars to I'm looking at boats where I'm living right now. Some of them are worth five million, seven million, three million. So Many of these people additionally want boat covers. Because they're again

   1:52:29looking at it On the The avenue of okay, what about the properties. As for my understanding with what I do with um stuff, anything that I have I take it in my house, Anything. I don't want anything outside because I don't want any damage to any of my other neighbors. And We would take it down anyway. As I would remove my boats, as I would remove my jet skis, and anything else that I think would damage

   1:52:59somebody else's homes. And I'm for having t some type of regulation. I don't have any problems with that. But I'm just I'm just seeing there's more positive out of this than there is for the negative. And we saw that with all the signatures when we did actually. get to the people that cannot be here because they work. I do appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:53:22And you're at [address removed]?

   Jennifer Akins

   1:53:26Yes.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:53:26And you have a boat cover? Yes. Thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:53:31Jeremy Gamble.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:53:48Morning Commissioner. Jeremy Gamble, [address removed]. I'm here to speak with you all about Approving an ordinance to allow butt lift covers in Pasco County. Um I want to thank Commissioner Oakano for having a discussion with me and hearing my concerns about the ordinance that was written as recently as two weeks ago that did have some Some problems that essentially would allow covers and be

   1:54:18impossible for us to actually pull the permit and meet the requirements of said permit. But uh there's there were some changes made, so thank you staff. That was very helpful. There's still a couple items, including the height, that I think is still questionable based on the the verbiage that's actually written in the ordinance compared to the actual drawing that's shown. They kind of don't. Match each other. Um per the drawing it's showing that the five feet above the lift does not include the arch,

   1:54:48but the ordinance states that it does. Uh the other problem is I think staff is assuming that boat lifts are all fifteen feet. Uh from the top of the dock. And they're not. Every single boat lift that I measure um is a different height. Some of them can be three feet above the dock, some of them are eleven. So We need to have a point of reference of what the actual we we need a starting point that's gonna be consistent to measure what our height's gonna end up being. Because

   1:55:19if your lift is three feet above your dock and I can only go five feet, now the total height of the lift is gonna be I mean literally eight feet above the top of the dock. It it just doesn't it doesn't make any sense. Short of that, I think everything else about the ordinance and the changes that have been made make complete sense. In reference to storms, our frames are rated for 180 miles an hour. The vinyl is recommended to be removed at 70 miles an hour. We

   1:55:50do have staff in place to remove vinyl for customers and reinstall it after the fact. Uh for Hurricane Helene, we took down over 500. Between Milton and Halene, we took down about another 230. All those were reinstalled after the fact when customers wanted those reinstalled. We had zero uh instances where cover was came apart and damaged anybody's property. Uh so that just wasn't a thing. Currently there's Add a minimum

   1:56:20of six hundred and eighty covers that I know of personally in Pasco County and absolutely none of those became a flying projectile and damaged anybody's property. So

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:56:29is this your company that's putting them up?

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:56:30It is.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:56:31So but and you knew you knew that you they then none of these have I mean these weren't legal,

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:56:37but

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:56:37you

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:56:38were legal and we proved it in court actually, twice.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:56:41Uh I'm not sure. Yeah, I don't think you did.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:56:45Judge Byrd disagrees.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   1:56:48No. You need to talk to your lawyer about that.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:56:54Um

   1:56:56Okay.

   1:56:58But but there was there was a boat that um we both know Commissioner Truex in Charlotte County. uh and who where they had The pipe Not the awning material, pipe or whatever you want to call it. Um flew into a neighboring boat and sunk it and And the boat owner Could not get any insurance money to cover the sinking of his boat.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:24Not surprising.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:25Most

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:25most boats aren't covered on boat lifts.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:27Right.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:28You have to have

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:28a separate

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:28rider in order for

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:29the boat to actually.

   1:57:35A projectile, like like the roof in my neighborhood, and hits someone else's property. Chair. You don't get covered. This is Yeah. I just he said he's not aware of any. But I'm telling you that's not.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:47I'm talking about Pasco, not Charlotte.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:49Okay. Thanks.

   Jeremy Gamble

   1:57:50Well, thank you.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   1:57:54That's all we have is pre-signed up.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:57:56Is there anyone else here to speak to boat covers? Boat l boat yes. Boat lift covers. What are we calling them? Wait a minute.

   Barbara Wilhite

   1:58:06Good afternoon, Barbara Wilhite. [address removed]. uh [address removed], that's my personal address. I've addressed you all before. regarding this issue and the impact uh the visual impact that this creates. It's been all these years without um having that visual impact and this will change the way you know things look in my community, uh for myself and neighbors. Um you do have protections in your land development code where you're protecting the views. So this is to change this is kind of inconsistent

   1:58:36with that. I thought that the uh the what the Planning Commission came up with which was allow a process. There's not one size fits all. For a lot of people, this isn't a problem. And they'll easily could go through a process and get their neighbors to say, I I'm fine with it. But for other people it might be a problem. But to not have a process that allows with for you to determine if it's a problem or not a problem, and just to go one size fits all and totally change what's been, you know, the condition of how a neighborhood's looked for forty years and just change it and not have any process

   1:59:07for it to to be decided if it's good or bad, I think that's concerning. So thank you for your time. Um

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   1:59:14Tony, can you put that picture up that I have? Um I took this picture I was looking at a house under construction in Hudson. And um I was on the second floor. of this house and I looked to my left and there was some of the book boat covers. uh that were a hundred percent black in the view. Um And I had my staff take the boat covers and extrapolate them on two other boat lifts. And

   1:59:44there's more boat lifts that we could have covered But This is what concerns me and I live on the water And I paid a lot of money for my view. And I know um a lot of other people have too and I have a boat. I have a very expensive boat. I have a seven digit number boat. And I don't know. I don't cover it. It's meant to be outside. Um Do you have do you have that picture?

   2:00:14I have copies of it. If you could

   2:00:18send this over? And Commissioner Oakley

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:00:28Uh move to receive and file. Second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:00:31Um so that's the boat. Those are the illegal boat lifts, canopies, whatever. On the left hand side.

   2:00:40The what?

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:00:40Call the vote. We've got a motion in a second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:00:42No, we have Lisa online who wants to speak. I want to speak. No no no. No, just for this. Oh, okay.

   2:00:50Okay. Uh was there a motion and a second? Yes. All in favor? Aye. Um So there's other boat lifts here. I did I realize there's two other canopies we could have put on here, but I would tell you that this person's view of the water Uh the uh that they Um The water view that's part of the co you know, the value of their property. is gonna be really impacted by all those boats. putting covers uh on their

   2:01:20lifts and Um I I know where Barbara lives. She's on the uh You you can speak in a second. Um where's where she lives on a uh a turn a turn I think she has three lifts. I mean, she gonna obliterate the canal view for all her neighbors. All her neighbors. Or they're not gonna have a water view. It's different, I think. Um it's why we were all fine with the lakes. Um

   2:01:50and ha and and where houses are spread very far apart, it's not gonna affect them. I it won't have I d see no problem with that. But where you have Homes like I can tell you I'm sorry the president of Gulf Harbors is out of town today. She would want to be here. She can tell you they are very much against this. Um It's gonna really impact the long views that we so enjoy um when you're on the water. And

   2:02:22I I just I just think it's a mistake. Um that w that we would allow these. So Um I know I'm in the minority. But most likely, but But I have to speak up for my neighbors and my value and other people's values that

   2:02:41Gonna deteriorate. Yeah. Yeah.

   Ron Oakley

   2:02:44I just wanted to add that I've had probably ninety percent of all my emails and my texts to me were four moat covers. And a very minority were not for

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:02:56I'm sure there are the s five hundred people that that guy's put the boat covers up on already. Um

   Ron Oakley

   2:03:02But I mean that's that's what I heard back from the citizens.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:03:05Yeah. We have someone else that wants to speak, so I'm gonna let her speak. Public comment, Pastor Jen.

   Pastor Jim

   2:03:15Hi, Pastor Gen CareWack [address removed]. I would just present that I I believe that there this should be taken into context in the same way that the people that purchase rural properties enjoy their view. They've purchased their properties. The folks on [address removed], as a matter of fact, enjoyed one individual, Daphne Say, enjoyed her backyard very much. And she hasn't seen it unfortunately in a very long time because of the

   2:03:45neighboring townhome community. And she had her opportunity to come and speak. and the majority just didn't w fall in her favor. So I think that to say because I think what I'm receiving, and I don't say that this is exactly what you mean to say, but that if you live on the water, your your interest and your view is more important than the folks that purchased and spent a lot of money to live in a rural area, purchasing maybe lots of acreage. No

   2:04:16clap. No clap. To to be able to enjoy the trees and to be a able to enjoy and then they end up with I don't know something hot topic lately is like a big campground or something uh you know uh near their property. I don't know. That's something that's come up lately. So I just I think that I I just wanna say it the the perception is, you know, on this conversation um seems to a little bit skew

   2:04:47the understanding of whether or not a waterfront with that view being more important than a rural property who says, you know, hey, I don't want that development across the street. I don't, you know, because that then blocks my view of I watch the sunset, but now there's two-story homes and I have a ranch home and now I can't Can't see the sun set as much as I could prior. Um, my neighbor also, I have a ranch home.

   2:05:17My neighbor is a two-story home. He put a play set in his backyard. I understand the concern. Every hurricane and storm that's come through. I, you know, I bring all my stuff like the other lady said, and I bring it and tie it down, make sure it's inside and button things up. And that play yard, that playset, two-story playset is still next. store to me and very much so could damage my property. And I don't think my property I it's not worth

   2:05:48seven hundred or a million dollars or whatever. But that's my property and and I purchased where I did and and I have to take with it, you know, the the things that come along after I've moved there and I just don't think it seems like You know, there should be an issue. If it's my property, the boat cover's safe, I should be allowed. The view is just what it is and you know, beg your neighbors not to put a boat cover. PM,

   2:06:18I don't know. I'm just saying I I think the rural neighbors feel the same way.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:06:23So um people may not be aware, but we have certain rules on the coastline that protect people's views. Fifteen feet from the edge of the seawall back, you cannot build a six foot uh fence that is Um Um what's the word?

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   2:06:42Okay.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:06:42What? Solid. You you can't do that in in in on the along the coast. You have to leave fifteen feet Um can't be higher than um what's required if you have a pool, but it has to be see-through. So it has to be metal going this way or wire going this way um to protect people's views um that of the water and that and so we have a different set of standards when you're along a coastline. Uh most counties in Florida do not allow boat

   2:07:12covers. Most cities along the water do not allow boat covers. Um especially in high in dense communities to protect th to for for personal protection and view protection. It's v it's you can go on Google Earth and I've done it many times. Go along the Florida coastline, go to Fort Lauderdale, go all over the place. Don't allow 'em. So Uh But I think I'm on the losing end

   2:07:43here, so I'm not gonna keep beating a dead horse Commissioner Oakley.

   2:07:49gentleman's question about Objects on the dock. Let's make sure we're not putting something in that we don't want to put in. Commissioner Mariano?

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:07:59Uh we can we can address that we'll first if you want.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:08:02No?

   Amanda Hill

   2:08:02Okay. Okay, so I believe you are referencing

   2:08:08Section one thousand and one four B two. I don't know. I don't have a memorized. I believe that's what it is. Um roofs, overhead coverings, walls, enclosures, and other similar visual obstructions are prohibited on docks, lifts, piling, or other similar structures built over the water, and then it says accept one and it continues. Um these visual obstructions are specific to things that are built. So if you have chairs or table or so that would not be impacted by that.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:08:39You can't put a build something on the dock in in a correct

   Unidentified speaker

   2:08:44chair so so to be clear, a non-permanent structure. Correct. If it's not built So we can have pirates and cannons?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:08:51If you can move it, then yes.

   Unidentified speaker

   2:08:55Yeah.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:08:56Okay, so I don't wanna um did you have another question? Just one more about the height.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:09:02To me, if if someone's gonna build a That boat lift's gonna be X number height. From what I can see we're allowing either it's either five feet or three feet from the top of that pole to where the cover can go over. Five feet. Okay.

   2:09:20You know, for from sea level, why aren't we just going from like with the seawall height of the

   2:09:27uh dock lift its the boat lift itself.

   Amanda Hill

   2:09:29I believe there was some discussion internally regarding that, but uh essentially we settled on doing it from the mean high water line instead. I believe there's some rationale regarding that. I don't know if Sam or Jackie would like to speak further to that. Yeah.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:09:43Chairman Mariano, I think it's important that we understand the industry standard for how this is done.

   Unidentified speakerVoice M

   2:09:55Good afternoon, Commissioner. So the fifteen foot above the mean high water line, that standard was already in place for docks, boat lifts, all structures over water. That's the gov the standard that's already in the code. So when we looked at boat lift canopies, we just kind of adopted that same standard but gave them some extra room because they do they they do extend above the top of the boat lift and we found that many of the boat lifts in the county are already at that fifteen feet. As far there was some discussion about the the thought of doing

   2:10:25boat lift canopies from the height of the seawall, but um I know internally staff advised against that 'cause there's you know folks that have gotten creative with their seawalls and the seawalls are very

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:10:35high. And I I could see that happening. Okay.

   2:10:37All right. Um Would you identify

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:10:39yourself

   2:10:39just for the for the record? Thank you. Question for Sam.

   Jennifer Akins

   2:10:43Yeah.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:10:44Yeah. So in our code like where did we come up with that standard? Just arbitrary in our code? Do we have any Industry experts that said hey this is where you

   Unidentified speakerVoice M

   2:10:53should

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:10:54you

   Unidentified speakerVoice M

   2:10:54shouldn't be I know it's consistent with what's seen around the state. I don't know if uh natural resources can speak to where fifteen feet comes from, but I think it's kind of a a reasonable, you know, so we don't have monstrosities on the water.

   2:11:10shed.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:11:11Commissioner, are you your question about the fifth fifteen feet above mean high waterline?

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:11:19Well, but that's deciding what's currently in there, where'd it come from? Like what was it just plucked out however long ago

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:11:26has been in the code since we've had the regulation, so it's like probably Probably prior to my arrival here. So we don't really know the methodology

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:11:36behind that height.

   Unidentified speakerVoice M

   2:11:37I mean unless natural resources can speak to that. But I do I do know it's consistent with what we see throughout the state.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:11:44Hello.

   Jackie Jordan

   2:11:50Jackie Jordan, Parks, Wreck and Natural Resource Department. Um I would say the fifteen feet from mean high is not really an environmental reason for it, so I don't have any additional information on why the fifteen foot was set.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:12:01Okay.

   2:12:05All right, Madam Clerk. So l last comment I want to make is just if you look at the picture that uh I had pulled up again. So under the boat canopy, if if somebody's building a dock That dock is going to be built for holding a boat. When it's holding the boat, when that boat's in place, it's blocking all sorts of view. The only difference is from the extension to the cover. is the only difference to it. If the boat's not there, it's good it's a decent view, it's a thin Then going across. Um

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:12:33how you're looking at it. If you're on the second floor it it's a Big.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:12:38But if the boat's there, yeah. It's a

   2:12:44You can see through a boat? Well that's good vision.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:12:47Yeah, I mean Yes, it's glass all the way round the boat's in

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:12:53there.

   2:12:55Your boat's on the lift.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:12:56You just don't see the h through the hole, but you see through all the rest.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:13:00Okay. Uh so anyway, so for me as far as block and view it's it's not much more than what's there anyway and let someone protect the thing. So I'm good with it.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:13:09Um Okay, I have some questions. Uh can we go back to the beginning to to the beginning of your presentation here, just to make sure. Um

   2:13:24Okay. Um the very beginning. Canopy shall be fabric or similar material that can be rolled or folded. Okay. It says it has to somewhere in here it says it has to be kept in a certain condition.

   2:13:40I believe it's this one.

   Nicholas Mudry

   2:13:42Yeah.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:13:44the County may order the repair of a boat lift canopy A butt with canopies declared unmaintained or and with or without notice may cause any structural safety. If a canopy is torn

   2:14:00the code enforcement's gonna come out and Tell give 'em a fine or what's gonna happen? If it's torn and flappin'? Wha what are we

   Amanda Hill

   2:14:07doing? So if it's not considered to be as presenting in a neat, clean appearance, then it could have uh resulting enforcement, but I am

   2:14:20Where does that specifically

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:14:30Building official issue.

   2:14:34So

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:14:34it's a code enforcement issue?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:14:36If it so if the building official determines that the canopy presents an immediate threat to public health or safety, it comes down then. If it's Just ugly.

   2:14:51Then there could be a citation and it would go and it would go to court.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:14:55Okay, so it has to be kept clean. Not full of bird poops so you're looking out your window and all that bird poop. Okay. Next page.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:15:03Look, we we have code that We're just piling on for things that code to do and they can't keep up on it. We can't just keep Using code as a

   2:15:15Is the Gestapo? for every every little thing. Th this is a this is a freedom issue. If you want to protect your your boat and your property that's really expensive, you should be able to do it and To to be s to be setting more for code that they can't and I've talked to Mike Corral about this a hundred times. Uh what we can enforce and what we can't enforce, what we can enforce well, what we don't enforce well. Like we're we're picking and choosing on code what our battles are. And this just

   2:15:46this just com compounds that we've got. So a fine I uh I don't want to I'm not for that.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:15:54Right, um next next next page. Let's see here.

   2:16:03Is there another page? I already advanced it. Oh that's all your com those are all your comments? Okay. So where's the one that says it has to be removed? Maybe go back. Did I miss that? Um direction.

   2:16:20The canopy s safely stored indoors. Okay.

   2:16:29So we've said we've stated at s it's sixty f I think sixty five miles an hour they gotta come off. Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:16:39Can you go back to the to seven, the one with the colours?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:16:43I think

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:16:44So I think Yeah. Now I'm being picky, but I think you need a you need a semicolon between green and monochromatic. Monochromatic is not a color, you're using it to describe the colors. So either you need to put monochromatic in the beginning of that sentence or I think a semicolon probably w will do it. Okay. Because I think it's monochromatic shades of beige white, silver, light grey.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:17:14Okay.

   2:17:18What does this mean, free of any design unless otherwise stipulated? We're gonna start selling ads on these or something? What does that mean?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:17:24Well that's it's prohibiting a design. Correct.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:17:28Yeah. Let's no designs. No, we're not gonna sell ads on boat boat covers or anything.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:17:35Right? Uh I think it'd be more like put your favorite football team on your boat cover, not necessarily selling ads like

   Amanda Hill

   2:17:46So this is saying like the county attorney said this is prohibiting that.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:17:51Okay, unless otherwise stipulated by the homeowners, association, or similar entity. You like that language?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:17:59That's a limitation. So unless the unless otherwise stipulated by the homeowners association that they want they have a more restrictive covenant

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:11Oh, in colors or something?

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:18:13Yeah. Okay.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:15Okay.

   Unidentified speakerVoice F

   2:18:15It can't override your con a homeowners association can't override your restrictions. But they can be more s restrictive if you're not going to be able to I i.e. they can prohibit canopies completely.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:31Okay, let's take a motion.

   Jack MarianoVice Chair

   2:18:34I'll make a motion to approve uh with a noted change on condition number seven by the county attorney.

   Ron Oakley

   2:18:39Second.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:41Right. All in favor? It's

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:18:42a

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:42it's a

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:18:42roll

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:43call vote.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:18:44Okay. Does Commissioner Yeager have any comments?

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:18:47Oh she can comment, or at least we're voting, but you will make a comment if you can. Yep.

   2:18:54I approve. Okay, it's gonna be a roll call, so hang on one second.

   Unidentified speakerVoice J

   2:18:58District One, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Commissioner Mariano. Aye. Uh District three, Chairman Starkey. Aye. Thank you very much.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:19:13Lisa, um no clapping, thank you. We're sorry you can't be with us and we we we have you and your family in our thoughts.

   Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair

   2:19:21Thank you.

   Kathryn StarkeyChair

   2:19:22Okay, what are where are we now?