PC6 parking code amendments continued to date uncertain

1:29:29Yes, we've got item PC six, and hopefully Ms. Hartley can join us.

1:29:36Okay.

1:29:50Ms.

1:29:50Hartley, are you still with us? Technical issues be damned. Yeah.

1:30:05Well, this calls for a

1:30:11You'd have one before we talk about parking?

1:30:18Ms. Hartley, are you there?

1:30:22Yeah.

1:30:25She's showing that she wants

1:30:26to pull.

1:30:27Can you hear me?

1:30:28Yes.

1:30:29There we go.

1:30:32Now we can't see you, but we can hear you.

1:30:35That's okay 'cause you're looking at the presentation anyway.

1:30:38Oh there you are.

1:30:39Better than me.

1:30:42All right.

1:30:44Okay.

1:30:46Ready?

1:30:49Okay. Thank you for letting me join virtually. It saved me three hours of drive time today, so I really appreciate that. Um this is I'm Kathryn Hartley. I'm a senior project manager with Venish and we've been working with the staff and with the horizontal roundtable folks on coming up with a new parking code for you and updated park updated parking regulations. Next slide.

1:31:16Uh next slide. Yeah. So we've been working on this for several months. Um the first time we presented to the horizontal roundtable was to give folks some options on the direction and where we could go with this. What a lot of communities have done is either get rid of parking minimums and maximums entirely and just let the market decide, or they have done more of a place-based option where they reduce parking in downtowns

1:31:47and in proximity to transit and so on and so forth. Um, or they've established uh maximums. And so we presented those options to the horizontal round table. The consensus was go for maximums. And then the staff met one on one with each of the um commissioners. to give them the same options and the consensus with them also was to establish maximum. So that's what we have done. And then we took the draft back to the horizontal round

1:32:17table for their review and comment. Next slide.

1:32:21So parking really is n is not just a technical calculation. It's actually a a policy decision because it's one of the things that really impacts the urban form of a place, right? Um when you have massive amounts of parkings with every with every use, it spreads things out, it makes it less walkable and so on and so forth. Next slide.

1:32:43When you take a look at the average size of a parking space, when you look at just the space itself, plus half of the drive aisle. It comes out to about 333 square feet or so, give or take, depending on the minimum size of a standard space. Um, but when you require more than three spaces per thousand square feet, you wind up with more parking than building every time. Um and that says a lot to the cost that impacts the design of a place and so on and so

1:33:13forth. Um, Strong Towns put out an article several years ago that says um that the national average for constructing a parking space, including the cost of land, is about $7,500. Uh we pulled some data from RS Means, which is a package that developers can use to estimate construction costs, and it also gives localized labor and material costs. And when we looked at that for 2023, the average space in Tampa Bay is $1,500, but that's not including the cost of land and stormwater

1:33:44attenuation and landscaping and all that stuff. Next slide.

1:33:50So why are places reforming their parking regulations? Well, lots of reasons. They want to reduce the amount of impervious surface in their city and county. They want to increase land use efficiency, increase the tax base. If you have more buildings and less parking, then obviously you have more taxable value and collect more taxes. Um, you can improve in your connectivity between places, reduce development costs. Reduce the vehicle miles traveled, um, and reduce the environmental impact, and you're getting transit ready,

1:34:21which we are desperately trying to do in Tampa Bay, right? Next slide.

1:34:28So there's definitely trade offs. Um Less space for building on a site is less development and less development is less tax base. This is basically the opposite of what I was just saying. Um increasing the required construction cost is more makes development more expensive and of course that gets passed on to the consumer, whether it's Add it onto the cost of your house or add it on to the cost of cost of your office space. It just adds to the cost. It gets passed on to the consumer. And it causes spread out and disconnected development. Next slide.

1:35:01So this is a very um cool website that you can take a look at. It's called um the parking reform network and you can click on each of those dots and see exactly what the local government um has done to revise their parking code. So again, most of them have been eliminating parking entirely and just letting the market decide, but there are some other options like including maximums and proximity to transit and so on. Next slide.

1:35:34So the again, just to reiterate, the Board of County Commissioners met one-on-one with the staff and we gave them those options and the consensus was to go with maximums. Next slide.

1:35:48So just to hit the highlights and then I can answer specific questions in the strikeout and underline. But we kept um the single family um detached uh townhomes and mobile home standards the same. So there's still a minimum parking amount for those uses. No changes there. Next slide.

1:36:13In most cases we flipped the minimums to maximums because they were um pretty excessive and you could probably see in the development around uh around the county how the parking impact the design of the place. And so that's why we um did that. We made some um adjustments to the community residential homes and allowed for um a little bit more there. in those circumstances and

1:36:43for uh county parks and recreation we eliminated mix minimums entirely and did not establish maximums. Those are two of the examples of where we deviated. Um We uh uh if you have a parking lot that's more than a hundred spaces, then you can have twenty s percent of the spaces um to be pervious materials, whether it's like turf block or pervious papers. Um those kinds of examples. Um we changed the ratio

1:37:15to fifty fifty for compact versus regular vehicle. It was set at seventy-five twenty-five. And we added some golf cart and trailer space dimensions. That was a request of the staff. And finally, we took out regulations that apply to public schools because that's actually controlled by Florida statutes and whatever in our local agreement that you have with the school. Next slide.

1:37:43That's

1:37:43readers.

1:37:48So again, just to reiterate, for single family um and town homes This is actually this is for the bicycle parking. For single family mobile home, two family townhomes. and uh multifamily under 10 units rather, we did not establish a minimum parking park a minimum bicycle parking requirement. So they're exempt from that. For multifamily, it's one per ten units. for any kind of assembly or recreation. Um whatever the when the

1:38:17planning staff looks at the site plan, they determine what the maximum attendance would be. Um, and then so you would have to provide two percent uh of of the maximum attendance for the bicycle parking

1:38:31Correct, can I say

1:38:32a bicycle

1:38:33parking space?

1:38:35So How does that work in reality? I mean, are you talking about a bike rack or are you talking about an actual Space.

1:38:45So the a bike space and this is actually in the um text if you look at the actual strikeout and underline, one space accommodates two bicycles.

1:38:57So are you talking about I think what what he's getting in is uh is this out in the par hard Parking area or is the Bike rack on the sidewalk somewhere.

1:39:07a a bike rack somewhere on the site and you actually have regulations already in your code that establish where those things have to be. I didn't change those.

1:39:16Okay, so this can be met this can be met with a bike rack. It doesn't have to be

1:39:22Correct.

1:39:23A physical space. Okay. I g I understand now. Thank you.

1:39:27Yeah, sure. Um for uh let's see, where was I? Oh for commercial and office, uh one space per 10,000 square feet. for restaurants and bars and the like, uh one space per twenty five hundred square feet. for things like um veterinary offices and kennels and things like that. Uh it's point zero five uh spaces per employee. for educational facilities and I realized after going back through and giving this a read before speak with

1:39:58you today, I need to edit that to say private educational facilities because again the public Uh public schools are regulated by floor and statute. Um it's one per twenty students. for any kind of human health services, doctor's office, the dentist, whatever, um, 0.05 per employee and then for industrial uses, none are required. And we took these from the um national uh bicycles, what is at CAPTA. Um These are the standards that they recommend and

1:40:28that's what we went with. Next slide.

1:40:34And um I'll take any questions you have on the strikeout and underline at this time. Thank you.

1:40:40All right, thank you. So was there any discussion about retrofitting of parking spaces for E B charging. Can I ask the same question when you're not going to be able to do it? Well go go ahead, maybe.

1:40:56Well, so I've got a question. First off, there's a also a proposal to change the definition of auto Vehicle service state you didn't address that. Automotive vehicle service and gas stations and convenience stores.

1:41:14Okay.

1:41:17Go ahead, you you t ask your question first because I think I'm asking about a different issue than what you're asking about. Well that's

1:41:22I'm gonna tie it into that. We're going there.

1:41:25Okay. Well my question is if somebody puts in a s define number of spots and say it's maximum And then you have you have minimum widths and lengths. My question is if somebody after the fact wants to add an E V charger or a solar carport or something that generally you would think the county would want to encourage I want to make sure they're not penalized. These are maximum parking requirements. No, but even a maximum there could be a penalty because are they gonna if they Say they

1:41:55put in a solar car porter, do they lose those spaces? Or do they get do they get to No, I

1:42:00mean if you took out a parking space to make it an E V charger, then you'd be under the maximum

1:42:08I understand that, but what if they would their maximum? Like they would they wouldn't want to be penalized for In other words, let's just say they have eighty spaces They want to put in a solar car. i they lose four spaces because they for the footers for the solar carport Do they get to make up do they still get four more spaces to put it you understand what I'm saying? Yes, you're gonna some can

1:42:30they you're asking can they replace those?

1:42:32Yeah, I wanna I don't wanna see somebody penalized because they've lost spaces due to putting an E V charging station or a solar carport or something that Do you would think that we'd want to be encouraging I would hate to see them penalized under the code. And you could have the same problem with The parking space dimension. where you put in an E B charger now it's below the dimensions And now are they in violation of our code?

1:42:59Understood. So we can make adjustments to the language to accommodate that. I didn't think about the dimensional requirements, and that's a good point. I should have thought that. Um there is language that um We added so that an applicant can come to the county and get an administrative approval for adding additional parking spaces for whatever reason. We can add EVs as a specific condition that would be considered, and then we should go in

1:43:29and add the dimensional requirements too and take that into consideration.

1:43:34Yeah, I I don't think you would just limit it to E V. I mean I mean when I was out west I saw a number of locations that had Solar car ports. And I don't think you'd want to He'd want some accommodation for I haven't seen them in Florida. At least not too much. I think maybe one or two places. But My point is if they're putting that in I don't wouldn't want to pen see them penalized Under our code.

1:43:57I can add that under the let me find the section number.

1:44:01You

1:44:02make the presumption that this

1:44:06I

1:44:06I

1:44:06don't pass. My point is that if it does, I don't want to see Somebody penalized for putting in that infrastructure. Can we ask some questions? Right. Let's make sure she's done with the presentation. Yeah, I wanna I wanna First you can question this all you want and I just wanted to ask that one question and then you then you can take over, John.

1:44:29So but you have a way of addressing that then?

1:44:33So we can add under um section F where it says parking facilities required on page hopefully what is four of seventeen of your version. Um where it reads um there's staff approval for adding additional spaces, we can add those conditions under there. Or I can just add to the table that EV spaces don't count towards the maximum. We can put that in the table that follows. Under

1:45:04F? However you'd like me to do that and then we'll add the dimensional requirements before it goes to the Board of Commissioners. What those things.

1:45:14Yeah, I I don't know that I wanna get into a drafting discussion Yeah I'll defer to whatever you and staff come up with. I just Um I think I'm okay with either scenario that you just mentioned. I just want to make sure that ultimately There's some way that somebody can not lose their maximum Because they're putting in E V spaces or a solar car park. And that if they want that approval from the staff, it's an administrative approval that doesn't require them to pay some special

1:45:44alternative standard fee or something like that.

1:45:48Okay.

1:45:50Brad, do you know generally what I'm talking about? Okay. Yeah.

1:45:55And again not in a drafting discussion, you also maybe want to be careful about specifically saying E V as opposed to maybe alternative fuel or something like that in case Technology changes and it ends up being a

1:46:07Right, we yeah, as friends have been playing with all the we we have talked about some of the language to allow some special considerations for tapping like this.

1:46:24Have Red Tip been planning in development? Still

1:46:26not on. I think you turned it off. Yeah, check one, two.

1:46:36Talk about the language too.

1:46:39Here you stand, please. Right.

1:46:51Brad Tippen, Planning and Development. Yes, we have actually talked about some language for that and some ways to allow for some of those newer technologies that are green-oriented to be able to be done in an easier manner with fewer hurdles. So we're working on some language in other areas of the country.

1:47:09I just know that when we do landscaping, you put some language in that allows you to administratively waive landscaping

1:47:15requirements.

1:47:28That's all I'm looking for, something similar for parking. Right.

1:47:32Yeah, that's that's what this is. We've had uh situations where uh uh a parking lot has their buffer right around the parking and the parking's right there and they need to remove uh one of the landscape islands to be able to put in the charging Killings. And they didn't get penal we don't penalize them for that. Yeah and so we're allowing that.

1:47:51So for example if they you might have put in a any kind of charger, it doesn't have to be EV.

1:47:55Right.

1:47:55The hydrogen tank.

1:47:57Yep.

1:47:57It m they it may reduce the dimensions of the s parking stole. And so I don't want them to that can be considered a violation Hopefully.

1:48:05We can we can we can work with the language to make sure that we're allowed to make that decision administratively on a case by case basis looking at the different types of scenarios. Because like you said, we can't predict the technology that's coming. We have some idea of some of it, but we don't want to re reinvent the wheel fifty times on this.

1:48:20Okay. I think staff has direction and the consultant have direction, but so I'm done. Go ahead, John.

1:48:27Okay, Kathryn, are you done with your presentation then? You're on the call.

1:48:31I am.

1:48:32You're on the question and answer mode? Regarding the

1:48:35Yep.

1:48:36All right. Regarding the allowance of twenty percent. Pervious parking materials for lots over a hundred spaces. I'm not sure why do we need that? The code already allows for. In fact, you can make a hundred percent of the parking spaces, pervious spaces under our current code, so why would I limit it to twenty percent? Section eight, which you haven't crossed out, says surfacing any off street parking areas shall be graded for proper drainage, shall be surfaced

1:49:06so as to provide durable and dustless surface. including but not limited to gravel, that's pervious. Concrete, which could be pervious concrete. bituminous concrete, which can also be pervious asphalt, Stabilize vegetation, which you're specifically allowing in your exception. And shall be so arranged. So the your strike and underline's actually limiting the amount of pervious surface. that could be currently constructed under our current code. I get people that come in all the time. They want to build a boat in R V storage

1:49:36and they say they wanna pave it. Well you don't need to pave it. And then they're gonna use up half your site in stormwater ponds. Our code already allows, as long as it's dust free. In fact we recommend.

1:49:48Under the current language it reads If parking spaces are provided in excess of ten percent of the required parking, those excess parking spaces are encouraged to be pervious or um and low impact. What

1:50:03I'm saying.

1:50:04What I offered that it's just more than a hundred, then you can have I can reword it however you like, but it does you do have a limiting

1:50:13planet code. Under the current code you can already build one hundred percent of it as pervious. In fact I've already

1:50:22got a

1:50:23I already have a project that's built and CO'd. It's right on Little Road. I'm It's one hundred percent pervious pavement.

1:50:33Oopsy.

1:50:37Yeah, this there's a specific section under what is currently E and I've read read lettered A. That just says only that which above is in excessive.

1:50:49That was so I understand what you're trying to what you want me to do.

1:50:54I'm not wanting you to do anything. I'm asking you to change

1:50:57The

1:50:57code already allows us to make a hundred percent of the parking purvious. We don't need to put in a limitation.

1:51:05It sounds like maybe you have a an internal conflict in your code. Um, let's see.

1:51:12Brad, you want

1:51:13what you're representing

1:51:16might be able to help a little bit with this. Uh Rad tip and planning and development. Um we we had a co provision that if you go above uh a certain percentage of the code requirement that we have now, uh it was a requirement for the remainder to be impervious. And I think that there was a some mistranslation of that language. You can do an entire impervious parking lot short.

1:51:40You mean pervious.

1:51:41I'm sorry, pervious. Thank you. And there are actually

1:51:44some pervious materials which will meet the ADA,

1:51:46by

1:51:47the way.

1:51:47So so that is something that we currently do allow. So I you know that may be just a a language translation piece on there that we need to fix.

1:51:53All that being said. I don't know how many of you are familiar with pervious pavements or use of gravel. Mm-hmm. They're great from a stormwater perspective. But you know, one of the requirement one of the reasons we have those stormwater ponds to collect the runoff off of roadways and parking lots. is because there's a lot of break dust. There's a lot of motor oil. A lot of antifreeze, a lot of car fluids, transmission fluid. that leaks out of cars when it

1:52:23rains that flushes off the pavement and is caught in a stormwater retention system where it is I'm gonna use the term loosely, Jamie, to understand what I mean, treated. before discharge. If I park in a pervious concrete parking space or a gravel parking space and my car leaks oil, Guess where that oil just went? So that's the part the people don't like to talk about about that technology. So it's not the panacea that we all m it might be

1:52:53great when it comes to stormwater. But it may not necessarily be great for the groundwater. So Just food for thought. I'm not opposed to pervious pavement and I'm not suggesting we should outlaw it. I'm not I'm suggesting we should not think it's that our savior. There's a lot of talk about quote green infrastructure and they focus on this, but that's the part they don't tell you about. Who wrote the background to this agenda memorandum?

1:53:26Kathryn, what d did you catch that question?

1:53:30I didn't I did not. Um I only wrote the strikeout and underline.

1:53:34So it's authorless.

1:53:37Mr. Jamali is here to answer that question. Amir Jamali, Planning and Development Department.

1:53:43What's excess vehicle usage?

1:53:45Access vehicle?

1:53:46Yeah. This says here that we're doing this because we want to Reduce excess vehicle use.

1:54:01It says that the the purpose of this is for Increasing impervious surfaces and heightened carbon emissions from excess vehicle use. So I want to know what is excess vehicle use.

1:54:23Real prison. That's the

1:54:26Try on the first page. Yeah. Third paragraph.

1:54:38And we were moving along so nicely, you know. No.

1:54:42I need to

1:54:43go back to Neil.

1:54:48So additional vehicle usage can be reduced.

1:54:52Well what is that?

1:54:54But what what constitutes an excess of vehicle usage?

1:55:00Yeah. Whether it be excess or excessive, what is excessive vehicle usage?

1:55:05Uh if you can provide opportunities for people to use other modes of transportation. And you rode the bus here today?

1:55:12No, I did not ride the bus here today. I see. Brad, did you ride the bus here today? Denise?

1:55:18No sir.

1:55:18Liam?

1:55:20But that would be a s that would be

1:55:21a symptom.

1:55:24Yeah, th the the it's a chicken and the egg situation. If there's two Broadly speaking, if there's too much parking in a particular area, distances are made wider between spaces, requiring additional means of transportation beyond just walking and bicycling, which for most people, translates to a car. But if you can limit the number of parking spaces and reduce the space between buildings You increase the chances for Other types of Modes of transportation to be used. Broadly

1:55:55speaking.

1:55:56Well the play devil's advocate though, I know what John's point is. So my car doesn't have any carbon emissions. But I still occupy it.

1:56:03No, not out of the rear end of the car. It just comes out of the power plant.

1:56:10But it makes out comes out of the lithium mine. The lithium mine and the smelting to make to make the Which may occur outside of Pasco County. I'm talking

1:56:24about in Pasco

1:56:24County. We're worried about our backyard.

1:56:34My point is that it is possible to have vehicle use that doesn't generate heightened carbon emissions. That still occupies a parking space.

1:56:43Did you know that when you ride a bicycle? Every time you exhale, you exhale carbon dioxide. So if more people ride bicycles And they're breathing harder. I guess they're parting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. But that's of course if you actually believe this stuff.

1:57:01Yeah, f for me the Yeah, for me the issue well From a planning standpoint, I'm looking at it from The uh The spatial perspective of how great our distances become when we have too many vehicles. And uh the account and we need to accommodate that number of vehicles constantly. Well

1:57:21shouldn't that be dependent on the density of the particular project though? So there's there's some spots where if you're out in the middle of the county in the middle of nowhere somewhere, you're gonna be d driving there regardless, right? But if you're in the middle of an urban center, yeah, that might make more sense. But shouldn't the code be more written to Address that based on density of the project. If that's what sh if that if that's what the issue is?

1:57:46Yes, and I think the idea is to by converting to maximums you have the flexibility within there to conform the developments to the marketplace to make it.

1:57:55What are you gonna do when one of my provider's land development clients wants to build a retail store or a restaurant that has zero parking?

1:58:06I think Terry and I I think to answer that I I interject here for a second. And obviously th this is a this is a hard balancing act. I don't know what the right answer is here and I don't know that there necessarily is a right answer, but Along those same lines, I think you By doing this you potentially create, unless there's something that I'm not seeing, I think you potentially create a lot of other issues outside of just parking. If somebody comes in and wants to do a use, I mean, w what does the county have or how how's the county gonna react to John's question exactly is

1:58:37when somebody comes in for a user And the way this is written with a maximum I mean Well, if I bring a fast food restaurant in and I want to put zero parking on my site. on and out parcel that is in an existing The let's take an out parcel in an existing shopping center. There's plenty of parking there, they can use the other parking. Well all of a sudden You start taking away parking from those other people or what if it's adjacent to an existing right-of-and all those cars start parking in the right-of-way? What is what is access management traffic? What do they think of that? I mean I think there's

1:59:07there's so many other things and if we if we strictly go to maximum and there's no minimum I think we open up Pandora's box and it's very dangerous.

1:59:17understand That American shopping trends have changed, especially post pandemic. Okay. along comes we all used to go, well Jamie, you've been here long enough, and Chris has been here long enough and Chuck's been here long enough. There was a time when we were happy to have a strip center here. You know why? Because there was nothing here. All right, and we drove to the the strip center. And then when we boy in nineteen eighty I'll never forget when the Gulfview Square Mall

1:59:47opened. You know, I rode my bike there, because I wasn't old enough to drive yet.

1:59:53That mall's dying. A lot of the strip centers along US 19 are dying. A lot of the ones in Zephyrhills have died. People's shopping changes. people's shopping habits have changed. So I think some of the commissioners drive up and down 19 or 98 or 301 and they see a lot of empty parking they see a lot of empty parking lots because we have a bunch of dead shopping centers. And what I would tell is if you go out there to the outlet mall or wiregrass, you're gonna drive around the parking lot th seven times before you

2:00:23find a parking space. And there's people and they've all met this requirement. So it's a matter of where that business, where that commerce has gone. I would tell you that based on a lot of people shopping and purchasing things online, I might be supportive of a reduction in. in parking requirements, but not the elimination of parking requirements. That is a very, very dangerous precedent. And I can tell you, if this ordinance passes, it won't be more than sixty

2:00:53or ninety days before you see an application come in With his seal on it or my seal on it or Greg Wegner's seal, he's gone. What are those? where you're gonna literally have zero parking because I have I ca in fact I can think of a client right now who I know would do that. And then he will have parking. He will have people trying to park on the sidewalk on fifty-two or parking on his neighbors properties and creating a nuisance. I don't think this is a good idea. And you

2:01:24know, for all of the urbanization that we're looking for. I don't think anybody has a vision of Connected City having 50 and 60 story office towers. I'll call it Connected City is not urbanized, it's more intensely suburbanized. And people are still going to use their vehicles, whether those be EVs, and I'm not against EVs.

2:01:50And the E V

2:01:53So okay, you won't have to provide parking for all of us poor schleps that drive those fossil fuel cars, but you'll have to provide ten thousand charging stations for all the people like David that need to charge their car because it won't go the other ten miles back home. And by the way, then they'll be occupying the spaces longer because of how long it actually takes to charge that car.

2:02:19That's fifteen.

2:02:25But uh to answer the question basically on the zero parking and the regulation and us using a maximum, the county is not uh the determiner of how many parking spaces a business needs. We we don't know that. The business knows that. Yeah but there's a reason that this code exists, Brady. But the but the the The other thing is that there are other regulatory factors there in that a a business that wants to or somebody wants to come and put a McDonald's in, the McDonald's corporation is going to want a certain amount of parking spaces. or if you're going to get financing, a financing company is maybe

2:02:56not going to agree to finance you if there's no parking space. There are other regulatory things that impact that that the county doesn't necessarily need to be

2:03:04controlling that factor. It doesn't affect all and it doesn't affect everybody. And I can tell you I've designed hundreds if not a thousand parking lots over my career and I've done it for the major national retailers and I've done it for the mom and pop businesses. I can tell you for instance publics They're not gonna take a site unless they can have a certain minimum amount of parking. All right, but there are some mom and pop business and I can think of one who's

2:03:34been recently through my door in the past month. Who I told him go find another site because there's not adequate access, there's not adequate parking, and I he would love it. If all of a sudden there were no parking and I can assure you all of his customers will be parking on his neighbor's property or trying to park on the sidewalk on fifty-two. And I don't think we've thought that far.

2:03:57Th there's the other um piece of the puzzle too, which is that when the development comes in they have to program their site and go through the site development and site planning process. If you forego the option for parking, let's say, in the in the event somebody comes in with zero parking spaces, if you forego the option for parking, you're increasing your risk of of doing things that are unprogrammed on site, such as allowing patrons uh parking on your grass or

2:04:28on your sidewalk or something strange like that. And that would be then a violation of an approved site plan. So it behooves the property owner and the d site developer to

2:04:39the same thing.

2:04:40The damage is done at that point.

2:04:46PO'd

2:04:46neighbors

2:04:47and self-regulating itself on the on this count.

2:04:51Well then in that case, let's just eliminate the entire land development code and the market can self-regulate itself too.

2:04:58Terry. Some of our code

2:05:02Unfortunately or fortunately is to deal with bad actors. I mean they're they're I I don't disagree with you that the publices of the world are not going to provide no parking. Or the McDonalds or oh The major Sure.

2:05:21But You could have a to John's point, a mom and pop that Doesn't have a lender, does you know, they're just building it with cash. And they can get more square feet of their business Because they don't provide any parking. Don't disagree that it helps the tax base, but

2:05:44Uh I mean what happens when they start parking on the neighbor's property or the Sidewalk or I mean Is code enforcement prepared to now have an increasing level of enforcement When that happens.

2:05:56Doesn't one have to ask themselves why we had a parking code to begin with? Because these things were problems to begin with.

2:06:03So I was gonna ask the consultant, are there any jurisdictions that have both a minimum and a maximum. Yeah.

2:06:13Yeah.

2:06:14I'm not hearing any concern with imposing a maximum because which is ultimately what I think you all are trying to achieve is you don't want over parked sites. I haven't got that far yet. Mr. Gerardi didn't seem to have an issue with it. I haven't got there yet. Okay.

2:06:30Never mind. No, and really I I mean I I my background or my question on the maximum was more of what's the relief procedure Same lines. There are you know certain retailers that do require Something that may exceed what is out now going to be outlined as a maximum.

2:06:49Although this says one can submit information, there's no process in this ordinance established by how that is reviewed and archived. So

2:06:57that was

2:06:57the right-of-way,

2:06:57but I'm but but I'm going by the board had a desire for a maximum. Whether that was a good idea or a bad idea.

2:07:07So my question is was was the board presented with an alternative of a minimum and a maximum and di was it specifically rejected?

2:07:20Um let me pull up that particular PowerPoint and I will tell you. Just give me a second to access that file.

2:07:28Also have Brad. Well who had the meeting with the board?

2:07:41Oops, wrong one.

2:07:44Mm.

2:07:58You know, transit's a good thing. And I'm not against transit. But you know, I had a discussion with

2:08:08More ip I don't want to call them old because they're probably listening. I know they were going to pay attention to this discussion today on YouTube, so I'm going to say older than me. But they're retired and they're facing the years where they may have difficulties with mobility. In fact one's had a stroke and has difficulty with mobility. So if the whole idea is we're all gonna ride the bus because there's no parking spaces

2:08:37I wanna know how The gentleman who's had the stroke. Or the guy yesterday in front of my office who was an Iraq war veteran and accidentally fell out of his motorized wheelchair and his prosthetic leg fell off. If anybody's thought about the burden of how those people get to a bus stop, because you can't have a bus stop and pick up at every individual person's house. And even though we may have lots

2:09:08of multifamily buildings going to be constructed in Connected City, we're not going to demolish the nice homes of the residents in Beacon Woods, well they're not here either, that live in Beacon Woods. So People are going to drive.

2:09:26Or be driven.

2:09:27And the other thing that I think we need to think about when we talk about urbanization

2:09:34We have a lot of people that come to this community and they're willing to buy those forty foot lots that a long a lot of the longtime residents, including myself, don't like. But that's what they like. And you know why they like that? because they fled that urban environment. Those people left Chicago They left New York City. They left Los Angeles. to come to Florida because that's the last environment they wanted to live in. And frankly that's exactly why my parents moved

2:10:04here and relocated us to Florida when I was a young child. That's why they're here. And if they want to live on an urban environment in an urban environment There's plenty of that down in the southeast. corner of this state. Or I would also tell them That Interstate ninety five and interstate seventy five also have northbound lanes as well. But that's not why they moved to Pasco County, the place

2:10:34with the vibrant spaces and open places.

2:10:38So uh uh to answer the question um I was in several of those meetings with commissioners and I do not recall the combination of a minimum and a maximum being discussed. We looked at changing minimums, changing from a minimum to maximum and then some other locationally specifically. criteria and different things like that. Uh the other thing that I need to make sure that everyone kinda keeps in the back of their mind and I know it's kind of a taboo topic these days to talk about, but it's autonomous vehicles and it's ride sharing. Um the person with the stroke can absolutely

2:11:09call an Uber to take them somewhere. That car does not necessarily need a parking space. It needs a loading and unloading area.

2:11:25I'm just saying that I I think that we need to keep keep in mind that we're not that off other alternative

2:11:31And although Tesla and other companies are working feverishly to develop them. So far we found that Tesla quite isn't capable of recognizing a semi truck crossing its path and we've seen lots of photographs of decapitated Teslas.

2:11:49So that's that's a whole nother discussion we can have, but the the the world seems to believe that they will be here within the horizon on what we would think of the things that we're being around.

2:11:59And that and that may be the time to update that code. But you know I could s I can speak on the whole ride share and the disability thing.

2:12:09They absolutely rely on people to drive them places to to get to where they need to be. One of the big services that they relied upon is the ARC. I don't know if anybody's familiar with the ARC. The ARC just lost their F D O T funding. And then we still haven't figured out the reason why. We don't know if it was a line up in veto at the state level or what it was, but they lost their funding. And there's a ton of visually impaired people that really relied on that transportation that now uh is is in a and you know, we actually had a a

2:12:39presentation at at a fundraiser for the Lighthouse the other night and and one of the visually impaired ladies was talking about how she you know, she can't buy frozen foods at the grocery store because she's on the bus for four hours to be able to get to where she needs to go. So You know, the there's This may be a c uh better conversation when some of these transit developments Or you know When we have a better bus network, when we have a better better transit network. But for now we're still pretty reliant on vehicles.

2:13:16And the problem that I got is this. Is you guys are the staff. All right, you work for the government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. No one elected any of you to decide what is excess vehicle usage or when it's appropriate for me to drive or me to walk. That's why we have elections.

2:13:42Perfect. So But this goes to the root of my question about what because The Board of this is ultimately a policy decision for the Board of County Commissioners. Okay. So there's apparently some more direction to Do something.

2:13:59But but I'm I'm not convinced that the board was presented with an option that addresses some of the concerns that you all are talking about. If they were never given an option of Hey, there's some jurisdictions that Do you put a cap on ma did you do maximum But they have a floor too which to make sure that There's some minimum amount of parking And I get your point about transit, but I think I've heard the commissioner saying that. You get a site like Target at Mitchell Ranch, okay,

2:14:29where they're Probably too many parking spaces for that target. Even in a suburban environment. And so I do understand why the board has a general desire and it's Th there could be a building there that's helping our tax base instead of just empty parking spaces. Even during Christmas that those spaces are empty. So there probably is some reasonable maximum that prevents that situation from occurring, and that may be why the board wanted a maximum. They don't want

2:15:00Well maybe

2:15:02it's not a maximum. Maybe it's a reduction of the required minimum. Right. I understand

2:15:15My guess

2:15:16is

2:15:16a target was Willow.

2:15:18My company does a lot of stormwater work for a major national retailer. Okay. to a representative of that retailer yesterday. and what they tell me. is that for the type of business that they run, for instance, our current retail parking requirement is one space per three hundred square feet. that it would be ideal for them if it were one space per three hundred

2:15:48and fifty square feet. They actually find that Pasco's minimums are not as onerous as some of the surrounding counties. Penellas, for instance, requires one space per every two hundred and fifty square feet. They find that that provides more parking than they need to operate their business. But that a lesser Men a mamma. might be advantageous and I do understand that. A lot of people shop online, a lot of people pre-order at Publix and drive in there

2:16:18and pick this stuff up, and it does perhaps lessen the need for the numb the minimum number of spaces that we needed at a previous time in history. But it doesn't eliminate the need for parking. And although there may be things and we can all debate whether they're great or not about autonomous vehicles and ride shares and all of that. Those are things that Are promised They may come. We don't know how long it'll come.

2:16:49I Don't frankly see autonomous vehicles driving around Newport Ritchie in the next thirty days or however it longs takes to enact this ordinance. In fact, look what New Port Richey had to do. To keep the downtown alive, they recognized they needed more and more parking. They finally had to build a five or six story parking garage over behind Keyser College to accommodate their parking needs. I will tell you that that parking garage is not full on a day-to-day basis, but if

2:17:19the city grows to what it aspires to be,

2:17:22it will

2:17:22be.

2:17:22It's full on Chasco. For sure. That's for sure.

2:17:26So

2:17:30But I'm just trying to make sure we do something that's consistent with it. I think there is a general board intent to

2:17:39Produce To to put a cap on so because there are some sites that probably There are under any scenario would be considered overburdened. But again, is there any

2:17:48empirical data regarding those sites where

2:17:52I know there's traffic studies that are done for traffic, so has there been any

2:17:56there is some empirical data, but uh generally when we we usually get requests to reduce parking. Uh when we get requests to reduce parking, people will provide us with the data from their sites as to how to do it. You know, this is what we usually use, this is how we function. And that tends to be what we consider to be more accurate. We believe our numbers are fairly arbitrary. The numbers that were put in there originally, those minimum parking numbers, I mean, they were based on something possibly at the time, but it's obviously overparking. It's parking for a maximum

2:18:26day, you know, the day after Thanksgiving shopping, Black Friday shopping, and then you know, 364 days a year, it's half empty. So we're we're trying to look at that and look at the max. You know, I don't think anybody on our side is opposed to uh you know incorporating some level of minimum. The problem is that that again, that's gonna be a a relatively arbitrary number at this point.

2:18:47Well there's the for instance, if we want something to base it on, there's the ITE parking generation. That's a possibility.

2:18:55So but the consultant just told us there are some jurisdictions that do minimums and maximums.

2:19:00Yes, and there are some that do absolutely none whatsoever. I

2:19:02understand. And they function

2:19:03perfectly

2:19:04fine too. So I mean how hard would it be to look at the jurisdictions that have done minimums and maximums to see My guess is if they're imposing a maximum their minimum floor is probably pretty low. And it may

2:19:17button.

2:19:18But it's probably better than zero, which is what I think part of the concern up here is. is you could have a bad actor that puts in zero And now they've force that impact on others around them. You know,

2:19:34for all this concern about vehicle usage and transit One of the things that this thing doesn't do and I had to laugh 'cause I watched the last commission meeting. And there's this concern for drive-throughs. You want to talk about a big energy waster and carbon emitter. How many people sit and waste how much gas every morning sitting in that Starbucks drive-thru? In fact, if they want to do something about drive-throughs, they need to be

2:20:04a conditional use. And the operators of those drive-thrus need to be told that if your drive-thru traffic backs up out on US-19, and I'm talking to Duncan Donor. nuts south a ranch road d backs up onto US nineteen every day and causes a traffic jam. If you can't figure out how to clear those cars out of the drive thru, we're gonna yank your conditional use for the drive through. But you know, we're for all this business about carbon emissions, we're a society that's gonna sit in a drive-thru at the banks, sit in a drive-thru at

2:20:34McDonald's, sit in a drive-thru at Walgreens. And burn up you could have parts in the space were going to eliminate Stopped the carbon emission and walked in the store, got back out, and got in your E V that didn't make the coal pipe

2:20:49emission. I think

2:20:50it's a good idea.

2:20:50So there is a separate L D C amendment that's going to come through dealing with drive throughs. Let's try to focus on parking today. Yeah, but I I don't disagree with you. I'm saying, but but Given the time we have can we try to get some some consensus on how to deal with parking parking lot? Can we d

2:21:06can we come down to consensus maybe that we need to have A minimum and a maximum and not just a maximum.

2:21:13So I would like uh David uh The board directed us. to come up with something related to maximums. So Do we want this recommendation to go back and add a minimum. I mean we can certainly do that if you feel that that's appropriate, but we don't want to appear that we're Not following the board direction. Of course. Well we would never put you in that

2:21:35position, Brad. If we're here to make a recommendation to the board and When we're reviewing it and we come up with all these

2:21:44Yeah

2:21:45then to then we rec we recommend to the board what we think

2:21:49reason I asked my members of the question was if the board was never presented an option of minimum and maximum, then adding a minimum back in, some minimum isn't necessarily inconsistent with the board direction because they were never presented with that option. Is that accurate? I

2:22:06Can I answer that question for you? Um, I'm looking at my PowerPoint that we presented originally to the HRT and that staff later took to uh each board member. And the case studies that I included on the parking maximum slide, which was option two. Um, there were three case studies I included that there are no min minimums and they added maximums. And then the fourth case study was they just did maximums for retail and

2:22:36office. So no, in this PowerPoint I did not add a community that had minimums and maximums. However, I did bring it up with the HRT at last meeting when we were presenting this draft and I said, look, Um, just you know, if you remember from the last time we offered the parking minimum the parking maximums and that's the way the four decided to go, but I said there are communities that have done minimums and maximums. Do you want me to look at that? And they said, No, move forward, this is good, we like it. Okay, but that's H

2:23:07R T.

2:23:07What so what I'm

2:23:08HRT,

2:23:09not our reward. So what I

2:23:10Yeah.

2:23:11R exactly. So let me let me get there. Why don't I, if there's consensus among the board members, I can go back and add minimums that aren't obnoxious but that do address your concerns. Um and that can go on, you know, we can change the timing of the Um when uh uh when it goes to the board if we need to. But I can go in and this week and add some minimum Move the ordinance forward with your other comments as well.

2:23:40Catherine, can you elaborate on what do you mean by minimums which are not obnoxious?

2:23:46Well, if you kind of take a look at how you're built out now, particularly looking at um, you know, where you have your county complex. I've been up there now a couple of times for meetings and You guys have an obnoxious parking. You could fit like five more buildings into your county complex and in some of those parking areas. So understanding that, you know, things like restaurants and coffee shops and, you know, those things, they need a minimum amount of parking, right? Depending on the size of the place. That makes sense. But

2:24:17the parking the parking standards you have now are are

2:24:19great. I've been here on days when I've had to circle this parking lot to find a parking space. So I I I disagree with that.

2:24:30That may have been you've been here a couple times that's been the case, but I've been here and I can assure you I've been here when there is zero to very little parking available, depending upon what's going on here.

2:24:41So I I don't think we can provide an answer at all today on what we think those minimums should be. So if we need to continue this, this, we we can can continue this. I think that's a good idea. Have another discussion with the board. We can do another round with the board talking about the minimum maximum and see if that is something they do want. And then then if they say yes we do want that, we can actually go through it is a work effort to go through and produce those minimums. Um if they decide that they don't want that, then we will bring this back like a

2:25:09personal suggestion. And and I don't

2:25:16The board They're not a group of p they're not planners, they're not engineers, and for the most part they're not commercial developers that build parking spaces. Okay. So they may not recognize immediately the ramification of the word maximum and I'm sure like I said some of them have gone and they've seen these dark shopping centers, they see this sea of parking, and there's clearly those could be other uses and

2:25:46I don't disagree with that. My personal recommendation. And I'm going to speak to some of the commissioners about that. Well that we not adopt maximums, but that we look at reduced Minimums. I think that's a that's a better way to get to the goal that we're trying to achieve. that they're trying to achieve. I get the idea there are competing goals of what the board

2:26:16wants to do and what

2:26:21So if that's the will of the board, how do we advance this? Do we continue this and make that recommendation?

2:26:28Okay the will you talk about the will of the Board of

2:26:29County Commissioners or make that recommendation, how do we advance this item we're speaking about to do we continue it with that recommendation to the BCC?

2:26:40If you don't like the idea of maximums at all Then

2:26:46We did not have to do that.

2:26:48I mean now you're going directly against what apparently the board Directed. You know I guess you could just move it forward and say you don't And the ultimate you're supposed to determine if is it consistent with the comp plan, but I'm not sure the comp plan gets into this little detail anyway. But you could you could make a recommendation that it just not be approved. I mean 'cause if if you're if there's no compromise position of Adding some minim I mean, 'cause adding minimums in is a sort of an amendment to what the initiative is. But

2:27:18if you're saying you don't want any maximums at all?

2:27:21What I'm saying is it may be an initiative That's right. On its face. Might have sounded good to solve a problem that was perceived but perhaps needed more thought and now that there's been some discussions. And I'm sure and I know that certain commissioners listen to these and hopefully they're thinking and digesting about This conversation And whether or not maximum is

2:27:51really appropriate. My personal recommendation Yeah. A reduction in the minimums. The minimums that we have in our code were developed in a different time and age before we had an Amazon dot com or Walmart online and Target online and or a pandemic where we all had to go pick the food up and bring it home because the restaurant was closed. So I understand people's behaviors have changed.

2:28:19But ultimately the Primary Focus of this amendment is imposing maximums. So If you don't like that concept

2:28:32at all. And th th there's never would be a maximum Then My recommendation would be that you just recommend that the board

2:28:41not do this. We focused a little bit about that. And I'm not necessarily I I told him my personal recommendation is for reduced minimums, but if we wanted to have maximums at least in the ordinance set out a clear procedure for how one goes about getting approved something beyond the maximum. There may be new concepts. In fact, I've seen this happen throughout my career. Some new restaurant comes out.

2:29:12And it's a smashing success and everybody in town wants to go there and you got a two hour wait to get in the door. Okay, so they need some more parking than maybe the code contemplated for that type of restaurant.

2:29:26So I think there is some

2:29:26language

2:29:27in there currently the

2:29:28But it says you can submit it, but then it doesn't say how it's going to be evaluated and or uh a adjudicated.

2:29:34So with alternative standard processes

2:29:37that we use for the

2:29:37right-of-way.

2:29:37Okay, so that's the kind of tweak that you could recommend that staff just like I talked about with the E B E allowance and all the other stuff That's the kind of tweak to the initiative that You could recommend a specific amendment to that language to create Specific criteria about how you deviate from the maximum. But if you just say there shouldn't be any maximum at all.

2:29:58Well we don't want everybody asking for an alternative standard every time they want to do something too, because then we're back to exactly what the ULI told us not to do, which is zoning by variance.

2:30:09Yeah, I mean you you would know it stands a reason that they would build the minimum amount of parking spots that they possibly could. Any developer would do that. So You shouldn't have to approve a uh Well that's over overage to the maximum. The minimum should be really what the focus is.

2:30:26I think one of the biggest points that we made and John made really and I was thinking about it is And this board has has the good fortune to have three engineers on this board that think about things like that. And and I think you m you made the point that You know, uh B O C Um Most of them are familiar with construction, most of them are familiar with

2:30:52There are nuances to these things that As an engineer you're gonna think about More than if you weren't an engineer. So Um I think I'm not sure.

2:31:03These things need to

2:31:04be brought to their

2:31:04attention. So but what I my

2:31:07point is is that it's one thing to say you the the language about how you deviate from the maximum needs to be beefed up. It's another to say There shouldn't be a maximum at all. I mean You all do what you want. You recommend whatever you want. I'm just saying that at some point If you're just saying the whole idea's bad Then you're better off just Well

2:31:28I'd like to speak to that real quick if I may. Um I I apologize for jumping in here during the discussion, but I realize that there are no I realize there are a number of engineers up here, but uh you know you have an entire team of professional planners, national associations of professional planners, certified planners that do this for a living specifically related to parking that the the entire best practice policies right now are are in line with what we're talking about. So when you're saying this you think this is a bad idea, I really kind of I'm

2:31:58sorry,

2:31:58I'm sorry, and this is something I've I had prepared and I did not want to go here. But now you've opened up the door and I'm gonna go here.

2:32:10Everyone sitting up on this board today Other than Mr Williams because he represents the school board. holds a professional license sanctioned by the State. The only people in this room that don't hold a license are planners. They may be certified by their own professional association. but they are not certified by any government entity.

2:32:39David, we won't recommend this just be continued and we'll discuss it. That's we're not gonna be abused. That's ridiculous.

2:32:44No, we're

2:32:45not being abused.

2:32:46No, I'm making a statement. Okay, so getting back to

2:32:53And are you

2:32:53a member of the AI C P? Okay.

2:32:56Let's let's let's okay.

2:33:00So staff hired a consultant, the consultant has made a recommendation. I was trying to see if there was some middle ground where we could propose a tweak to add minimums And to potentially change the criteria for how you deviate from the maximums. I think those are potential amendments that staff could work on if you continued it to either continued it or attended it to the board with those recommended changes. If you don't think there should be a maximum you fundamentally

2:33:30disagree with the concept of a maximum My recommendation would be that you just send that recommendation to the board and let the board do what they want to do. That that's up to you all to decide what you want to do. But at some point you can't just tweak what they're proposing i if you just fundamentally think a maximum's a bad idea. So

2:33:54I know that's

2:33:54what John

2:33:55stated. I I personally agree with that as well.

2:33:57So then you're better off I mean, I will tell you the board doesn't always agree with you. They didn't agree with you on park impact fee. You guys proposed a bunch of recommendations and they rejected every single one of them. So so You all can do whatever you want to do.

2:34:14You can't fix it. There there are probably th if if you're willing to live with a maximum you'd probably fix some of the stuff. Ad minimums, things like that. But if you're not willing to live that you better off just recommending D the board not pursue the amendment.

2:34:28Kathryn, can I ask a few questions here just particular to this? Other other municipalities that have maximums What is their procedures or are there common procedures out there for developments that want to exceed the maximums. I mean are there are I'm sure there are standard provisions.

2:34:46requirement. I have one pulled up and free, so let me just look what they're Processes. One of the case studies that I Looked at for this.

2:34:58Let's see.

2:35:17I I just and the reason I'm asking that question I did not I just didn't see in here where that was outlined and my suggestion would be to add something but I'm trying to figure out what to

2:35:30One of the case studies that I um had in that original PowerPoint was Dunwoody, Georgia. And they have a a similar um Alternative uh compliance.

2:35:45option where it says it just reads the applicant the applicant submits a parking study or survey prepared by a sign and sealed registered professional in the state of Georgia with expertise in parking and transportation, demonstrating that the motor vehicle pars parking ratios do not accurately reflect the actual parking demand that can reasonably be anticipated for the proposed. So they can turn something in to s to the staff and have it administratively approved.

2:36:15That sounds similar to our alternative cannon process basically.

2:36:19Exactly. All right. Now, in particular, going through your red line, I've got a few questions here. The compact ratio, the ratio of compact spaces, it looks like in in most categories it it was eliminated. However, there's you know a couple, for example, the vet office animal hospital, it looks like it's still to remain seventy five twenty five. Was that intentional?

2:36:40Um I took it out of the table and put it under um the beginning of section F and just said that it's a fifty fifty split. Okay. They can do a

2:36:50fifty fifty split. I just

2:36:51took it out of the

2:36:52table. Page sixteen of the red line it's not strike Strike there's no strike through. So just I I just wanted to that maybe just a typo then. I didn't know if it was a typo. I just wanted to bring that up. So so essentially what Oh thanks. Unless it's specifically outlined like for Non-medical, administrative, or government where it's 75-25. Somebody could do under the pro what's proposed, could do a hundred percent compact spaces. No, they can't do that. No, they can be fifty fifty.

2:37:215050, yeah.

2:37:22What was it that I missed?

2:37:24John.

2:37:26Uh page sixteen of the of the strike through version, it's under veterinary animal hospital. Oh,

2:37:33okay.

2:37:33That's okay. My page

2:37:36numbers are different than your page numbers.

2:37:38Let's see. Well, depending on animal uses.

2:37:43Above the kennels.

2:37:46Mine is struck. My version is struck. I'll I'll make sure that it's corrected before it goes any

2:37:53Okay. Okay. Um in any event the pr provision was fifty fifty.

2:37:58And as you guys were looking at this ordinance, was there any did you guys look at or were you asked to look at standard the dimensions. I know there was some stuff added to the table for the dimensions, but I know there's other people. Local municipalities that a standard space is smaller than nine by twenty and then there's others in the area as you go north where a standard space is larger than nine by twenty. I mean it is nine by twenty standard and and So you guys didn't even look at that.

2:38:27Um 10 by 20 is what most local governments have adopted. And those are pretty, that's a generous parking space. Nine by twenty is what you currently have. I would say eight by twenty is too small because in those cases, those are all the dings I get in the side of my car when a space is less than um nine by twenty. So I would say don't go lower than that.

2:38:50Okay. So then why Why and how the justification for in multifamily And non-residents have up to fifty percent compact car spaces.

2:39:09I'm sorry,

2:39:10can you

2:39:10repeat the question? Why does why in this proposed ordinance Is multifamily allowed to have up to fifty percent compact parking? What sets multifamily Uh A part differently from commercial or any other thing that would entitle them to more compact spaces. Actually I think they treat the same way.

2:39:45Okay. How many units units anything over ten units I think?

2:39:49For for what's the purpose? I'm I'm I've got here Published this month. Car and Driver Magazine of the twenty-five best selling cars and trucks and SUVs in the country. Do you want to guess what the top ten are? Because they're not compact cars.

2:40:09In fact,

2:40:12only a couple of them actually qualify as compact based on the definition of compact car from the federal government. So twenty plus of the top twenty five cars are not compact.

2:40:29So do you wanna keep it at seventy five twenty five?

2:40:35Well I'm not sure what I want to do with the ordinance yet. And and

2:40:41let's assume that's the right-of-way.

2:40:42I don't mean to be dis sound disrespectful because I'm not, but I'm not negotiating with you about what should be in the ordinance. I'm here to make a recommendation to the commissioners. And that's m then that's m my

2:40:54mission today. Well, I think we can use this time, um efectively by giving me some specific direction, that's okay with me. Um if the board, if all of you agree that it should go back to 7525, I'm happy to do that before it goes to the board.

2:41:16Is that what the current That's the current regulation now. It is seventy five twenty five.

2:41:23Mm-hmm. Happy to make that change back.

2:41:28I'd be in favor of that. I personally believe that a fifty percent compact parking ratio in multifamily and non residential will Create. A lot of a lot more dings. That you don't like.

2:41:43So Kathryn, was that one that was specifically discussed with the board members or is that just that was a staff horizontal round table type issue?

2:41:52That was yeah, just uh discussed amongst that was not discussed with the board, no. Okay. We just gave them the board the basic options of reduce parking, eliminate parking maximum or place-based. So those are the four options that we gave um in that original PowerPoint that we gave to the horizontal round table and that the staff met one on one with the board with.

2:42:27Happy to make that change back. I mean you all know what people are driving around you. Tampa is a different I live in Tampa were a different Slightly different place and You know, you know what people are driving around you, so if you think it should go back, happy to make that change.

2:42:41Maybe let me just throw out an idea. To move this forward. If there are if there are

2:42:49I think what you've all has ended up doing on park impact fee is you basically said if the ordinance is adopted we want to see the following changes. I think you could do something similar here. I'm not suggesting that you need to recommend approval of the ordinance, but You could say

2:43:08If adopted We recommend that that these three changes be made to the ordinance. Well let me ask this

2:43:17One of the things that I'm going to do.

2:43:21That's I found

2:43:25fun, engaging. was when we had our planning training A couple of few weeks ago.

2:43:35And it was an opportunity where uh it was a public forum and need because of sunshine law reasons, but it was an opportunity where the planning commission could sit in the same room with the county commission. and we could all exchange thoughts and ideas and have a little discussion and debate and I'm thinking that maybe The best. thing for this I I don't wanna completely throw this away. I I think there's some justification

2:44:05for reductions or or maybe there's maybe there is some justify maybe somebody can convince me there's that there's a justification for a maximum. But I think it would be helpful If perhaps we could have a workshop Where we could all sit and ex discuss those and exchange those ideas freely with the people that we're here to make recommendations to.

2:44:29So that's a That's something that the board County commissioners would have to be a very good thing.

2:44:38Um I could tell you the board members certainly listened and watched these Planning Commission meetings, so I don't think I would not assume that just because

2:44:47You're not in the same room, they're not listening to your own.

2:45:03I think there's definitely some good here. I think the bottom line is I think there's just some things that maybe weren't considered when it went purely to maximum with no minimum is my position. Um I think you open up a lot of issues, a lot of potential issues on on other sides or other areas that may not have have been thought about.

2:45:22So what I'm suggesting again to try to move it along is I mean you could

2:45:28Your motion could be if the ordinance is adopted at all, I understand you have concerns about it in general. you could say we want inclusion of some minimums put back in. You know, we want the compact spaces changed to seventy five, twenty five. We want E Vs and solar car ports consider. I mean, these are you could say if adopted, these are changes that should be made. Nothing

2:45:58to say that then you have to recommend that it be adopted at all. Because that's basically what you guys did with parks. Is you fought about it for three hours And then we're going to do that. You basically said if adopted we want these changes made.

2:46:14So So what's the rush? Is there some

2:46:20that's your other option is continue it. But if you're gonna continue it it should be with some direction to staff to Come back with specific amen like for example if you want to see If you want to see the actual minimums before you're prepared to move it forward to the board, that would be a grounds for you to continue the item and ask direct staff to add some minimums in And So you can see them before it you goes to the

2:46:45board. I

2:46:46would

2:46:47shouldn't that be the board's decision to direct them to to do that? A are we the correct board to direct somebody to go do something?

2:46:55Well we could still override. Okay, but see yeah, the board could always say we don't care what the we didn't don't like these minimums that the Planning Commission and staff came up with. Get 'em, take 'em all out. They could absolutely do that. What I'm hearing though, this is why I asked the question originally Was the board cons presented with an option that included both maximums and minimums? The answer was no. Kathryn clearly said that. So we don't know how the board feels about adding minimums in. Right. You would not necessarily be acting inconsistent

2:47:25with the board's intent. If you added some minimums back in. Their direction was impose maximums. Okay. If you say you don't want any maximums at all

2:47:37That's a different conversation. I

2:47:39so you're saying maybe uh the idea is to recommend continuance with the addition of uh some minimums.

2:47:48W well i if you it depends on what you want. If you want Be th before you're willing to recommend something to the board, if you want to see the actual minimums to see if they're To quote Kathryn, obnoxious or not, I don't know whether what you guys consider obnoxious. Okay. Um Then that would be a reason to continue it. But if you're gonna continue, it should be for staff and the consultant to Present some modified work product to you.

2:48:17If you don't like the idea at all, I'd rather you just say we don't like it and board you

2:48:21with whatever you want. Yeah, I don't think it's I don't think we're saying that, but I I do think that what you just structured there was for me makes sense. The continuance? The continuance with some direction to establish the minimums. You know, to for us to reveal. Let us have a chance to look at some minimums. Well I if if

2:48:38I were going to do that. And I might have to do that. I'd want to look at some of the things that we're going to minimums. And like I said, I I strongly agree with re A reduc I know this sounds crazy. A reduction of the minimums because I do understand people's habits have changed.

2:49:02if we're going to talk about maximums, I think we need to clarify What the procedure will be and how that will be A judged. adjudicated. I'm sorry if I'm using the wrong term, but I think you know what I mean. There needs to be a procedure. Um I

2:49:28Chuckled a little bit under my breath. May I offer a suggestion? Well hold on a second. I I chuckled a little under my breath as you were reading what you said Dunwoody, Georgia did. It was basically well go get an engineer to sign and seal that you need more parking and away you went. Well

2:49:45Uh maybe maybe that's what we want to do here. I don't know. I

2:49:50I don't know how one qualifies themselves as a parking exp I think you said the language included they have to have expertise in parking or something. I don't know how one ad Judges whether one's a qualified parking expert or not.

2:50:02Well I would I would guess it would be something similar along the lines of what somebody has to submit if they want to go below the minimum that's in today's ordinance.

2:50:12Yeah, it's And Brad left.

2:50:19they basically do a like a little parking study and say here's data from other places that it parked and it's perfectly fine. with this lesser number of spaces. You guess you could do the rever to Jamie's point, you could do the reverse on a You know, they should f show a shopping center that needed that many spaces and that they're it's fully occupied with cars. I mean so You can do parking studies. You just you give case studies from other places that show they needed that many spaces. Kathryn, is that kind of what you're talking about?

2:50:50Yes. Why don't we I if I can offer a suggestion, why don't we just consult the most recent version of the ITE parking standards. The ITE has been getting better about recognizing that not every place is completely suburbanized and you have different contexts. Um and so their their more recent documents have been reflecting that that change in society. Um why don't we why don't we consult The most recent ITE parking manual. Bring

2:51:21back some minimums to you all so that you have some comfort to move this forward. And then when it goes to the board, they can strike that provision if they want to. It'll just be uh, you know, one column in the table. Right, that has the minimums and if they say, Well, that's not what we wanted, we'll strike that then and then they can do that when they get to their meeting. But to give you some comfort, we can make changes to the ordinance and bring it back to you for discussion.

2:51:45So moved. Yeah. And so you would all Kathryn in the same when you bring it back you'd also address the the compact ratio

2:51:56you'd fix the clarify the process that you brought the process to deviate from the maximum, deal with the EV solar carboard issue.

2:52:07That's what you'd bring back to the Planning Commission. And

2:52:10although I was quick

2:52:11to say so moved,

2:52:12that we need to put a time frame on this. Do we need to how much

2:52:17time do you need to do that?

2:52:20I'm also working on your peril of flood stuff right now that we're trying to get to hearing. Do you have a December meeting?

2:52:26One yes. There is a December meeting on December seventh and it's in Dade City at one thirty.

2:52:33Okay, why don't we why don't we plan for that? Does that give staff enough time to get it through the process?

2:52:41I believe it does, yes.

2:52:45So can the board just continue it to that date and then you don't have to readvertise?

2:52:50Correct. I'd be fine with that. We've got to cone it to a specific date to not have to read. December seventh, yeah. December seventh.

2:52:58I'll come in person next time.

2:53:04No, a bike. She'll be riding a bus. I don't I don't

2:53:06I don't have to

2:53:07take three days to get there. Uh an hour and a half. Um

2:53:11Therein

2:53:12lies the problem, huh? I I will second it's a speed rails. I will second that long and uh Clarified motion.

2:53:22Thank you, Derek. So it's the motion to the motion is to continue to December seventh. That's in Newport Retrieve?

2:53:29No, it's in Dade City at one thirty in Dade City.

2:53:34Um To address The various comments that we'd noted.

2:53:41Which will include a a look at the ITE minimums for parking.

2:53:48Everything we've noted. Alternative fuel, yeah. Yeah. Compact car ratio.

2:53:55So it sounds like Kathryn, you're pretty clear on what you need to address.

2:53:59Yes. Yeah.

2:54:00Okay. And if you're the one drafting it, that's that's that's the important thing.

2:54:08I think I got it.

2:54:09Okay.

2:54:10I just got a message from Brad and he would actually prefer it to be to a date uncertain.

2:54:15Well that means he's gonna have to re advertise. I wouldn't be opposed to that either.

2:54:21He said if there's gonna be minimums imposed he would recommend a date uncertain.

2:54:25Is that so he can go back towards on a round table? Is that why?

2:54:29Well I Just a comment. We gotta remember what people's the horizontal round table Is engineers and developers Most of those engineers working for the developers And the purpose of establishing minimums in the code to begin with. When you go to the H the HRT for an ordinance like that, that's kinda like letting the foxes guard the hen house, so to speak, too. I mean so we need to

2:54:59be real careful about that.

2:55:02Well I I I don't know if there was any explanation of Brad's test. But

2:55:08they said no when I asked.

2:55:11They said who said no about minimums?

2:55:13The horizontal round tape. I asked them if they wanted me to impose minimums as well as the maximums. They said resoundingly no. You

2:55:21made Mr. Moody's point for

2:55:26the

2:55:26I was listening that day. I didn't participate because I don't want to risk violating the sunshine law, but I do turn those meetings on and listen.

2:55:36where I was going with it is I don't know that you're gonna change their opinion But I believe staff does pres like to at least go back to them if some major change has has occurred so they can For example, There may be a minimum there they say, well, we don't want to use IT for them. We can live with a minimum, but we don't think it should be based on IT for that use. And so you've given them no chance to that's f I that's fair.

2:56:02And at least they're aware of it and if they've got you know issues with it they can raise their concerns during the meeting. That's

2:56:07So do you change your motion to a date uncertain? So but if that's the reason Brad wants to continue to a date uncertain, then I understand why he would want that.

2:56:18His response is they just need time to evaluate the principles and understand that the appropriate minimums would be set.

2:56:26Fair enough. Okay. I think that's a reasonable answer and I would support to a date uncertain if I can get a second. second.

2:56:34So if that's your amendment, I will then still second your amended motion.

2:56:41Okay, we have a motion and a a second. Any further discussion on that motion?

2:56:45I mean I'll just add that I I don't think anybody up here is saying that there's necessarily anything materially wrong with this, but I think there's other things that need to be considered and to be thought about. Um I mean I mean I don't I know it got a little contentious here and I don't think that was anybody's We do appreciate the staff's hard work on it. I think there's a lot of hard work put in here and I think there's you know a lot of things to be considered. Um so Well

2:57:05the good news is I think Catherine's saying these are all things that she can address. Correct and that other jurisdictions have addressed. So

2:57:12Yep.

2:57:14Well the other thing we need to look at too is other jurisdictions may have addressed, come back and demonstrate that they've addressed them with success. Just because someone else did it doesn't mean that that worked Or was the right thing or and then we also have to compare that community, how does that community compare to Pasco It could be a

2:57:38case study and

2:57:38failure for all we know.

2:57:46What jurisdiction was it? She said done will be.

2:57:49On I don't remember off the top of my head. I remember clicking through that map that I showed you for the parking reform network and going through and seeing who did what. Um and in hindsight I probably should have pulled one of those and put in the in the PowerPoint that did a minimum and maximum. But I'll I'll have to go back and read them and I've got no problem picking up the phone and calling their staff and saying, Hey, how's it going? Um and if they say it's terrible, we're sorry we ever did this, then I can relay that back to you. Yeah, that'd be probably a good idea for you.

2:58:17Okay. Okay, so we have a motion, we have a second. Any further discussion of the motion? If not. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign? Okay. Is that a name? No, I said okay. Oh okay. Kidding me?

2:58:39You had to go to the bathroom and pull my phone quick. Now you're getting personal.