community residential homes and reasonable accommodations

52:39Are we ready? I'm ready? Okay, sorry about that. Okay, okay.

52:48Item P fifty one is PD twenty six zero zero two five. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code. Section two oh four point three General Functions, powers and duties, section three oh four public notice requirements, section four oh two point three conditional uses, section four oh seven Point two zoning variances, section 407.4 alternative relief, section 407.5 alternative standards, section 503, AC Agricultural District, Section 504, AC1 Agricultural District, Section 505, AR Agricultural

53:18Residential District, Section 506, AR1, Agricultural Residential District, Section 507, AR5, Agricultural Residential District, Section 508, AR5 M H Agricultural Mobile Home District Section 519 ER Estate Residential District Section 510 ER2 Estate Residential District Section 511 RMH Mobile Home District Section 512 R1 M H Single Family Mobile Home District Section 513 R2 M H Rural Density Mobile Home District Section Five Fourteen R1 Rural Density District Residential District Section

53:48Five Fifteen R2 Low Density Residential District Section Five Sixteen R3 Medium Density Residential District Section 517 R4 High Density Residential District Section 518 M F one Multiple Family Medium Density District Section 519 M F2 Multiple Family High Density District Section 520 M F3 Multiple Family High Density District Creating Section 408 Reasonable Accommodations Section 530.26 Standards for Community Residential Home. Homes large, amending appendix

54:19A, definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severability, inclusion into the land development code, and an effective date. This comes with a recommendation to accept the public comment and adopt the proposed land development code amendments and ordinance by roll call vote. There is a presentation of so desired. And uh if not desired, uh there's an update post planning commission that needs to be provided to the board.

54:45Let me just ask a quick question to get into it. That takes about three minutes to go through that whole thing. Right. And that happens now and then. Is there anything legally we can do to change it? Kind of like we used to we used to have to read at at the budget hearings. We'd have to read the whole resolution. And about seven or eight years ago they changed it where title only. Is there something that can be done we Spare.

55:08I'm all for it. Or

55:09summarize. Summarize

55:10it.

55:11Um I'm not sure that you can avoid reading the title difference, although I'm not sure the title needs to be this long. Um There probably was a way to shorten this title. I don't want to get into how they could have done it but

55:24let's if you would have the conversation, let's see if this find a way to make it easy for this guy.

55:29No problem.

55:30Alright, well what uh

55:33hey

55:34Terry, look so now that the robot language is done, speaking code out there, but Oh but

55:42it's not easy either. No.

55:44No, not at all.

55:45You gotta stay in line.

55:47So my my understanding with fifty one is this this is to become compliant with changes that the state made. And within this provision it deals with um

56:00halfway houses, whatever you want to call 'em, that are in residential neighborhoods. Correct.

56:06Uh community residential homes, yeah.

56:09Resident you you know the the problem like in Quill Hollow for example there's a uh a a home for troubled youth that's in a residential neighborhood. Yes. And the state was talking about increasing the level and the problems are still compounding and it's impacting all you know, this is this is a problem house in a residential neighborhood. This ordinance It has something to do with that, correct?

56:36Yes, it d it deals with um those types of uses.

56:39It makes it compounds already tough situation that we can't control, makes it worse. Yes or no. Has the ability to because they can have more heads and beds.

56:52I don't know if it requires it doesn't necessarily require you to approve. those types of uses. What it requires you to do is

57:01You know the case I'm talking about.

57:03I I'm aware of

57:03it.

57:03But it I don't know that it required you to approve those uses, but it requires you is follow Fair Housing Act and ETA criteria when you're reviewing But there's nothing in here that requires you to approve the A u a conditional use or So so I don't think this is saying that you have to prove something. But you ha it's saying that if you're gonna deny it, you've gotta base it on the criteria that are in the code which follow the Fair Housing Act and the Americans

57:34of Disability Act and the state of law.

57:37So if we approve this, then we're really handcuffed.

57:41I'm not sure that you're any more handcuffed than you are under the FHA and ADA now.

57:49In other words, you were already handcuffed by the F H A and ADA. But

57:53we approve this. It makes the rules more stringent.

57:56It I think in my opinion it makes the rules more compliant with the FHA and ADA and the new state law. I'm not sure it's any more stringent than what I'm saying. Because that project that you're talking about, it arose because we got a complaint under the FHA in eighty eight. that we were violating the F H A and ADA, that's how it got approved in the first place.

58:23So I think because our the the argument was our code didn't comply with the F A check. So I think what staff was trying to do is bring forward to you a code that does comply with the FHA and the ADA so that if we deny a project like that, we can easily more easily defend it.

58:40Are you sure?

58:42Yes, because we weren't we weren't able to defend that one when we got approved because our code did not comply with the FHA for the ADA.

58:51I like your passion. I'm just making sure that

58:53you're not going to be able to do that.

59:01Yes. That's Yeah. Okay.

59:05Alright, thank you.

59:06Uh do we need a presentation? Nope.

59:09Mr. Chairman Mariano. There's one thing to note that the since the uh first hearing of this item, uh the text was updated. There was a divergence at the Planning Commission from the original recommendation where they wanted to have uh certain uh reasonable accommodations uh heard through public hearing, but further legal research identified that Um that that should not happen in that way to be consistent with case law and with uh federal requirements, etc.

59:40Uh so it were the text that's presented to you today has reverted back to the original recommendation from the department to make these not go to public hearing.

59:50Okay. And it's a recommendation for approval now.

59:52Correct. Okay,

59:53sir. Alright. Yeah. Very good. Is anyone here from the public to speak to this item? Is there anyone online?

1:00:00No one's online.

1:00:01To the board.

1:00:02Move approval.

1:00:04All in favor say aye. Aye.

1:00:05Aye. Any appointment? Roll call. Okay. District one, Commissioner Oakley. Aye. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District three, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Chairman Mariano.