MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PINELLAS PLANNING COUNCIL March 16, 2011

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PINELLAS PLANNING COUNCIL March 16, 2011 The Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) met in regular session in the County Commission Assembly Room, Pinellas County Courthouse, 315 Court Street, Clearwater, Florida, at 1:02 P.M. with the following members present: John Doran, Chairman, City of Clearwater Vice-Mayor Jim Ronecker, Vice-Chairman, City of Oldsmar Mayor Jerry Knight, Secretary, Town of North Redington Beach Vice-Mayor John Morroni, Treasurer, County Commissioner David O. Archie, City of Tarpon Springs Mayor Nina Bandoni, City of Safety Harbor Commissioner Sandra L. Bradbury, City of Pinellas Park Councilmember Patricia Gerard, City of Largo Mayor Jim Kennedy, City of St. Petersburg Councilmember Linda S. Lerner, School Board Member Patricia J. Shontz, City of Madeira Beach Mayor Not Present: David Carson, City of Dunedin Vice-Mayor Samuel Henderson, City of Gulfport Councilmember Also Present: Michael C. Crawford, Interim Executive Director, PPC Linda A. Fisher, PPC Staff Christopher Mettler, PPC Staff Michael D. Schoderbock, PPC Staff Carolyn Shoemaker, PPC Staff Jewel White Cole, Managing Assistant County Attorney Other interested individuals Michael P. Schmidt, Board Reporter, Deputy Clerk I. CALL TO ORDER A. Invocation and Pledge B. Identification of Members Present C. Recognition of Outgoing Member AGENDA 1

II. III. IV. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of February 16, 2011 Council Meeting B. Financial Statement for February 2011 C. Countywide Planning Authority (CPA) Actions March 2011 D. Annexation Report February 2011 E. Preliminary April 2011 Agenda F. Correspondence PUBLIC HEARING To begin at 1:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as agenda permits A. Public Hearing Format Announcement and Oath B. Amendments to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan Group 1: Subthreshold Amendments 1. Case CW 11-04: City of Indian Rocks Beach 2. Case CW 11-05: City of Indian Rocks Beach Group 2: Regular Amendments 3. Case CW 11-06: City of Treasure Island (SAP Adoption 2011) Treasure Island Downtown Special Area Plan REPORTS/OTHER ACTION A. Minor Plan Change: CW 6-12 (SAP Change No. 2-2011) City of Dunedin CRD Guideways to Downtown s Future (To Be Withdrawn) B. Annual Countywide Plan Map Assessment Status Report for 2010 C. Proposed Amendment of the Countywide Rules Re: Changes to Amendment Thresholds and Special Area Plans V. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ITEMS A. PPC/MPO Unification Update B. Preliminary Budget Discussion for FY 2011/12 C. Verbal Reports VI. VII. OTHER COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Chairman/Member Items ADJOURNMENT CALL TO ORDER Chairman Doran called the meeting to order at 1:02 P.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE The Invocation was given by Councilmember Bradbury, following which she led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2

IDENTIFICATION OF MEMBERS PRESENT themselves. At the Chairman's request, a roll call was taken in which the members introduced RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING MEMBER Chairman Doran reported that Mayor Shontz will be departing the PPC after two years of service; whereupon, he presented the Mayor with a plaque commemorating her years of service on the Council, expressed his appreciation, and wished her well in future endeavors. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Chairman Doran presented the Consent Agenda items, as follows: A. Minutes of February 16, 2011 Council Meeting B. Financial Statement for February 2010 C. Countywide Planning Authority (CPA) Actions March 2011 D. Annexation Report February 2011 E. Preliminary April 2011 Agenda F. Correspondence Thereupon, Mayor Gerard moved, seconded by Councilmember Bradbury and carried, that the Consent Agenda items be approved (Vote 11 0). PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing Format Announcement and Oath Upon request by the Chairman, all persons planning to give testimony were duly sworn by the Deputy Clerk. 3

B. Amendments to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan GROUP 1: SUBTHRESHOLD AMENDMENTS PUBLIC HEARING: CASE CW 11-04, PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF INDIAN ROCKS BEACH TO AMEND THE COUNTYWIDE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FROM RESORT FACILITIES HIGH (RFH) TO RECREATION/OPEN SPACE (R/OS) APPROVED Pursuant to legal notice published in the February 26, 2011 issue of the St. Petersburg Times as evidenced by affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was held on Case CW 11-04, a proposal by the City of Indian Rocks Beach to amend the Countywide Future Land Use Plan from RFH to R/OS, re 0.4 acre m.o.l., located on the northwest corner of Gulf Boulevard and 12 th Avenue. Mr. Crawford referred to a map, pointed out the site location, and provided historical background information. He indicated that it is a subthreshold amendment; that the subject area contains a municipal park; that the amendment stems from the City s Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) process, whereby the need was identified to recognize the city-owned park by amending the land use to Recreation/Open Space; and that staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. be heard. No one appeared in response to the Chairman s call for citizens wishing to Mayor Archie moved, seconded by Commissioner Morroni and carried, that Case CW 11-04 be approved as recommended by staff (Vote 11 0). PUBLIC HEARING: CASE CW 11-05, PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF INDIAN ROCKS BEACH TO AMEND THE COUNTYWIDE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FROM RESIDENTIAL URBAN (RU) TO PRESERVATION (P) APPROVED Pursuant to legal notice published in the February 26, 2011 issue of the St. Petersburg Times as evidenced by affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was held on Case CW 11-05, a proposal by the City of Indian Rocks Beach to amend the Countywide Future Land Use Plan from RU to P, re 2.1 acres m.o.l., located on the northeast corner of Indian Rocks Causeway and East Gulf Boulevard. Mr. Crawford referred to a map, pointed out the site location, and provided historical background information. He indicated that it is a subthreshold amendment; that the subject area is vacant; that the site is owned by the Florida Department of Transportation 4

(FDOT); that the amendment stems from the City s EAR process, whereby the need was identified to recognize the natural area by amending the land use to Preservation; and that staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. be heard. No one appeared in response to the Chairman s call for citizens wishing to Councilmember Bradbury moved, seconded by Mayor Gerard and carried, that Case CW 11-05 be approved as recommended by staff (Vote 11 0). GROUP 2: REGULAR AMENDMENTS PUBLIC HEARING: CASE CW 11-06 (SAP ADOPTION 2011), PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND TO AMEND THE COUNTYWIDE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG), INSTITUTIONAL (I), RECREATION/OPEN SPACE (R/OS), RESORT FACILITIES MEDIUM (RFM), AND TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY (T/U) TO PLANNED REDEVELOPMENT MIXED USE (PR MU), INSTITUTIONAL, RECREATION/OPEN SPACE, RESORT FACILITIES MEDIUM, AND TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY APPROVED Pursuant to legal notice published in the February 26, 2011 issue of the St. Petersburg Times as evidenced by affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was held on Case CW 11-06, a proposal by the City of Treasure Island to amend the Countywide Future Land Use Plan from CG, I, R/OS, RFM, and T/U to PR-MU, I, R/OS, RFM, and T/U, re 51.2 acres m.o.l., bounded generally by Gulf Boulevard and Boca Ciega Bay and comprised of properties on either side of 104 th, 105 th, 106 th, 107 th, and 108 th Avenues, Park Place, and 1 st Street East. Mr. Mettler provided historical background information regarding the Treasure Island Downtown Special Area Plan and the redevelopment efforts which have taken place over the past several years. He indicated that in November 2006, the Downtown Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City and was included as part of the Special Area Plan (SAP); that the Plan was developed with substantial public involvement, including a four-day charrette in April 2006; and that it describes existing conditions and proposes several alternative redevelopment strategies. Referring to a map and aerial photograph, Mr. Mettler pointed out the location of the subject area, described surrounding uses, and provided a brief overview of the proposal. He indicated that the proposed amendment seeks to reclassify approximately 21 acres on the 5

Treasure Island Future Land Use Map and the Special Area Plan; that the category of Commercial General would be changed to the categories of PR-MU-Gulf Boulevard and PR- MU-Core; that the remaining 31 acres m.o.l. are not proposed to be changed; and that no changes to the uses of the plan categories or density/intensity standards are proposed; whereupon, he reviewed the six objectives of the Treasure Island Downtown SAP, including: Promoting mixed-use development. Promoting 107 th Avenue as the premier pedestrian street of Downtown. Creating a system of civic spaces and linkages. Instituting a district-wide approach to parking. Increasing in-district demand for Downtown businesses. Promoting cooperation among property owners. Leveraging public assets to support effective redevelopment. Mr. Mettler indicated that the SAP utilizes the application of the PR-MU category to encourage mixed-use development and to allow greater residential density and non-residential intensity in the Downtown area; and that the SAP also anticipates that the City will consider incentives such as transferable development regulations and density/intensity averaging; whereupon, he presented information relating to proposed density and intensity increases, floor area ratios, and impervious surfaces. Thereupon, Mr. Mettler recommended approval of the amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1. Submission by the City of any future amendment to the SAP for receipt and acceptance, or for consideration as an amendment, as is determined necessary, under the Countywide Plan Map amendment process. 2. Submission by the City of an assessment of the Special Area Plan s progress with respect to its enumerated objectives five years from the effective date of the Countywide Plan Map amendments pursuant to this SAP. 3. Submission of the proposed land development regulations establishing the PR-MU-Core and PR-MU-Gulf Boulevard zoning districts and other implementing provisions for receipt and acceptance, or for consideration as an amendment, as is determined necessary under the Countywide Plan Map amendment process. 6

4. Authorization of an exception to the Scenic/Non-Commercial Corridor Unique/Scenic View subclassification for the portion for 107 th Avenue in the SAP. In response to the Chairman s call for the applicant, Lynn Rosetti, City Planner for the City of Treasure Island, appeared in support of the proposed amendment, and related that Treasure Island has been working for a long time to promote mixed-use development within the Downtown area; that any increase in density would also have to be approved by the voters; and that residential development through the Special Area Plan would be limited to being part of the mixed-use development. Robert Klute, Planners Advisory Committee (PAC), indicated that the PAC had voted 11 to 0 in favor of the request. heard. No one appeared in response to the Chairman s call for citizens wishing to be Thereupon, Mayor Gerard moved, seconded by Councilmember Bradbury and carried, that Case CW 11-06 be approved as recommended by staff (Vote 11 0). * * * * Deviating from the agenda, Chairman Doran indicated that Item No. V A. would be addressed at this time. * * * * EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ITEMS A. PPC/MPO Unification Update Received/Discussed/Provided Direction REVISED SPECIAL ACT AND REAPPORTIONMENT Ms. Fisher presented information relating to the Revised Special Act and Reapportionment, and reported that the Florida Legislature is considering House Bill 1041 and Senate Bill 1446, which revise the Council s existing Special Act to enable unification of the PPC and MPO; that the two bills, which are identical, use the language approved by the Joint Land Use and Transportation Committee at its final meeting on December 6, 2010; and that PPC staff will closely track the proposed legislation, keeping the Council apprised of its progress. 7

Ms. Fisher related that all local governments in Pinellas County have adopted resolutions in support of the unification process, as well as the MPO Reapportionment Plan, which will be transmitted to the Florida Department of Transportation once the legislation has passed; and that the Reapportionment Plan will add two new rotating seats to the unified PPC/MPO Board. She related that outreach has continued to the sixteen communities who will share the two new seats; that an informational presentation was given at the Barrier Islands Governmental Council (BIG-C) meeting on February 23; and that the elected officials in attendance requested clarification on some aspects of the federal and state requirements for rotation, which is being provided for them; whereupon, she indicated that a special meeting of the BIG-C to discuss membership rotation has been scheduled for March 30; that the six inland communities that will share the remaining seat have scheduled a similar meeting for April; and that the process seems to be moving along smoothly. PROPOSED EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE County Commissioner Karen Williams Seel discussed a memo she sent to members of the PPC and MPO proposing the formation of a joint PPC/MPO Executive Committee comprised of three elected officials from each agency to oversee the unification process, including the initiation of the hiring process for an Executive Director and the creation of a unified budget, and requested that the PPC appoint its three members. Councilmember Danner reported that the MPO had selected City of Dunedin Mayor Dave Eggers, Commissioner Seel, and himself to serve as the MPO representatives; whereupon, Chairman Doran suggested that since Mayor Ronecker, Mayor Gerard, and he had served on the original committee, the members may wish to reappoint them as the PPC representatives to the Executive Committee. Thereupon, Councilmember Kennedy moved, seconded by Commissioner Morroni and carried, that Chairman Doran, Mayor Ronecker, and Mayor Gerard be reappointed to serve on the Joint PPC/MPO Executive Committee (11 0). Following the vote, Chairman Doran asked if a committee alternate was needed, and the consensus was no. Commissioner Seel requested that the Planners Advisory Group be reconvened, noting that it was established during the Joint Land Use and Transportation Committee, is separate and distinct from the Planners Advisory Committee and is composed of senior planners in the area led by Carol Stricklin; whereupon, Mayor Gerard moved, seconded by Mayor Archie and carried, that the Planners Advisory Group be reconvened (Vote 11 0). Referring to an outline of the three-tiered countywide plan map amendment concept, Commissioner Seel related that the three-tiered outline could streamline the process, 8

and Chairman Doran concurred; whereupon, Mr. Crawford related that staff is supportive of the three-tier plan; and that the support of the Executive Committee and input from the Planners Advisory Group regarding the update of the Countywide Plan would be helpful to staff in moving the process forward in an expeditious manner. COUNTYWIDE PLAN UPDATE Mr. Crawford indicated that in addition to the unification of the PPC and MPO, the proposed revised Special Act provides for a complete update of the Countywide Plan, inclusive of the Countywide Plan Strategies, Countywide Plan Map, and Countywide Rules; and that the intent is for it to be implemented as expeditiously as possible; whereupon, referring to a timeline titled Countywide Plan Update Proposed Work Program FY 2011-13, he discussed the work program drafted by the PPC staff, which would see work commencing at the start of Fiscal Year 2011-12 and concluding by the end of Fiscal Year 2012-13; and indicated that the program would consist of the following three phases: Phase I Inventory of Conditions, Data and Analysis Update, and Criteria Development (October 2011 April 2012) Inventory of Areas Planned for Redevelopment. Update Current Data and Analysis. Develop Criteria to Identify Areas with Redevelopment Potential. Develop Criteria to Identify Areas of Stability. Inventory and Analyze MPO Data and Policy in Relation to Land Use. Phase II Policy Development, Countywide Rule Drafting, and Future-Oriented Map Development (May 2012 April 2013) Draft Policy Direction Based on Phase I and Other Input. Draft Countywide Rule Amendments to Carry Out Phase I. Draft Future-Oriented Countywide Plan Map to Carry Out Phase I. Local Outreach, Communication, and Input (six months). Phase III Policy, Rule, and Map Adoption (May September 2013) Adopt Updated Countywide Plan Strategies. Update and Revise Countywide Plan as Necessary. Adopt Countywide Rules to Administer Countywide Plan Map. Adopt Future-Oriented Countywide Plan Map. 9

Mr. Crawford related that the proposed unified PPC/MPO Board could be seated on October 1, 2011; that combining the two staffs would take place after that date; and that the PPC staff is working on several items, including approval of the Special Act, formation of the Executive Committee, seating of the Board, and the hiring of a new Executive Director. He related that the timeline plan presented today is not fully integrated with the timeline of the MPO; that he had discussed this with Planning Director Brian Smith; and that if the Council elects to move forward, a plan would be brought before the Council integrating the land use and the transportation plans and timelines. Mr. Crawford related that the Countywide Plan will integrate Pinellas by Design and dovetail with the three-tiered review and approval process, identify areas expected to see redevelopment and those that may not, and the result would be fewer map amendments as the map would be future-oriented and policy based; whereupon, he asked for the Council s authorization to move forward with a more refined plan to update the Countywide Plan. Councilmember Bradbury expressed her support for the integration of the two plans; and Councilmember Kennedy commented that he liked the idea of a specific timeframe; whereupon, Chairman Doran, with input by Mr. Crawford, clarified that the two-year timeframe relates to how long it would take to complete the Future Land Use Plan; and that the political process could potentially be completed by October 2011 when the new Board is seated. Mr. Crawford indicated that regardless of the Special Act, the PPC is charged with updating the Countywide Plan and that staff is already moving forward with the Map; and School Board Member Lerner and Mayor Archie expressed their appreciation to staff and the Council members for all their hard work. In response to queries by Mayor Gerard, Commissioner Seel indicated that there were some concerns by the PAC members relating to the timeline, but that with the help of the Planners Advisory Group, the process could perhaps be completed in less than two years; whereupon, she requested that the Council consider addressing the reduction of the Land Use Map categories as soon as possible, which would allow St. Petersburg to dovetail its map with the Countywide Map. City of St. Petersburg Planning and Economic Development Department Manager Rick MacAulay explained why a new Countywide Future Land Use Map is important to St. Petersburg, indicating that in addition to reducing the number of Land Use Map categories, it should reduce the number of amendments that would have to go through the PPC and CPA process; that much time has been spent with subthreshold and even regular amendments that do not have Countywide significance; and that St. Petersburg does not wish to continue using a map 10

containing over 30 categories for another two or three years. Mr. MacAulay indicated that the formation of the PPC/MPO Executive Committee and the reconvening of the Planners Advisory Group have increased his comfort level in regard to the timeline. In response to queries by Mayor Gerard, Mr. MacAulay related that although the decision to withdraw support of the PPC/MPO unification plan legislation is retained by the City Administration, he was relieved to hear of the accelerated timeframe; and acknowledged that both he and Planning and Economic Development Department Director David Goodwin were involved in the Planners Advisory Group during the Joint PPC/MPO Committee deliberations and would continue to be involved. In response to query by Commissioner Morroni, Councilmember Kennedy confirmed that although St. Petersburg had misgivings after adopting the resolution in support of the legislation, the discussion today has relieved the concerns about how long the process was going to take; whereupon, Chairman Doran related that the Countywide Plan update is a step-bystep process; and that all of the stakeholders want the map to be comprised of a minimal amount of colors and be completed in a minimal amount of time. School Board Member Lerner stated her concerns relating to how the stance of St. Petersburg could affect the proposed PPC/MPO unification; whereupon, she expressed the hope that St. Petersburg would attempt to work things out rather than withdraw its support, relating that problems could arise if stories of discord make their way to legislators, and Councilmembers Kennedy and Danner provided input. Mayor Gerard referred to a letter written by Mr. Goodwin, on behalf of the City of St. Petersburg, threatening to rescind support of the MPO reapportionment, and requested that a letter from St. Petersburg expressing its support of and commitment to the plan be forthcoming. Discussion ensued and Councilmember Danner reiterated that, based on the actions to appoint an Executive Committee and reconvene the Planners Advisory Group, it was his expectation that no recommendation to rescind will take place at the next City Council meeting; whereupon, he stated that the City Council does support the plan; and Councilmember Kennedy indicated that he would request that Mr. Goodwin draft a letter clarifying St. Petersburg s position. Thereupon, Mr. Crawford presented the following clarifying information: That the Planners Advisory Group led by Carol Stricklin would provide input to the PPC staff in its preparation of the Plan, and the Executive 11

Committee would help with the unification process and provide guidance, but that the PPC staff, with the assistance of its consultant, would be charged with preparing the Plan. That the current Special Act does not allow for the three-tiered process, but the process can move forward as soon as the new legislation is approved; and that while the process will move quickly from that point, realistically, it will not happen immediately. That the PPC staff and the consultant, with input by the Planners Advisory Group, will put together a public outreach plan. Commissioner Seel indicated that the Executive Committee will want to be informed and engaged to ensure that the process is moving forward expeditiously; and suggested that staff first look at the colors on the Map and come up with some broad color categories; whereupon, Mr. Crawford emphasized that the Map needs to be future-oriented and based on policy. He reiterated the need for a set of Countywide Rules to implement the three-tiered process, presented information relating to Phases I and II of the work program timeline, discussed what is involved in changing the map to encompass only a few broad color categories, and recommended that the current Countywide Plan be updated judiciously so as to provide legal authority to go forward and adopt a map to comport with the Plan. Mr. MacAulay referred to a map and a table, and provided an informal presentation of the St. Petersburg s Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), indicating that it is the map that St. Petersburg envisions countywide, with a few added colors. In response to queries by Chairman Doran, Mr. MacAulay related that it took two years to complete the Vision 2020 Special Area Plan, five more years to change the City s Future Land Use Plan, and three months to assemble the five-color map, noting that even though the five-color map is only a map with colors on it, the underlying plan categories are in the City s Comprehensive Plan; whereupon, Chairman Doran related that the goal of the Future Land Use Map needs to be future-oriented, not just a map with collapsed categories. David P. Healey, Healey Consultant Services, LLC, stated that the Council is mingling two very different issues, the Executive Committee working towards unification of the two entities and the updating of the Countywide Plan. He indicated that he strongly supports having an Executive Committee to move the mechanics of the transition process forward as expeditiously as possible, as identified by Commissioner Seel. 12

Mr. Healey discussed the issue of how and on what basis to update the Countywide Plan, pointing out that the purpose of the unification of the PPC and the MPO is to have a fully integrated land use/transportation connection that hinges in part on the work going forward on the transportation front with the Alternative Analyses and the updated long-range transportation plan. Mr. Healey stated that the St. Petersburg Comprehensive Land Use Plan is merely a map containing several colors, and is neither a plan, nor comprehensive; that implementation depends entirely on the underlying Comprehensive Plan and the City s land use regulations; that St. Petersburg has not validated the map at the local level; and that the map has no legal standing. Mr. Healey reiterated that there is more to updating the Countywide Plan than simply producing a color map; and suggested that Council strive for a more fully integrated land use/transportation connection as work goes forward on the transportation front. Mr. Healey recommended transitioning to the unified Board as quickly as possible so that it can provide staff with clear direction about how it wants it to proceed with updating the Countywide Plan so as to generate a respected work product. In response to the concerns expressed by Councilmember Danner regarding the lengthy timeframes which could be involved as cities rezone properties and write their codes and comprehensive plans, Chairman Doran indicated that it would be done on a Countywide basis, would not be contingent on any one city, and would not slow the progress of St. Petersburg. Vice-Mayor Knight related that several of the cities have special area plans and redevelopment plans; that he supports the formation of the Executive Committee and the Planners Advisory Group; and that Council should move forward with haste with the mechanism that has been put into place. Councilmember Bradbury indicated her support for Mr. Crawford s timeframe and moved that the PPC move forward with his recommendations; whereupon, Mayor Archie seconded the motion, stating that trust among the cities is a key factor in moving forward; that no one wants to slow the process; and that the Council needs to provide a united front when dealing with the Legislative Delegation. During discussion, Councilmember Bradbury clarified her motion and Mr. Crawford clarified his recommendations, noting that staff would seek guidance and input from both the Executive Committee and the Planners Advisory Group, but that it would be staff, along with the consultant, who produced the updated Countywide Plan; that updating the Countywide 13

Plan would follow the timeline presented today; and that the three-tiered process would be followed. Thereupon, following discussion and at the request of Chairman Doran, Councilmember Bradbury withdrew her motion, noting that the discussion following the approval of the Executive Committee and reconvening of the Planning Advisory Group, although important, had been merely political banter; and Mr. Crawford indicated that the PPC staff, in coordination with the MPO staff, would take responsibility for setting up the MPO/PPC Executive Committee meetings, including making arrangements for the minutes, and do other such planning as necessary; and no objections were noted. REPORTS AND OTHER ACTION A. Minor Plan Change: CW 06-12 (SAP Change No. 2-2011) City of Dunedin Community Redevelopment District (CRD) Guideways to Downtown s Future Special Area Plan Accepted as Withdrawn by the City of Dunedin Mr. Crawford reported that the City of Dunedin has submitted a letter requesting that the item be withdrawn; and that a motion to accept the letter would be appropriate; whereupon, Mayor Gerard moved, seconded by Mayor Shontz and carried, that the letter to withdraw the item be accepted (Vote 11 0). B. Annual Countywide Plan Map Assessment Status Report for 2010 Received/Discussed Mr. Mettler presented a summary review of the Countywide Plan Map amendments approved in 2010, a review of local jurisdiction approvals of intensity standard adjustments that exceeded Countywide Rule s standards, the status of conditions and supplemental recommendations associated with Council recommendations of approval, and how the conditions and supplemental recommendations which have yet to be resolved were addressed. Items of note included the following: Twenty-two applications from 11 jurisdictions were reviewed by staff, and all were recommended for approval by the PPC and approved by the CPA. Approximately 555 acres of property in the County were re-designated to either the CRD or PR-MU plan categories. 14

The following net gains and losses were seen in the Industrial Plan classification during 2008, 2009, and 2010: 2010: net loss of approximately 11 acres. 2009: net gain of approximately 122 acres. 2008: net loss of approximately 48 acres. The PPC has received replies from nine of the 25 local governments in response to its inquiry regarding intensity standards adjustments, and the only reported adjustment for 2010 has been found to be substantially in compliance with the Rules for such variances, indicating that the Standards in the Countywide Rules are adequate to allow development to occur. Eleven of the 22 cases had associated conditions or supplemental recommendations, and the PPC is continuing to track several cases dating back to 2004. Mr. Mettler indicated that the challenging economic times have much to do with the delay of many of the conditions and supplemental recommendations; and that staff will consider the historical application of those conditions and recommendations as it moves forward with amendments to the Countywide Plan and Rules. C. Proposed Amendment of the Countywide Rules Re: Changes to Amendment Thresholds and Special Area Plans Received/Discussed/Provided Direction/Public Hearing Set for April PPC Chairman Doran stated that this item is related to the previous item in that it would reduce the number of cases being brought before the PPC; whereupon, Mr. Crawford clarified that rather than reducing the number of cases, the amendment would reduce the amount of PPC review of the cases by qualifying some of the amendments as subthreshold amendments, which require less review than regular amendments, and by changing the standards of minor amendments and substantive amendments. Mr. Crawford indicated that the raising of the bar for cases to qualify as regular amendments is an attempt to bridge the gap until the new three-tiered plan process is in place, noting that the change would be significant. He indicated that when the Special Area Plan (SAP) requirements were adopted in the Rules, it was not foreseen that there would be as many map amendments as have been submitted, but that in practice it has not worked out that way; and that this amendment to the Rules will meet that reality. Using St. Petersburg's Vision 2020 Plan as an example, Mr. Crawford indicated that it has had 13 Map amendments since adopted, and if the 15

regulations proposed today had been in effect, only five of those 13 would have been classified as regular amendments needing a more intensive PPC review and the remaining eight would have been classified as subthreshold amendments requiring very little PPC review. Mr. Crawford indicated that the proposed amendment to the Rules would also change the standard between what is a minor amendment, such as the Dunedin SAP amendment which was only a receipt and acceptance item and required no advertisement and very little work, and what is a substantive amendment that might change densities and intensities and would require a more intense review. He indicated that the changes bridge the gap between today's Special Act and its Rules and the Countywide Plan Map that will be adopted if the changes that are now before the Legislature are approved. Mr. Crawford indicated that the request authorizes the PPC to hold a public hearing in April, which provides the Council and the PAC 30 days to review the amendment before the public hearing. Robert Klute, Assistant Community Development Director, City of Largo, confirmed that the PAC voted 8 to 1 to table the item, noting that there was some concern as to how this amendment relates to the larger effort of merging the PPC and the MPO. City of St. Petersburg Planning and Economic Development Department Manager Rick MacAulay indicated that the PAC tabled the item for two reasons: (1) that the City of St. Petersburg felt that the memo mischaracterized its position, noting that the relief the City is seeking involves the interim, or new, Countywide Future Land Use Map and this amendment regarding SAPs and subthreshold amendments does not provide that relief; and (2) the broader issue that the PAC needs more time to review an item before scheduling a public hearing, noting that it received the item on a Friday and was scheduled to take action at the meeting on Monday. In response to queries by Mayor Gerard and School Board Member Lerner, Mr. MacAulay indicated that the PAC voiced no opposition to temporarily changing the Rules until the new Map is adopted, and discussed the time line for taking action. Mr. Crawford clarified that he discussed the amendment in detail with Mr. MacAulay and Mr. Goodwin in February, allowing plenty of time for review; that the amendment was not intended to address St. Petersburg's bigger concern of the five-color map but to give relief to a particular issue the City raised at the joint PPC/MPO Committee meeting; and that the amendment benefits other communities as well; whereupon, he stated that tabling the amendment for a month would have only a minor impact on other items it is working on; and that staff would be amenable to a delay if the Council so chooses. 16

Thereupon, Mayor Gerard moved, seconded by Mayor Ronecker, that the public hearing be set for the April PPC meeting (Vote 11 0). EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ITEMS B. Preliminary Budget Discussion for FY 2011/12 Mr. Crawford indicated that the Fiscal Year 2012 budget process for Pinellas County is underway, with budget forecasts and targets having been reviewed with the Board of County Commissioners, Constitutional Officers, and Agency Heads in January and February. He indicated that under the budget schedule of the County, the preliminary budget information of the PPC was due to the Office of Management and Budget on March 11, 2011; that Attachment No. 1, PPC Revised Adopted FY 11 and Proposed FY 12 Budget Summary, has been included for the Council s information and discussion; and that a copy of the Transmittal Memorandum has been included and summarized below; whereupon, he emphasized that the transmittal information is preliminary and has not been reviewed by the Council. The direction applicable to those agencies with separate ad valorem taxing authority is to prepare a budget anticipating a six percent decline in ad valorem tax revenues while maintaining the current millage rate, which translates to a projected reduction of $41,602 in the Council s ad valorem proceeds as compared to the current year. The preliminary total budget proposed by the Interim Executive Director is $1,146,273. The items associated with the unification of the PPC and MPO anticipated to impact the budget have been discussed with the MPO Executive Director, and are, therefore, included in the Fiscal Year 2012 preliminary budget. In order to balance the budget, approximately $392,014 representing 46 percent of the audited Fiscal 2010 fund balance will need to be appropriated consistent with the three-year projection and approach approved in the formulation of the Fiscal Years 2010, 2011, and 2012 budgets. Given the significant reduction to the budget (-23.4 percent), millage rate (-26.5 percent), and ad valorem tax revenue (-35.1 percent) in Fiscal Year 2010, 17

and with the reductions in Fiscal Year 2011, any further reductions to the budget or millage rate for Fiscal Year 2012 are unworkable. Accompanying Attachments to the Transmittal Memorandum Attachment No. 1 to the accompanying memorandum summarized the preliminary budget by major accounts for Fiscal Year 2012 in comparison to the current year. Additional details and refinements will be added over the next few months, based in part on the status of the current budget at mid-year to be reviewed with the Council in April. Attachment No. 2 allocates the proposed budget by major work program components. Attachment No. 3 illustrates the current staff organization, following the loss of two positions in last year s budget, and the vacant Executive Director position. Mr. Crawford indicated that while the numbers are preliminary and will be refined as the Council works through the budgeting process, there is little latitude to adjust the work program or the budget given the established parameters; that an adjustment to the millage rate may be needed in Fiscal Year 2012; and that Fiscal Year 2013 would be the first year for a truly unified budget for the proposed PPC/MPO Unified Board; whereupon, he related that while staff will be integral during the process, the services of a consultant will be necessary not only to move at a quicker pace but for needed professional input and expertise; and that funding for a consultant has not been included in the budget. Thereupon, Mr. Crawford offered three options to the members relating to funding for the consultant and requested input from the members, and discussion ensued; whereupon, Commissioner Morroni moved, seconded by Mayor Archie and carried, that a combination of fund balance and reserves (Option B in the agenda documents) would be utilized to begin the consultant portion of the update (Vote 11 0). OTHER COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Chairman/Member Items None ADJOURNMENT 18

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:15 P.M. Chairman 19