Largo staff propose local rules for temporary emergency housing, advise opting out of county ordinance

City planners told the commission on Sept. 9 that Largo needs its own standards and a faster, clearer process for temporary emergency housing after storm events.

What staff proposed: Planning staff (Speaker 10) asked the commission to opt out of the Pinellas County ordinance that the city previously adopted and instead adopt a chapter in the city's Comprehensive Development Code (CDC) with: definitions for congregate and non‑congregate temporary housing; an expedited temporary‑event review pathway for multi‑unit sites; required submittals (site plan and letter of intent with duration, services and security plans); interdepartmental review (police, fire, community development); and potential locational safeguards (separation distances from residential areas and pet facilities to limit noise/odor impacts).

Why the change: Staff and the city attorney reviewed past emergency declarations and found Pinellas County has not historically declared the separate "housing emergency" needed to trigger county code provisions. That gap leaves the city without a clear approval process during many real-world events, staff said. Because Senate Bill 180 (effective July 1, 2025) restricts some local land‑development regulations within specified post‑hurricane windows, staff coordinated with the city attorney to ensure proposed language remains consistent with state requirements.

Local experience and examples: Community Development Director Cheryl Reed described recent responses after storms: the Red Cross temporarily used a church site for shelter and services; nonprofit groups and faith-based organizations placed travel trailers on church campuses and in mobile-home parks; and FEMA/Florida DEM placed temporary non‑congregate units in parks and vacant lots. Staff described permitting experiences that worked and situations (e.g., an unscheduled Red Cross deployment at a church) that strained coordination because no local code required formal pre-notification.

Implementation and timing: Staff recommended drafting CDC language, with planning‑board review as early as the next cycle and commission hearings in October–November. They said expedited reviews for emergency sites should be measured in days (staff suggested "within a few days" for an expedited process and aimed for under two days in urgent cases).

Commission questions: Commissioners asked about pre‑approval of likely sites, whether only recognized disaster agencies should be allowed to set up sites, and the ability to require recognized-response partners. Staff said pre-approvals and guidance could be explored; limiting who may set up sites risks legal constraints under recent state law and could impede community groups that provide assistance.

Next steps: Staff will draft CDC amendments and coordinate with the county and city attorney. The commission did not vote; staff will return with formal code language for public hearings.